Agree or Disagree? "Arrogant Pseudo-Intellectual" is a phrase that atheists should use to describe Christian apologists or "scholars"!?

Question

We're talking about Christians who even DARE to attempt a justification or explanation for all of the superstitious nonsense in their bible by using some sort of pseudo-rational, pseudo-analytical process of argumentation while committing almost every logical fallacy there is.

We're talking about Christians who because they were educated in theology at some college or at some "theological seminary", arrogantly assume that their apologetics conveys some sort of intellectual nuance when all it conveys is a level of conceit that blinds them to their own biases, prejudices and ignorance.

We're talking about Christians refuse to acknowledge any similarities between their bible stories and Bronze Age superstitions bout virgin births and sacrifices because the Bronze age occurred some 2000 years before Jesus?

We're talking about Christians who are unwilling to subject their own superstitions and dogmatic beliefs to the same level of scrutiny or critique that they subject their opponents to, which often is expressed in such clever and witty rejoinders as "can you prove that atheism is true"? Or "it takes just as much faith to believe that something came from nothing",... as though these arrogant pseudo-intellectuals have any iota of regard or respect for, logic, reason, or the scientific method in general.

In many regards these arrogant pseudo-intellectuals are worse than their fundamentalist counterparts and thus should be called out and condemned as such.

Agree or Disagree?

Answer 1

Agree or Disagree? "Arrogant Pseudo-Intellectual" is a phrase that atheists should use to describe Christian apologists or "scholars"!?



- That's reasonable.

Answer 2

I think that your post here is more likely to invite accusations of being an arrogant pseudo-intellectual. I wouldn't apply that term to Christian apologists. Christian apologists are more like mental contortionists--or maybe illusionists, using trickery or gross mental gymnastics to make people think that they've proved the unprovable.

Answer 3

Disagree, we don't need to be dragged down to their level of personal attacks when reason fails. Name calling isn't going to resolve the issues, it is more likely to exacerbate the situation and make them even more stubbornly refuse to accept evidence.



We should calmly and rationally address their claims, and even if it is unlikely to convince the exceptionally deluded fundamentalists we are more likely to have outsiders become more receptive and accepting when we approach it from a position of peace rather than vitriol.

Answer 4

Disagree. It would be a sweeping generalization to so characterize all Christian apologists.

Answer 5

Why so angry ? and why the name calling ? If it helps you to feel better then call us what you like. You should know, however, that it won't help you develop a Christ-like character. A Christ-like character is the only kind of character that can be trusted in heaven and a Christ-like character is the only kind of character that is capable of enjoying heaven. Hope this helps. God bless.

Answer 6

I don't feel the need for a label, especially such an aggressive one.

Answer 7

disagree christians are far more intelligent than atheist.