When No Evidence is Ever Enough

In discussions about God, the resurrection of Jesus, or the reliability of Scripture, a common phrase skeptics use is: “I find that unconvincing.” On the surface, this seems like a reasonable stance—after all, people need to be persuaded before they accept something as true. But what happens when no amount of evidence is ever enough? What happens when someone dismisses every argument, yet cannot articulate what would actually convince them?

At that point, we must ask: Is their skepticism based on reason, or is it a position they are unwilling to surrender no matter what? If someone claims to be “rational” yet refuses to state what would change their mind, their position ceases to be rational and becomes an unexamined article of faith.

G. K. Chesterton observed, “The purpose of an open mind, like an open mouth, is to close on something solid.”¹

But for some, the mind remains open indefinitely—not because they are searching for truth, but because they are actively avoiding commitment to it.

---

The Moving Goalpost of Skepticism

One of the defining features of rational inquiry is falsifiability—the ability to state what would change one’s mind. The philosopher Karl Popper made this the foundation of the scientific method. A claim is meaningful only if we can describe what evidence could disprove it. If a person claims that no amount of evidence would ever convince them, then their position is no longer one of rational skepticism but of dogmatic unbelief. It is no different than a man claiming, “I will not believe in airplanes until I see one fly over my head,” only to say, “That was just a trick of the light,” when a plane actually appears.

Consider the resurrection of Christ. Historians, theologians, and scholars provide multiple lines of evidence:

1. The empty tomb – Michael Grant, a highly respected historian and skeptic, stated, “If we apply the same sort of criteria that we apply to other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.”² Even scholars who do not accept the resurrection acknowledge this historical fact.
2. Eyewitness testimony – Multiple sources record appearances of Jesus to individuals and groups, including over 500 people at once, as attested by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:6.
3. The explosive growth of the Church – Christianity did not emerge in a vacuum; it arose in Jerusalem, where Jesus had been publicly executed. If his body were still in the tomb, producing it would have destroyed the movement immediately. The rapid spread of Christianity in the very city where Jesus was crucified is best explained by the resurrection.
4. Conversion of skeptics – Saul of Tarsus, an enemy of Christians, became Paul the Apostle after encountering the risen Christ. James, the brother of Jesus, was skeptical but later became a leader in the early Church after witnessing the resurrection.³
5. Jewish burial customs – Jesus’ burial in a rock-hewn tomb aligns with known first-century Jewish practices, contradicting the claim that he was simply discarded in a common grave.⁴

Yet, when these points are presented, the response is often, “I still find that unconvincing.” If you ask, “What would convince you?” the answer is often vague or non-existent. This is not skepticism; this is an unfalsifiable belief.

C. S. Lewis put it bluntly: “You cannot go on ‘explaining away’ forever: you will find that you have explained explanation itself away. You cannot go on seeing through things forever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it.”⁵

If skepticism prevents someone from ever seeing truth, then it ceases to be a tool for discovery and becomes a weapon against reality.

---

The Debate That Exposed the Issue: Matt Dillahunty’s Own Admission

This issue was brought into sharp focus during a debate between Christian scholar Mike Licona and atheist Matt Dillahunty, where Dillahunty was confronted with a direct question:

“What would convince you?”

In a remarkable admission, Dillahunty stated that not even supernatural events—such as seeing a person beheaded and then alive again—would convince him.

This reaction was analyzed by former debate teacher Nate Sala of Wise Disciple, who pointed out that Dillahunty’s position was not one of genuine skepticism but of dogmatic resistance to belief, no matter what evidence was presented.

If someone refuses to believe even when confronted with supernatural events, their rejection of Christianity is no longer intellectual—it is ideological.

You can watch Nate Sala’s full reaction and breakdown of this moment here:
➡️ Watch the video

Richard Lewontin, a prominent evolutionary biologist, once admitted regarding materialism: “We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs… because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. We cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”⁶

Atheism is not always about evidence; sometimes, it is about a prior commitment to rejecting God, no matter the cost.

---

Areas of Expansion: Psychological and Cognitive Biases Behind Disbelief

A more detailed examination could explore the cognitive mechanisms that cause people to resist belief regardless of evidence:

1. Confirmation Bias – People interpret new information in a way that confirms their pre-existing beliefs while ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicts them.
2. Cognitive Dissonance – A person who has committed to an atheistic worldview may experience psychological discomfort when faced with strong evidence for Christianity, leading them to reject it outright.
3. Motivated Reasoning – Atheists, like anyone else, may have deep personal or emotional reasons to reject Christianity, such as a desire for autonomy or past negative experiences with religion.
4. Worldview Investment – Many skeptics have spent years building their identity on atheism, and admitting the possibility of God’s existence would require a fundamental shift in their beliefs, values, and lifestyle.

Aldous Huxley was brutally honest about this reality when he admitted:

“We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.”⁷

Blaise Pascal summarized it well: “There is enough light for those who desire to see, and enough darkness for those of a contrary disposition.”⁸

---

A Challenge to the Unconvinced

If you claim to be unconvinced, ask yourself: “What would convince me?” If you cannot answer that question, then the problem is not the evidence—it is you.

G. K. Chesterton warned, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”⁹

The question is not whether the evidence for Christianity is compelling. The real question is: Do you want it to be true?

---

Footnotes

¹ G.K. Chesterton, The Autobiography of G.K. Chesterton.
² Michael Grant, Jesus: An Historian’s Review of the Gospels.
³ N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God.
⁴ Jodi Magness, Stone and Dung, Oil and Spit: Jewish Daily Life in the Time of Jesus.
⁵ C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man.
⁶ Richard Lewontin, Billions and Billions of Demons, The New York Review of Books, 1997.
⁷ Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means.
⁸ Blaise Pascal, Pensees.
⁹ G.K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong with the World.