Matt Dillahunty on The argument from scripture
Dillahunty, a former Southern Baptist who studied to be a pastor, dismantles scriptural authority from the inside.
Matt Dillahunty's treatment of the argument from scripture carries unique weight because he spent years studying the Bible with the intent of becoming a minister. His deconversion was driven in large part by what he found: contradictions, failed prophecies, moral atrocities attributed to God, and a text that, on honest examination, looked far more like the work of fallible humans than an omniscient deity.
Dillahunty's central argument is that the Bible cannot serve as evidence for God because it is the claim, not the evidence. Using the Bible to prove God is circular — it presupposes the very authority it is trying to establish. The question is not what the Bible says but why we should believe what the Bible says, and that requires independent evidence.
He is particularly effective at cataloguing biblical contradictions — not minor discrepancies but fundamental disagreements about the nature of God, the conditions of salvation, and the moral requirements of believers. If the Bible is the inspired word of an omniscient God, Dillahunty argues, these contradictions are inexplicable. If it is the work of dozens of human authors over centuries, they are exactly what we would expect.
“I didn't leave Christianity because I wanted to sin. I left because I studied the Bible more carefully than most Christians do — and I couldn't make it work.”
“The Bible is not evidence for God. The Bible is the claim. I'm asking for the evidence.”