Thunderf00t, a popular atheist on YouTube, posted this video a few days ago:
I didn't like this video. Seemed to me like he was stretching quite a bit just to take another jab at Christians. Thunderf00t has produced some excellent videos, but I didn't count this one among them. After watching it, I just forgot about it and moved on.
Then I saw this video by YouTuber HappyCabbie:
This video led me to HabbyCabbie's blog entry about Thunderf00t's video: What does a Shepherd mean to a Christian?. I thought he made some good points, and pretty much echoed what I already thought: Thunderf00t is critiquing something he doesn't understand. Oh well. Nobody's perfect. I didn't think much of it after that.
Then I saw Hemant praising Thunderf00t's video on his blog: The Lord is My Shepherd: A Horrifying Thought.
This led to my responding to Hemant's entry by posting a link to HappyCabbie's article in the comments section. Most of the Friendly Atheist's readers paid no mind to little ol' me, but a couple readers noticed. Commenter Robert W, who's obviously a Christian, thanked me for posting the link. Someone named starskeptic replied to me with this: "I must be missing what’s good about this response." I would prefer that starskeptic actually explain what's wrong with HappyCabbie's blog entry, instead of just dismissing it offhandedly.
That's when I considered the irony. Indeed, some atheists will agree with Thunderf00t because they actually agree with him. Some atheists (like me) will disagree with his interpretation of Psalm 23. But some atheists will agree with Thunderf00t because Thunderf00t is a popular atheist, or because Thunderf00t is "on the same team." Now who's the sheep?
We want our criticisms to be good. Don't we? I know I've spent a lot of energy explaining that being an atheist doesn't automatically make you a critical thinker, but I'm trying to offer the benefit of the doubt here. If you agree with what Thunderf00t says in the video, fine. Just make sure you have good reason to. "Because it makes fun of Christians" isn't a good reason. "Because I'm an atheist" also isn't a good reason.
If someone wants to criticize me, fine. I can't possibly be right about everything I think, say or write. The criticisms should be well thought-out. The truth is, sometimes the religionists are correct when they accuse atheists of attacking straw men.
I say this because, as much as some non-theists don't want to admit it, sometimes the apologists of religion score legitimate points. That's not to say they ever actually prove their religion is correct; quite the contrary, in fact. In those situations in which their religion is being attacked, they counterstrike by exposing the flaws in the arguments of their critics, thus further confirming their misguided notions and causing theists to high-five each other because their house of cards didn't come crashing down this time.
We must remain skeptical, even when it comes to the arguments of those whom we consider to be "on the same side." When I was a Christian apologist, I wanted the arguments for my faith to be solid. As a result, I found myself debating Christians as often as I debated atheists. I’ve always had the tendency to turn the axe of radical criticism inward. That may be a significant factor in my de-conversion from religious faith. Of course, the more I swung the axe, the more the arguments and evidences for Christianity toppled over. I had no choice. I refused to settle for weak arguments. And regardless of which side of the theological fence I currently find myself, I still refuse to accept weak arguments. My only choice, therefore, is to continue to turn the axe inward, which at times means I will critique thinkers with whom I agree, taking on the role of devil's advocate.
Think what you will of the content of either Thunderf00t's video or HappyCabbie's response, but I can at least respect HappyCabbie's intentions.
Dead-Logic.com
