Rebuttal to christianity?

Thought some of the members of the holyground might like to read this.It is an 18 year old's rebuttal to a book written by Tom Short called "5 crucial questions about christianity".VERY GOOD READ!

actually, Id say this is a worthless piece of crap that has been copied from numerous other athiests...nothing new here at all...and somehow I havent changed my mind.

JoshuaB has to be the fastest reader on the face of earth! LOL @ another typical christian walking through Life applying common sense to every aspect of life except proof of Jesus/god! You obviously didn't read the entire article in less than 15 min.

haha...granted, I didnt read all of it, but I read the beginning bits about faith, I read the contextual arguments, I read most of whats here, looking for something new...I love a good debate with new ideas, unfortunately, none of these ideas qualify as new.

Well, if any christian here bothers to read the entire article I would like to hear their opinion!

JoshuaB, making the assumption that there are no good arguments, or that there is nothing new, without reading the entire article??? Sounds Like EVERY other Christian i've ever met. An absolute refusal to think outside the box.

Machine, have you read in it's entirety, "Evidence that demands a Verdict"?


I did in fact go back to read the entire article, however, all of these questions have been answered over and over and over again, by people much more intelligent than myself. You can accept the answers or you can't. Which of those two are not my concern, but there are answers to every rebuttal...the thing is...the kid wrote the article, took the time to show the guy this, but what the kid really wanted was for someone else to tell him he is right, just like you do now. Your looking for validation, and if you can group me in with "every other christian I've ever met" well then, its simple enough, I must be foolish and not willing to think. Its just simply not possible for an intelligent person to believe that that.

The kid wrote an article saying "you believe in the bible, well AH HA, I have compiled a list of rebuttals that no matter what answer you give, I will know that Im right"

I call bullshit on that...because thats all it is. There is no reason any believer when presented with something like that should have to go through it line by line to rebut everything. Why should we have to? The person who wrote it has already drawn thier conclusion, its very apparent from the style of writing.

so why shouldnt the believer have to answer that question?

Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

Its very obvious you hold little regard for christianity, if its not the case, please let me know, but you did call it "garbage" in a previous post.

You tell me, what would make you believe? Even though I could provide a rebuttal for every one of those scriptures, I won't, because it holds no water to you....why should I take the thing I hold to be most sacred and allow you to tear it apart? I'll tell you, I shouldn't. Because you don't care, not because I cannot provide valid answers.

Now, go read evidence demands a verdict, in its entirety, and then tell me what YOU think of it. but if you can't then your just another close minded athiest refusing to think outside of your box.

Although I have not read mr.mcdowell's evidence that demands a verdict in it's entirty,I can tell you it doesn't address questions of an atheist it adresses questions a believer might have. ( I am refering to vol.1)I am still in the process of reading it.But I have read "evidence for joy".A Christian feel good classic.

I am not looking for validation in my beliefs, I just thought this article might promote some free thinking among christians!

And as far as me trying to change your mind all I can say is someone who holds emotion as his standard of evidence will not be moved by rational, clear-cut explanations. Reason begets reason, faith begets faith. Therefore, someone who already holds christianity as an absolute truth will not be inclined to reconsider his experience as metaphysically irrelevant. For example, someone who holds his emotional attachment to religion as a standard, then trying to give him rational arguments will not work : it will have no emotional resonance for him, and therefore will be unuseful for his own ideas of the world!

evil that is not a rebuttal against Christianity, there are many acceptable thoughts associated with those facts. One is that the bible is not meant to be a scientific treatise. Another is the gap theory. Another is that God made it that way to screw up the scientists, that is actually my favorite :)

Those might be rebuttals to fundementalists, but they do not make up a huge contingent of us, just the loudest, and usually most obnoxious.

the rev

machine, have you read the bible through? Have you read CS Lewis? Evidence that demands a Verdict is not just for believers??


Yes I have read the bible (several times)I have one at my desk that I read almost on a daily i havn't read CS Lewis , but I will. Any Suggestions??

Might I suggest a book you could read?:"Losing faith in faith from preacher to atheist" By Dan Barker.

Machine has gained much respect from me.

the rev

BTW Megalodon is 2-15 million years old.

Well, I tried to read the article but was immediately turned off, when mr. Jacobs reveals an utter ignorance of Christianity with regard to "faith." If he'd have done some simple biblical referencing he'd have searched out the Greek/Hebrew words and understood that Christian faith is very much a "trust." And not simply a blind trust. When Christians/bible use "faith" they're mostly speaking of a trust. And then his semantical tirade gets real murky. "I don't have faith in the cars not to hit me, but I trust that they won't, unless they're unmanned... blah, blah, blah. If the remainder of his arguments are of this caliber, it's not worth a read.

I also don't care for the fact that he states that Christians use "God is real cuz the bible says so, the bible is real cuz God says so." I personally have never heard Christians say that. And then he denies that any "credible" atheists use the "I haven't sensed God so He mustn't exist" argument. Seems the bias runs strong in this kid.

Hmmm. Wisdom teeth are anti-design evidence? Me thinks not. Could it be that civilization and diet have possibly influenced jaw/teeth size? He really should do some research, since he begins his article with, "I like to view both sides to arguments.." He says pseudogenes serve no purpose. I think that's still being debated. He states earlier that "Just b/c we can't detect God doesn't mean He doesn't exist." Yet, he assumes b/c he hasn't researched enough to learn of recent pseudogene findings that they must be useless.

(CUT) Pseudogenes are often referred to in the scientific literature as nonfunctional DNA, and are regarded as junk. But more scientists are now conceding that this is far from true for many pseudogenes. Failure to observe pseudogenes coding for a product under experimental conditions is no proof that they never do so inside an organism. It is also impossible to rule out protein expression based solely on sequence information, as DNA messages can be altered by, e.g. editing the transcribed RNA, skipping parts of the sequence, etc. Moreover, the inability to code for a protein useful to an organism hardly exhausts other possible functions pseudogenes may have.(PASTE)

I may read more later, but as Josh has already stated, a few clicks of the internet and a google search could rebut most of his "rebuttal."


"If you want a rebuttal to christianity just take a course in college. Just today my friend in Geology class held a 3 million(maybe 30) year old Megalodon Tooth and a 30000 year old peice of pottery."

Maybe it is 3 BILLION years old. Or maybe 3 THOUSAND. What makes your or anyone else's best guess correct? The absolute best myth is that the Bible makes a claim that the Earth is __ years old.

Seems a bright kid.

No one ever answers my questions though.

What do I do with the experiences I have had? Can I in good faith abandon the very real observations in my own life just because they were either subjective, or could not be scientifically verified?

I have heard his arguements before, and I agree that neither side has irrefutable evidence regardless of what they "feel is true". I know what I have seen, felt, heard, and experienced to be the truth. I hope others have the chance to experience the same things someday.

the rev


Sorry if my last post sounded harsh. I wrote it at the end of the day on my way out, so I was a bit rushed, reading over it, I saw it could be taken as an attack against you. Thats not what I intended. I just wanted to show you that neither side whose mind is already made up is going to have thier mind changed by rebuttals, and when your in a situation where your dealing with a fundamentalist and they are talking about politics or whatever to you, you know where they stand, and very often I'd avoid having a dicussion with them in regard to certain things beccause I know what they think and where it would lead, and I just don't want to go down that path because it won't resolve anything. Thats the reason the author treated the kids letter the way he did, it wouldn't have been appropriate to go over the letter in front of an entire group who had gone to see a speaker spend all his time writing a rebuttal that for most people there it wouldnt have been beneficial. What he should have done is offered to start a dialouge, much like the ones we hold here, to have an open exchange, these are the things I think that cause peoples minds to change.


No problem I never felt you were attacking me personally,I understand where your coming from 100%! Just understand I didn't start this thread to try to disprove christianity/prove atheism!(I know better than that) I just thought it was a well written rebuttal(for an 18 year old).I thought it raised some good points.

Although I am not trying to change a christian's mind/HEART about their faith' I would say that I 'm on a never ending quest to prove that we atheist arn't evil people with no morals ect...some of us are really good people. For example I can honestly say I agree with almost everything the rev post's (except the god part)I just don't understand why christians get so upset when someone questions the validity of their religon, I havn't experienced that as much from people of different faiths, Why is that?

Well, I certainly cannot answer why all christians get so upset when someone questions the validity of thier faith. What I can tell you is like Rev said, Ive had experiences that if I am being honest with myself, have shown me God. and the God Ive been shown is the God of christianity, what am I do to with that? I think part of it is that you havent experienced what the christian does...that in itself is a significant experience. Also, through no fault of your own there hve been some first class asshole athiests making all the christians think that athiests are horrible people. I dont think that your evil or that you have no morals...certainly not. But Id venture a guess that a lot of the morals that you have find thier base in a judeo christian tradition...this is the case most of the time if you are in the western world.

I dont think that I really get upset, it just exasperates me when I see someone give me a book by bertrand russell and they say "well this explains it"...I dont work that way, because there are so many objections, Ir eally dont care to write another novel to rebut his. I know rebuttals to those questions, and its fine to address those, one at a time, one person to another, but to answer a thesis with another thesis I just find to be ineffective. You have to remember, to most christians, the scriptures are the source for our beliefs, when someone who does not understand them, takes them out of context to try and show an inconsistancy that is a product of misunderstanding, and use it to build a defense against a christianity that does not even exist, I dont feel like that person is going to have an open mind/heart to the fact that they may in fact be incorrect...I hold these things to be sacred, and what we hold to be sacred, whatever it is, we want to defend that. WHen someone attacks something that you hold sacred, what would you do?

Does that help explain why you might encounter this type of behavior?