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.

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,330
29,575
113
#81

2 Corinthians 4:4 plus I wonder how when someone is blind to something, which, let's face it, means they cannot see it at all, or comprehend it, and finds the message connected to it foolishness, and is hostile in their minds toward the One True God behind it all, and loves evil, and suppresses truth, and cannot come to God on his own, being a slave of sin and unable to submit to God's law... I wonder how these people who push "free will" think such a person suddenly decides to throw over their very human nature and choose something he cannot even receive... some say without any help from God at all.
 
Oct 10, 2024
124
42
28
17
USA, Indiana, Elkhart, Goshen.
#82
Great and I hope you had better results than I. Jesus tried to draw all people but had to hope that being hoisted on a cross would do it. It appears that every tongue confessing him as Lord may not happen until in heaven. ☹️
Jesus doesn't draw all to Him. He doesn't, "try". Read John 10.
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,099
295
83
#84
But God already knows the outcome, and He knew before the foundation of this Earth...
Now you introduce another point that is difficult to explain.

Four terms are used to describe (but not explain and certainly not “box in”) the supernatural power of God: omnipotent (almighty), omniscient (all-knowing/ intelligent), omnipresent (everywhere), and omnitemporal (eternal). “Natural laws” actually are ongoing supernatural operations of God (RM1:20). If the NT is not too good to be true, then the Lord of the universe is neither dictatorial nor distant, but rather relates to humanity. Although we cannot comprehend the infinite God completely, hopefully we can do so sufficiently in order to achieve the type of relationship God desires to have with humanity (JN 14:9-25). God desires communion.

1. God’s omnipotence means that He can do everything except “disown Himself” or not be God (2TM 2:13). It does NOT mean that God can perform logical absurdities, such as creating a rock too large for Him to move. Omnipotence or sovereignty also means that human MFW has limits with regard to how it can contradict God’s will. God provides morally competent humans the ability to resist His intentional will and plan of salvation within limits, (such as the time limit that will end with death and judgment per HB 9:27), which is called His permissive will.

2. God’s power is equivalent to His omniscience. Jeremiah wrote that “God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom.” (JR 10:12) Many NT passages refer to God as the source of true wisdom (e.g., ACTS 6:3, 1CR 1:25, CL 2:2-3, JM 1:5). God’s infinitely superior knowledge is extolled in Romans 11:33-34 (echoing IS 40:13-14) and Daniel 2:20-23. Omniscience includes knowledge of people’s thoughts (PS 94:11, MT 12:25) and the foreknowledge of events (ACTS 2:23, RM 8:29, 11:2, 1PT 1:2).

Some people think that God even knows what a person will be/do before that person exists (JR 1:5). If this view is correct (which I find incomprehensible, cf. Kant), it must be maintained that God’s foreknowledge does not predetermine a person’s spiritual choice regarding the satisfaction of God’s requirement for salvation or else moral responsibility would be abrogated. I find it simpler to think that God merely tweaks the river of history occasionally to keep if flowing in the direction He intends but allows the fish to swim as they wish. God allows eddies in the river of His plan of salvation.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,330
29,575
113
#86
The general call. But God changes the hearts of only His sheep. How does this and John 10 not go against each other?
What do you think about all of this? God bless you and may God reveal the truth in Christ to us all!
You have mentioned John 10 more than once now, but which verse(s) specifically do you have in mind?
 
Oct 10, 2024
124
42
28
17
USA, Indiana, Elkhart, Goshen.
#88
You have mentioned John 10 more than once now, but which verse(s) specifically do you have in mind?
Most of it goes with what I'm saying, but especially probably the first ten verses or something. God talks about His sheep in there and that's the part I'm referring to.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,330
29,575
113
#89
Most of it goes with what I'm saying, but especially probably the first ten verses or something.
God talks about His sheep in there and that's the part I'm referring to.
I am partial to these two... I'll take a look at the beginning verses...


John 10:27-28
:)
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,330
29,575
113
#92
My question is ultimately, do you believe you can be unsaved after you are accept Christ?
No worries. I can assure you that in all my years online as a Christian (17, now) I have
never said anything that could be taken to mean I believe we can lose our salvation.
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,099
295
83
#93
No worries. I can assure you that in all my years online as a Christian (17, now) I have
never said anything that could be taken to mean I believe we can lose our salvation.
Ah, but "for freedom" indicates that the question is whether saved "me" is free to not embrace God's grace/salvation; will those who commit apostasy be in heaven against their will?
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,099
295
83
#96
I remind you that I am exploring the logic of Paul in RM 1:20 when he says that creation reveals God's power and loving nature.
I began the logical train of thought by citing three unavoidable beliefs and then two qualitatively opposite answers to the question regarding the meaning of life. Next I posited that sane or non-nihilistic people choose to believe that life has meaning or a moral dimension, and I noted four flavors regarding what warrants such faith, beginning with humanism. Now I will share thoughts about karmaism, naturalism and theism.

Karmaism, (found mainly in Hinduism/Buddhism), has a doctrine of reincarnation according to one’s karma or performance of good and evil deeds. This belief provides a rationale for universal morality, but its fallacy may be assuming that the ground of meaning is impersonal, merely natural or even subhuman. Although there are occasional claims by someone to have memories of previous lives, if karmaism were true one might expect that everyone who was a sentient adult in the previous life would remember much of it. Thus, I find insufficient evidence for karmaism (reaping what is sown naturally).

The adherents of naturalism posit that humans instinctively accept the validity of morality or of acting in accordance with a reciprocity principle or the “golden rule” (do unto others as you would have them do unto you, cf. MT 7:12), and they are satisfied with whatever meaning can be derived from this earthly existence. The problem with this view is that humanity has also had a proclivity toward evil throughout history, so there is no basis for saying the negative force toward others is not equally valid and for mandating a universal golden rule or moral imperative. Logically, all it can offer is a “pyrite suggestion”. Morally, it merely continues KOTH.

Pantheism or belief that nature is god and polytheism or belief in many gods envision a vitiated or diminished divinity and thus are tantamount to atheism. Also, deism says God created the world but does not interact with it (as though He died), which amounts to practical or functional atheism. The cry of Jesus on the cross, “My God, why have you forsaken me?” (in MT 27:46) expresses feelings in accord with this view, while the resurrection of Jesus (MT 28:5-7, if it occurred) provides hope that such feelings do not match the facts.

The only viable alternative to atheism is NT theism, which reformed the OT concept by revealing that the one almighty God is also all-loving. (The NT concept of God is described more fully in Parts III and IV, but at this point see 1TM 2:3-7.) It views God as creating and communicating by means of His Word (Logos in JN 1:1), and it affirms that the world is created intentionally rather than accidentally “banged” from a “singularity” (RM 1:25).
The atheist opinion maintains that the existence of a supernatural Deity is not proven, although it is not disproved either, which means that the evidence needs to be evaluated honestly. Atheists assert 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” (see axiomatic belief #1).

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 per NT Christianity. I choose to believe the last is best: Let there be God!
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,067
4,349
113
#97
The atheist opinion maintains that the existence of a supernatural Deity is not proven, although it is not disproved either, which means that the evidence needs to be evaluated honestly. Atheists assert 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” (see axiomatic belief #1).

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 per NT Christianity. I choose to believe the last is best: Let there be God!
there is one more key factor, TRUTH!.
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,099
295
83
#98
there is one more key factor, TRUTH!.
Yes, and helping any open-minded atheists to learn the truth about God may require explaining how creation reveals God's power and loving nature. I began the Bible-based logical train of thought in this thread by citing three unavoidable beliefs and then two qualitatively opposite answers to the question regarding the meaning of life. Next I posited that sane or non-nihilistic people choose to believe that life has meaning or a moral dimension, and I noted four flavors regarding what warrants such faith, beginning with humanism. Then I shared an analysis of major religions including karmaism, naturalism and atheism. Now I will continue by citing evidence supporting faith in God.

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 began with a “bang”, when a marble of matter or a singularity of energy suddenly 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 (KOTH) 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 view is similar to 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.]

Y'all's commentary?...
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,067
4,349
113
#99
Yes, and helping any open-minded atheists to learn the truth about God may require explaining how creation reveals God's power and loving nature. I began the Bible-based logical train of thought in this thread by citing three unavoidable beliefs and then two qualitatively opposite answers to the question regarding the meaning of life. Next I posited that sane or non-nihilistic people choose to believe that life has meaning or a moral dimension, and I noted four flavors regarding what warrants such faith, beginning with humanism. Then I shared an analysis of major religions including karmaism, naturalism and atheism. Now I will continue by citing evidence supporting faith in God.

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 began with a “bang”, when a marble of matter or a singularity of energy suddenly 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 (KOTH) 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 view is similar to 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.]

Y'all's commentary?...
Open-mindedness has been the position for many of us for a long time in the context of witnessing "Atheist."

The scientific rigor and refutation of their position have been done very well, yet it is not the "church" that results in insults when they are provided with the articulation of the belief in an unseen God.

Moreover, the public school system and Colleges teach evolution as truth, not a theory. There have been repeated instances of Professors mocking and scoffing at Christians and doing so with intimidation. Students remain silent about their faith because they don't want a bad grade. Open, mature dialog is not accepted as much in academia, but the institutions of higher learning started most of them as theological seminaries.
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,099
295
83
Open-mindedness has been the position for many of us for a long time in the context of witnessing "Atheist."

The scientific rigor and refutation of their position have been done very well, yet it is not the "church" that results in insults when they are provided with the articulation of the belief in an unseen God.

Moreover, the public school system and Colleges teach evolution as truth, not a theory. There have been repeated instances of Professors mocking and scoffing at Christians and doing so with intimidation. Students remain silent about their faith because they don't want a bad grade. Open, mature dialog is not accepted as much in academia, but the institutions of higher learning started most of them as theological seminaries.
Don't get me started on academia!

Too late:

How We Got Here: A Summary

After declaring independence from England in 1776, winning it in the Revolutionary War and defending it in the War of 1812, slavery caused the Civil War in 1860 and then struggles for equality and the right for all citizens to vote threatened our unity. In the 1900s, dictators attacked freedom, provoking World War I in 1914, WWII in 1940 and the Korean War in 1950. Then the high cost and eventual loss of both the Vietnam War in 1973 and the War on Islamic Terrorists from 9-11-91 until 2019 divided and damaged our country. Today (2022) our nation that began as a republic established by the U.S. Constitution appears to be in danger of becoming an authoritarian socialist state.

While the history of wars against threats to our liberty is fairly well known, what is only recently becoming apparent is the threat our disunity will end in socialism, which now governs most of the world and almost every aspect of our society–education, entertainment, news, social media, banking and monopolistic businesses–corrupting politicians and elections. The main cause of this corruption is that following WWII America allowed subversive educators to infiltrate universities, including Herbert Marcuse and Marxist Saul Alinsky, whose book Rules for Radicals was dedicated to Satan and whose rules included deception and violence (the end justifies the means). The teachings of such radical professors has influenced many college students (including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama) to favor socialist policies. (See The War for America’s Soul by Gorka, p. 59-65.) Many Americans are oblivious to the slow disintegration of the Constitutional consensus, because the owners of most news media were similarly educated and sympathetic.

A main financier of the socialist movement has been George Soros, who became a billionaire, established a network called the Open Society Foundation to promote a global government, and since 2003 has been financing numerous socialist groups in the U.S. (See The Shadow Party by Horowitz & Poe, p. 78-95 & 177-82.) Another leader of the globalist cabal or “new world order” is Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum in 1971, which meets annually in Davos, Switzerland. He envisions a technological revolution that transforms the world (including America), converting humans who freely worship God into drones coerced by a fascist-communist state as in China. A prominent American participant in the WEF is Bill Gates. (See The Great Reset by A. Jones, p. 4-7, 28 & 95.)

The globalists began to conspire with communist China (the CCP) in 1978, when the Trilateral Commission befriended Chinese leaders and sought a New International Economic Order. Since then the CCP has pursued a clever strategy that has steadily weakened the U.S. as China gained power, currently on display as its military buildup, the COVID-19 pandemic, aggression against Taiwan and the “One Road One Belt” policy. It aims to surpass the U.S. and dominate Eurasia by the year 2049. (See Reset, p. 40-44 & War, p. 136.) And now, authoritative Biden administration dictates are weakening the U.S. and attempting to banish conservative Constitutionalist opposition. Much of the news media fail to report this truth, so that many people remain ignorant of the dissolution of the American dream of liberty for all (like frogs being boiled alive because the water temperature is raised slowly). Where will we go from here?