|A Continuing Dialogue with an Atheist|
This is an answer to a long letter sent by an Atheist. I have edited out the filth and a lot of what would bore the readers. The Atheist's remarks are in red with the answers inline.
When you use gross vulgarity, it shows that you don’t have any real substance to your beliefs. Consider whether you would present your case in this way in a court of law if your life were on the line. When you fail to provide any real substance, that confirms the fact that you don’t have any real substance to your belief system.
I can understand your frustration. Anyone would be frustrated and upset who had to defend Atheism. Christians can relate since we all have had God show us when we have been wrong with a whole inner perception of the world that was a house of cards, based on nothing but made up stuff. If you have begun to engage in addictive kinds of sin, having your rationalizations for those sin threatened is very stressful. These things are understandable, and this letter will be truthful and as gentle as possible.
Now, you have the additional problem of coming in to start up debates and you find out that there is a follower of Christ who is actually being led by Christ--and willing to discuss it. So you find that the entire discussion comes down to your made-up stuff versus God's revelation of reality.
In addition to all of that, you are getting answers that don't fit within your paradigm/fake-reality. Everyone has a paradigm/fake-reality. The problem is that the paradigm/fake-reality seems more real that reality itself. The paradigm/fake-reality becomes a filter to keep anything foreign away, including reality itself. When reality/truth clashes with the paradigm/fake-reality, there is a decision to be made. Will you accept reality as it really is or will you filter it out, explain it away, get angry, ridicule, etc.? It is very normal to get angry when your paradigm/fake-reality implodes. Followers of Christ also have paradigms/fake-realities. Sometimes, they think that everything should go smooth for them because they don't really listen when God tells them He is doing something greater than just making them comfortable. The Holy Spirit works to destroy the fake-realities of Christ-followers and replace them with the One Who is Reality/Truth. Sometimes they hold onto theologies through which they interpret Scripture rather than listening to the Voice of God.
It might help you to know that all those who follow Christ, are still immature in our ability and willingness to hear His Voice and to respond in obedience. We have just scratched the surface. There are higher heights than we are yet able to comprehend let alone enter into. We have to constantly remind ourselves that even the things that we are very sure we understand, we don't know them as we will one day understand them. It is a walk from glory to glory, from faith to faith, and from light to every increasing light. This is kind of like the hope that was originally held out for science, but science, like denominational theologies in the church, becomes political and tries to keep out any light.
You would like SeekFind.net to post some links to some Atheist websites. The Secular Humanist websites and universities don’t send their students to SeekFind.net. You mention that you think that SeekFind.net doesn’t post these links because I feel threatened by Atheism. Atheism is indeed a great evil and a dangerous belief system, but Atheists will only be able to advance as far as God allows them to, so there is not reason to fear Atheism.
Genesis said Noah had three sons and did not have any more children after the flood.
That’s interesting. Can you give me chapter and verse so that I can read it and know that you aren’t reading something into the text that God never said? Actually, it says that Noah had three sons. It doesn't say that he had no other sons and it doesn't say that he had no other daughters. In any case, this doesn’t help your contention that the population would not have been enough to build the Tower of Babel somewhere over 100 years after the flood. The real problem is, "How many people do you assume were working on the Tower of Babel?"
That's 4 generations after the flood.
In Noah’s family only, yes, that is true. It does not say that was representative of everyone, however. Remember that it is impossible to prove anything based on arbitrary assumptions. If you are going to try to prove the Bible to be in error in a way that involves assumptions, then you must use the most favorable assumptions and be open to peer review if someone points out that there are assumptions that could be made that would make your claim of error a false claim.
By making certain assumptions, you can keep the population small in your mind. It's just a story you are telling yourself. You would have to go back in time to find out. God didn't think it was important enough to add to the Bible. But you are missing the point. Here is the point:
Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” Your concern is that there were not enough people. How many people do you think were involved and how do you know that? This is where your story falls apart.
you arrogantly label the use of science, evidence and deduction (and basically anything you disagree with) as "assumptions".
It is arrogant to call made-up stories and rationalizations science. It is arrogant for any person to say that they don't need or want God or His salvation through Jesus Christ. It is arrogant to think that the human mind can think properly without the Anointing of the Holy Spirit.
What evidence do you have, without resorting to made-up stories, arbitrary assumptions, irrational statements, or outright lies that God doesn’t exist, that God doesn’t reveal His will and His ways to His people, that the flood didn’t take place, for billions/millions of years, and that God didn’t created the Heavens and the Earth in 6 days?
It's not even worth debating with someone who says "I know because God told me".
You think this is a debate, then. Do you remember that you jumped onto a Christian site, sent a personal message from there, and started making a lot of accusations, which were answered for you as kindly as they could be while still being truthful. Since God does reveal and that is the reason that Christians know these things, are you saying that it would be better to lie to you and make something else up? It would be easier, if you insist on debating, and it would level the playing field if both Atheists and followers of Christs would build their thoughts on the foundations of stories, assumptions, lies, and irrationality. However, that is not reality. Reality is that those who follow Christ are led by Christ.
God's supposed to be omniscient, yet it tested Abraham's loyalty by telling him to sacrifice his son. That is a barbaric thing to do.
This statement shows that you are trying to understand the Bible with your own reprobate mind. Turn to Christ. Pray for revelation. Keep praying in sincerity until He answers you.
What is even more arrogant is *you* claim to know about *me* through revelation: "He has revealed Himself to you. I know that by revelation." Pure, unmitigated, filthy arrogance is what that is.
Humility is actually dealing with reality as it really is. Humility is realizing one's need for Christ. Arrogance is a failure to deal with this reality. Humility admits the weakness of the human mind, how easily it can be fooled, and how quickly it adds to what is being observed through presuppositions, assumptions, what seems like inductive reasoning on the surface, just-so stories, irrational thinking, leaps of make-believe faith, or outright lies. This is even more of a problem when we want something to be true that is not true. Arrogance depends on human strengths and reasoning rather than God's revelation. It tries to be independent from God. Followers of Christ know that we don’t have power in our own minds to get anything right. The arrogance of the ungodly is to presume that they can make it without God. God created the human mind/soul in such a way that it doesn't function properly without His love and power flowing through it. It is arrogant to reject God. The reprobate natural human mind is indeed arrogant.
I see that you have accepted a lie about the creation to keep yourself from acknowledging God. God says that you do this because you love darkness rather than light—because you love sin more than righteousness." . . . You don't know anything about me (you assume you do because "God hath revealed it!") and for that reason I know your "revelation" is nonsense.
It isn't necessary to know you, but it is known, by revelation, that those who reject the free gift of forgiveness an deliverance from sin reject it because they love their sin. If you are rejecting Jesus, you are one who fits this description. It sure seems like you are rejecting Jesus. Are you rejecting Jesus?
(In reaction to this: Actually, genetics proves otherwise. If they were medium brown, which is likely, they would have had everything to produce any tone (and other traits) within one generation. When living things become isolated and interbreed between those who have lost information in the genome, they eventually lose that information completely. True speciation is exactly this kind of information loss." the Atheist makes a claim.)
you clearly know nothing about genetics.
OK. Without any made-up stories or assumptions, show the error. See Creation Answers Book, Chapter 18.
"What makes you think that actual experience of reality is a made up story?" Prove it's reality. Prove that God has revealed all this to you. If you can't give me proof and just expect me to take you or the Bible (or GOD'S) word for it, then don't expect me to believe you.
Let's look at that with a bit of humor. Suppose someone said to you, "Prove that you are not a computer that created itself by random processes. If you can't give me proof and just expect me to take your word for it." Could you, across the Internet, prove it? Pictures mean nothing. They could be electronically produced. Birth certificates could be forged. There is no way to prove something to someone who doesn't want to believe.
However, God has an answer to your need for proof. God says, “Taste and see that the Lord is good.” He says, “Whoever is on the side of Truth listens to Me. He invites you to listen. He promises that whoever will come to Him and keep seeking Him in sincerity and humility will find Him. Besides this, you already know that He exists. God has revealed that. You can say that the thought of His existence has never occurred to you, but you would be lying.
Your paragraph on "unbelievers" vs "non-believers" is completely pointless. They mean the same thing, despite what you claim. I don't understand why you even made that point.
Glad that you asked for clarification if you didn’t understand. This is the difference between one who has never heard the Good News about Jesus as opposed to the one who has heard but is rebellious against God. There is a difference between ignorance and willing disobedience. There is a difference between open-mindedness toward God and closed-mindedness toward God.
The Holey Bible is full of errors. Different Christians can't even agree on how to interpret it's wild claims.
(Note that when this was written, many things were written to insult God, like the Holey Bible reference here, but were ignored so as to concentrate on what might have substance.)
So, how does the fact that Christians are still struggling with hearing God’s Voice, are spiritually immature, and are trying to figure out the Bible with their natural minds rather than waiting for the revelation that comes from God—how does that fact mean that the Bible is full of errors? How does your conclusion follow your evidence?
You'll just dismiss any of the errors I bring up
If you are going to claim errors, you ought to leave yourself open to peer review. When someone points out that a so-called error can be interpreted differently and there is no error at all, then you ought to consider that you might have made a mistake.
All so-called "errors in the Bible" are some combination of made-up stories, arbitrary assumptions, irrational statements, or outright lies.There are thousands of these so-called "errors." They have been dealt with over the past two-thousand years and now people just keep repeating the same old lies. Every error that anyone brings up turns out to be an error on the part of the one who claims there are "errors in the Bible."
We know by revelation that there are no errors. God has revealed this to Christ-followers who are listening to His Voice.
People who want to discredit the Bible do so because God speaks through the Bible and they don't want God to rule over them. They take the attitude, "If I can make up any assumption, story, irrational thought, or lie that makes the Bible seem to contradict itself or seem to be in error, then my assumption proves there is an inconsistency/error in the Bible." That, of course, is irrational thinking. (some caveats about hearing God's Voice)
That's why every one of these attacks is so easily refuted. However, someone who doesn't want to believe God cannot be convinced by any evidence, yet they will accept any flimflam that says what they want to hear. And they tend to imagine that they are very intelligent in doing so.
You brought up several of the common Atheist attacks against the Bible (not reproduced here). All of these are based on the same flimflam, and there is no sense in answering them. The answers are on the Internet. You can Google them. Or just ask God about it and He will explain it. After 2,000 years, the slave-master, Satan, has exhausted the number of lies that can be told against the Bible. Every lie has already been answered with Truth. You aren’t likely to come up with anything beyond that.
On the other hand, there are some things in the Bible that we don't yet understand. God has not revealed everything to us. But when He speaks to us through the Bible, we are learning to listen to His Voice and to respond in obedience. Just as scientists say, "We don't know that yet," so followers of Christ often have to say, "We don't know that yet."
These are all FACTS. Not assumptions.
Facts are never the problem--if they are facts and not empty claims or irrational interpretations. Every lie contains enough facts to make it seem realistic until you look into it more carefully. Then, you see the little twisting of the truth into a lie. It’s like rat poison. It can be 99% good food, but it’s that little bit of poison that makes it work so well. The good food is to get you to eat it so that you die.
Not very scientific.
This is a common remark among the ungodly. Science here is probably defined as Atheistic science--that is, built on the starting assumptions-presented-as-axioms of Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism. You can't put the Almighty God into your Naturalism/Materialism/Uniformitarianism box. That is irrational thinking. You want miracles to have naturalistic explanations but you give no evidence for naturalism (because there is none).
Actually, the arbitrary assumptions of Naturalism/Materialism includes the assumption of no-God (Atheism), so, by using it as an argument against the Bible being God’s word you are actually using circular reasoning. You are presupposing what you are trying to prove. You could just as well say, "There's no God, therefore there's no God."
By the way, Atheistic science is not the most reliable way to understand spiritual things or historical things like the age of the Earth/Universe or evolution versus creation. It might be used somewhat, but it is not the best way. Some people once put together a philosophy like that, scientism, but they could not prove it by science. That means it is a self-refuting irrational philosophy. In other words, if it were true that science was the most reliable way to understand things, then it would be false that science was the most reliable way to understand things. Sounds funny, doesn't it? It is funny. Self-refuting statements are hard to understand if you have not already learned the concept. True Truth is a book that deals with that.
We don't dogmatically claim to know that the Earth is 6,000 years old. We know that God created the Heavens and the Earth in six days and we know the number of generations between Adam and Christ. That's about it. Even though a plain reading of Scripture seems to indicate a young Earth; even though there is zero observed evidence and only circular reasoning and speculations that support old Earth stories, we can't even deny the possibility that God could have done something that Scripture doesn't hint at and that has left no scientific evidence. It is possible. It just is not worth the time to think about it.
You made a point that basically says that death is an enemy. God says that the last enemy to be destroyed will be death. However, the second death is the one that you should fear. I don’t fear that one. Do you?
. . . what were the Romans doing when they crucified Jesus? Or rather, what were they not doing? Did they believe he was the son of God? Did they believe in Christianity?
Many of them didn’t believe Him. He prayed for the Romans and the Jews that the Father would forgive them for that rejection.
When the rich man was in Hell, he wanted Lazarus to be resurrected so that he could talk to his brothers so that they wouldn't end up in that terrible place. He was told that his brothers wouldn't listen to Moses and the prophets and they would not believe even if someone rose from the dead.
So, God is not just or fair to anyone, then?
That would be an example of an outright lie based on irrational thinking. You will find that God is absolutely just. That’s why God had to die in your place. Someone had to pay the price so Christ did. God never violates His Own Nature. Of course, He won’t force His goodness on you.
But assuming God is just and fair and its punishment will be just and fair (although he tortures innocent people for bets with Satan, kills innocent children and wipes out most of life on Earth), well then, I'm ok with that. I don't need to fear a God who'll punish me justly. So I don't need to fear the penalties of non-belief.
That is a lie of course. Using irrational thinking to attack God will not protect you from His judgment. But it will allow you to soothe yourself so that you can continue in sin. He knows your every thought before you think it. He is absolutely just and has absolute knowledge. You can't get away with anything or fool God about anything. You can be forgiven, though. The word, forgiveness, means more than just pardon. It also means to take the sin away. To deliver you from slavery to Satan. To remove the desire to do the sin.
The bottom line is this: in every case you are depending on made-up stories, arbitrary assumptions, irrational thinking, and outright lies. For some reason you want to debate using these. You came to a Christian place, though a public place, to try to start a debate. Who knows why? The answers to your statements and questions have been given as kindly as possible without being untruthful. You don’t like the answer because you have been told that God reveals Himself to everyone who is actually following Him. That seems to be unnecessary to state, but even some people who go to church every week don't know that. How could anyone follow Him unless He leads. He speaks.
So, in a nutshell, it is the revelation that comes from God versus your own made up stuff by which you interpret what you observe.
This was not the end of the dialogue of course. Another long diatribe with threats and vulgarity came back. That is a good time to shut down the conversation that is not going anywhere. When Jesus sent out the 70, He said, "If someone who promotes peace is there, your peace will rest on them; if not, it will return to you. . . . when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.'" So look for an open door, an open mind. Don't try to beat anyone into submission who does not want Jesus. You will sense the one who promotes peace because your peace (the peace of Christ) will rest upon them and you will sense it.
By the time a person has degraded to the point where they are out trolling, they are pretty well confirmed in their evil. Generally, they like to argue. They enjoy it. There is an old expression: Never wrestle with a pig. You'll both get really dirty and after a while you find that the pig likes it. Proverbs 26, beginning at verse 4, talks about the great catch 22, no-win, situation of dealing with fools, the people who say that there is no God: Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him--Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes. If you do answer, you get into a ridiculous debate and the fool is delighted. If you don't answer, the fools ego and arrogance both jump through the roof. (read about blogs) (read about trolls) So, what do you do?
When you run into a person who uses the "toss the elephant" tactic of throwing as much junk at you as possible hoping that something will stick, it becomes very time-consuming. God has only given us enough time and money to do His will. If we spend our time doing things He doesn't lead us to do, then we will not have enough left to do His will. So, you must be led by God.
Here is one way to cut this off:
Keep it short:
Here is another option:
Here is one more example:
They will only answer a few times if you stick to the same thing. The beauty of these responses is that they can be repeated with very little variation regardless of what the other person says. It's almost as if the ungodly people are deliberately trying to burn up as much of your ministry time as possible. As soon as they find out that you are putting in very little effort, they bail out of the conversation. (You won't want to do this if you intend to establish a long term relationship with the person.) The more variation you put into your replies, the longer you will prolong the madness. The more you try to answer all their nonsense, the longer you prolong the madness. There is really no end to the wrangling over virtually nothing that an ungodly person can engage in. The danger is that you take on their same spirit (and it is a spirit) when you continue to wrestle with them.
Last updated: Dec, 2013
Toons & Vids
A Continuing Dialogue with an Atheist
Answer to Critic
Appeal to Possibility
Argument to the Future
Love Between a Man and Woman
Righteousness & Holiness
Proof by Atheism
Scriptures About Marriage
The Reason for Rejecting Truth
Witness on the Internet
Flaky Human Reasoning
How Do You Know?
The Real Purpose of the Church
The Real Purpose of Life
From Glory to Glory
REAL Faith--What it IS & IS NOT
REAL Love--What it IS & IS NOT
How to be Led by God
How to Witness
Wisdom: Righteousness & Reality
Holiness & Mind/Soul
Redemption: Free From Sin
Stories Versus Revelation
Circular Reasoning-Who is Guilty?
How Can We Know Anything?
Mind Designed to Relate to God
Answers for the Confused
Fossil Record Says: "Creation"
Avoid These Pitfalls
Public School's Religion
Public School Failures