Skip to Content
 

Top 100 Atheist Challenges

How can you take the gospels as inspired when they don't even make that claim for themselves?

While it is true that the gospels themselves don’t claim to be the Word of God, 2 Timothy 3:16 does say that all scripture is God-breathed. If it can be independently demonstrated that the gospels (as well as 2 Timothy, of course) are scripture, then it follows that if the statement in 2 Timothy 3...


Miracle stories were crafted AFTER Jesus died, and then included just to make Jesus look like a Jewish wonder working messianic figure. It’s called messianic fiction.

As far as the truth of Christianity is concerned, the only miracle of any consequence is the resurrection of Jesus.  If there is good reason to suppose that this story was not added later to make Jesus out to be a messianic figure, then the question is sufficiently answered (since all the...


There’s no evidence outside of the Bible that indicates the miracle stories about Jesus are authentic!

The question is misguided in that it seems to assume the Bible (and the New Testament specifically) is just a single book.  Not only are there in fact four different sources for the miracles of Jesus in the New Testament (with additional sources contained within those), but there is the...


The New Testament authors were all influenced by pagan religions. Sorry Christians, but Jesus is an unhistorical myth. If you don’t believe me, Google 'Jesus Mithras Osirus Horus'.

Ultimately, an in-depth examination of this issue will require an analysis of each particular case, but in general it ought to be pointed that the authors of the New Testament were Jews who, obviously, regarded the stories of Mithra, Osirus, etc. as false.  Thus suggesting that the early...


In Matthew 27:52-53, it says that after Jesus' death, dead people were resurrected and were walking around Jerusalem. Empirically, how could this have happened, and why?

While certainly possible, a Christian need not be committed one way or the other with respect to whether this purports to describe a historical event, or whether it is Matthew’s gloss on the historical event of the crucifixion in terms of apocalyptic imagery.You may also be interested in...


Reasons why I don’t believe? Well, to start with, the Jesus Resurrection accounts in the Bible contradict one another. Need I go on?

As a matter of fact they do not, as is shown by John Wenham in his book Easter Enigma: Do the Resurrection Accounts Conflict?.  If they did, however, this need not at all detract from their value as historical sources given that they are in agreement with regard to the central details of the...


If "scripture" just is what has been accepted by the Church, then isn't the apocrypha scripture as well?

Actually, the answer to that question is no, because with respect to the apocrypha, the “Church” in question would refer to the believers in the Old Testament (i. e. the Jews). And all the evidence we have (from Josephus and the Talmud, primarily) suggests that the Jews of that time rejected the...


The “Gospel of Judas” was originally in the New Testament and was conveniently “exorcised,” if you know what I mean. That was convenient.

The gospel of Judas, as it exists now, stems from a single Coptic manuscript written between the third and fourth centuries.  Unlike the canonical gospels, it does not cast Judas’ act of delivering Christ over to the authorities as one of betrayal.  Rather, according to the account, Judas...


If you want to know the truth, read the Gnostic gospels – you’ll then understand why the Christian church repressed them for 1,700 years.

The primary collection of such texts stems from what is called the Nag Hammadi library, found in Nag Hammadi Egypt in 1945.  Though the contemporary media likes to make hay as a result of finds such as these, scholars (by and large) agree in relegating the gnostic gospels to the 2nd century....


Given that the gospel accounts were written by BIASED Christians, their content can’t be accorded much legitimacy. Some sources had Al Gore inventing the ‘Internets’, too.

The more relevant question in this context is what it would have taken for the authors of the New Testament to become biased Christians in the first place.  Given that the faith to which they eventually committed themselves hinged on the occurrence of public, objective matters open historical...