Everything You Need to Know AboutChristian Apologists

Problem 1
Time is simply the measurement of movement and the increments of such measurement (e.g. minutes, hours, days) are based on how long it takes for Earth to move around the sun. During the Big Bang is when everything in our universe was set into motion making the start of motion and thus the start of time in our universe. Space, on the other hand, is in simplest terms the area within a container. Prior to the Big Bang, our entire universe was condensed into a tiny fireball but then that ball rapidly expanded creating space within it. When scientists talk about the start of time & space they are talking about the start of movement and the formation of space within only our universe, not the start of all time & space. The Big Bang that created our universe is believed to be just one of many Big Bangs that each created separate universes containing time & space.

Problem 2
Just because something was created does not mean it was supernaturally created.

This is a false use of the Theory Of Probability. This “argument” is based on the invalid assumption that life, the way it is, was the pre-determined targeted outcome.

Consider this; the mathematical odds of dealing a hand of thirteen specified cards from a well-shuffled deck of fifty-two playing cards are about 635,000,000,000 to one. If a person calls out thirteen specific cards ahead of time and then those specific cards are dealt, one could claim that was likely too improbable to happen naturally. However, if the cards are already dealt and made known before the person calls out the thirteen specific cards there is no reason to suggest that the selection of the cards required any special guidance.

Problem 1
Yes, life is complex but that does not mean it had a conscious designer. A snowflake is complex and it does not require a conscious designer.

Problem 2
Life is actually overly complex with far too many unnecessary parts assembled in such a frantic mess that causes a wide range of faulty design flaws from avoidable limitations to cancer-causing agencies. The over-complexity shows that life certainly was not designed by a conscious being with the ability to plan ahead or work efficiently.

Problem 3
The complexity of life has already been well explained by science through natural means.

Problem 1
Life was designed, but not by God. Just as we once assumed that lightning thrown down from a cloud had to have a conscious being doing the throwing we also assumed that the apparent design of life had to have a conscious being doing the designing. Life was designed, and indeed has a designer, but not a conscious one. The designer of life is nature and its method for fine-tuning life is a process known as Natural Selection, not conscious decision making.

Problem 2
We already know how life was designed through natural means. In order to understand how life could have and was designed through natural means, you first must understand the basic mechanics and principles of evolution along with the observable and known evidence which the explanation, or “theory,” of evolution is based upon.

Problem 1
The planet Earth is far from being perfect for life and throughout life’s history, there has been a vicious battle against nature to survive. Life has gone through many mass extinctions, some even bigger than the mass extinction that devastated the end of the Cretaceous period.

Problem 2
Just because life can exist on Earth does not mean that it was designed for life. Your shower is an ideal setting for fungus to grow but it obviously was not designed for the inhabitance of fungus. Life was a side effect of the conditions of Earth, not the other way around.

Problem 3
Although Earth is the only planet in our solar system known to naturally sustain human life it is by no means the only planet in our universe that is capable of doing so. There are over one hundred billion galaxies in the known universe, each of which could potentially contain hundreds or even billions of separate solar systems. In light of this relatively modern knowledge, the number of potential Earth-like planets such as “Gliese 581 C” which could harbor life is, to say the least, dramatically and unbelievably high. The odds of known life forming on just one of those planets is suddenly less impressive.

Problem 1
DNA has been nicknamed “The Language Of Life” because it is like a language. Although DNA has many similarities to language and code it also has many differences and is not subject to the same limitations.

Problem 2
We also know different ways of how DNA and its predecessor RNA could have simply formed by natural means so saying DNA could not have formed without a conscious creator only proves a failure to keep up to date with the modern knowledge of DNA.

Problem 1
When physicists say there was “nothing” before the Big Bang of our universe they do not mean literally nothing. What they mean is that there was no matter, just energy. It was that energy which formed matter and the Big Bang.

Problem 2
If you are claiming that the universe had to have a creator because “something can’t come from nothing” then you would also be claiming that that creator had to have a creator too, and so on.

Problem 1
Many credit the voice in their head as the voice of God. That voice, however, is just unfiltered thought. It is the same “voice” that speaks when people talk to other gods or when children talk to their imaginary friends.

Problem 2
If one actually convinces themselves that the voice in their head is “evidence” for God then they must also believe in most other gods and every imaginary friend ever conceived by a child.

Problem 3
Also, if God existed why would his communication abilities be limited to the same level as imaginary friends? In the Bible, God speaks aloud, either projected from a bush, through the mouth of a donkey, or even face to face.

Problem 1
There have been cases where a doctor was sure that a person could not recover, then after people prayed the patient did in fact recover. However the same has happened for those who were not prayed for. The opposite has also happened to people. The doctor was sure they would recover then the patient takes a fatal turn for the worse, even when prayed for. What is really going on is that the doctors were simply wrong. Even doctors make mistakes.

Problem 2
People of all theistic religions are convinced that praying to their god or gods has caused people to be healed. Regardless there has never been any documentation to support such claims. There has never been imagery of structural changes to an eye as it was supposedly cured of blindness by a god. And there has never been evidence supporting any other supernatural case.

Problem 1
If this was the case then it is very dishonest for anyone to say they believe that a god exists.

Problem 2
The existence of God is actually testable and provable. The definition of a god does include a being that resides “outside of the natural world” which is a realm that is not testable. However, the definition also includes interactions with the natural world and it is those interactions that are testable and provable or disprovable.

By calling God something else, something that is proven to exist, does not mean that God exists. Saying that “Bigfoot is nature” or that “Bigfoot is energy” does not prove the existence of Bigfoot despite the proven existence of nature and energy. God is not nature, just as nature is not a supernatural being.

Problem 1
If God proved his existence by making a public appearance or performing supernatural acts that break any of the well-known laws/limitations of nature, this would not affect our freedom to love him. Only after his existence is solidly proven is one free to honestly decide if they wish to worship or love God. One might argue that people will just falsely worship God for the sake of going to Heaven but isn’t God said to be able to tell if a person is being honest or not?

Problem 2
In the Bible, we are told on countless occasions that God proves his existence. Only in real life, outside of the stories, is he non-existent.

Problem 1
The Antiquities of the Jews is not based on historical events. Right in the preface Josephus specifically tells us that the history he is writing about is based on Hebrew scriptures and religious books.

“Now I have undertaken the present work, as thinking it will appear to all the Greeks worthy of their study; for it will contain all our antiquities, and the constitution of our government, as interpreted out of the Hebrew Scriptures.” “I shall now betake myself to the history before me, after I have first mentioned what Moses says of the creation of the world, which I find described in the sacred books after the manner following.” – Antiquities of the Jews — Preface

Problem 2
Josephus also describes God’s creation of the earth, Adam & Eve, Noah & the flood, the Tower of Babel, the 10 Plagues, the parting of the sea, and other Jewish folklore in his Antiquities of the Jews. Again, Josephus cites religious books as his only sources.

Problem 3
Josephus was not even born until 37 CE.

Problem 4
Antiquities of the Jews was not written until 94 CE.

Problem 5
Josephus was an orthodox Jew and never believed in a savior named Jesus Christ.

Problem 1
The Passing of Peregrinus is not a documentation of historical events. It is a satire and work of fiction, by the play writer Lucian, in which the lead character takes advantage of the generosity of the Christian religious group.

Problem 2
The reference to Jesus is only describing what Christians of the time believe in. It is not, by any means, suggesting that those beliefs were true.

Problem 3
Lucian was not born until 125 CE.

Problem 1
The reference to Jesus is only describing what Christians of the time believe in. It is not, by any means, suggesting that those beliefs were true.

Problem 2
Immediately after describing the beliefs of Christians (e.g. Christus suffering at the hands of Pontius Pilatus) Tacitus then calls those beliefs a “most mischievous superstition.”

Problem 3
Tacitus was not born until 56 CE.

Problem 4
Annals XV.44 was not written until 115 CE.

Problem 1
There is nothing to suggest that “Chrestus” is a reference to the Christ referred to as Jesus.

Problem 2
This passage is set during 50 CE, twenty years after Jesus’ supposed death.

Problem 3
Suetonius was not born until 41 CE.

Problem 4
“The Life of Claudius” was not written until 115 CE.

Problem 1
The writings are only claiming that there were Christians in Asia Minor around 100CE. This is not something that is doubted.

Problem 2
Pliny only describes what Christians of the time believed in. It is not, by any means, suggesting that those beliefs were true.

Problem 3
Pliny the Younger was not born until 61 CE.

Problem 1
The figure that historians called “Historical Jesus” is not a reference to the figure Jesus Christ. Although Jesus was not originally based on a real person some later aspects were. Certain stories in the Gospels suggest that some aspects of Jesus’ life were loosely inspired by legends of an actual person or persons. Historians have dubbed this person(s) “Historical Jesus” because an actual name is not known. Outside of scripture, there is nothing to suggest that this person(s) existed but certain scriptural writings about Jesus, such as the resurrection story, sound more like they were based on a real-life regular human being than a demi-god figure.

Problem 1
Just because a figure is influential does not suggest they existed, all mythological gods were very influential. And, historically speaking, it is the stories of Jesus that have been influential, not the figure himself.

Problem 2
The existence of Christian martyrs doesn’t prove that Jesus was real, it only proves that people were convinced that Jesus was real. Martyrdom is not limited to just Christianity, it has been abundant in various religious groups around the world. People have also been martyrs for the promises of 72 virgins in paradise and stories of a spacecraft trailing comet Hale-Bopp.

Problem 1
The 1st century was a well documented time and we have a great deal of historical evidence for figures, eg. Julius Caesar, who actually existed.

Problem 2
Even if it were true, that we could not prove the existence of anyone from that era in time, then this would mean that Jesus’ existence is not provable and thus there are no honest reasons to believe to he existed.

Problem 3
Even though Alexander the Great lived over 300 years before Jesus’ supposed lifetime there is still a great deal of evidence for his life that we don’t find for Jesus. First off there is actually contemporary evidence such as the silver decadrachm coins (on display at the British Museum) bearing his name that was issued during his reign. There are also many cities named after him, some of which were formed by him during his lifetime, eg. Alexandria in Egypt.

Although the most complete and well-known biography of Alexander was written, by Arrian of Nicomedia, 400 years after his death it was written with references to contemporary biographies from people such as Callisthenes and Ptolemy. Both of whom served under Alexander.

Problem 1
Such a finding would only be evidence that a person was crucified during the 1st century, a time when many people were killed by crucifixion.

Problem 2
The Shroud of Turin is a forgery. After independent analysis by the University of Arizona, Oxford, and Swiss Federal Institute of Technology all results date the shroud to be from between 1260 and 1390 CE.

Problem 1
All known copies of these letters were written long after the time Jesus supposedly lived.

Problem 2
The letter forged as Jesus mirrors passages from the Diatessaron (c. 150-160 CE) and not the earlier versions of the gospels.

Problem 1
There are no specific references to the figure Jesus Christ in the Talmud.

Problem 2
The Talmud was not written until 200-500 CE.

Problem 1
Oral tradition applied to storytelling and folklore. Historians, on the other hand, documented events as they occurred or at least cited contemporary documentation in their works. Jesus is said to have lived during a time which is well documented in history.

Problem 2
Even if Jesus was said to live during a time when people did not write or document anything, this would still not be a reason to believe he existed. Rather it would be just an excuse to avoid supplying a reason.

Problem 1
First off, this is based on the assumption that the character Jesus Christ was an actual historical figure, which is not true.

Problem 2
“Lord, liar, or lunatic” are not the only options. There is another option that is far more common throughout history. The story of Jesus Christ could have also just been a legend, over exaggerated tales loosely based on a real person that was neither Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. Take for example the legends of Hercules. Hercules was a real person who was simply stronger than the average person. Over time people exaggerated stories of how strong he actually was and even credited his strength to have been given by the gods.

Problem 3
The people writing the Jesus stories were likely liars or lunatics which voids out anything they said about Jesus… or talking donkeys…  or supernatural events.

Problem 1
Whether or not life’s natural history is seen as “immoral” does not mean it is not true.

Problem 2
The term “survival of the fittest” and eugenics are actually based on Lamarckism, the disproven hypothesis that organism can pass on characteristics it acquired during its lifetime to its offspring. It is Darwin’s theory of evolution that proved Lamarckism to be wrong. He proved that evolution is not progressive or goal-oriented, and that mutations during the reproduction process are what gets passed on. Not characteristics acquired during one’s lifetime.

Problem 1
In layman’s terms a “theory” is just a hunch or guess. In scientific terms that is called a hypothesis. A theory in scientific terms is a well-substantiated explanation based on lines of evidence that enable valid predictions and have been tested through various means. The “theory of evolution” is a scientific fact, the explanation of how life evolved. The “theory of gravity” is the explanation of how gravity works.

Problem 1
Just because something sounds absurd does not mean it is not true.

Problem 2
What someone says or who said it is not important, the evidence supporting the claim is what actually matters.

Problem 3
This quote is from “The Origins of Species.” Here Darwin mentions the absurdity to point out that no matter how absurd an idea may sound it may still be true. He then goes on to explain how the human eye easily could have evolved through natural means, and even gives examples of the various intermediate stages which can be seen in organisms living today.

As the theory of evolution explains, humans did not evolve from modern apes. They simply share a common ancestor, a species that no longer exists. Asking why are there still apes is like asking why are there still cousins.

This simply is not true, at all. It does not require any faith to accept evolution as truth. The theory of evolution is a scientific explanation based on empirical evidence. Nothing in science requires faith or is a matter of belief, if it did then it would not be science.

Problem 1
This “Crockoduck” claim is by the apologists Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, who know little to nothing about the theory of evolution… or science.

Problem 2
This is the opposite of what evolution tells us. Such a find would actually disprove evolution since ducks are not ancestors of crocodiles.

Problem 3
More importantly, species do not evolve to become a particular different species, and species also do not evolve in full segments. New species are defined simply by when genetic differences are too great for two organisms to successfully reproduce.

The only difference between Micro and Macro evolution is time and the number of accumulated changes. Macro and Micro evolution have little to nothing to do with appearances. Changes are accumulated to the DNA every time it is passed on during reproduction. If the accumulated changes, on a genetic level, causes organisms to be unable to reproduce fertile young with each other they are defined as separate species.

Problem 1
True, the explanation of how life evolved cannot explain where life came from. Just as the theory of gravity can not explain how an object which is falling was first created. The theory of evolution has nothing to do with where life comes from, only with how that life evolves.

Problem 2
The main reason why we don’t know how life was first created through natural means is that there are so many known ways it could have naturally happened. There are various tested and proven explanations to how life most could have been formed, none of which invoke supernatural explanations.

This claim by Apologist Fred Hoyle is based on the misconception that evolution is a strictly random process. Although the changes that occur in DNA during reproduction are random, the designing process is not random. The evolution of species is guided through a process known as natural selection.

Problem 1
Again, it doesn’t matter who says what, it is the evidence for their claim that matters.

Problem 2
This is not true. Almost every single scientist in fields related to the history of life agrees that evolution is a fact. A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that only about 5% of scientists identified themselves as creationists. However, this number includes those working in fields not related to life origins (such as computer scientists, mechanical engineers, etc.). Taking into account only those working in the relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in creationism or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995). This means that less than 0.15 percent of relevant scientists believe in creationism. And that is just in the United States, which has more creationists than any other industrialized country. In other countries, the number of relevant scientists who accept creationism drops to less than one-tenth of one percent.

Learn more at http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html

Problem 3
This original claim, by The Discovery Institute, about a list of scientists rejecting evolution is an extremely dishonest one. To learn more watch this video by DonExodus2

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy (disorder) of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time.

Note, the “isolated system” part. Life is not an isolated system, we get energy from the sun. The Second Law of Thermodynamics disproves computers… unless you plug them into a power source.