Religious Apologetics. The Professional Narcissist's Trump Card

A random Christian Fundamentalist said this to me today.

"Modern Apologetics has proven Archeology to be false. Therefor I recommend you put your trust in God not Man as Man is short sighted and simple minded. God sees the whole picture. You just need Faith. Science is really just mans best guess based on a limited understanding of the world around us. Nothing changes about God he is the beginning and the end. I hope you pray on it."

------------
My reply to that nonsense:

The fact that religious fundamentalists don't understand even the basics of science
isn't directly my problem.

Their horrible religion, on the other hand,
is everyone's problem.

Apologetics is just a multipurpose tool for (badly) hiding problems.

It can literally be used to pseudo-harmonize any random assortment of contradictions.

Example:
Statement 1:
Tommy says "Joe just got back from the store, with milk and bread".

Statement 2: (about the exact same Joe, and the exact same event)
Tommy says "When Joe got to the store, it was closed. He wasn't able to get any milk or bread."

Apologetics:
"Out of our devotion to Tommy, we must find a way to make these statements both true.

So let's imagine some unspoken parts of the story.

Let's suppose ... When Joe got to the store, yes. it was closed. So he couldn't get any milk or bread from the store. BUT a Magic Man in the sky gave him some milk and bread.
That way, Joe certainly did still arrive home with milk and bread.
So now, ...
There's no contradiction".
---

That's literally what religious apologetics is.

And it works the same on literally everything.

It works (poorly) for all religions,
all religion's texts,
all courtroom testimonies (if you successfully bribe or threaten a the judge first),
and every bit of gaslighting
that every clinical narcissist will ever GIFT to themselves.
----
Apologetics
is a trump card
that absolutely and utterly renders all facts, logic, and ethics
moot.

Like the Fundie said,
it doesn't matter what the forensic evidence says,
as revealed by forensic science
and a mountain of damning, verified facts,
and iron-clad logic.


FAITH is the "Get Out Of Accountability Free" card
that all religion's apologists print for themselves.





And then they sign the bottom of that card "so sayeth the Lord",
in their own human handwriting.

But whenever an apologist for some OTHER religion does the same thing,
they cry foul.
"Only WE can do that (shady AF) thing!"

Their "faith" trumps all other faiths.

Why?
Because they say it does,
and
because they IMAGINE that a "God" says it does.

Why?
Because they wishfully want it to be true,
and
because they have childishly crutched their entire sense of worth upon that entirely man-made structure.

Worse yet, they've allowed that same foolishness to rob everyone else's worth,
in their own eyes;
- which they narcissistically imagine to be the eyes of a "God".

That's all their fundamentalist religious faith really is.

It's when someone either HAS
clinical Narcissistic Personality Disorder
or is expertly emulating that disorder;
with religious training and religious justification.
---------

Part 2 (follow up)(after he replied with more predictable gaslighting and dodges)
--
My further reply:

When I have faith that a chair will hold me,
that faith is just another way of saying "earned trust" based on an abundance of empirical data; including past personal experiences with that chair, and/or similar chairs.

When someone has religious faith,
they're basing that on emotion-driven narratives
cultivated within their mind by other fallible humans.

They can say and think "but I've personally experienced my God".
And they can liken that to how I've personally experienced the existence, benefits, and reliability of a chair.
And I can certainly understand how that seems like a fair and fact-based comparison.

But I think we should notice all the logical fallacies and hypocrisies
underneath it all; holding it all up.

If someone wants to say "that shouldn't matter", then the discussion is over.

If they're willing to be a non-narcissist and say "of course such things should matter and would discredit anything built upon such a foundation", then the discussion can continue.

Any "faith" which supports itself
isn't really supported by anything.

Any logic employed
which arbitrarily doesn't count the same when someone of a contrary view (or contrary religious narrative) employs it,
is hypocritical.

If a Christian cites any sort of experience, or observation, or facts, or reasoning to support their religious narrative as "the truth",
then they have the option to be not-a-narcissist about it, when people with contrary religious narratives cite the exact same sorts of things to support theirs.

Personal experience reports from a Christian
nullifies the usefulness of "personal experience" as "evidence"
for Muslims, and
rival Christian sects,
and rival fringe groups,
and rival independent "persons of faith",

And vice versa.

If anything (any sort of "evidence") doesn't work as evidence for contrary religions,
then it doesn't work as evidence for yours.
Nor does it just work "better" for yours. Because that too would just be an appeal to personal bias.

You "feel" that it's "true".
But so do people in rival faiths.

You "know" from "personal experience" that it's true.
But so do people in rival faiths.

You have a mountain of religious apologetics which "proves" (to you)
that your existing religious biases are well-enough-reasoned.
But so do people in rival faiths.
Meanwhile, the only facts you honor
are the facts which seem useful as support.

All other facts be damned.

Same with logic.

Same with personal experience.

Whatever supports your narrative
is useful and thus valued and shared.

Whatever doesn't support your narrative
has no value to you and surely shouldn't matter to anyone else.

Whatever directly discredits your narrative
must only "seem to" because "we don't know enough yet",
or was "planted" by The Devil, in order to trick people out of their "salvation".

Everything is subject to your assumptions.
Everything is based on confirmation bias.
So you can never be wrong.

Locking you into that state
is the mistake you made long ago
of letting your perceptions
become your identity.
---

Starting at
Time Index 22:38
here is one Historian/Archeologist
quoting another
about why people who confine themselves to your mind-state
cannot be reasoned with.

https://youtu.be/6Md_xVCCHHQ?t=1358
---
Part 3 (because he kept on talking)


He said:
"People in our world think they all have the answers as if we have conquered science and we know everything. "
---

I replied:


Literally no one thinks that.

He then said: "then why does everyone say follow the science and you will have the answer. "
---
So then I explained:

Sometimes people say something like that
when;
what they really mean is:
"we will eventually find a useful answer about (some specific matter), if we keep using science to look into it"
Example:
cures for various diseases.

Why use science for that?
Because relying on prayers for that
is the lazy versions of witch doctors and voodoo magic.

---

Other times people say something like that
is when:
what they really mean is:
"Science already has some proven-practical/useful answers for (whichever specific issue).
Go read up on it."

They don't mean science has all the answers.

They don't even mean that science will eventually have all the answers.

Nor do they mean that science deals in "absolute facts".
Only child-minds think in such terms.

Gravity is regarded as a fact, within the context of our repeatedly tested and observed experiences.

But gravity is not an absolute fact, because (for example) this could all be a simulation, dream or other type of illusion.
Same with evolution.
Same with the existence of matter.
Same with cake.
We should be 99.99% sure, at most, about all established "facts".
It's a spectrum.

Science is:
Empirical data and logic.
It's simply the most objectively rational and reliable available methodology and criteria available to us;
as expected, per logical reasoning.
and
as shown, per results.

It wasn't religious faith that helped us learn how to communicate in real-time to people on the other side of the earth.

It wasn't religious faith that created computer tech, or solved so many diseases.

Science did that.

Religious "faith" talks a big game; but doesn't produce results that come anywhere near the talk it talks.
----

But let's not mystify science.

Science
is being done
when a toddler puts something in their mouth, to learn more about it.

Wonder,
test,
learn,
test some more,
learn some more.

Actual scientists simply have a more comprehensive and refined methodology; and it's usually safer.

When a rational human being says "Go find out" about something,
that means "go gather empirical data and subject that logical analysis".
It does NOT mean "go adopt an arbitrary faith about it".
---
---
FAITH
is a feeling
masquerading as a fact.
---
---
-----------------------
Part 4. Because he kept on talking.

He said
"We say follow Jesus for he will light your way
(Example : have faith that no matter what happens to your physical form your soul will live for eternity)"
----

To this, I reply:

Thousands
of rival (contrary; mutually exclusive; can't all be true) Christian-themed sects
~say the same thing~.

That includes Jehovah's Witnesses, Roman Catholics, Mormons, various types of Baptists, so-called "non-denominational" churches, etc etc..

They each are referring to a different conceptualization of who-and-what "Jesus" is, what he meant, and which parts are obligatory to people today.

They can't even agree on what will HAPPEN to everyone who dies will disagreeing with them.

Various rival factions of Muslims say the same thing about Mohammed.

Jews used to say the same thing about Abraham.
Small remaining pockets of fundamentalist-Jews still do.

I don't who you mean by "we".

I don't know what you mean by any of it.
Because rival believers all use the same WORDS
but mean something different by those words.

If YOU say "Just follow Jesus"
and then THAT appeals to some random person, ...

That random person
who liked those words
is going to randomly study with random sects, while trying to "find Jesus".
And they're going to get sales-talked into a version OF Jesus
which is NOT THE SAME as yours.

Whose fault is that going to be?
At least partly yours.
Because you left them only with a few catch-phrases and a very vague notion;

- which any random smooth-talker is going eventually giving MEANING to,
if they keep "seeking" and "knocking".
And they will NOT realize they've been duped.

But according to your religious narrative,
your "God" is going to violently torture them forever
for the "crime" of being TRICKED.
And you will get off scot-free, even though YOU set them up for it.

If there a universe where such a grand "plan" could be rationally considered SANE (let alone "Just"), ...
it sure isn't this universe.