Jump to content
  • entries
  • comments
  • views

Why Christians Hate Evidence




"Your god is evidence," a Christian recently wrote in response to a YT video I'd commented on.


While he made a marked mischaracterization of what I believe, he lit upon a very good point: that yes, I do put a lot of stock in evidence when I evaluate claims.


If I buy a car, I want to know that the car is reliable. Do I take the salesman's word for it, or do I go find reviews of the car's worthiness and hire a mechanic to take a quick look under the car's hood before I put my safety and financial security at risk?


If I start a new diet, I want to know that it's healthy and works as promised. Do I take the popup ad's word for it, or do I read physicians' assessments of the diet's effectiveness and safety before I put my health at risk?


If I buy a house, I hire several different kinds of inspectors to ensure that its trees are healthy, that there aren't termites in its woodwork, that its foundation is solid, that the electrical system is seaworthy, and that there's no mold in it anywhere. I also consult financial experts to ensure I'm buying at the right time so I don't face falling underwater. I don't just take the realtor's word for it that the house is in good shape and that now's the time to buy buy buy!


If I had a child, you can bet I wouldn't just take the word of the other mommies from the park that Attachment Parenting and co-sleeping were great childrearing philosophies. I'd consult psychologists and studies to ensure that if I chose to do something like that, I'd at least have a shot at producing well-adjusted, respectful, happy children.


If someone sends me a chain email suggesting that Obama is a Muslim, I investigate that claim to see what evidence there is for it. If someone tells me that bacon consumption will extend my life by decades, I investigate that claim before I begin buying in bulk.


In every other area of life, evidence is considered a good thing. I'd be considered a lunatic if I didn't take pains to examine evidence before making a decision.


But religion gets a free pass. Why? The evidence suggests that if it didn't get that free pass from having its evidence examined, it couldn't exist. It must make evidence a demon and exorcise it, or else it fails completely. Not only is there no evidence that anything substantive in the Old or New Testaments happened as claimed, there is disproving evidence for much of it. Christians can only continue in their faith by insisting that ignorance is a virtue and believing in their deity despite a lack of any positive evidence confirming any of their claims. Indeed, many evangelicals regard their ability to believe despite evidence to be a divinely-granted favor. Many many blog inches have been wasted on crowing about the wonders of living in Christ without needing this piddly "evidence" that non-believers all think so highly of.


All that said, the second ANYTHING happens that might have a ghost of a chance of proving any aspect of the Bible, Christians are on it like white on rice. Hell, the History Channel for a while had a show about Biblical archaeology that was precisely intended to "discover the truth" behind the Bible's claims, though its conclusions never did seem to accomplish that lofty goal. Every time somebody finds something in the Middle East that might conceivably have half a shot of supporting ANYTHING that happened in the Bible, Christians hop all over it till it's shown to be anything but evidence for their claims, then go find the next pseudo-evidence to hop all over. And I don't think any non-believer has been spared a Christian's excited retelling of some haphazard "miracle" that "proves" Jesus is real.


I'm forced to conclude that Christians aren't against evidence. Far from it. If there really were evidence for their claims, they certainly wouldn't be so dismissive of the power of having evidence behind them to back their religion and show its validity. They just don't have any, so they--very conveniently in my opinion--make a virtue out of not having any. If Jesus showed up tomorrow and began restoring amputees' limbs, you can bet they would immediately point to the whole circus as proof!


As long as Christians insist on making evidence into some sort of boogeyman, as long as they insist on making the pursuit of evidence into some nefarious endeavor that cheapens the human spirit, I can safely dismiss their religion's demands.


1 Comment

Recommended Comments

It's somewhat comical to observe the whole "faith vs evidence" conundrum in Christians. They know they have no evidence upon which to base their faith, and yet they are very insecure without this evidence.


It's not the unbeliever they are trying convince, but themselves. They seek desperately to prove that they are rational adults, and not deluded nitwits like those OTHER clowns in those "false" religions. Christianity, they say, has "evidence that demands a verdict." Whereas those OTHER people are deceived followers of a false god, whose faith isn't founded in the TRUTH...like the Christian.


Yet when asked to provide this evidence they can't do it. Their faith has no foundation other than hope and crossing their fingers. This realization makes them uncomfortable, so they keep seeking evidence that PROVES they aren't deluded. Never understanding that faith and evidence are mutually exclusive. Faith is believing WITHOUT evidence/proof. Where there is evidence there is no need for faith. So bang goes your religion.


They're like dogs chasing their own tails, and when they bite it it hurts. It'd be funnier if Christians weren't so dangerous to innocent by-standers.

Link to comment
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.