Religions Wiki:LayoutApologetics

From Religions Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:

A very brief description of the argument goes here.

Background information

A more in depth description of the argument goes on this section of the page. What is the argument? Where did it originate? When is the first documented case of the argument being used? Who have been its major proponents? Is this argument still being used today, or is it an argument that has made AiG's list of arguments theists shouldn't use?


Joe Blogs version

The first version of the argument may be in the form of a quote from a famous apologist or proponent of the particular argument.

Joe Blogs in Joe's autobiography c.2009

"This is obviously where the body of the quote would go. It would more or less be a copy paste from the source material. For the purposes of achedemic deconstructions most quotes like this should be covered by fair use copy right, but don't make a habit of copying entire pages of information."

Complete Syllogism

This version of the argument may be in the form of an in depth or expanded syllogism which more or less covers all the basic premises, logical steps and conclusions. Every apologetic argument page should contain a syllogistic version of the argument. This serves a two fold purpose. a) it lays the argument out in a clear premise manner that can be followed step by step. This is often

p1. First premise
p2. Second premise
a. Second premise expanded point one
b. Second premise expanded point two
p3. Third premise
a. Third premise expanded point one
b. Third premise expanded point two
p4. Forth premise
p5. Fifth premise
a. Fifth premise expanded one
b. Fifth premise expanded two
c. Fifth premise expanded three
c1. First conclusion
c2. Second conclusion
a. Additional notes about second conclusion
b. More additional notes about second conclusion

Simplified Syllogism

This version of the argument may be in the form of a simplified plain English of the first syllogism. There are often many versions of an argument, differing in both the number of steps and complexity of those steps, but most of them can be broken down to 2–3 premises and a conclusion which adequately covers the core argument.

p1. First premise
p2. Second premise
p3. Third premise
c1. Conclusion

Counter arguments

False premise p2.b: Unproven assertion

This counter argument p2.b(version 2) may be an unproven assertion. For example, a statement about God's character that has no evidence to back it up, or any way of cross-checking. The details of why it is an unproven assertion should be laid out in depth in this section. It is probably also worth mentioning that it would be best for clarity and organization sake to have the counter arguments running in the same step-by-step order as the actual syllogism.

Straw man fallacy p3: Evolution

This counter argument p3.(version 3/simplified version) may be a premise that is just completely wrong and in complete conflict with our current understanding of science. Such as a Ray Comfort statement that males and females had to somehow asexually evolve perfectly side by side before they developed the ability to sexually reproduce. The details of why this premise is incorrect should be laid out in depth in this section. Facts, figures, reasons, references, etc.

Fallacy of reification p4: Real apples

This logical flaw may be a case of fallacy of reification. For example, p4 may state that the apple in my hand is conceptual because the apple in my head is conceptual. Although it is in one of the premises, it is more a problem of logical validity rather than soundness.

Special pleading: What caused God?

This flaw may be a case of special pleading. Perhaps the conclusion is in conflict with one of the premises. Such as the conclusion of the first cause argument that God has no first cause, despite the first premise being that everything has a cause.

Other counter arguments

  • Some arguments for God have a single fairly blatant error, and are fairly simple to dismiss.
  • Others such as the [Transcendental argument#CARM.Org Version |TAG argument] are rather complicated and fractally flawed.
  • More complicated arguments may have many errors, not all of which [Transcendental argument#Other Counter-arguments |justify having their own section].
  • Those additional counter claims should be placed in this section

Additional notes

This is where additional notes on the argument go. This may include something that may completely negate the argument but on a slightly higher meta level isn't really related to the syllogism, or perhaps some additional information related to but separate from the logical validity and soundness of the argument itself.


See also

External links


  • [Wikipedia:main article] - This is may be an article about the subject.
  • [Wikipedia:Peripheral reference] - This is may be an article about a subject related to the argument.

v · d Arguments for the existence of god
Anthropic arguments   Anthropic principle · Natural-law argument
Arguments for belief   Pascal's Wager · Argument from faith · Just hit your knees
Christological arguments   Argument from scriptural miracles · Would someone die for a lie? · Liar, Lunatic or Lord
Cosmological arguments   Argument from aesthetic experience · Argument from contingency · Cosmological argument · Fine-tuning argument · Kalam · Leibniz cosmological argument · Principle of sufficient reason · Unmoved mover · Why is there something rather than nothing?
Majority arguments   Argument from admired religious scientists
Moral arguments   Argument from justice · Divine command theory
Ontological argument   Argument from degree · Argument from desire · Origin of the idea of God
Dogmatic arguments   Argument from divine sense · Argument from uniqueness
Teleological arguments   Argument from design · Banana argument · 747 Junkyard argument · Laminin argument · Argument from natural disasters
Testimonial arguments   Argument from observed miracles · Personal experience · Argument from consciousness · Emotional pleas · Efficacy of prayer
Transcendental arguments   God created numbers · Argument from the meaning of life
Scriptural arguments   Scriptural inerrancy · Scriptural scientific foreknowledge · Scriptural codes