A Horrible Attempt at Debunking Christianity

by Max Andrews

One of the blog followers, @DalloDallo on Twitter, sent me the video below.  The video was an attempt by another blog to debunk Christianity in a couple of sentences. Well, watch the video.

To begin with, I want to advocate that Christianity is falsifiable.  However, this is not how to falsify Christianity.  The argument suggests that just because Adam and Eve are fictitious Christianity is false.  Well, that doesn’t follow.  Even if Adam and Eve are theological myth or allegorical, say, of all humanity, then atonement still applies.  This argument is against the theory of universal sin, primarily seminal and original sin (maybe an entailment against atonement).  If theistic evolution is true and Adam and Eve are theological myth, Christianity is still true.  Paul, in 1 Cor. 15.17, says that if Christ had not been raised from the dead then our faith is in vain.  If Christ had not risen then Christianity is not true. That’s the task for falsifying Christianity.  This “one fell swoop” argument is not an argument against Christianity at all.  What they are arguing against is the model of sin (original sin, imputation, inherited, etc.) and an entailment, at best, would be against atonement.  This is an embarrassing argument and demonstrates a complete lack of familiarity with the biblical text, doctrine, and, I know it’s harsh, logic.

9 Responses to “A Horrible Attempt at Debunking Christianity”

  1. How to debunk atheism in a few sentences:

    Atheists say there is no God. But we know this is pure fiction. Therefore, atheism is false.


  2. Not a good argument. I don’t even think Paul says that Christ died for the original sin per se, but for all the fallen who are living IN original sin, so even if A&E are simply an allegorical description of humanity’s heart (although I don’t actually believe that), then Paul’s point is still valid: for just as in ad’am (man, mankind) all died because in ad’am (mankind) all sinned, so Christ died for all who died in ad’am.

  3. Max how do you suggest that Christianity is Falsifiable? Are you suggesting that new archaeological evidence may falsify it? I can see how it could be falsified conceptually but not practically.

  4. “But we know the story of Adam and Eve to be pure fiction,” the narrator boldly asserts, presumably because somehow “evolution proves that Adam and Eve’s story is nothing but, at best, allegorical fairy tale.” Unfortunately, since he was trying to debunk Christianity in one minute and nine seconds, we have no idea how biological evolution is supposed to prove that Adam and Eve never existed. It is a brutal non-sequitur fallacy to reason from the fact that anatomically modern humans arose “from precursor primates” to the conclusion that two particular humans never existed. Since the narrator is probably proud of his argument, I shall be embarrassed for him.

  5. Still to this date the best arguments against Christianity have come from Deists of the enlightenment. Go figure

    Atheists like this make me chuckle :)

  6. If you’re going to call Christians idiots your post won’t be approved. Sorry. We’re looking for something a bit more intelligent.

  7. Trackbacks

Leave a Reply