• Nerd02@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    What do you mean when you say: “christian apologists”? I’m afraid I am not understanding your question and that’s me speaking as a Christian.

    Do you mean people defending Christian positions in thelogical debates? Or is it the name of some niche sect I am not aware of?

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Apologetics is essentially “defending” something as opposed to say proselytizing (in the example of Christianity). It’s frequently used for indefensible topics like rape apologists (the type to suggest the victim was asking for it or could have tried harder to say no) or Nazi’s (the usual propaganda). Christian apologists tend to hand wave or ignore the atrocities because “god is an absolute “good”” therefore anything he does is by definition “good” and us mere mortals can’t understand the divine plan. Babies dying? God is good. Babies dying and going to hell because they are unable to accept Jesus because they literally are unable to understand the concept? God is good.

      • Nerd02@lemmy.basedcount.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I’m sorry that you felt the need to compare those who spread Christian doctrine with rape apologists and Nazis, but there are some things I don’t like about your comment. Chances are you are not interested in hearing them (at least judging from the wording you used), but someone else in this thread might be.

        Yes, God is an absolute good. Yes, we cannot understand Him. Most “atrocities”, like you called them, come from men being given free will by God and drifting away from His teachings, thus doing stuff that isn’t good. God is good.

        If a baby dies and is baptized they go straight to Heaven. If a baby dies and isn’t baptized we don’t actually know for sure what happens (it is never explained in the Bible), but by interpreting other aspects of Christian dogma we can hope and assume that they too would be saved. On this topic I recommend the following read, by the International Theological Commission

        [There are] grounds for hope that unbaptised infants who die will be saved and enjoy the Beatific Vision. We emphasise that these are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge. There is much that simply has not been revealed to us.

        If there are other “atrocities” that you can think of and you’d like to discuss, I’d be happy to.

        EDIT: boy did this blow up. I’m sorry for the replies I have left unanswered but I don’t have the time or energy to give any more nuanced answers on the topic. I am also not an all knowing expert of Christian / Catholic theology, I am simply trying to spread some awareness and a different view, on a platform that is evidently mostly Atheistic. If you have further questions the Internet will likely have the answers you seek, expressed better than I could anyway. Cheers.

        • TheActualDevil@sffa.community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I mean, I don’t believe it but bible believers do; how about the global flood? Various plagues in Egypt as well as ending the whole party with killing off all first-born sons? Commending genocide (multiple times)? Enabling chattel slavery? Obliterating Sodom and Gomora(sp?). Ooh, on that same point, didn’t he just turn Lot’s wife into salt because he looked at her? All the stuff he did to Job to win a bet? And I think Jesus set a wild bear on a bunch of kids because they were bullying some guy?

          Those are off the top of my head, but I know there’s more.

          • Jojo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            There are some protestants who believe the literal words (usually in the King James Bible) are all literally exactly true, but I think the majority of Christians including Catholics and Orthodox believe that it can be metaphorical or mythical in parts. This is often couched in disclaimers saying it’s true, but the truth is it didn’t have to be literal or something like that

            Those who believe everything literally happened have a much harder time defending all the “evil” stuff God did, while those who don’t can at least say we probably just don’t understand that bit.

            • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Everyone believes it to be metaphorical or mythical “in part” the difference is where they draw that line.

              Outside of YEC Flat Earthers everyone believes that passage in Exodus where the sun stopped moving to be a metaphor, but most evangelical Christians still take the creation story to be literal.

      • Nerd02@lemmy.basedcount.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Oh yeah. No doubt about that, you never stop learning. It applies to all aspects of life, not just religion.

        Reading that links it looks like I actually did know what the discussion is about and just got confused. I googled “christian apologists” like OP called it, found no exact definitions and so I started wondering if maybe it was something I didn’t know about. Protestant denominations often have weird names and I keep finding out about new ones, maybe there was also a prot denomination called “apologists”. Guess not, though.

    • iiGxC@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, like one example where I’ve noticed it was the most recent discussion with alex occonor and william lane craig. I’ve also experienced it talking to one of my cousins about religion/christianity, but what inspired this post was the theo von podcast where he had jeffrey long on. He was saying “theo” so often it made me super uncomfortable

      • Nerd02@lemmy.basedcount.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Uh I see. I didn’t know any of those people, so I had to google that discussion between Alex O’Connor and Wiliam Lane Craig. Listened along for quite a bit and it was actually very interesting (so thank you, I’ll definitely finish listening to the whole thing later on).

        From the way the used that “technique” I am guessing it isn’t really that much about Christianity but rather, as others have said, a way to connect to the other person. People often get understandably heated during theological debates (understandably so, our most important beliefs are being challenged), maybe calling the other person by their name is a way to try and remembering the human and forming a sort of emotive connection that could otherwise get lost during the discussion.

        Why specifically Christians? I don’t have an answer to that one. I am guessing it might happen more frequently with religion talks rather than say politics, or other frequent topics of discussion, because religion tends to appeal more often to morality and thus emotions. Just a guess, though.