Featured Give me your best come back to an Atheist!

I get them to admit they cannot prove there is no God, hence they start on a faulty presupposition. The best they can be is agnostic. Once the possibility opens God May or may not exist, their belief is shown to be ridiculous.

 

I try to boil down the "why" they claim to be atheists:
Specifically, I like to know whether their objections are intellectual or existential or even merely emotional.

More often than not, objections are existentially expressed:
"What about all the evil in the World, why would God allow suffering etc..."

Such a person should be reacted to not so much with pre-suppositional argumentation, but in the form of Theodicy as much as anything else.
I find the most important thing is to understand their REASONING behind their proclaimed "Atheism" <---which as W.D. rightly said is usually agnosticism not "Atheism".

Too often, their reasons are personal and emotionally linked and is not a result of any intellectual rigour.

If it's not existential in nature:
I tend to begin with the
Kalam Cosmological Argument
Argument from morality (Teleological argument)
Argument from contingency.

 

In their own language:Irreducible Complexity

Irreducible Complexity : A component of The Intelligent Design Theory.

Very Briefly: An argument by proponents of Intelligent Design that "certain biological systems are
too complex to have evolved from simpler or 'less complete' predecessors".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity

The intellectual agnostic-atheist community has claimed that Irreducible Complexity has "been refuted".

But of course they would have to say that.

HankD

 

Cmon Hank! Pondscum can become DNA. What's so hard about that?

 

Isn't pondscum DNA to begin with?

HankD

 

Warren Hearnes was governor of Missouri, back in the 1960s. He passed away in 2011. He was from Charleston, in Southeast Missouri, only an hour's drive from my Paducah, Kentucky home. As a young TV reporter, I interviewed him several times. He was also a Baptist.

One day, at his home after an interview, we were discussing his trade mission to Russia to help market Missouri products. He related a conversation with a Russian official. Hearnes had commented that he was a Christian. The Russian official, of course, did not believe in God.

This is what Governor Hearnes told him: If you're right and I'm wrong,when I'll die, I'll just be dead and will lose nothing. If I'm right and our wrong, when you die you'll lose everything."

 

Tom, that is in a nutshell, Pascal's Wager.

 

Obey the scripture and do not give them a forum
Mat 7:6
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

 

Just thought that I would enlighten everyone in case you missed it, if you choose to engage, discuss and illuminate atheists (unbelievers) with information, thoughts and experiences of your life as believer (as you were once a non-believer) then you are being disobedient to scripture.

 

QF, did you mean to say "if you choose not to"?

 

As with most human interactions, the idea is to establish some common truths, that both you and the atheist can agree upon, thus establishing that you are not a whack-job screaming my way or the highway.

First try to boil down their objections to 3 or 4 that you can address. Usually (but not always) they will use Calvinism as a strawman, pointing to its incoherence and irrationality. They use Calvinism as a whipping boy. Next, they usually point to some feature of the OT law and say "really?" Here you might find an opening to present the Law of Christ, the Law of Liberty and they might see a speck of light. Ask why they rail against the OT law, rather than the one that applies to and is taught by Christians.

The Bible certainly teaches good stewardship, investing our ministry where we get the most bang for the (spiritual) buck. Some Atheists are like the trolls we find here, they ask questions but are not actually interested in learning, but only in demonstrating some flaw in the thinking of those that respond.

My answer is to present the pure gospel, including Hades and Gehenna, the choice God sets before them, and the plea to be reconciled to God. But, once you have presented the gospel and re-explained what they seemed not to understand, there is no need to spend more time, especially in a mano-mano exchange tantamount to "I'm smarted than you."

 

I often miscommunicate and leave off words,,,,but not this time. It was my response and interpretive take on an earlier post. I will, according to an earlier post, be disobedient....when I am given the chance to engage someone of the atheist variety.

 

I looked it up, and you're right.

 

A Conversation between an Atheist, a Calvinist, and a Bible Student.

Calvinist: Adam had free will before he fell. Since then man's will has been corrupted by indwelling sin.
Atheist: This view seems Calvinistic, are you a Calvinist?
Calvinist: Just biblical, Mr. A.
Atheist: Mr. C, do you admire the writings of John Calvin?
Calvinist: Yes, I agree with most.
Atheist: I thought you might. So Mr. C, you do not believe you have free will?
Calvinist: Our will is constrained by our depraved nature; it is not free.
Atheist: Do you choose to love God or is that programmed into you?
Calvinist: I believe that God quickens the elect, and then we believe and choose Him. We are not able to do so of our own will.
Atheist: So God programs you to love him. Hmmmm....
Calvinist: Our nature restricts our choices, when in our corrupt fallen sinful state, we could not love God.
Student: Mr. A, some students of the Bible believe with Mr. C that our choices are restricted by our nature but disagree on the restrictions caused by our fallen nature.
Atheist: Mr. C, To "quicken" would be like putting the batteries into a toy? Would you enjoy love from a doll that you programmed to say, "I love you"?
Calvinist: Please understand, Mr. A, I am not trying to convince you or anyone, only those quickened will be convinced. But you asked me which may mean you have been quickened, and I am trying to answer.
Atheist: Mr. C, I not looking for convincing. I am just curious about your beliefs.
Calvinist: Fair enough.
Atheist: Now what about that doll? If you programmed a doll to say, "I love you," could you convince yourself that the doll did indeed love you and would you find such "love" satisfying?
Calvinist: To answer, I must go back to why God created man in the first place.
Atheist: You can't tell me whether YOU would be satisfied with the love of a doll you had programmed to say I love you without giving me what you believe is the history of God?
Calvinist: I am not God, Mr. A. I can only answer by what scripture says.
Atheist: Oh I didn't think you were God or even that you speak knowingly of him. I am just wondering if YOU would be satisfied with the love of a doll that you had programmed to say, "I love you."
Calvinist: If I had the power to create a doll to love me, I would give it free will as God did to man.
Student: Mr. C has put it correctly, love does not demand its own way, so our choice to love God or not must be made autonomously for it to bring glory to God.
Atheist: Fair enough. And if that man disobeyed you, would you then curse all of his descendants?
Calvinist: Actually, Adam’s sin placed all of mankind in a fallen unholy sinful state because God is holy and mankind became unholy. When Adam and Eve’s eyes were opened they we corrupted.
Atheist: According to scripture, didn't the words of the curse come from God himself? And surely the power of the curse did.
Calvinist: Right, but God’s action was in response to the autonomous action of Adam. God told man that if he ate of the fruit he would surely die. Now God had put the forbidden tree in the Garden for a purpose, but that purpose was fulfilled by Adam choosing to sin.
Atheist: To think that man has the power to bring a curse on his fellow man sounds superstitious to me. Is this really what you believe?
Calvinist: Close but no cigar. Only God has the power to place mankind in a fallen or unfallen state, spiritually or physically, but God’s action was in accordance with His statement to Adam as given in scripture.
Atheist: You can only recite scripture? You can't think for yourself? I am asking you if you think God decided that because Adam had sinned, all of Adam's descendants would be afflicted?
Calvinist: Yes, I believe God decides all things.
Atheist: So God decided that all of humankind would be guilty because of Adam's sin?
Calvinist: Yes, because of the transgression of the one, the many were made sinners.
Atheist: Mr. C, you believe in eternal torment for those who fail to believe as you do, don't you?
Calvinist: I believe in eternal separation from God for those that are not His chosen, yes.
Atheist: And you believe that only the elect can come to a saving knowledge of Christ?
Calvinist: Yes.
Atheist: Would you approve of beating a blind man when the blind man failed to see?
Calvinist: Certainly not. However, in this case the man chose blindness to light.
Atheist: If I am made without the ability to see....do I have a choice about whether or not I can see?
Calvinist: Mr. A, those who are not elected have a will, but because they are not chosen, they do not have the ability to choose God.
Student: As I pointed out earlier, non-Calvinists believe that the fallen are able to see dimly, sufficiently to find the narrow way that leads to life.
Atheist: But Mr. C, you disagree with our Bible Student don’t you. So why would God endlessly torment them for not having what he alone can give them?
Calvinist: Mankind, in Adam already chose.
Atheist: If a teacher punished an entire class for the actions of one child and if the teacher then said, "This boy has cursed all of you because of his actions. I will now beat every child in the class and I will beat each of your children that is born and ever enters this class in the future," would that seem fair to you?
Calvinist: It is not my place to evaluate what is fair. I accept God's sovereignty.
Student: Mr. A, do not reject Christ because you reject the questionable views of some who trust in Christ.
Atheist: Well I am dealing with the view of Mr. C and I think his view makes God into a tyrant. Mr. C, if God told you to kill a child, would you do it?
Calvinist: I know of what you refer, but doesn't apply to saints today.
Atheist: According to the scripture, God did command men to kill babies in the Old Testament times, so I: think it's a fair question.
Calvinist: It is a moot question. We are not in Old Testament times, Mr. A. But lets explore the idea. The NT tells us to be willing to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters in Christ. Even today Christians have put their lives on the line to help others in Iraq. Cowards are not Christians, and Christians are not cowards. Mr. A, do you have what it takes to trust fully in Christ, to put you life in His hands?
Atheist: Lets get back to my issue, Mr. C, do you have a right to evaluate any of the actions of God?
Calvinist: No, even when God’s actions seem adverse toward me, my faith in God tells me that all things will work together for good for those who love the Lord.
Atheist: So if God told you to rape a woman, you would have no right to question that, would you? Can you think of anything more hateful than torturing someone forever?
Calvinist: Mr. A, I think you are putting too many irons in the fire. Lets agree that God does not ask us to do what is wrong. Now lets move to the idea that scripture teaches that God treats the lost unfairly. Eternal separation is clearly taught in scripture.
Student: The idea of eternal torment is an inference drawn from scripture, but some students understand the conscious awareness of the lost ends when they have been justly punished for their misdeeds. Eternal punishment and eternal darkness simply means their separation from God is forever.
Atheist: Let me rephrase. The question is: do you think it is wrong to torture someone forever?
Calvinist: No, I think tormenting Satan forever is just.
Atheist: When would you ever think it was just or right to torment a person forever?
Calvinist: God’s punishment will provide perfect justice to the lost, no more and no less.
Atheist: Mr. C, if you made a person who had NO ability to see, why would you be angry at the person for failing to have what you alone could give him?
Calvinist: I am very sorry you can't understand God's ways Mr. A. But you are not yet given to do so. Maybe someday you will be quickened. Until then you will continue in darkness.
Atheist: Mr. C, if being "quickened" means that I have to see cruelty as good, then I am glad that that will never happen to me. If being in the "light" means that I must become a thoughtless object, parroting words of praise to a sadistic monster, not because I love him but because he programmed me to say I did, then I would much prefer what you call darkness. Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions.
Student: Mr. A, you are ignoring the alternative view I provided. First, since you can see dimly, the idea of beating the blind man is invalid. You do not have to accept cruelty (eternal torment of all unbelievers) because their punishment for their misdeeds will be just. Your programming only predisposes you to darkness, but you have the opportunity to repent and turn to God. God is saying, “Here I am, Here I am” and He would not reveal Himself if you were unable to affirmatively respond.
Atheist: Thanks Mr. S, I do not see any flaws in your views, but I am sure they do not reflect what the Bible actually teaches because most Christians do not share your views.

 

Only Jesus can remove the scales from the unbeliever's eyes. He does this through the preaching of the Word. The Holy Spirit draws--not the entertainment of the flesh. "No one comes to the Father unless The Spirit draws him"

Repeat after me salvation is no salvation at all.

Best come back: where will you be in 100 years? Are you sure? Could you be wrong? Let's talk about eternity.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James