Most annoying theist arguments

[rickymooston]

Hi all, first post here.  Great forum...

This isn't an argument for believing in Christianity, but in all my years of "searching for God" in the church, it always drove me nuts how God/Jesus took ALL the credit for the good, but NONE of the blame for the bad.

If something good happened to someone, i.e., job promotion, healthy child, removed a wine stain from a shirt, then the it was the Lord's will and it was because of him.  The person couldn't take credit as it would be evil pride.   

However, if something bad happened to someone, then it was our evil, sinful nature that caused the situation.  The person gets the blame, NEVER God.

Geesh, talk about a huge EGO! 

Sort of like a modern CEO.

[Tails_155]

two words: Straw Man

(unless it's "Strawman" in which case, one word...)

[rickymooston]

two words: Straw Man

(unless it's "Strawman" in which case, one word...)

I admit while I've seen theists and atheists both use Strawmen, theists are better at the technique and that is indeed highly annoying.

Do you have any strawmen in particular that keep getting over used by theist after theist?

[Tails_155]

about every other question that isn't totally ignored?

[ThePhilosopher]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins. 

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

[Cycle4Fun]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins. 

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

1.  You can't choose to believe.
2.  There are an infinite amount of possibilities all with the same amount of evidence (0)
3.  By Pascal's argument you should pick the religion with the worst hell and/or best heaven

[rickymooston]

By what authority do you base your morality is my pet MOST annoying theist argument

[velkyn]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins. 

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

It does disturb me that you call yourself the philosopher and don't already know.  Thank you, Cyke, for the review.

[Hermes]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins.

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

It does disturb me that you call yourself the philosopher and don't already know.  Thank you, Cyke, for the review.

Yep.  It's why I called Dunning-Kruger in the other thread.

[rickymooston]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins.

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

It does disturb me that you call yourself the philosopher and don't already know.  Thank you, Cyke, for the review.

Yep.  It's why I called Dunning-Kruger in the other thread.

Is that a rather innovative way to insult somebody?    Basically, "you are too stupid and arrogant to comprehend that I already checkmated you 15 moves ago."

[Hermes]

Is that a rather innovative way to insult somebody?    Basically, "you are too stupid and arrogant to comprehend that I already checkmated you 15 moves ago."

Keep in mind, it's not intended as an insult because an insult is intended to bring someone to a lower position than they deserve.  It's a statement of fact; someone who calls themselves a philosopher and considers Pascal's Wager as valid is either incompetent or intends to insult our intelligence.  From what I've seen, I doubt it is the later in TP's case.

How's that for an insult?   

[Pale Rider]

3)  Claiming miracles that would leave clear evidence happened, but not admitting such evidence simply does not exist. 

I also want some poor fool to try to use pascal's wager on me in person so I can kick them in the shins. 

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

Say what? Am I reading this right? Man I knew my glasses were bad but darn.....

[rickymooston]

Is that a rather innovative way to insult somebody?    Basically, "you are too stupid and arrogant to comprehend that I already checkmated you 15 moves ago."

Keep in mind, it's not intended as an insult because an insult is intended to bring someone to a lower position than they deserve.  It's a statement of fact; someone who calls themselves a philosopher and considers Pascal's Wager as valid is either incompetent or intends to insult our intelligence.  From what I've seen, I doubt it is the later in TP's case.

How's that for an insult?   

[Hermes]

Well, even the confidently ignorant occasionally have merits.  Not that I can think of any right now, but if paid good money I'd write some ego boosting good copy.

[Husky]

whats wrong with pascal's wager?

Er... *SPEECHLESS* What's wrong with you? Haven't recovered since the lobotomy?

[madame_zora]

Well, even the confidently ignorant occasionally have merits.  Not that I can think of any right now, but if paid good money I'd write some ego boosting good copy.

*scrounges for cash*

Uh, what can I get for eight dollars and sixty-seven cents?



MY most annoying argument is the argument from personal stupidity. It goes something like this: I don't understand __________ so that proves goddidit!!!

Do they understand evolution? No! {ah didn't cum frum no ape!}
Do they understand abiogenesis? No! {huh, wut's that?}
Do the understand the second law of thermodynamics they try to throw around? No! {proves goddidit, besides sumpthin can't cum frum nuthin.}

It boils down to "Because I'm stupid, god is real".

[Hermes]

Well, even the confidently ignorant occasionally have merits.  Not that I can think of any right now, but if paid good money I'd write some ego boosting good copy.

*scrounges for cash*

Uh, what can I get for eight dollars and sixty-seven cents?

For you my dear Madame, any compliment that I could create in your honor -- ones that would justly make lesser people fidget and blush in selfless embarrassment -- would be unworthy of you.  I would be universally shunned if I were to take a cent from you, so I must humbly refuse.

How are ya sexy?  Long time no 'see'!

[madame_zora]

Well, even the confidently ignorant occasionally have merits.  Not that I can think of any right now, but if paid good money I'd write some ego boosting good copy.

*scrounges for cash*

Uh, what can I get for eight dollars and sixty-seven cents?

For you my dear Madame, any compliment that I could create in your honor -- ones that would justly make lesser people fidget and blush in selfless embarrassment -- would be unworthy of you.  I would be universally shunned if I were to take a cent from you, so I must humbly refuse.

How are ya sexy?  Long time no 'see'!

Hey there hot stuff, I've had a case of "life intervenes" syndrome. Life- who needs it? Things are settling down again.

My mama taught me to look out for the silver-tongued devils, haha.

[kevyrat69]

I told someone at work I didn't believe in god and somebody said, "You can't see the wind, does it exist?"  Like I'm stupid for not believing in god.

[rickymooston]

I told someone at work I didn't believe in god and somebody said, "You can't see the wind, does it exist?"  Like I'm stupid for not believing in god.

^^.

MY most annoying argument is the argument from personal stupidity. It goes something like this: I don't understand __________ so that proves goddidit!!!

A generalization of the classic God of the Gaps argument, the retro-active gap.

Along lines you mentioned, its annoying when they keep quoting Darwin, since more than 100 years of science has followed Darwin!!!

P.S. I second the welcome back.

[Tails_155]

"You didn't answer my question"

when they didn't ASK a question... ESPECIALLY when compounded with the fact they often don't answer the questions I do ask, and requote if unanswered...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXMKPvWqgYk[/youtube]

here's a GREAT list

[gold_digging_ants]

The one I've been getting a bit the past few days (which I don't think is covered here) is "you can't disprove God, therefore he's real!"  And when I point out that that's a logical fallacy (complete with link), I either get "logic doesn't apply to God" or "you just don't understand" (which is annoying all on its own) or "I don't have to follow your rules!"

Followed by "you can't disprove God, therefore he's real!  I win!"

The other one that irritates me is "an atheist said that, therefore it's not right" (which was used on me for "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence")

[StPatrick]

The one I've been getting a bit the past few days (which I don't think is covered here) is "you can't disprove God, therefore he's real!"  And when I point out that that's a logical fallacy (complete with link), I either get "logic doesn't apply to God" or "you just don't understand" (which is annoying all on its own) or "I don't have to follow your rules!"

Followed by "you can't disprove God, therefore he's real!  I win!"

So basically, anything from Ichabencow.

The other one that irritates me is "an atheist said that, therefore it's not right" (which was used on me for "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence")

We should turn it back on them and say "A Christian said that, therefore it's not right."

[gold_digging_ants]

So basically, anything from Ichabencow.

Actually, I've had that from three theists in the past three or four days.  But ichabencow has been the most annoying about it.

[Atheist_Convert]

Okay, I haven't seen this one in here yet but see it on many, many threads in  one form or another.

"If you used to be a christian, there is no way you were a true chirstian^tm". Implying or outright saying you're a liar and were never sincere in your search or beliefs.

Not my number one least favorite but certainly very annoying.

[Hermes]

Okay, I haven't seen this one in here yet but see it on many, many threads in  one form or another.

"If you used to be a christian, there is no way you were a true chirstian^tm". Implying or outright saying you're a liar and were never sincere in your search or beliefs.

Not my number one least favorite but certainly very annoying.

[stating the obvious ...]

Self defense meme.  It corrects for any doubt by nuking it from the start.

Note that it doesn't work in reverse; a Muslim that converts to Christianity was neither a 'true Muslim' nor a 'untrue Muslim' ... all that matters is the Christianity part.

[gold_digging_ants]

And every atheist that converts/ reconverts to Christianity was definitely a RealTrueStrongAtheist^TM. 

[Dissenter]

I think you need to cut the crap about Christians, we believe God is real, because He is real.

From mail bag a couple of days ago. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=3303.msg69977#msg69977

These people get to vote. It makes me cry.  :'(

[madame_zora]

I think you need to cut the crap about Christians, we believe God is real, because He is real.

From mail bag a couple of days ago. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=3303.msg69977#msg69977

These people get to vote. It makes me cry.  :'(

Me too, but their posts here provide limitless hours of entertainment so thanks for sharing.