Oscar takes on: One Minute Apologist

Introduction

During Oscar's time as a Youtuber (none of his work survived), he stumbled across a guy named Bobby calling himself oneminuteapologist. Wylde was quick to note that Bobby wasn't very good at apologizing; in fact, he seemed hellbent on talking about the Bible at every turn possible. This became annoying to Oscar and he asked, "Whyfor dost thou speak so highly of Scripture?" Bobby grinned a plasticy grin and said, "I was once an out of control teen and young adult. Then, I started following a ruleset that prevented me from being out of control. I owe God everything." Oscar was not very satisfied with this answer. After all, anyone can follow rules! What was so special? Wylde set out to find out. He watched numerous videos and came to some surprising conclusions.

Arguments for a Creator or Jehovah?

Out of the 778 videos, some basically duplicates of others, but Oscar noticed a trend. As an example, take video 778, Do the Intricacies of the World Point to a Designer, and 777, Does the Beginning of the Universe Entail God's Existence. Neither one of these is specifically a Christian argument. They are in fact deist arguments. The deist sees something designed as proof of a designer. It says nothing of the rules or regulations, if any, made by the Designer. Many deists say the beginning of the universe entails a Creator because of the Infinite Regress fallacy, that is, all things have a cause and thus there must be some Ultimate that is uncaused. Bobby, rascal that he is, states that these point to Jehovah and Christ without any cause as to why. After all Allah was a creator, why not him? It is precisely this point why the arguments are never used for anything beyond a Creator.

Bobby makes a surprising claim in video 764: doubters are the ones who take things literally. Oscar noticed that logicians must take things literally in order to be used for proofs. It can thus be seen that Bobby thinks logic = doubt. Why is a miracle of Christ to be taken literally, but a prophecy not? Who knows! The Bible is supposed to be inerrant, yet Bobby says those who doubt take things literally. Well, if Jesus didn't literally die and literally rise again (tired of that word yet?) then there's literally no reason to be a Christian. Bobby wouldn't argue that. He would argue that if you doubt, you take things too literally, and that you should pray and not take things literally. In other words, just ignore the doubt and read Scripture how you need to to fit your views.

Paine is really tired of this $#!+

Video 704 briefly discusses some arguments for God's existence. Bobby leaves out the ontological argument for good reason: if God is perfect and must exist because it would be possible to think of a god that is greater than can be conceived would be. In other words, it is reducto ad absurdem. Whether the argument is successful or not is not Oscar's concern. What is is that it only postulates a perfect being. Whether it is Jehovah is not specified. Bobby also mentions the cosmological argument. This is the first cause/infinite regress fallacy already covered above. There is nothing saying the First Cause must be Jehovah, only a Creator able to Cause. The teleological argument is the argument by design already covered. It only dictates a Creator, and thus is no proof of Christianity.

Flawed Reasoning
In video 608, How were the New Testament Books Picked, Bobby states that the books were picked by universal agreement, relation to the writers they were attributed to, and if they agreed with the Old Testament. The problem for him and Christians is that this is self proof, If the Old Testament is true and the New Testament book agrees, then it's a book of the Bible. This begs the question of authority of the book, which Thomas Paine covers thoroughly in The Age of Reason. There is no proof of being inspired. Also, universal acceptance is a bandwagon fallacy.

Thus Oscar Wylde has once again shown that Christianity steals deistic arguments and doesn't even extend them properly.