Let me try. Because you like Wikipedia, so will I. But i'll be cropping your arguments if they are too long, I will still answer the whole, original "argument". Please realise, though, that this is not answered by a priest nor scholar, but a believing student that shares his point of view on "common sense".
i'll also accent words by _underscoring_ not CAPSING because it focuses way nicer.
Dear erisblastar
"1. My first reason for losing belief was that I learned evolution is true. (...)"
If your argument is based on dissing with a "Christianity cannot immediately explain away" concept, it's not an argument. Does a discussion require a clock? I find this more of a neutral statement. As of the evolution - it's just a theory that may or may not be true. How come other animals didn't evolve to create hivemind or other exotic form of civilisation?
"2. On that note, one of the historical problems of the Bible is that there is absolutely no evidence for any Adam or Garden of Eden. In fact, there is much evidence against it, most of it from the findings that support evolution."
While I don't prove that Garden existed, it may be treated like a story.
"3. Another historical problem with the Bible is that it is abundantly clear to any student of geography that there has never been a global flood. There cannot have been. There’s no evidence from the rocks. Besides, there isn’t enough water on the planet."
"4. Further, not even Abraham is a historical character. He is a literary invention, as even Wikipedia shows."
Well, if wikipedia says so. But even Wikipedia is _unsure_ wherever he did or did not exist.
"5. Continuing the historical problems, Moses is another character from the Bible who never existed. There was no wandering through the desert for 40 years, and no plagues of Egypt, and no Commandments from Mount Sanai. I’m not a historian and this is meant to be brief, so I’m not presenting the evidence for these last few assertions, but these Biblical figures being fictional is almost as commonly accepted among historians as evolution is among biologists.
"6. On a different hand, there are several moral problems with Christianity and/or the Bible. In particular, the Bible forbids neither slavery nor rape. Indeed, it allows the beating of slaves as long as they don’t die for at least a day or two (Exodus 21:20-21). In the case of rape, the woman can be put to death for adultery if she doesn’t scream loud enough (Deuteronomy 22:23-24) or be forced to marry her rapist (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). Clearly, these are NOT moral positions! (If you disagree, please seek help.)"
So. I disagree. Grab Catechism of the Catholic Church if you're looking for law regarding men.
Also I have _never_ seen, heard etc of using Deuteronomy in our "time".
Is this a problem with Christianity? No.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22&v...
Bible doesn't forbid slavery and rape?
I. It's the Old Testament.
II. From what I know slavery isn't forbidden because it's common (do you realise I'm talking about the times author wrote the Deutheronomy?).
III. Because rape is not forbidden it _does NOT_ mean it's allowed.
(sorry for using KJV)
"7. Further, many sects of Christianity still forbid all forms of homosexuality, masturbation, and extramarital sex. While we should certainly not approve of cheating, there is no reason to forbid other consenting acts of sex. (...)"
O. Sects? Okay...
I. How does this prove || disprove God?
II. Because homosexuality is unnatural event. We (so do I) believe that God created "Adam and Eve". That's how babies are not born.
III. Wet dreams? Show me quote of the Bible concerning this.
IIII. Love is not only about senseless and brainless pleasure.
V. You say before God, that you love her/him (your spouse) and next few years you say: "well, God. I don't love her but I love another one. Sorry but I made a mistake". There may be good reasons for divorce, that's why it's not forbidden, but _strongly_ and often denied (more of a last resort).
"8. Another moral problem with Christianity, or at least many sects of it, is that it forbids abortion and contraception. There is no moral argument for forbidding contraception. It does not end a life; it prevents one from beginning. (...)"
My, you are totally wrong and you even don't know it.
I. _If_ "There is no moral argument for forbidding contraception. It does not end a life;" Well done, you just used your own argument to prove, that if purpose of _abortion is to end life_ (KILLS) it is morally "wrong / bad / evil".
II. Contraception pills? You mean those hormones and chemicals women take, and then the fertilized egg can't merge(?) with womb? It's the _same_ as abortion, but here the child doesn't have the body which could defend it from killing her.
The problem with abortion is not due to killing - we all should know that's bad.
The problem lies in rape.
"However, if it is entirely illegal, it leads to women being thrown in jail for miscarriages."
Please - evidence. I need to use arguments, so i need sources."
"To me, this alone is enough to convince that abortion needs to be legal for at least the first trimester."
This is becoming absurd. Hey, lets kill someone if we "just don't have the time to be a parent".
Absurd: Yes, it's legal to kill during first trimester, but you shan't kill a second after.
Who gave you right to decide of life and death?
"9. Perhaps one of the more galling arguments put forth by Christian apologists is that of morality, claiming that the existence of morality is proof of their god."
When we are done ridiculing each other's beliefs - so if I disprove your argument nr 6 and your second argument, do I win disproval of number 9?
Morality _is_ natural, even if it has been created by God.
How does it disprove?
"10. The least moral Christian teaching, however, is the requirement of faith to avoid Hell. I hope I need not explain more than to point out that some people, such as myself, are apparently incapable of holding a conviction without evidence. Why would a god make me this way, then doom me to eternal torment for being this way?"
Bad point, bad argument. It'd be an honour to have it explained, cite or something please.
Until I get an answer, I shall only say : It requires faith because of nature of God.
If religion named "Randomigion" was based on _knowledge_ not _faith_ what would it be?
We all knew God existed, thus we all because of _fear_ of going to hell became "Randomigion believers" and stayed this way, crumbling and dying while thinking if we did something against our God.
But we (at least I am) are Christians of Christianity. We know we require faith because of not knowing of God's Power and Might we have _free will_ and _love_ that we can display to others. We can believe or not. Also - Jesus said we all have been saved. But we still have to learn the love the way it truly and really is.
"11. This leads nicely to one of my other problems. If the Christian God were real, if He were omniscient, omnipotent, and wanted me to join Him in Heaven when I die, and if believing in Him was the first requirement for that, wouldn’t He give me everything I need to believe? And yet, I find absolutely no evidence, not evidence a convincing argument. I simply cannot believe, and if the Christian god were real, I would."
Well, this argument is based on same concept as number 10, so my answer applies here as well.
"12. Indeed, it is difficult to tell that all Christians believe in the same god. There are so many disagreements between the over 40,000 denominations that one is forced to wonder how all-powerful that god could be. After all, I could probably write a book that is interpreted fewer than 40,000 different ways; why couldn’t god do that with the Bible?"
Because of translation errors and way the languages change, we get other tenths of 9,000 different ways and wording of "Jesus walks on the water".
"13. The most classic reason to doubt Christianity is the problem of evil. I simply cannot believe that an all-loving being is watching over a world wherein child rape exists. I differentiate this from the problem of suffering, in that I could accept that some suffering is necessary even with an all-loving and all-powerful God in charge, but the unnecessary and ceaseless suffering of countless innocents in natural disasters worldwide is simply too much. Tsunamis, hurricanes, child cancer, parasites that eat a lamb’s brain as it slowly dies… how can anyone look at that and still believe in a loving deity capable of stopping such monstrosities?"
"14. I have one last historical argument. The character of Jesus in the gospels is possibly fictional, and certainly not as miraculous as described. Historical consensus is that the man did exist, but there are compelling arguments that he was a myth who was historicized, much like Hercules. In any case, most historians see all the contradictions among the various gospels as evidence that many of the events described never happened. Indeed, very little is left. However, this is an argument I am still studying."
Show me contradictions. I don't know what the other people said, but i really want to.
I take you are still studying this argument, so i will wait for it to be refined.
"15. My final main point is that Christianity causes harm. I cannot begin to list the harms that have come from following Christianity. From slavery, to child abuse (“Spare the rod, spoil the child”), to persecuting gays… These are not isolated incidents. They happen over, and over, and over. Why would a loving god allow such behavior from his earthly representatives?"
Once again this I have answered, thus repeating an argument doesn't mean is a new one.
Also, if you cannot begin to list the harms, how can you prove it does cause harm?
From what i see, you are willing to release more arguments.
If you are truly looking for an answer for the question "Is There a God?" please write to http://carm.org
they'll gladly help you look and discover your Path :)
If your post is just because you can write this on internets and you are looking not for an argument but a way to badmouth Christians for their beliefs, please don't do it - you're an adult and can manage your time to do better, like proving we are wrong by _doing better_ than an "average" Christian does. Help the poor, feed the homeless, help the old, learn to love etc.
If you do so, I'll personally come to you and thank you. (it may take some time though, as I'm studiying)
TL;DR; Really i took some time. Try to read please, because that's the point of discussions.
and visit http://carm.org
Fair? I don't think so:
the "waste" is providing the money for food, instead of teaching them how to farm their own food, teaching them where and how to build good well.
And the most important (so I think) – Giving them their original African
seeds instead of our weaker and GMOded one
It's like giving them a fish instead of a fishing pole…
If we will provide them food, they'll grow even more dependent on us :/