Apologetics and the Evidential Problem of Bad Christians

In reply, ... I agreed with Rauser's observation. However, I then added my own observation. To paraphrase my own initial comment, I pointed out: At least one bible writer (the anonymous and non-eyewitness writer of "Matthew") insisted such failure of character proves such persons do not really speak for their favorite patriarchal deity. I then proceeded to observe how Conservative Evangelical Christians, **in the highlighted video clips** were laughing gleefully. But they weren't enjoying something clean and innocent. They were enjoying their own failed character, in ironic defiance of their own religion's founders' standards. -The very same standards that MaverickChristian decries as unfair. I expressed each of those points this way: "Bible: "You will know them by their fruits" Conservative Evangelical Christians: "LOL" -------- In reply, many random viewers have agreed with me. However, this is when a random Christian decided to object to my observations.

9

Highlighted reply

@MaverickChristian

11 hours ago

That passage was talking about people, not beliefs. Saying Christianity is false because Christians have done terrible things is still an ad hominem fallacy. ---

My reply to "MaverickChristian" begins here:

The ad hominem fallacy occurs when someone attacks the character, motives, or other personal attributes of a person making an argument, rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. 

This Latin phrase translates to "to the person," and it is a logical fallacy because the personal attack is irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of the argument being made. 
Instead of engaging with the merits of a viewpoint, the fallacy seeks to discredit it by discrediting the person who holds it, often using personal insults, accusations of self-interest, or highlighting hypocrisy. Why it's a fallacy:
Irrelevance:A person's character, appearance, or circumstances do not affect the validity of their argument. 
Emotional Appeal:Ad hominem attacks often appeal to emotions and prejudices rather than facts, diverting attention from the actual issues at hand. 
Poor Argumentation:It is considered a form of poor argumentation because it avoids genuine debate on the merits of a claim. 

----
Is this what I did?

Before I answer that, notice something important here:

MaverickChristian is inadvertently accusing the author of "Matthew" of committing the Ad Hom fallacy. 

When I cited that passage, MaverickChristian accused the writer's own specifically stated purpose of that *test** as an Ad Hominem fallacy. 

However, is that what Not-Really-Matthew and I really are guilty of?

No.

Not-Really-Matthew (author of "Matthew") was simply pointing out that anyone claiming to have spent all day at the GOD-BEACH and yet has no GOD-TAN, ... surely did not just come from there.


Now, I'll agree they've been walking some sort of metaphysical beach. 

 Just as importantly, I do not doubt their joy. 
But their happy place has been running red with the blood of non-consenting victims for thousands of years. 

 In some cases, the ethical compromises of Christians are not so extreme.

For some people, we could chalk it up to:
Christian person(s) having a bad day,*IF*  
a.)
Their normal behaviors are exemplary,
and if 
b.) Their worst behaviors are only mildly problematic. 

However, our diagnosis should look deep enough to discern if this is the case. 

A Tree and its Fruit
15Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.…

Berean Standard Bible · Download

Cross References

Galatians 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, / gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Consider also:
 2 Corinthians 5:17.


Being a "new creation" refers to the transformative experience of becoming a Christian, where old ways of life pass away and become new through faith in Christ, resulting in a spiritual rebirth and renewal. 
Ambassadors for Christ
…16So from now on we regard no one according to the flesh. Although we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away. Behold, the new has come! 18All this is from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:…

My point remains:

Such persons are clearly not:
a.) Manifesting the alleged fruits of the alleged "Spirit".

Nor are they:
b.) "A new creation".

Not-Really-Matthew (author of "Matthew") INSISTED upon this as an objectively measurable *litmus test*.

And yet,
Conservative Evangelical Christians all (yes, each and every one) not only FAIL that test, ...
They fail it spectacularly.

Many also literally LAUGH about failing it.

However,
that TEST isn't an Ad Hom.

Assessing/grading a self-declared Christian's CHARACTER is not a way of avoiding the point.
It IS the point.

Now, let's add even greater clarity to these issues.

This should go on the record, too.

 I was only partly agreeing with Not-Really-Matthew (author of "Matthew").
I agree that epic and habitual failures of that test DO prove that such persons have NOT been enjoying a real communion, "indwelling", or even EXPOSURE to a perfect BEING's radiant and transformative power. However, ... Where Bible-writers and I disagree ALSO matters here. They presume such a relationship has been transpiring between: a.) such a BEING and b.) countless many humans. - But since we're still on that topic, I'm calling Bullshit on that. In reality, the very most character-impressive "Christians" fail to outshine the character of humanity's best differently theistic people. Nor do they outshine humanity's most virtuous non-theistic people. Christianity is a fantasy theme. It's like Wiccans, shamans, and witch doctors. It's for people who are unsatisfied with any sense of value or empowerment they could get from the real world. So they play make-believe to supplement what they feel like they're missing. Such ego-crutches stunt progress towards rational and psychosocial maturity. Generally, such people are extra-lovely whenever they're playing with flowers and crayons. And yet, being stuck within the psychology of a child renders such persons dangerously unpredictable when ethical urgencies arise. Here, we see exactly what we should expect to see when people haven't yet done the work it takes to become greatly self-aware, compassionate, or accountable. For some "Christians," that damage is greatly (but never completely) mitigated by sufficiently powerful exposure to healthy *secular* experiences, especially during formative years of youth. We call those Christians "progressive". However, political Conservativism is a smokescreen for anyone who has never strongly developed character virtues like compassion, empathy, or social accountability. Whenever this mixes with a moral-authoritarian religion, a person's worst traits are amplified. This is where we see humanity's most dangerous people indulge their own brains' narrative-generation reflexes to continuously generate fantasies that preemptively demonize every person they perceive as an outsider, along with every situation they find irrationally threatening.

.