Stump the Christian?

[FatAndFaithless]

Fair enough.

[SteveII]

Yeah but what breaks the whole jesus thing is even historians agree that a biblical jesus never existed. Whats even more damning against christianity 
there has been jesus like figures before in mythology. yeshua or jesus never even existed or even died there is not historical evidence outside of the bible.
Also mary his mother also never existed either. So yeah the bible its a bunch of lies/metaphors. 

Ugh, not another stupid "Jesus never existed" argument... I don't think that any three words you typed in a row have any real value.

[dyresand]

Yeah but what breaks the whole jesus thing is even historians agree that a biblical jesus never existed. Whats even more damning against christianity 
there has been jesus like figures before in mythology. yeshua or jesus never even existed or even died there is not historical evidence outside of the bible.
Also mary his mother also never existed either. So yeah the bible its a bunch of lies/metaphors. 

Ugh, not another stupid "Jesus never existed" argument... I don't think that any three words you typed in a row have any real value.

Well if he did there would be historical evidence. 



Then again i don't believe the bible to be true. If anything the bible is all metaphors now.
Because back then you could lie and people would believe you for the most part. 

[SteveII]

Ugh, not another stupid "Jesus never existed" argument... I don't think that any three words you typed in a row have any real value.

Well if he did there would be historical evidence. 



Then again i don't believe the bible to be true. If anything the bible is all metaphors now.
Because back then you could lie and people would believe you for the most part. 

Here is a link from another thread on this subject. Tim (the author) is an atheist. http://www.strangenotions.com/author/tim-oneill/

[FatAndFaithless]

I believe the historicity of jesus is the topic of another thread even just on this forum.

[dyresand]

I believe the historicity of jesus is the topic of another thread even just on this forum.

It's the one that questions the bible. 

[Ravenshire]

I think evolution should be studied. However, I do object to the teaching as fact, that all life has evolved from nothing and everything has a common ancestor.

(emphasis is mine)
Evolution is a fact. Obviously your schooling failed you. Evolution has nothing whatsoever to say about the origins of life and I think I speak for most when I say I would be very skeptical of an teacher or text making the above (bolded) claim. And yes, we can be traced back to a common ancestor of all life, whether you like it or not.

I think the science curriculum should stop at describing what the theories are and how they work and not stray into statements best left to other fields (like philosophy and religion).

And who decides what part(s) of evolution get left to philosophy and religion? You? How 'bout we let the evidence dictate whether it's science or philosophy. So far the evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of it being science.

[Randy Carson]

How can I corner, of course with my words, Christians and make them feel they have no choice but admit to rethinking their position or part of their positions when it comes to the bible or their god? I usually go fishing online at conservative news sites like Breitbart News Network. I'll click on a story or headline, look down at the comments and either look for key words that Christians use or post a stimulating comment, which they would of course feel the need to correct me or defend their so called faith. Is there any tools or creative weapons of reason and logic that I can use to stump them?

If you're disrespectful and go for the shock value (like many in this forum), you will be dismissed out of hand and be another example of the "new atheist" that think that their ideas are somehow new, everyone else is stupid, and mockery and ridicule is the best tool (as Dawkins encourages) to accomplish the enlightenment of the masses. 


I will caution you. If you ask a good question of an intelligent Christian that he/she cannot answer, you may just end up helping them. If they go research the issue, they will learn that the question has been asked and answered before. So, you may be inadvertently and indirectly educating Christians. BTW, several of you on this forum have served me in this way, so...thanks!

If you want to be an effective atheist evangelist, you will have to know what Christianity teaches FROM Christian sources. If you get your information of what the Bible teaches or what Christians believe from forums like this, it will be very clear very fast you do not understand what it is you are attacking and again be dismissed or waste time running down  tangents. 

Amen.

[Esquilax]

I think evolution should be studied. However, I do object to the teaching as fact, that all life has evolved from nothing and everything has a common ancestor. I think the science curriculum should stop at describing what the theories are and how they work and not stray into statements best left to other fields (like philosophy and religion).

When we can literally see evolution happening before our eyes, in the lab, I'd kinda like to know what you would consider a fact, if evolution doesn't count. My family breeds dogs: I've seen the line evolve over the years. If something we can witness, record and track doesn't count as factual, what does? 

And while I have not really followed the campaign for creationism in the science classroom, does it really matter? Is this really a disaster as some claim? If you want to discuss other creation stories from other religions, who cares? It might be better for students to understand there are other views.

Are you seriously asking why we wouldn't want students in schools to be taught untrue things? Or at least, let me soften my wording to be accurate, things that have no evidence for them?

Can you give me an example of the anti-science stance of the Christian right? I send my daughter to a very conservative Christian college (Grove City College). They have a stellar reputation in the STEM subjects and graduates are snapped up by Fortune 100 companies 4 weeks before graduation. 

And yet you just betrayed your serious misconceptions about a cornerstone field of modern biology; the christian right's hardline defiance of evolution is the poster boy of anti-science stances, as is their cavalier attitude to manmade climate change, their opposition to medical treatment in favor of prayer (in some cases) and so on. That was just off the top of my head.

[henryp]

Late to the party, but if you were trying to convert someone, stick to the aspects that can't be true, rather than the things that can't be proven or seem unlikely.

That being said, there's not really a lot of reason to try and convert someone unless you are somehow certain they will be happier with the results of non-belief. That's usually a one-way street.

Religious people are trying to get us into heaven. That's a nice thing to do, despite it being misguided in our opinion.

Our motivations are a little more unclear. We want them to 'see the truth', but whether that's better or not is up for debate, and it probably isn't our call to make that decision on their behalf. So, outside of some more extreme circumstances, I'd say just politely discuss things rather than try to defeat them to the point they give up their faith.

(side note: nobody in the history of ever has ever been convinced of anything in a comments section)