There are many good arguments and evidences for Christianity. Being exposed to those is why I'm now a believer after being raised atheist in a secular country.

What I often hear in response to these arguments and evidences is reasons why they're maybe, possibly not true.
They're all well-supported, and I know my belief is justified. But, as with any human knowledge, they're not 100.0% proven. There's room for a little doubt. Therefore, some people feel justified in rejecting them. That's why would-be apologists often get stuck debating stuff...
...like the premises of the cosmological argument, thinking this will defeat the doubter's doubt and drag him over the finish line. No. These arguments can go on ad infinitum, because when someone's determined to hold onto doubt, you're not going to pry him out of it that way.
What Christians need is a different approach, and here it is. Get off the ropes and get onto the offensive. When a critic starts challenging your arguments, stop, and challenge him to present a coherent worldview of his own that accounts for all of the things you've presented.
Ask, what is the non-Christian worldview that explains:

the existence of the universe
order and design
fine-tuning of the universe
the lawfulness of nature
life
human consciousness
objective reality
rational thought
reliability of our senses
morality
good and evil
NDEs / OBEs
Explain that you have a coherent, evidence-based worldview that explains ALL of that. Ask what his worldview is that explains all of it. Explain that this worldview needs to be at least as coherent and evidence-based as Christianity for you to take it seriously.
Do not relent. What you will find is that most critics haven't thought about this, at all. They usually find it sufficient to focus on minor criticisms of your arguments and keep you pinned against the ropes. Turn it around on them. Make them present their own coherent worldview.
You might get, "I don't have to present a different worldview to show that yours is wrong." That's true. But he probably hasn't shown that your worldview is wrong. What he's tried to show is that he's not convinced. Because there's a small possibility that a premise in your...
...argument isn't true. But that applies to even the most well-tested scientific theories. They all leave room for a little doubt. That's not the same thing as proving them wrong or even likely wrong. A possibility that a premise might not be true ≠ argument proven wrong.
Once you've made a reasonable case for a coherent worldview with broad explanatory power, the only way to defeat it is with new evidence that seriously contradicts it or with a superior worldview. Ask your critic if he has either of those.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sarah Salviander

Sarah Salviander Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sarahsalviander

12 Nov
The black hole epic shows that people have an especially difficult time with anything that is vast, strange, and invisible. It's normal to want the emotional comfort of dealing with what is touchable, visible, familiar, and safe.
But this need leads to an attitude that is a significant part of atheistic thinking and has caused science a lot of trouble: "If I can't see it or touch it, it doesn't exist, and I don't have to think about it."
Black holes explode that attitude by demonstrating in the most dramatic way possible that the universe cannot be understood on those limited terms. Black holes are too big and important to ignore; they force people to struggle with something that stretches their understanding...
Read 8 tweets
9 Nov
If you think Genesis 1 belongs in the panoply of other creation stories, or that it copied some of them, I challenge you to actually read those other creation stories and compare them with Genesis 1. The differences are striking. These stories are not even in the same category.
Elements of pagan creation stories:

- chaotic pre-existing cosmos
- first god emerges from the chaos
- produces lots of other gods
- personal drama, warring between gods
- the world and humans made from the corpse of a dead god
- objects like the Sun and Moon personified by gods
Style of pagan creation stories:

- lengthy prose
- dramatic language

Not all non-Abrahamic creation stories follow this exact pattern, but many of them, including the ones supposedly "copied" by the Genesis author, do.
Read 8 tweets
3 Nov
I keep seeing this silly atheist claim that if Christians read their Bibles, they'll stop believing. As if God's Word can testify against God. It's the exact opposite. The more I study scripture, the more my questions are answered, the stronger my faith, the greater my peace.
I experienced something similar in physics. As a freshman, I'd been swayed by alternative physics that flew in the face of conventional science. Agitated, I asked one of these renegade scientists how I could proceed in my university studies if what I was being taught was wrong.
He said it was necessary to master conventional physics before I could reject it, and encouraged me to study hard. So, I did. And through that I realized that conventional physics was actually quite sound. Far from rejecting it, I came to embrace it, and ended up going for a PhD.
Read 4 tweets
29 Oct
Modern physics is sometimes used to claim there's no such thing as objective truth. Is that a valid thing to do? Let's think this through.

We don't know for certain that objective truth exists. We have to assume it. And for certain worldviews, such as Christianity...
...there's a firm basis from which to make the claim that objective truth exists.

So, let's go ahead and assume it does. The question is, does our knowledge of modern physics—the subjectivity of relativity and the probabilistic fuzziness of quantum mechanics—disprove it?
First, the obvious defeaters. If there's no objective truth, then there's no basis for making the claim that modern physics is valid. How do we know modern physics applies for everyone at all times and in all places? Or for anyone anywhere? We don't.
Read 12 tweets
6 Oct
I have no idea how anyone who's read Genesis and knows anything about the history and development of the Earth can say this. It's so utterly, nakedly false that I can only surmise that people repeat it because they assume or want it to be true.

So, a thread about Genesis.
Here are some of the scientifically-verifiable claims made by Genesis:

The universe was created (Gen 1:1) ✔️
Earth initially did not exist (Gen 1:2) ✔️
Continents appeared first (Gen 1:9) ✔️
Then oceans formed (Gen 1:10) ✔️
First life was plant life (Gen 1:11) ✔️
Seed-bearing plants appear (Gen 1:11) ✔️
Sun and Moon become visible from Earth (Gen 1:15) ✔️
Animal life starts in the oceans (Gen 1:20) ✔️
Flying creatures appear (Gen 1:20) ✔️
Giant aquatic animals appear (Gen 1:21) ✔️
Other aquatic animals appear (Gen 1:21) ✔️
Read 9 tweets
5 Oct
The funny thing about gravity is that it's very weak compared with the other forces, but it's also the dominant force shaping the universe on large scales. Sound confusing?

Consider...

Weak: You can overcome the gravity of the entire Earth with just a small magnet.
Dominant: Gravity (indirectly) produces things like this. These are plasma jets shooting out of the core of a galaxy. These jets extend for hundreds of thousands of lys, like streams from a colossal cosmic firehose, big enough to dwarf the galaxy from which they're emanating.
Those plasma jets were produced by a supermassive black hole actively feeding on material. As interstellar gas pours down onto the black hole, the extreme gravity near the black hole speeds it up until it forms a surrounding, super-heated disk of matter. (see illustration below)
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!