Apologetics: witnessing to atheists
- Thread starter GWH
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Imagine that you have suddenly begun to exist as a mentally competent or normally intelligent human being (like Adam and Eve in Genesis). Certainly, your immediate concern would be meeting your survival needs, but as soon as there was time for reflection, would you not wonder why you were “born”, how you should behave, and what you ought to accomplish with your life?
Since absolute skepticism or agnosticism is unattainable for thinkers or truthseekers, there are only two qualitatively different ways of answering these questions. One way is by assuming that there is no ultimate “whyness” or purpose beyond survival and avoiding pain, so it does not ultimately matter what one believes or does, because humanity merely evolved from eternal energy/matter, into which it “devolves” at death. You may desire for some reason to survive and to save the world, but if life becomes too painful you may wish you were never born and want to destroy the world, because there is no good reason you ought to be like Messiah rather than like Mania or to be loving rather than maniacal. You may believe and act like evil exists or not, because life is a farce or a continual “King of the Hill” (KOTH) struggle against human adversaries and various other types of adversity, having no ultimate or universal moral imperative (UMI).
The second type of answer is that life is NOT a farce—that existence has meaning, and how one believes and behaves does matter for some non-arbitrary reason. This answer seems more appealing to me and almost logically imperative, although some people appear to prefer the paths of nihilism and KOTH (cf. MT 13:14-15).
I call the first type of answer cosmaterialism, because it views reality as consisting only of the material cosmos or universe and as having only four dimensions (space plus time), which are perceived by the five physical senses, implying a perpetual history of KOTH. I call the second way of believing moralism, because—while accepting the reality of the physical/material—it also affirms a fifth dimension perceived by a sixth intuitive or spiritual sense that gives reality a logical basis for meaning and morality (which means for ending KOTH
.
The choice between cosmaterialism and moralism logically is the first fundamental choice in life (cf. GN 3:5). It can be thought of as a watershed decision that divides all people into two essentially different philosophical categories or world-views like a continental divide, although the analogy breaks down at the points the various oceans connect. A person who believes cosmaterialism, moral nihilism and that life’s struggles are meaningless frequently tends to seek escape even via suicide, whether by one act or by a downward spiral of self-destructive behavior. Again, until and unless this option were somehow proven beyond doubt, moralism or viewing life as meaningful seems to be the better belief.
Since absolute skepticism or agnosticism is unattainable for thinkers or truthseekers, there are only two qualitatively different ways of answering these questions. One way is by assuming that there is no ultimate “whyness” or purpose beyond survival and avoiding pain, so it does not ultimately matter what one believes or does, because humanity merely evolved from eternal energy/matter, into which it “devolves” at death. You may desire for some reason to survive and to save the world, but if life becomes too painful you may wish you were never born and want to destroy the world, because there is no good reason you ought to be like Messiah rather than like Mania or to be loving rather than maniacal. You may believe and act like evil exists or not, because life is a farce or a continual “King of the Hill” (KOTH) struggle against human adversaries and various other types of adversity, having no ultimate or universal moral imperative (UMI).
The second type of answer is that life is NOT a farce—that existence has meaning, and how one believes and behaves does matter for some non-arbitrary reason. This answer seems more appealing to me and almost logically imperative, although some people appear to prefer the paths of nihilism and KOTH (cf. MT 13:14-15).
I call the first type of answer cosmaterialism, because it views reality as consisting only of the material cosmos or universe and as having only four dimensions (space plus time), which are perceived by the five physical senses, implying a perpetual history of KOTH. I call the second way of believing moralism, because—while accepting the reality of the physical/material—it also affirms a fifth dimension perceived by a sixth intuitive or spiritual sense that gives reality a logical basis for meaning and morality (which means for ending KOTH
.The choice between cosmaterialism and moralism logically is the first fundamental choice in life (cf. GN 3:5). It can be thought of as a watershed decision that divides all people into two essentially different philosophical categories or world-views like a continental divide, although the analogy breaks down at the points the various oceans connect. A person who believes cosmaterialism, moral nihilism and that life’s struggles are meaningless frequently tends to seek escape even via suicide, whether by one act or by a downward spiral of self-destructive behavior. Again, until and unless this option were somehow proven beyond doubt, moralism or viewing life as meaningful seems to be the better belief.
-
1
- Show all
Thanks, and with that encouragement I will proceed to presenting the second watershed decision, which flows immediately and implicitly from the moralist viewpoint (like major rivers from one side of the Divide)—choosing what (or who) to believe gives existence meaning and under-girds moral conscience.
As one analyzes the variety of moralistic beliefs, there seem to be four main viewpoints extant in the world:
1. the ground of meaning/morality is human power (humanism, cf. GN 11:4),
2. there is a natural moral law or karma in the universe (karmaism, cf. GL 6:7),
3. there is natural “meaning” with an instinct or proclivity toward morality (naturalism, cf. RM 2:14),
4. a supernatural Supreme Being exists, especially biblical and especially NT monotheism (belief in one God, GN 17:1&DT6:4, EPH4:6).
Examining the evidence for the various viewpoints makes it evident that the only viable alternative to atheism in its diverse forms is NT theism, which reformed the OT concept of God by revealing that the one almighty God is also all-loving (per 1TM 2:3-7). It views God as creating and communicating by means of His Word (GN 1 & Logos in JN 1:1), and it affirms that the world is created intentionally rather than accidentally “banged” from a “singularity” (RM 1:20&25).
The atheist opinion indicates that the existence of a supernatural Deity is not proven and it asserts that one cannot prove a negative, so the burden is on theists to prove God exists. However, this assertion assumes God is not the positive “I AM”, the essence of existence (EX 3:14). A neutral statement about ultimate reality is the following: “It is logical to remain open to believing all credible possibilities (those which present sufficient evidence) and to hope the most desirable rational possibility is true.” Alternatively, the Bible indicates that the purpose of this life is rather for humans to prove to God they are worthy of—or qualify for—heaven (cf. DT 6:16 & MT 4:7).
This discussion shows that everyone lives by faith regarding God or ultimate reality (2CR 5:7), and the structure of earthly reality forces souls to choose between various contradictory beliefs and to make (albeit sometimes rather subconsciously) the two watershed choices described: between nihilism and moralism, and between the various atheistic beliefs and the highest type of theism, NT Christianity. (I believe the last is best: Let there be God! :^)
As one analyzes the variety of moralistic beliefs, there seem to be four main viewpoints extant in the world:
1. the ground of meaning/morality is human power (humanism, cf. GN 11:4),
2. there is a natural moral law or karma in the universe (karmaism, cf. GL 6:7),
3. there is natural “meaning” with an instinct or proclivity toward morality (naturalism, cf. RM 2:14),
4. a supernatural Supreme Being exists, especially biblical and especially NT monotheism (belief in one God, GN 17:1&DT6:4, EPH4:6).
Examining the evidence for the various viewpoints makes it evident that the only viable alternative to atheism in its diverse forms is NT theism, which reformed the OT concept of God by revealing that the one almighty God is also all-loving (per 1TM 2:3-7). It views God as creating and communicating by means of His Word (GN 1 & Logos in JN 1:1), and it affirms that the world is created intentionally rather than accidentally “banged” from a “singularity” (RM 1:20&25).
The atheist opinion indicates that the existence of a supernatural Deity is not proven and it asserts that one cannot prove a negative, so the burden is on theists to prove God exists. However, this assertion assumes God is not the positive “I AM”, the essence of existence (EX 3:14). A neutral statement about ultimate reality is the following: “It is logical to remain open to believing all credible possibilities (those which present sufficient evidence) and to hope the most desirable rational possibility is true.” Alternatively, the Bible indicates that the purpose of this life is rather for humans to prove to God they are worthy of—or qualify for—heaven (cf. DT 6:16 & MT 4:7).
This discussion shows that everyone lives by faith regarding God or ultimate reality (2CR 5:7), and the structure of earthly reality forces souls to choose between various contradictory beliefs and to make (albeit sometimes rather subconsciously) the two watershed choices described: between nihilism and moralism, and between the various atheistic beliefs and the highest type of theism, NT Christianity. (I believe the last is best: Let there be God! :^)
-
1
- Show all
Atheists claim there is no more evidence for the existence of God, the Creator and Judge of humanity, than for the reality of obviously fictional entities, such as Odin or unicorns. However, four types of evidence or reasoning may be viewed as supporting rational belief in God, although they do not prove He exists: the unique universe, theocentric human history, existential need and moral conscience.
Current scientific theory states that the universe expanded with a “bang” when a singularity of energy exploded, and that it will end with a “whimper” when the stars eventually fade to darkness. This unique universe theory is compatible or consistent with belief in a God who created the universe “ex nihilo”, who sustains it by His power, and who will judge its moral agents at the end of time.
Current knowledge of world history suggests that humanity descended from one genetic source and evolved into various cultures. Throughout history humanity has perceived deity to be the ground of meaning and morality. Theocentric history reached its apex or spiritual climax with the NT teaching that there is one almighty and all-loving God, who desires all humanity to live in harmony on earth and also in heaven, and who allows humanity to experience earthly existence including pain and disappointment for the purpose of teaching them their need for Him (cf. HB 12:10).
Current existential reality indicates that mortals need God in order to obtain immortality, that morality needs God for a universal imperative and ultimate justice, and that the NT offers the best hope that this “duo of desirables” (DOD) or heaven and justice/hell can be attained. Just as physical needs are satisfied by material realities, perhaps our metaphysical needs indicate the reality of supernatural solutions (the God of the DOD).
Moral conscience indicates and logically requires accountability to a moral authority, and the supreme Authority would be God. Paul wrote (in RM 1:32 & 2:15) that people “know God’s decree that those who do evil deserve death” and that their consciences “show that the requirements of the [God’s moral] law are written on their hearts.” Our feeble attempts at earthly justice may reflect or serve as evidence of God’s perfect justice. (This has similarities with Platonic idealism, cf. 1CR 13:12, HB 8:5, 9:23 & 10:1). We may perceive perfect justice partially (1CR 13:9-12) using spiritual eyes/intuition/a sixth sense along with inference, logic, and even imagination. [Slashes indicate equivalent terms.]
Current scientific theory states that the universe expanded with a “bang” when a singularity of energy exploded, and that it will end with a “whimper” when the stars eventually fade to darkness. This unique universe theory is compatible or consistent with belief in a God who created the universe “ex nihilo”, who sustains it by His power, and who will judge its moral agents at the end of time.
Current knowledge of world history suggests that humanity descended from one genetic source and evolved into various cultures. Throughout history humanity has perceived deity to be the ground of meaning and morality. Theocentric history reached its apex or spiritual climax with the NT teaching that there is one almighty and all-loving God, who desires all humanity to live in harmony on earth and also in heaven, and who allows humanity to experience earthly existence including pain and disappointment for the purpose of teaching them their need for Him (cf. HB 12:10).
Current existential reality indicates that mortals need God in order to obtain immortality, that morality needs God for a universal imperative and ultimate justice, and that the NT offers the best hope that this “duo of desirables” (DOD) or heaven and justice/hell can be attained. Just as physical needs are satisfied by material realities, perhaps our metaphysical needs indicate the reality of supernatural solutions (the God of the DOD).
Moral conscience indicates and logically requires accountability to a moral authority, and the supreme Authority would be God. Paul wrote (in RM 1:32 & 2:15) that people “know God’s decree that those who do evil deserve death” and that their consciences “show that the requirements of the [God’s moral] law are written on their hearts.” Our feeble attempts at earthly justice may reflect or serve as evidence of God’s perfect justice. (This has similarities with Platonic idealism, cf. 1CR 13:12, HB 8:5, 9:23 & 10:1). We may perceive perfect justice partially (1CR 13:9-12) using spiritual eyes/intuition/a sixth sense along with inference, logic, and even imagination. [Slashes indicate equivalent terms.]
-
1
- Show all