Thursday, March 03, 2016

You Might be a Hyper-Skeptic of Christianity of Christianity If...by Bill Pratt

I have written about what I have learned from blog comments here, but in this featured post, Bill Pratt of Tough Questions Answered shares "patterns of behavior that have led...[him]...to refer to some...skeptical commenters as hyper-skeptics. A hyper-skeptic is someone who will not ever consider any evidences, arguments, or reasoning given for Christianity."

He has even created a You Might Be a Hyper-Skeptic if...list that is as follows:

You don’t need to read anything actually written by Christian scholars, because you are just smarter than they are (and you’ve heard it all before).

You think it’s doubtful that Jesus ever lived.

You believe that Christian apologists are lying most of the time.

You actually think that the evidence for a flying spaghetti monster is as good as the evidence for the Christian God.

When you read a blog post written by a Christian, you aren’t reading for understanding; you’re reading to find isolated phrases or sentences that you can attack.

You believe that Antony Flew renounced atheism only because of old age and senility.

You don’t understand theology or metaphysics, but you’re certain it’s just a bunch of made-up mumbo-jumbo.

You almost never agree with anything a Christian apologist writes, even on the most uncontroversial subjects.

You believe that if you ever publicly agree with a Christian, you are contributing to the downfall of civilization.

You are 100% certain that people cannot rise from the dead, and no amount of historical evidence would ever be convincing.

You think that the strength of the historical evidence supporting the stories in the Book of Mormon is roughly equivalent to the strength of the historical evidence supporting the New Testament accounts of Jesus’s life, death, and resurrection.

You think that The God Delusion is a tour de force that annihilates all of the best Christian arguments for God.

You think that the Bible contains nothing of value.

If many of these describe you, Pratt offers you some friendly advice:

"...if you’re a skeptic and you find yourself fitting much of the criteria I’ve listed above, you need to step back and ask yourself why. Why have you become as dogmatic and fundamentalist as the religious folks you like to deride? If you are a hyper-skeptic, you are not reasonable and you are not thinking clearly when it comes to Christianity. Take some time off from the blogosphere and figure out why you’ve crossed this line. I sincerely doubt it is a purely intellectual issue."

You can checkout Pratt's entire post here and I highly recommend Tough Questions Answered.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad 

4 comments:

northierthanthou said...

Caricatures are fun. Yep.

dgfisch said...

If the shoe fits ....

Anonymous said...

Lineup of the usual strawmen. You don't seem to be able to conceive of honest, intelligent people (many of them former Christians) who have examined the objective & subjective evidence and found it wanting (at best) or outright nonsense (at worst). Maybe take a step back & look at yourselves first.

Stardusty Psyche said...

"You are 100% certain that people cannot rise from the dead, and no amount of historical evidence would ever be convincing."
There is no historical evidence of anybody ever rising from the dead.

Digging up an old issue of the National Enquirer is not historical evidence of visitations by space aliens. Just because you dig up and old book that says something happened does not mean it happened.

"You actually think that the evidence for a flying spaghetti monster is as good as the evidence for the Christian God."

All gods are equally speculative. I can make up any I wish and they are all as likely as any that anybody else made up.