Dang! We went from Penn and Teller to social debate??
This happens too often =P
My stab:
Counter 1:
"And my personal opinion? If you need a book or a person to tell you what's right and wrong, then there's somethiong seriously wrong with you."
This argument is well-engraved in the belief that through personal reflection, one may find truth for oneself, free of any other doctrine or dogma getting in the way of personal enlightenment. The reason I take issue with the above (incredibly general) statement is thus: In order to understand /anything/, one must be educated. If you isolate a small child for his/her entire life up through the teen years, he/she will have no concept of what good or bad behavior is (it's been done). If you don't seek out some way to feed your intellect, your intellect will not be fed.
And on this subject, I'd say that just about everyone is told to believe something by someone else, which is how social trends have gotten the way that they are. For example: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert -- nowadays, it's nearly impossible to have a discussion about anything political with a "youth" or "young adult" without one of these two men's opinions being mirrored by someone in the discourse. It should therefore be noted that while we have no control over how the world tries influences us, we have the ability to choose /what/ we turn to for influence.
Counter 2:
"How do you get philosophy from a vengeful, murderous being such as the god of the old testament?"
The God of the old testament is no different from the God of the New Testament. The difference between the two testaments is never claimed to be that the Father "changed." Absolutely not. As Christ said "I did not come to change the law, but to fulfill it." This underscores the major difference between the two testaments: Christ's redeeming presence. Now, regardless of whether or not you believe in the Christian religion, it is valuable to note that why things are apparently "different" regarding God's reaction to sinfulness is /not/ because He changed, but because Christ's sacrifice removes the sins of all who believe in Him.
As for God being "murderous" and "vengeful," and resultantly being impossible to follow in the incredibly moral sense of religion and Faith, the overall idea of good and evil from the beginning of time has always been "every action has a consequence." Actions without consequence simply don't exist, and God supports this idea with different consequences for righteousness and immorality. In the case of Pharaoh Ramses, whose firstborn was taken by the Angel of Death during the last plague of Moses, it is incredibly significant to note that God sent a messenger to tell Pharoah several times to let free his slaves or else a temporal punishment would be wrought upon his kingdom. Nine warning were given and ignored before the final retribution.
Counter 3:
"oh, yeah, that part about loving they neighbor is great for what i believe in. but the part about killing kids and raping women, and god seeking justice. that can't possibly be true, since it doesn't make sense to MY OWN BELIEFS. i guess i'll ignore it.."
I'm sorry you've gotten this sort of response from an uneducated apologetic, because this should never be the attitude of an evangelist.... However, if you are referring to the Old Testament God, then I think you've mishandled how things in the old testament are presented. To the best of my knowledge, rape was never condoned by God. Just because some of His chosen people did it, doesn't mean He didn't punish them for it. In fact, many of the patriarchs of the Old Testament were punished just as severely, if not more so, than the Egyptians were for their transgressions.
When God sent the Ten Commandments to Moses on Mount Sanai, He was giving firm commandments to His people on how they /should/ live. But the people didn't always do that, and third parties didn't always respect it. Thusly, civil wars that erupted throughout the Kingdoms of Israel resulted from disobedience, and wars were fought with other countries to stop attempts of foreign invasion. Also something to consider is what society was like back in that time, in that culture. We look upon some of the images in the Old Testament with modern, western eyes, and turn away in disgust. Yet a movie like "The Last Samurai" comes out and no criticism is given toward the way the Japanese kill themselves and slice off their heads because of shameful defeat in battle.
Counter 4:
"So the god who holds us accountable for the sin of a man who lived thousands of years ago, shouldn't expect his history to be at all relevant? "
Adam and Eve are representative of everyone's sinfulness. Catholics believe that Jesus wasn't simply a plan B, he was the one and only plan that God always and forever knew would /have/ to happen. That being said, I don't understand God's logic to be: "Because Adam sinned, all of humanity must be doomed to hellfire unless..."
The way I understand God's reasoning is thus: "Adam and Eve sinned. So do their children, and their children's children. They will all be sinners from now until the end of time, but they still understand and yearn for dignity, so I will give them the option of believing in me and my Son to save them." In the end, we are held accountable for our own sins, not Adam's. Blame can never be placed on the father for the son's wrongdoings (which we see through several lines of kings in teh Old Testament).
Counter 5:
(General Counter)
I just want to say that I'm sorry on behalf of any Christian who claims to be preaching the word when really they are just painting a negative stereotype for the rest of us. I was told a story the other day about a Franciscan Monk who used to preach at my church here in California:
This monk (Father Ben) and three of his monk friends decided they wanted to reach out one day to the youth of America. They got together to think of what they could -- where do young kids hang out these days? They thought and they thought, and decided: Fort Lauderdale at Spring Break! so they packed up an old old van, pooled their rations together and bought an igloo container filled with water, along with a bunch of oranges, which they sliced on the way.
Upon arriving several hundred miles away from their abby at Fort Lauderdale, they were shocked at what they saw. On the sidewalk ahead of them was a man with an open bible spitting rhetoric at the faces of young collegiates walking by. Down the street was a man with a faux crown of thorns on his head, carrying a big wooden cross on his shoulders, wearing a sign that said "this blood was for you" around his neck. There were others doing similar things of a non-inviting and very aggressive nature, which floored this group of monks! And of course, so many people were simply turned away.
They set up their table, placing the igloo container of water and the sliced oranges on top, and started calling out "Free water and snacks!" And people flocked over (not that it was needed because a bunch of dudes in brown habits wearing cords around their waists is hard to miss anyway!). The result was fantastic: hundreds of people came (the water obviously needing to be refilled =P) and people got what they needed. some people were intrigued by the monks and asked questions about their Faith. Some weren't at all, it didn't matter to them. But the monks were satisfied knowing that they served by providing that which was needed, and God worked through all that.
So basically - most of the time, it is not a good idea to look at the believers and judge God based on us, cuz a lot of us aren't using the right tactics.