The Challenge of Disproving the Mythological “Straw Man” Argument

“Expert” debaters on the WordPress forum, especially when it comes to defending atheistic evolution, love to throw around the “straw man” accusation at Theists.

More often than not, especially when an accusation of the mythological “straw man” gets thrown around, people feel misrepresented because they are misrepresenting themselves. They fail to nail down their position to anything except for the ole’ “I don’t believe and I don’t have to prove why I don’t believe” line. Then they bemoan any other attempt to get the conversation beyond the point of “I can’t disprove the existence of God any more than I can disprove a unicorn, a one-eyed purple people eater or a flying spaghetti monster.”

Well, I can’t disprove that a giant spruce tree didn’t light the fuse to set off the multicolored atomic bomb that created the mother of all black holes which then led to the stretching of alien DNA thus resulting in life on Earth 43.298347 years later, and neither can you! But then again, that’s not my proposition. My proposition is that life was created by the Supernatural Being who can be seen through nature and whose will can be understood through the Bible.

in modern philosophy the straw man lives

(Photo credit: Templestream)

So let’s the put the proverbial shoe on the other foot for a moment.

There are those who contend for and hold to the proposition that says life is nothing but a chemical process and that we’re nothing but “higher thinking” animals with no soul and no ultimate responsibility, but to that I say, “PROVE IT.” Prove to me that life can come from non-life. Until that can be proven, any atheistic evolutionist debater and “believer” is sidestepping the exact thing that they require from Theists – the burden of proof through scientific testing.

But then answer of, “I don’t have the answer(s) because we’re still learning” will be given as if that’s a proper permission slip to keep from being “pigeon-holed” into anything.

So let me get this straight – the only thing that you will say is that you don’t believe in God, but you can’t disprove that He exists, yet you’re still sure that He’s not out there. Talk about circular reasoning!

Let’s try it like this: You (as an atheistic evolutionist) believe in a-biogenesis, but can’t prove that it exists, yet you’re still sure that it’s out there.

A belief in one is chosen over the other with the later lacking as much supposed scientific proof as the former yet still receiving the scientific benefit of the doubt! And to say such a thing is a “straw man” argument??? How does that misrepresent the argument?

The mythological “straw man’s” life didn’t even come from “nothing” but rather something to which people hold on to when they believe in something that can’t be nailed down. So before the next “straw man” accusation gets propped up out in the debate garden, please remember to be equal and rational with the “prove it” challenge.

Now if I could only disprove that the “straw man” even exists…wait a second, I can’t disprove something that I don’t believe in! Right?

#atheism, #debates, #evolution, #existence-of-god, #straw-man, #theology