The points on this page may shake the faith of the Atheist in the precepts of Atheism, but the most important thing is that you share the Good News (Gospel). This is simple. All these other things may help, but it is the proclamation of the Gospel that transforms minds. See Give Them the Gospel.

Every argument against God and His revelation is based on hot air. It is based on, "I just made this up." When you drill down, every argument against God and His revelation is based on such things as Materialism, Naturalism, Atheism, or Evolutionism.� The examples given here can be applied to any such argument against God and His revelation.

You will probably never speak to anyone who refuses to answer the question more than a few times, but this example contains many of the types of things you may hear.� It was taken from snippets of many conversations. Much of the condescension and foul language has been removed, and rarely do you have anyone who does not try to change the subject when asked to reveal why they believe in their most basic presuppositions. The nature of presuppositions is that people believe them without proof because they want them to be true. The nature of revelation is that it is a direct encounter with the living God.

Ministry is not an argument based on a premise of hot air. Ministry is the proclamation of the Person of the Living Christ. We ought to speak and write by the Holy Spirit so that our words are infused with the Holy Spirit. It is the Person of Christ Who draws people to Himself. Here is an example using the concept of Naturalism.� The same would apply for materialism.� Note that actual wranglings of Atheists are generally very cluttered with name calling, accusations, and many other distractions.� They don't think quite as neatly as we have portrayed them here, so you have to kind of sort through the flimflam and decide what you are going to respond to.� If you get right to their presuppositions and the circular reasoning, arguments from ignorance, and declarations of universal negatives that they use to brace up their presuppositions, you are better off.

Sadly, those people who have come to the point where they totally oppose Christ are quite hardened, so you are not likely to see many of them admit that they are telling stories that are based on vapor.

It's absolutely naive and infantile to propose something more than naturalism. There is no rational basis for believing in god, angels, demons, dragons, unicorns, pixies and all sorts or nonsense.� You must prove that the supernatural exists or what you are left with is naturalism.

To use a baseless presupposition of Naturalism as evidence for Naturalism is circular reasoning.� Can you give conclusive evidence that Jesus Christ doesn't constantly order everything in the Universe, that He doesn't reveal Himself to every person, and that followers of Christ are not experiencing what they are experiencing? God speaking is supernatural, but Naturalists refuse to acknowledge the evidence.

Naturalism is not baseless, and I'm not presupposing anything. I'm starting with the known natural world.� If you want to add something to to the known world you have to prove it. The proof of Naturalism is that I don't ever see God or angels or demons.

Presupposing Naturalism as a starting point for your logic, doesn't prove the reality of Naturalism. To believe in Naturalism because of what you claim that you can't prove to yourself about God, angels, or demons is an irrational argument from ignorance and an� irrational declaration of a universal negative--and not credible evidence for Naturalism.

The burden of proof is on you, buddy. You need to prove to me that God exists.

Lord, protect us from picking up the foul spirit of the ungodly person who is attacking Christ.� Those who are attacking Christ are not only deceived, but they are also evil.� However, you are to walk godly in Christ Jesus. The wrath of man doesn't work the righteousness of God. Don't let them take you off the track of challenging their deepest hidden presuppositions.

God proves to me, and� for every person who will receive Him, that He exists.� Jesus says, "My sheep hear My Voice," and "Whoever is on the side of Truth listens to Me." However, each person is responsible for finding God for themselves. God makes it easy.� Whoever seeks Him finds Him. A follower of Christ has no responsibility to prove Christ to you, since Christ has made Himself readily available to you, but you have still not provided credible evidence for Naturalism.

There is more than enough evidence that the natural world exists. Without evidence for the supernatural you are left with what you can prove using evidence.

To presuppose that God is NOT holding the natural world together and giving it order and that God does NOT reveal His existence (and many other things) to me and millions of other followers of Christ moment by moment, and then, by this baseless presupposition, to filter out all evidence for God, this is circular reasoning.� Describe the process by which you can know the inner spiritual experiences of all these people plus all the Christ-followers of the last 2,000 years?

I'm not believing in anything other than what I can see.� I can see natural things.� That's all that I believe in.� People who believe in things they can't see are insane.

Actually, Naturalism includes a belief that God does NOT reveal His existence (and many other things) to me and millions of other followers of Christ moment by moment. And you can see that? What is your process that makes you think you know that we are not experiencing what we are experiencing? Show the steps of your science.

Science proves there is no god. I know god does not reveal his existence because there's no evidence that He does.

Please describe the process by which someone can determine that God doesn't exist and that God doesn't reveal His existence--without depending unfounded declarations or presuppositions. What are the steps to your repeatable lab work that you do to show this?

I don't need to explain the process by which I can I know that God doesn't reveal His existence, which is why "inner spiritual experiences" are non-arguments because they are not evidence.

If you can't follow the logic of that last statement, then I think you understand that it is irrational. This is an actual example of what someone wrote.� No kidding!

When you start with a subjective filter of Naturalism, the fact that anyone has inner spiritual experiences seems as though it doesn't make any sense. However, the only reason it doesn't seem to make sense is because it doesn't fit the subjective filter, your make-believe, rationalized faith in Naturalism. I've never seen credible evidence for your presupposition that God doesn't communicate with His people but lots of concrete evidence against it.

I know that God is NOT holding the natural world together and giving it order because we can show that the existence of the Universe and the ordering of it requires absolutely no supernatural deity to do.

Making up an alternate story, even if you were even able to make one up that would seem to make sense (which I have never seen yet), would not make that story true. A story is not credible evidence that your story is right or that God is wrong. Why shoulk I believe you when you say that I and millions of followers of Christ are not experiencing what we are experiencing? What makes you think you are right? Why shouldn't I believe God rather than you?

If I were to accept that Jesus ordered the Universe I would accept that Jesus ordered a Universe in which stars explode every second, galaxies implode, the Universe is hurrying towards its heat death, the success of our Universe is contingent on the destruction of infinite others, the Andromeda galaxy is set on a collision course with our own, our native planet has killed 99% of all living species that resided within it and can only sustain life on some of it's surface some of the time.

Often, people will make inaccurate statements, but they are off the point. Why address them?

You indeed do see a Universe that is suffering from sin, a testimony to the fall in the Garden of Eden.� Naturalism says that Jesus Christ doesn't constantly order everything in the Universe, that He doesn't reveal Himself to every person, and that millions of followers of Christ are not experiencing what they are experiencing. But, can you give conclusive evidence that we are not experiencing what we are experiencing and that Christ is not holding the Universe together for His purpose?

What you claim god says is irrelevant, because unless you can show independently, objectively verifiable evidence that said claims are true, your argument is a non-argument.

You can believe what you like, even Naturalism, Materialism, and Atheism, which are all simply baseless assumptions. I will continue to believe my real experiences with the real God and live in reality. You use circular reasoning to use Naturalism as a presupposition to filter out all independently, objectively verifiable evidence that is not Naturalistic. Not only that, but we know, by revelation, that you already know that God exists, and you know that His justice brings judgment.

Oh, that's cute. You believe you live in reality and dismiss the other possibilities as assumptions whereas ignoring the fact that your own beliefs are equally, if not even more, rooted in baseless assumptions.

Isn't that funny how the Atheist wants the follower of Christ to accept the wild and unfounded concept of Naturalism as a presupposition. If we were to take as a presupposition the notion of Naturalism, as the Atheist has been trying to push for, then what the Atheist just said would be true--the Christian faith would be rooted in baseless assumptions.� However, now the Atheist brings Naturalism in as an unspoken presupposition, again trying to push his/her presupposition of Naturalism as a basis for thought. But that is what the Atheist is trying to prove, so they are presupposing the very thing they are trying to prove.� That is the definition of circular reasoning.

You know that real experience is different from baseless assumption, don't you? Jesus Christ is real. That is my experience, all my close friends experiences, and the experience of all who follow Christ. You have not provided any credible evidence that revelation is simply a baseless assumption and not revelation from God, nor have you provided credible evidence for the dogmas of Naturalism, Materialism, and Atheism.

"Experience" as you have defined it is not a form of credible evidence. again, if you want to make a claim about reality, then you'd better be ready to show independently, objectively verifiable evidence to support your claim - and experience is neither of those things, much less both.

Still, you bring circular reasoning, assuming Naturalism, which is what you are trying to prove. Empirical means "by experience" or "by experimentation." Anyone can experiment,� can come to Jesus in deep respect, sincerity, brokenness, and humility, and verify this and receive the same revelation. If you want everyone to believe your presupposition in the face of empirical evidence, showing verifiable evidence for Naturalism might be in order.

I tried that. I read the whole Bible praying that God would reveal Himself to me, and I got nothing.

Pardon me if I don't believe that you came to Jesus in deep respect, sincerity, brokenness, and humility. The reason that I don't believe you is that Jesus tells us that whoever will keep seeking Him in this way will find Him. Keep in mind that you cannot fool God. Don't be deceived. God is not mocked. Whatever a person sows, that is what that person will reap. So, this is no credible evidence for Naturalism.

You cannot possibly be led by Christ, hearing His Voice and having Him live within you.

George Bernard Shaw said, "People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." People who say that no one can actually know Jesus Christ personally should not interrupt those who are doing it.

You have no evidence that God even exists.

God says that His speaking to His followers and the resulting supernatural trust is the substance of His vision of reality and the evidence of the things He has proclaimed before they're seen. Faith comes by hearing the utterance of God, and faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. However, it appears that you have no credible evidence for Naturalism.

So, faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. But is it evidence? If I believe that I can read golden plates as Joseph Smith supposedly did with magical glasses, then is that evidence that I can? If I believe in Thor, then is that evidence that Thor exists.

That's the same circular reasoning of presupposing Naturalism to prove Naturalism. And confusing the two types of faith (rationalized, make-believe faith versus the faith of God) is committing a logical� fallacy using the double meaning of the word, faith. The faith of God comes when God speaks and we respond. Make-believe faith comes when ungodly people refuse to acknowledge the voice of God. What credible evidence exists for Naturalism? (some caveats about hearing God's Voice)

To me, many of the actions of the God of the Bible do not seem to be the actions of a good god.

If you can't prove Naturalism, can you prove that your sense of morality is superior to God's? How can one have true objective morality without God? How do you know that something is either moral or not moral without objective morality? Do you fully understand God's end purpose for creating the Universe? If so, then how you know that this is God's purpose?

We can't accept the Bible as a guideline. There are many known errors in the Bible.

Note that there are no errors in the Bible. Every claim that is brought forward claiming errors has been shown to be unsound. Satan has made this accusations for thousands of years and Christ has refuted every claim of an error by pointing out Satan's errors. Yet, ungodly people continue to publish lists of thousands of so-called errors or inconsistencies. Other ungodly people go to these lists and add them to their argument. But every one of these accusations can be and has been answered.

People have been trying to find one actual error in the Bible for thousands of years and have been unsuccessful. If you want to discuss some specific examples, we can do that, but let's finish one discussion first: provide concrete, absolute proof for Naturalism or else admit that Naturalism is a baseless presupposition that you use to filter every thought you have and every bit of evidence you look at.

This example was included because Atheists will try to change the subject before admitting that their house of cards can't stand scrutiny, so you just ask them to finish one discussion before starting another.

Revelation is unreliable. If you've had a direct revelation, merely feeling it to be convincing doesn't make it true. We've all had our minds play tricks on us. And many others have had hallucinations and other persuasive experiences that we would both regard as false.� So, there is no way to verify revelation.

As you pointed out, the human mind is deceitful and desperately wicked so we cannot know what is real and what is not, whether natural or spiritual. There is nothing spiritual that can be discerned by the human mind, so God doesn't leave discernment up to the human mind. He provides the discernment with the revelation. Presupposing Naturalism to prove Naturalism is circular reasoning. Do you have verifiable proof for Naturalism?

You must be humble enough to know the limits of your own knowledge. There are some things no one can know. In these cases, we must be honest with ourselves and admit that we don't know. We must only accept those things that can be verified. There is no evidence for God.

Know the limits of our own knowledge. How can anyone know that there is no evidence for God without knowing all things? That would be the� fallacy of a universal negative. We know that there is evidence for God in creation and in God's direct communication with us. Ungodly people have make-believe� rationalized faith that God doesn't exist. By what means can you verify that I and all other followers of Christ are not experiencing what we are experiencing?

The human mind is extremely susceptible to hallucination.� The human mind can't be trusted to discern between God and some other source, so revelation is not reliable. We must know the limits of our minds, what we can and cannot know. Then, we must only believe those things that can be verified.

Great example! The human mind can't be trusted. Note the strange logic: we can't trust the human mind, so we shouldn't turn to God for revelation but rather trust the human mind to know its limits and then trust it again to know how to verify. But it can't be trusted. Only a human mind without the Anointing of God could come up with a rationalization like that. Is there any reason anyone should believe in Naturalism?

If a thought arises in my head, how could I possibly know that this is the voice of God. There are many people who claim to hear from God, but their statemetns conflict. There is no way to test for the source.�

Many speak Satan's words and claim to be speaking God's words, but God gives discernment to every person who seeks Him. This is true in spite of the fact that the true seeker may be deceived by Satan. And God has, through the Bible, given ways to test for the source. If you turn to Christ and continue to seek Christ, He will progressively reveal Himself. The claim that there is no way to test for the source is circular reasoning using the presupposition of Naturalism to prove Naturalism.

The Bible can't be trusted. If you read the revelations of others in a book, you know that throughout history various people have claimed various contradictory revelations. They can't all be true. And maybe none of them are. We have to use our reason at some point to sort the revelations out. We have to choose which revelations to believe.

We know that Scripture is the unique Utterance of God by direct revelation. God unfolds revelation to us through Scripture. Just as we don't know all things about God's creation� (true science) or about what God reveals through Scripture. He unveils these things progressively. However, to imply that God doesn't lead us to the correct choice about what to believe is to presuppose Naturalism without providing any credible proof for the reality Naturalism. God reveals Naturalism to be a lie.

Naturalism is self-evident. You know that you have had times when you have not known whether God was speaking to you or it was your own mind.� You mind is unreliable to discern the difference.

Naturalism is Scientifically impossible. Satan is often successful in confusing Christians with the same claim about discernment. Some Christians even become Atheists. However, God gives discernment progressively as a gift to all who seek Him in humility, deep respect, and submission. On the other hand, we don't see verifiable proof for Naturalism.

We often see the world through our own subjective filter. Have you considered all the evidence. Have you considered that you might to well to follow Allah or Satan. Faith is not a reliable way to know anything.

Christ-followers consider all the evidence God provides, material and spiritual, but the subjective filter of Naturalism keeps people from considering the evidence God provides. And there's no evidence for the� presupposition of Naturalism. Can you present anything credible to show that I and millions of followers of Christ are not experiencing what we are experiencing or that our God-generated supernatural faith is the same as rationalized make-believe faith in Naturalism?

Though this example shows a person who does not admit having any experience in support of the presupposition, those who have had alien/demon experiences or something similar may have an experience that claims that Naturalism is fact. Demons disguise themselves as aliens in order to deceive.� They then tell many lies and people gladly believe them.

�