I'm going to go ahead and take Owen's challenge. The site he posted (godandscience.org) is so filled with mistakes that I don't even know where to begin.
I think I'll start with the first article: "A Loving God Would Not Send Billions of People to Hell, Would He?" Even though I don't personally like this atheist argument very much, the counterargument offered by this site is hilarious.
So why doesn't God make everyone into perfect beings and allow them all into heaven? It would actually be more cruel if God were to do this, since many people prefer hell to the alternative (complete submission to God).
The main question is why God didn't just make us all perfect, so I've decided to focus on this segment of the article. Unfortunately, this is just so mind-numbingly stupid that I don't think there's anything to say. Who the hell would choose Hell (pun not intended) over submission to God,
provided that God does exist? Atheists refuse to submit to God because there is no proof that this God exists, not because they think Hell is a nicer predicament.
The next article that I have chosen to examine is "God: Invented in the Image of Man?"
However, if men were to invent the God of Christianity, it is unlikely that it would be the demanding God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is described as holy1 - without sin and without the ability to commit sin.2 The holiness of God is described as being above anything that humans can attain, such that no human can stand before Him as holy.3 Behaving more morally than most other people is not sufficient to escape the punishment of the God of the Bible.4
I fail to see why any of these reasons is any reason to believe that the Christian God was not the product of mere invention.
In nearly all religions, salvation is attained through human effort. Only in Christianity does salvation come solely as a gift from God5 - it cannot be earned through human effort.
What the hell are they thinking? Are they saying that we are either predestined for hell or heaven? Well, in that case, I'm glad to hear that I have just as good a chance of getting into heaven as the person who wrote this article.
Most of the religions of the world describe their god as existing within the universe.
Let's see...Judaism: No, if Christianity says no. Islam: No. Buddhism: No. Hinduism: No. Taoism: No. In fact, Christianity and Judaism are the only two religions in which there is doubt as to whether their god exists within the universe. Maybe the authors should actually
learn the other religions of the world before attempting to make a comparison.
Human Lifespan: ~120 years
Crap like this says a lot, and I mean A LOT, about most Christians.
I will not do a one-by-one on the next article: "What about atrocities that have been done in the name of religion?" However, I will say that this guy has the reasoning ability of a peanut. He asks "Should atheism be blamed for the atrocities of [Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot]?" The answer, of course, is no. These leaders did not commit these atrocities in the name of atheism. Similarly, we should not consider Christians who have committed atrocities without citing Christianity as their motivation. The issue at stake here is the Christians who have committed atrocities in the name of Christianity, oftentimes using legitimate Bible scriptures to justify their actions, and this article has failed to account for such people.
I am really tired of looking at this. Maybe I'll finish the rest of my analysis at a future date.