Apologetics: witnessing to atheists

  • 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.
the_seeker said:
Hm.
We can start with the problem of suffering.
Do you have solution to this problem?
Click to expand...

Having pondered this problem for 55+ years, here is my solution:

Three issues frequently are cited as constituting stumbling-blocks to belief in the NT God for some people. The first problematic issue is reconciling God’s power and love with the fact of evil and its consequence/suffering. A person—even a theist—might think that God would not permit evil, suffering and hell to exist. People who are mystified by evil and repulsed by its punishment/suffering do not realize that the essential aspect of being a human rather than a robot or subhuman creature is moral free will (MFW), which is what enables a person to experience love and meaning. This is what makes humans different from animals, whose behavior is governed mainly by instinct. This is what it means to be created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26-27; robot or responsible).

MFW only exists when there is the possibility of choosing between two qualitatively opposite moral options that we call good and evil. These options are opposites because of essentially different consequences for choosing them. Choosing good results in blessing, life and heaven; and choosing evil results in cursing, death and suffering/hell (Deut. 30:19). This is why hell as well as heaven exists. It is the just consequence for choosing evil rather than God. The Spirit of God is good: love, peace and joy (Gal. 5:22-23). Therefore, whoever rejects the Lord is spiritually separated from Him (Isa. 59:2) and thereby chooses the evil or satanic spirit of hatred, strife and misery and reaps the just consequence called “hell” in the afterlife (Gal. 6:7-9, Heb. 9:27-28).

Evil people punish/torture themselves by experiencing delayed karma, just as those who experience appropriate justice during this earthly existence also punish themselves or reap what they have sown and send themselves to jail. This view makes souls responsible for breaking the rules rather than blaming evil on the judges (or Judge) who enforce the rules. The purpose of suffering earthly punishment is to promote repentance, but the reason for retribution in hell is to attain justice. It is difficult to imagine, but somehow even someone as evil as Hitler will receive perfect justice, perhaps experiencing the agony of the millions of deaths he caused in accordance with the principal of “eye for eye” (MT 5:38), after which their souls are destroyed forever (per John 17:12, Rom. 9:22, Gal. 6:8, Phil. 3:19, 2Thes. 1:9, 2Pet. 3:7 & Rev. 20:13-14).

God loves and wants to save everyone (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11, Acts 17:26-28); Christ died to show God’s love and the possible salvation of all (Rom. 5:6-8) including His enemies (ungodly, atheist, anti-Christ). Also, God is just (2Thes. 1:6a, cf. Rom. 3:25-26 & 9:14, Deut. 32:4, Psa. 36:6, Luke 11:42, Rev. 15:3). All explanations of reality and interpretations of Scripture should conform to this certitude: “The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” (Psa. 145:17) The Judge is just. It would be better not to attempt an explanation of God’s Word than to state one that impugns God’s justice and love for all people (Joel 2:13, John 3:16).

Even suffering the wrath of God (Rom. 1:18) is an expression of His love. Hebrews 12:4-11 offers the clue for harmonizing these two themes. This passage indicates that divine wrath is intended as discipline: to teach people to repent of their hatefulness or faithlessness (Pro. 3:12, Isa. 33:14-15 Rev. 3:19) before they die, after which divine wrath will be experienced justly without the opportunity for repentance. The Christian creed includes:
  1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or Creator God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who loves sinful humanity (Rom. 5:6-8, John 3:16) and who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation from suffering or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.
  2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).
  3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 15:14-28).
Over...
 
the_seeker said:
Hm.
We can start with the problem of suffering.
Do you have solution to this problem?
Click to expand...

I do.
I recommend that you start taking some English classes … or even better move to California and then we can talk about the problem of suffering.
 
the_seeker said:
Hm.
We can start with the problem of suffering.
Do you have solution to this problem?
Click to expand...

I have one, but it is not a short one, and it involves understandings that many in this forum would find questionable. If I can finish the book I am working on, it will explain how to deal with the issue of suffering though in a theistic format. It will also include a new "proof of Giod" based on scientific experiments that date all the way back to the 2000's, with follow ups into the 2020's. I am waiting for a scientist who was directly involved to get back to me to confirm that I am not abusing the science.
 
GWH said:
Having pondered this problem for 55+ years, here is my solution:

Three issues frequently are cited as constituting stumbling-blocks to belief in the NT God for some people. The first problematic issue is reconciling God’s power and love with the fact of evil and its consequence/suffering. A person—even a theist—might think that God would not permit evil, suffering and hell to exist. People who are mystified by evil and repulsed by its punishment/suffering do not realize that the essential aspect of being a human rather than a robot or subhuman creature is moral free will (MFW), which is what enables a person to experience love and meaning. This is what makes humans different from animals, whose behavior is governed mainly by instinct. This is what it means to be created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26-27; robot or responsible).

MFW only exists when there is the possibility of choosing between two qualitatively opposite moral options that we call good and evil. These options are opposites because of essentially different consequences for choosing them. Choosing good results in blessing, life and heaven; and choosing evil results in cursing, death and suffering/hell (Deut. 30:19). This is why hell as well as heaven exists. It is the just consequence for choosing evil rather than God. The Spirit of God is good: love, peace and joy (Gal. 5:22-23). Therefore, whoever rejects the Lord is spiritually separated from Him (Isa. 59:2) and thereby chooses the evil or satanic spirit of hatred, strife and misery and reaps the just consequence called “hell” in the afterlife (Gal. 6:7-9, Heb. 9:27-28).

Evil people punish/torture themselves by experiencing delayed karma, just as those who experience appropriate justice during this earthly existence also punish themselves or reap what they have sown and send themselves to jail. This view makes souls responsible for breaking the rules rather than blaming evil on the judges (or Judge) who enforce the rules. The purpose of suffering earthly punishment is to promote repentance, but the reason for retribution in hell is to attain justice. It is difficult to imagine, but somehow even someone as evil as Hitler will receive perfect justice, perhaps experiencing the agony of the millions of deaths he caused in accordance with the principal of “eye for eye” (MT 5:38), after which their souls are destroyed forever (per John 17:12, Rom. 9:22, Gal. 6:8, Phil. 3:19, 2Thes. 1:9, 2Pet. 3:7 & Rev. 20:13-14).

God loves and wants to save everyone (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11, Acts 17:26-28); Christ died to show God’s love and the possible salvation of all (Rom. 5:6-8) including His enemies (ungodly, atheist, anti-Christ). Also, God is just (2Thes. 1:6a, cf. Rom. 3:25-26 & 9:14, Deut. 32:4, Psa. 36:6, Luke 11:42, Rev. 15:3). All explanations of reality and interpretations of Scripture should conform to this certitude: “The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” (Psa. 145:17) The Judge is just. It would be better not to attempt an explanation of God’s Word than to state one that impugns God’s justice and love for all people (Joel 2:13, John 3:16).

Even suffering the wrath of God (Rom. 1:18) is an expression of His love. Hebrews 12:4-11 offers the clue for harmonizing these two themes. This passage indicates that divine wrath is intended as discipline: to teach people to repent of their hatefulness or faithlessness (Pro. 3:12, Isa. 33:14-15 Rev. 3:19) before they die, after which divine wrath will be experienced justly without the opportunity for repentance. The Christian creed includes:
  1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or Creator God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who loves sinful humanity (Rom. 5:6-8, John 3:16) and who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation from suffering or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.
  2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).
  3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 15:14-28).
Over...
Click to expand...
GWH said:
Well, I not see non-Jews not having to follow the Mosaic laws, putting faces on coins or the Temple Scroll to be significant grains of sand.

I am glad you find my rationale for hell plausible.

NT references to Hades may be metaphorical or semi-parables.

Yes, grains of sand are by definition not boulders that would be something significant unless a person magnifies them until irritation causes serious doubt.

Would you want to start a thread for the purpose of discussing your writing?
Click to expand...

I am actually trying to figure out a good way to express what has prompted my writing. I think I have a post but I want to give myself time to be certain that I am saying things properly and in a way others might understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GWH
The problem of suffering has been answered a gazillion times. Once that’s been answered, the critic will then ask about the problem of evil (which has also been answered a gazillion times). Once that has been answered, the critic will then move onto the problem of hell (which has also been answered a gazillion times). Once that has been answered, the critic will move onto who they believe the God of the Bible is (which has also been answered an gazillion times). And on and on the questions will go. Does anyone see the pattern here? Once you answer them, they will just move on to something else. Why? Because they aren’t getting the answers that *they* want. They aren’t getting the answers that *suits* them. So it’s not that there are no answers, they simply refuse any and all answers unless it conforms to their wishes, wants, desires and needs.

It’s not really about finding answers with these people. It’s more about control, an agenda, and protecting their own worldview. In other words, it’s volitional. A matter of their own will, not intellectual. Their goal isn’t to understand, it’s simply to move the goalposts to fit their preconceived commitments or beliefs.

Asking questions about God and suffering are biblical questions asking about the biblical God. That demands and requires a biblical answer. But they will not accept the biblical answer to their question about the God who they ask. Their questions only makes sense if they accept that God exists, only makes sense if they accept what His word says, but they don't accept that. So, their question is starting off on the wrong foot, as they are asking about God and they don't even believe in Him or His revealed word to be correct. So every biblical answer you give them will be brushed off because the answer they want is an answer that is not biblical.

Why would critics keep on asking questions or pointing to things that have already been answered, has solutions, or are unproven allegations about God and Christianity? I would venture to say for the very same reasons a lot in our press continue to put out certain stories. They care more about getting what they want than about being honest or fair. They care more about their own wants than the answer, solution, and truth. They desire to prioritize narratives or agenda over full truth.
 
True, there are atheists and skeptics who do not truly want any answers, answers might upset their perception of how the world is. The same is true of some Christians, they do not want anything that upsets their perception of how the world is.

But one problem with the "gazillion" times some questions have been answered, a gazillion different answers to a single question amounts to a gazillion times that people have admitted not being certain about what the answer truly is. What some people are looking for is an answer that stays consistent over a broad spectrum of questions, not one that flips and flops depending on how the question is worded.
 
rewriter said:
True, there are atheists and skeptics who do not truly want any answers, answers might upset their perception of how the world is. The same is true of some Christians, they do not want anything that upsets their perception of how the world is.

But one problem with the "gazillion" times some questions have been answered, a gazillion different answers to a single question amounts to a gazillion times that people have admitted not being certain about what the answer truly is. What some people are looking for is an answer that stays consistent over a broad spectrum of questions, not one that flips and flops depending on how the question is worded.
Click to expand...
Don’t bother responding to any more of my posts, rewriter. I’ve put you on ignore. Feel free to do the same. I could just as easily say “But one problem with ____” on your comment, but what good will it do?
 
Blue155 said:
The problem of suffering has been answered a gazillion times. Once that’s been answered, the critic will then ask about the problem of evil (which has also been answered a gazillion times). Once that has been answered, the critic will then move onto the problem of hell (which has also been answered a gazillion times). Once that has been answered, the critic will move onto who they believe the God of the Bible is (which has also been answered an gazillion times). And on and on the questions will go. Does anyone see the pattern here? Once you answer them, they will just move on to something else. Why? Because they aren’t getting the answers that *they* want. They aren’t getting the answers that *suits* them. So it’s not that there are no answers, they simply refuse any and all answers unless it conforms to their wishes, wants, desires and needs.

It’s not really about finding answers with these people. It’s more about control, an agenda, and protecting their own worldview. In other words, it’s volitional. A matter of their own will, not intellectual. Their goal isn’t to understand, it’s simply to move the goalposts to fit their preconceived commitments or beliefs.

Asking questions about God and suffering are biblical questions asking about the biblical God. That demands and requires a biblical answer. But they will not accept the biblical answer to their question about the God who they ask. Their questions only makes sense if they accept that God exists, only makes sense if they accept what His word says, but they don't accept that. So, their question is starting off on the wrong foot, as they are asking about God and they don't even believe in Him or His revealed word to be correct. So every biblical answer you give them will be brushed off because the answer they want is an answer that is not biblical.

Why would critics keep on asking questions or pointing to things that have already been answered, has solutions, or are unproven allegations about God and Christianity? I would venture to say for the very same reasons a lot in our press continue to put out certain stories. They care more about getting what they want than about being honest or fair. They care more about their own wants than the answer, solution, and truth. They desire to prioritize narratives or agenda over full truth.
Click to expand...

As I shared in my testimony, in my experience the Southern Baptists had no answers to the problems you mentioned,
which is why I devoted my life to finding them in order to be part of the solution, which includes inoculating our young
believers against the disease of doubt. Was your experience in your church upbringing different/better?

The answers I shared are quite Biblical, like them or not--and even some CC folks don't like them--although they offer no better explanations--perhaps because of what rew said: different answers to a single question suggest that Christians don't have a
good answer, and so immature Christians are tempted to doubt there is an answer.
 
GWH said:
As I shared in my testimony, in my experience the Southern Baptists had no answers to the problems you mentioned,
which is why I devoted my life to finding them in order to be part of the solution, which includes inoculating our young
believers against the disease of doubt. Was your experience in your church upbringing different/better?

The answers I shared are quite Biblical, like them or not--and even some CC folks don't like them--although they offer no better explanations--perhaps because of what rew said: different answers to a single question suggest that Christians don't have a
good answer, and so immature Christians are tempted to doubt there is an answer.
Click to expand...
Apologetics was never discussed when I was a child/teen where I attended. It was only until last year maybe. However, up until then, I did the same as you. I began seeking and finding the answers. And in doing so, I realize everyone is different when it comes to evidence, so there’s no one-size fits all answer. Some might be convinced with cause and effect, others might be convinced through love, while others are convinced with the design argument. It’s the same for evil, pain and suffering, or the personal loss. We all grieve and experience it in different ways, so there’s no one “silver bullet” to resolve the problem for some. It requires love, timing, patience, compassion, and kindness on our part. That’s been my experience dealing with my own personal life. An answer I may have received from someone might not have helped, while another does, but the answer that helped me might have not been the answer that helps others. And what helps others might have been the answer that wouldn’t have helped me.
 
GWH said:
As I shared in my testimony, in my experience the Southern Baptists had no answers to the problems you mentioned,
which is why I devoted my life to finding them in order to be part of the solution, which includes inoculating our young
believers against the disease of doubt. Was your experience in your church upbringing different/better?

The answers I shared are quite Biblical, like them or not--and even some CC folks don't like them--although they offer no better explanations--perhaps because of what rew said: different answers to a single question suggest that Christians don't have a
good answer, and so immature Christians are tempted to doubt there is an answer.
Click to expand...

I also have searched and searched without finding answers. That is part of what has driven me to question tradition, and in doing so I have found consistent answers, but at the cost of some of what I had valued before.

To say the scriptures are true as tradition presents them is a statement of faith. Tradition says look at things this specific way and ignore the difficult spots. Deep investigation, looking at the "clearly irrelevant" evidence, works as well in biblical studies as it does in science, and science does not advance by staying in the comfortable areas, but by looking at the places where things just do not seem to fit. A question that cannot be answered consistently suggests an error in the assumptions involved in its answer.
 
the_seeker said:
Hm.
We can start with the problem of suffering.
Do you have solution to this problem?
Click to expand...

Suffering exists because we live in a fallen world corrupted by sin. When humanity first rebelled against God, sin entered creation, bringing with it suffering, pain, death, and sorrow. However, Scripture assures us that this suffering is temporary. God promises a future restoration when the problem of sin will be fully and finally resolved, and all its consequences, including suffering itself, will be no more.

Revelation 21:4 says, " And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

From an atheistic perspective, suffering is meaningless. Suffering will happen. But from a Christian perspective, there are two kinds of suffering. From a believer's view, suffering of unbelievers is due to their own rebellion against God. However, when a believer suffers for the cause of God, they are comforted by God.

2 Corinthians 1:3–4
“Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God.”

This is not some hollow statement. A believer who genuinely suffers for the Lord in doing His work will receive the comfort of the Holy Spirit in ways you cannot imagine in our present world. If this comfort was non-existent, then scores of testimonies of Christians being comforted in their sufferings for Christ would not exist. Yet, they do exist throughout history.

Here are just two quick examples:

Ignatius of Antioch

c. AD 107

Condemned to be torn apart by wild beasts in Rome, Ignatius wrote letters while under guard.

He testified:

“Now I begin to be a disciple… Let fire and cross, let packs of wild beasts, let breaking of bones and tearing of limbs come upon me, only let me attain to Jesus Christ.”​

This was not bravado but Spirit-enabled courage and longing, echoing (Philippians 1:21).

Richard Wurmbrand

20th century Communist persecution

Founder of The Voice of the Martyrs, imprisoned and tortured for 14 years in Romania.

He testified:

“I have seen Christians in prison who were joyful though beaten. God’s presence filled the cell.”​

Despite brutal conditions, he repeatedly described the comfort of the Holy Spirit as more real than physical pain, consistent with (Hebrews 13:5–6).

From a Christian perspective, when a believer suffers for their faith in believing and following God's Word it cannot be compared to the glory which shall be revealed in them one day. They will also reign with Jesus Christ.

Romans 8:18
"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us."

2 Timothy 2:12
“If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us.”

Sometimes suffering for God's kingdom cannot be understood or seen in the moment until later.
Joseph’s brothers hated him, plotted to kill him, stripped and cast him into a pit, sold him into slavery for silver, and then deceived their father into believing he was dead (Genesis 37).

Even after being sold into slavery and unjustly imprisoned, Joseph remained faithful and honored God, and the LORD was with him and prospered him even in prison (Genesis 39:20–23).

Later, when Joseph was released from prison and rose to a position of power in Egypt, he encountered his brothers who had wronged him. To make a long story short, Joseph's brothers eventually had a change of heart about what they had done. The evil they committed against Joseph ultimately served a greater plan for good. Joseph and his brother reconciled.




.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue155
Bible_Highlighter said:
Later, when Joseph was released from prison and rose to a position of power in Egypt, he encountered his brothers who had wronged him. To make a long story short, Joseph's brothers eventually had a change of heart about what they had done. The evil they committed against Joseph ultimately served a greater plan for good. Joseph and his brother reconciled.




.....
Click to expand...

I meant to say the plural and not the singular.
Meaning, I meant to say,

"Joseph and his brothers reconciled."




.....
 
Blue155 said:
Apologetics was never discussed when I was a child/teen where I attended. It was only until last year maybe. However, up until then, I did the same as you. I began seeking and finding the answers. And in doing so, I realize everyone is different when it comes to evidence, so there’s no one-size fits all answer. Some might be convinced with cause and effect, others might be convinced through love, while others are convinced with the design argument. It’s the same for evil, pain and suffering, or the personal loss. We all grieve and experience it in different ways, so there’s no one “silver bullet” to resolve the problem for some. It requires love, timing, patience, compassion, and kindness on our part. That’s been my experience dealing with my own personal life. An answer I may have received from someone might not have helped, while another does, but the answer that helped me might have not been the answer that helps others. And what helps others might have been the answer that wouldn’t have helped me.
Click to expand...

I completely agree that there is no one way to witness for the One Way (1Pet. 3:15), so while what I learned answered my questions,
I can only hope that those I share may help a few folks find answers that satisfied their questions and encourage them to doubt their doubts.

We seem similar and simpatico, but some on CC seem to have papal complexes and know all of the answers, some of which
differ from mine, and so I am concerned that our different answers to the kerygmatic question (Acts 16:30) could contribute
to doubt or belief that Christians don't have a good answer because there is none. Of course, there may be questions that
will not be answered fully until we go to heaven, but I have learned a lot from what GW taught.

What do you think about the answers I shared re the problems you cited?
(Discussing one at a time is fine :^)
 
rewriter said:
I also have searched and searched without finding answers. That is part of what has driven me to question tradition, and in doing so I have found consistent answers, but at the cost of some of what I had valued before.

To say the scriptures are true as tradition presents them is a statement of faith. Tradition says look at things this specific way and ignore the difficult spots. Deep investigation, looking at the "clearly irrelevant" evidence, works as well in biblical studies as it does in science, and science does not advance by staying in the comfortable areas, but by looking at the places where things just do not seem to fit. A question that cannot be answered consistently suggests an error in the assumptions involved in its answer.
Click to expand...

I am glad you are a truthseeker, rew, and I hope that answers I share help with what you are writing, so feel free to adopt anything you want to incorporate in your belief system.

I think you will find that even deep investigation will not be able to answer all questions, so you will need to learn to walk by faith (2Cor. 5:7) per the Propensity Principle (PP), which once again is this:

The PP employs linear logic (rather than circular reasoning) to propose faith in the NT God as the best belief that solves the maze of questions about ultimate reality as follows:

1. Current scientific knowledge cannot explain how the universe came to exist by means of natural causes, thus it is possible that the cause of the universe is a supernatural Creator/God.

2. The most creative species is humanity, whose traits also include language, moral conscience and God consciousness (personality), so it is possible that these human traits reflect attributes of a God who created humanity.

3. Existential reality indicates that humans are mortal and life is painful, but when life is happy, one wishes it would continue indefinitely. Thus, it is rational to seek how to be saved or to become immortal in a heavenly existence.

4. Comparing all possible ways of achieving salvation, the best or most credible way/hope at this point appears to be the God who resurrected Christ Jesus.

5. When words from God are sought, the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul seem to be the most highly inspired when compared with other scriptures (including the OT), because its concept of one God as the just and all-loving Judge (rationale for morality) is spiritually highest or most advanced, and the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is most credible.

6. Thus, it is appropriate or wise to believe in the NT God and to accept Jesus as God’s Messiah.

Atheists deny the validity of this rational argument, but in the absence of disproof, I find the decision to reject the biblical gospel of salvation from selfishness, spiritual death, and a miserable destiny to be illogical or foolish. This is why all truthseekers should agree on NT theism now rather than assume atheism is an unlucky guess.

As someone has said, heaven is like a vision of water in the desert: the scoffer will surely die where he/she is, while the believer will live if right. Again, however, this analogy should be viewed in terms of comparison shopping and logic rather than of blind faith and fear. True love for God is evoked by His love for humanity and is a reflection of His loving Holy Spirit (1John 4:7-12); it cannot be coerced, although it can be imitated (2Cor. 11:14 calls Satan an “angel of light”). Heaven may not be a mirage!

A biblical illustration of the PP is the OT story about Naaman being told to bathe in the dirty Jordan River to cure his leprosy (2Kings 5:10-14). The Naaman Example teaches us not to let sinful pride prevent us from being cured of spiritual sickness by methods we think are silly or do not fully understand. Some people might not understand why God ordained Messiah to atone for humanity’s sins, so they think the Gospel seems foolish or silly (cf. 1Cor. 1:18-25). However, they accept physical reality without necessarily understanding very well how it works (cf. John 3:8), and Jesus said that those who seek salvation will find it, which indicates that God graces every sinful soul with the ability or opportunity to understand how to be saved (Matt. 7:7, cf. 1Tim. 2:3-4), which might be called “seeking grace”.

Those who reject the PP (and Naaman Example) apparently employ a logical fallacy that might be called non praecedere (comparable to non sequitur), making an unwarranted conclusion which precedes unknown facts, namely the cause for the universe “banging bigly”. Atheists assume a natural cause will be discovered, but their assumption is premature and thus inappropriate or illogical. The astute atheist will realize that the logical train of thought from Descartes to the PP that has been presented is common sense that is available to every normal human adult, which is why there is no excuse for disbelief in God (Rom. 1:20). On the contrary, it is the reason Christians can bet or have confidence that their faith is correct (Heb. 10:19&35, Phil. 3:3-7, Eph. 3:12) and it is the atheists whose faith is blind.
 
GWH said:
I completely agree that there is no one way to witness for the One Way (1Pet. 3:15), so while what I learned answered my questions,
I can only hope that those I share may help a few folks find answers that satisfied their questions and encourage them to doubt their doubts.

We seem similar and simpatico, but some on CC seem to have papal complexes and know all of the answers, some of which
differ from mine, and so I am concerned that our different answers to the kerygmatic question (Acts 16:30) could contribute
to doubt or belief that Christians don't have a good answer because there is none. Of course, there may be questions that
will not be answered fully until we go to heaven, but I have learned a lot from what GW taught.

What do you think about the answers I shared re the problems you cited?
(Discussing one at a time is fine :^)
Click to expand...

I would note that Blue gave good traditional answers. His point 1 is very sound, the science offers three arguments for a creator that are hard to refute because the appeal to infinite universes fails. If there are infinite universes, this one never comes into existences as there is always one more that must exist prior to this one. This is related to Zeno's ancient argument that movement is impossible as there are an infinite number of specific points one must cross to move and thus never an initial one, so the initial one cannot be crossed.

Point 2 fails because there are many conscious, creative creatures with languages as science has discovered. It is a fallacy to link these traits with likeness to God. The ability to love universally and to teach other species to do so seems plausible though.

Point 3 is logical, but holds no evidential meaning. One can desire to fly like a bird also but that is not an achievable goal.

Points 4 and 5 reference the resurrection of Jesus but exactly what this resurrection looked like is questionable. Mark and John both seem to have been edited to add a physical resurrection and people being resurrected was a common belief in the 1st century. Augustus and Tiberius, for example, were both reportedly resurrected and seen as such by others. How would claims by the early Christians have been perceived any differently and why would Paul say "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. " (Galatians 3:1 another grain of sand) if the only source for evidence for the Galatians to have "seen" was verbal testimony?

Traditional arguments are fine, as long as tradition is assumed to be correct. The issue becomes the numerous places where tradition fails to provide sound answers. Salvation comes from the same root as salve, or a healing paste/ointment. What is the healing and why, in the first couple centuries of Christianity (pre-Nicaea and even for a brief time following) were other religions considered also subject to receiving this salvation although by a lesser approach?
 
rewriter said:
I would note that Blue gave good traditional answers. His point 1 is very sound, the science offers three arguments for a creator that are hard to refute because the appeal to infinite universes fails. If there are infinite universes, this one never comes into existences as there is always one more that must exist prior to this one. This is related to Zeno's ancient argument that movement is impossible as there are an infinite number of specific points one must cross to move and thus never an initial one, so the initial one cannot be crossed.

Point 2 fails because there are many conscious, creative creatures with languages as science has discovered. It is a fallacy to link these traits with likeness to God. The ability to love universally and to teach other species to do so seems plausible though.

Point 3 is logical, but holds no evidential meaning. One can desire to fly like a bird also but that is not an achievable goal.

Points 4 and 5 reference the resurrection of Jesus but exactly what this resurrection looked like is questionable. Mark and John both seem to have been edited to add a physical resurrection and people being resurrected was a common belief in the 1st century. Augustus and Tiberius, for example, were both reportedly resurrected and seen as such by others. How would claims by the early Christians have been perceived any differently and why would Paul say "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. " (Galatians 3:1 another grain of sand) if the only source for evidence for the Galatians to have "seen" was verbal testimony?

Traditional arguments are fine, as long as tradition is assumed to be correct. The issue becomes the numerous places where tradition fails to provide sound answers. Salvation comes from the same root as salve, or a healing paste/ointment. What is the healing and why, in the first couple centuries of Christianity (pre-Nicaea and even for a brief time following) were other religions considered also subject to receiving this salvation although by a lesser approach?
Click to expand...

rew, your ref to Blue I think meant me, so here are my comments on yours:

1. We agree.
2. Please note that the reference was to creatures with higher order language, moral conscience and God consciousness (personality),
which your reply failed to notice.
3. What was once unachievable can be achievable later, such as flying.
4. Evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus is better than for anyone else, and thus his resurrection is more credible. One of the strongest arguments is 1Cor. 15:13-20, but even Paul who experienced Christ on the road to Damascus said 2Cor. 5:7.
5. The NT teachings of Jesus and Paul seem to be the most highly inspired when compared with other scriptures (including the OT), because its concept of one God as the just and all-loving Judge (rationale for morality) is spiritually highest or most advanced IMO.

Historical accounts and scientific argumenta are fine until/unless there is good reason to doubt them and amend one's understanding.

Over...
 
GWH said:
Apologetics: witnessing to atheists
Click to expand...

Presenting "Apologetics" to an "Athiest". is like wrestling a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

The only way into the safety of salvation starts with CONVICTION from the Holy Spirit (Rom 10:17) which is the beginning of FAITH.

There's a local legal firm in Dallas whose slogan is: "The name you know, the Firm that you trust". "Know" is intellectual assent - "Trust" is FAITH. Intellectual assent is good, but doesn't get the job done. Heb 11:1 must exist for the conversion to be complete. Isa 53-10-12 is what makes the difference.
 
Bob-Carabbio said:
Presenting "Apologetics" to an "Athiest". is like wrestling a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

The only way into the safety of salvation starts with CONVICTION from the Holy Spirit (Rom 10:17) which is the beginning of FAITH.

There's a local legal firm in Dallas whose slogan is: "The name you know, the Firm that you trust". "Know" is intellectual assent - "Trust" is FAITH. Intellectual assent is good, but doesn't get the job done. Heb 11:1 must exist for the conversion to be complete. Isa 53-10-12 is what makes the difference.
Click to expand...

Well, the way some people tell it, we all begin as pigs,
but conviction begins when a pig squeals/repents of disbelief and increases as it learns GW.
Then we all walk by faith in GW (2Cor. 5:7) and increase our confidence (2Cor. 5:8, 2Tim. 1:12)
as we employ a sound hermeneutic (1Thess. 5:21) and become mature (Eph. 4:11-15).
 
  • Like
Reactions: rewriter
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back