Read on Twitter
THREAD:
So I was just reading a couple of Christian apologetics blogs, which I will not name. These two blogs went out of their way to make their targets (atheism or whatever) appear as absurd and as immoral as possible.
1/
So I was just reading a couple of Christian apologetics blogs, which I will not name. These two blogs went out of their way to make their targets (atheism or whatever) appear as absurd and as immoral as possible.
1/
For example, in their attacks on atheism, the blogs would bring up alleged examples of evil acts (such as pedophilia) committed by atheists, blunders committed by atheists in debates, etc. These same blogs never mentioned that such evil acts are not representative of atheists
or various good acts done by atheists or various good performances by by atheists. Likewise, when attacking LGBT rights and lifestyle, the blogs did something similar. Find outrageous examples designed to make LGBT people look as bad as possible.
3/
3/
I think it’s easier to see this (and to see what’s wrong with it) when your group (or a group you support) is the target; it’s less easy to see when the target is a group you disagree with. And that got me thinking:
4/
4/
Without even trying, I am certain that I could easily find numerous examples of atheist blogs and even entire orgs which do the same thing to Christians. So I don’t think atheists, as a group, are entitled to get on their high horse.
5/
5/
But, for atheists, the problem is doubly bad. Not only is this sophistry (which I consider a form of dishonesty), but it also DESTROYS the idea (really, the myth) that atheists are unique and superior when it comes to their use of logic and reason. What a load of crap.
6/
6/
The fact is that the vast majority of what I see on social media (FB, Twitter), blogs, and even academic journals related to God’s existence, religion, etc. — regardless of which side is writing it — is sophistry. There is virtually no
7/
7/
attempt made by people from any side to truly follow the arguments and evidence wherever they lead. Sure you can find exceptions such as Paul Draper (atheist) or Randal Rauser (Christian), but they are the (VERY RARE) exceptions.
8/
8/
I truly don’t understand how the majority of people live in such a simplistically partisan way. Don’t people want to know truth? How can they have any confidence at all that what they believe is the truth when they make zero genuine effort to challenge their opinions?
9/
9/
If you’re an atheist and you spend time reading atheist blogs but either (a) never read anything by a theist, or (b) only read theistic material so you can figure out how to refute it (as opposed to genuinely considering the possibility that the material is correct),
10/
10/
then I don’t know how you can look yourself in the mirror. You’re clearly not open-minded. While you might be able to fool others into thinking you’ve considered the best arguments and evidence, deep down you know that’s a lie.
11/
11/
Of course, the same could be said of Christians. In particular, I think of all the Christian blogs with “blog rolls” which link only to other Christian blogs (sometimes hundreds of them), without linking to a single non-Christian blog. Apparently Jimmy’s 10th grade
12/
12/
apologetics blog he writes for his Sunday School class is worth linking to, but stuff by, say, professional philosopher (and atheist) John Schellenberg isn’t. Or it is, but you so lack confidence in your arguments that you don’t dare expose your readers to any possible
13/
13/
source of doubt. Whatever. Anyway, my point is that partisanship seems to be a pervasive feature of all camps. I find it depressing. I do not have optimism this will change anytime soon.
14/14
14/14
