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.
Well, yes, but can we explain the rationale for this succinct truth? What I just posted elsewhere is applicable here:
An issue frequently cited as constituting stumbling-blocks to belief in the NT God for some people is reconciling God’s power and love with the fact of evil and its consequence. A person might think that God would not permit evil, suffering and hell to exist. People who are mystified by evil and repulsed by its punishment 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 (GN 1:26-27).
MFW only exists when there is the possibility of choosing between two qualitatively opposite moral options that we call good and evil. Thus, God created theoretical evil or the possibility of rejecting Him as an option that actualizes MFW/free human personality. As such it is necessary and even good (GN 1:31). Of course, it was wrong for Satan (1JN 3:8) and humanity (RM 5:12) to make evil actual by choosing to Sin or reject Faith in God’s Lordship. 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 wrath or cursing, death and hell (DT 30:19).
This is why hell as well as heaven exists. It is the just consequence for choosing evil rather than God. Even the wrath of God is an expression of His love. Hebrews 12:4-11 offers the clue for harmonizing these two themes. This passage indicates that suffering divine wrath in this life is intended as discipline.
Suffering earthly misery should teach people their need for God's salvation to heaven, and wrath resulting from sin should teach people to repent of their hatefulness or faithlessness (PR 3:12, IS 33:14-15 RV 3:19) before they die, after which divine wrath will be experienced justly without the opportunity for repentance.
God could not force people to return His love without abrogating their humanity; love must be evoked. If God were to zap ungodly souls, it would be tantamount to forcing conversions at gunpoint, which would not be free and genuine. If God were to prevent people from behaving hatefully, then He would need to prevent them from thinking evilly, which would make human souls programmed automatons.
Therefore, for reasons we may understand only sufficiently rather than completely, God designed reality so that experiencing His presence is less than compelling, so that even Jesus (God the Son) on the cross cried out “My God [the Father], why have you forsaken [taken God the Spirit from] me?” (MT 27:46, PS 51:11) This phenomenon is sometimes called “distanciation”, because we experience God as distant from us and “unknown” (ACTS 17:23), even though He is close or immanent, “for in Him we live and move and have our being” (ACTS 17:28).
Some atheists argue that souls may be good or have good “hearts” and merit heaven without accepting Christ’s atonement or else they do not deserve punishment because of the poor environment in which they were raised.
The NT says there is no excuse for rejecting God, but it does not consider whether a person might have a psychological reason (such as being abused as a child by an unloving “Christian” father).
What do y'all think about this argument?
The NT says there is no excuse for rejecting God, but it does not consider whether a person might have a psychological reason (such as being abused as a child by an unloving “Christian” father).
What do y'all think about this argument?
Let me pose the question another way: Does a person who was born in outer Mongolia in 1,500 B.C. who failed to satisfy GRFS and died at the age of fifteen deserve the same punishment in hell as the person who was born in Europe in the 20th century A.D. who was responsible for murdering millions in an effort to conquer some part of the world?
Okay, I will begin by noting that anyone who thinks instead of going to so much trouble to provide Messiah's sacrificial atonement that God should punish each individual for his/her own sins thinks too highly of himself and too little of the holiness of God. Even though some sins, such as murder, seem worse than others quantitatively, because they cause more obvious harm, all sin—even that of omission (JM 4:17)—is evil qualitatively and equivalent to murder for being diametrically opposed to the perfect will of God (JM 2:10-11).
Thus, while it might seem that the just consequence for your own sins (or for the poor adolescent in outer Mongolia who did not seek God mentioned previously) would be a hell much less horrible than for someone like Hitler, all ungodly souls are on Satan’s side and cannot earn heaven by trying to be good without cooperating with God. So instead of seeking salvation our own way, it is wise to be grateful for grace and ask for clarification of one’s (mis)understandings in heaven.
Because perfect justice is not attained during this earthly existence, there is a resurrection and judgment (HB 9:27-28), when those who serve the Spirit of love (although imperfectly, PHP 3:12) are separated from demonic souls who do not even want to try to cooperate with the Holy Spirit (MT 25:31-46). Otherwise, there would be no ultimate justice and the entire biblical revelation would make no sense (1CR 15:14&19). If atheists/evil-doers remained unconscious after death, such ignorance would be relative bliss and morality would be nullified (ECC 2:12-17). Thus, hell (as a potential destiny) as well as heaven is good/part of the duo of desirables (DOD)!
The horror of self-condemnation for serving Satan is this: apparently the misery of hell does not motivate genuine repentance. Thus, God abandons people assigned to hell or second death (RV 20:6, RM 1:28-32), because they are hopelessly corrupt (JN 6:44). This destiny is eternal for anyone whose sins are infinite. For the rest, hell will end in destruction or non-existence after justice is achieved per the following passages:
JN 17:12, “None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.”
RM 9:22, “What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?”
GL 6:8a, “Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction.”
PHP 3:19a, “Their destiny is destruction.”
2THS 1:9a, “They will be punished with everlasting destruction.”
2PT 3:7, “By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.”
Because unrepentant/unseeking souls are annihilated after being appropriately punished in hell, God is both just regarding the ungodly and loving toward those who repent, receive His Holy Spirit and thus reflect Christ's love in the natural world imperfectly and then sufficiently perfectly in the supernatural heaven eternally.
Okay, I gave the full/complete answer, but now I will be concise.
Does a person who was born in outer Mongolia in 1,500 B.C. who failed to satisfy GRFS and died at the age of fifteen deserve the same punishment in hell as the person who was born in Europe in the 20th century A.D. who was responsible for murdering millions in an effort to conquer some part of the world?
Yes qualitatively, but no quantitatively.
(Hope that is clear enough :^)
By means of this reply I would like to reiterate the main points covered in this thread (motivated by 1PT 3:15) sharing why I believe NT Christianity is the best belief or answer for questions about ultimate/spiritual reality.
The "unavoidable beliefs" are for those who like philosophy, and the "watershed choices" are a logical analysis of the major belief types in world history that I view as a minor divine insight, because I do not remember learning that from anyone.
I also do not remember anyone listing "ways God is not disproved" as an argument for belief in God, since He has NOT been disproved in any way. Nor am I aware of anyone posing the "questions and answers" that logically accompany the various belief systems.
The main insight I believe God has given me is called the "Propensity Principle". While is does not prove the truth of the NT God, it proceeds with linear (rather than circular) logic or reasoning to lead an atheist to consider putting faith in Christ rather than blindly believing their doubts.
In this presentation I have answered questions and addressed arguments that I have heard atheists ask and make. In the final section I shared the best Bible-based explanations that knits Scripture together into a harmonious whole regarding "how the Trinity, what the hell and why MFW for God".
Hope you have been edified! (LIC :^)
Today my newsfeed has an article about reasons ex-Christians become skeptics, so let us consider whether we can counter them.
First, they come to doubt the doctrines they were taught. I know this happened in my own life when I realized that the SBC omitted reading Scriptures that did not support the OSAS dogma. I do not know if this is why a daughter of a missionary became an atheist, but I was motivated to search GW for myself and found the doctrine of volition that needed to be harmonized. Apparently, how to harmonize this doctrine with those emphasizing God's sovereignty is still a problem for many on CC.
First, they come to doubt the doctrines they were taught. I know this happened in my own life when I realized that the SBC omitted reading Scriptures that did not support the OSAS dogma. I do not know if this is why a daughter of a missionary became an atheist, but I was motivated to search GW for myself and found the doctrine of volition that needed to be harmonized. Apparently, how to harmonize this doctrine with those emphasizing God's sovereignty is still a problem for many on CC.
NONE!! The HOLY SPIRIT is the one who CONVICTS OF SIN, and the on who enables FAITH in people. Paul didn't play around with "Theology" to win people. He simply taught Jesus Christ, and HIM CRUCIFIED, and let the Holy Spirit handle the "Heavy Lifting". you're not capable of producing anything but "Intellectual assent" which doesn't get anybody Born Again,
In my experience it seems more likely that people become saved through an emotional service, and they remain immature if not discipled beyond sermons urging repentance. Thus they may be swayed by illogical or wrong reasoning to abandon faith in Christ/Truth and place it in Falsehood, at least until they learn that everyone walks by faith rather than absolute science.
On the contrary, Paul's writings form the backbone of theology along with the teachings of Jesus. If they had simply preached about Christ on the cross, the NT would be rather brief! Most of what is posted on CC comes under the heading of theology more than soteriology (which is the focus of the Kerygma thread :^)
I emphasize logic/reason without intending to demean emotion. Both are important aspects of personality, but their relationship is analogous to that of saving faith and works: faith precedes love (per GL 5:6), and right reasoning should guide one’s emotion. Biblical passages that seem to support the view that human logic is a divine gift include the following:
- “Come now, let us reason together,” says the Lord. (IS 1:18a)
3. “So [Paul] reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there.” (ACTS 17:17)
4. “We do, however, speak a message of wisdom [right reasoning] among the mature…” (1CR 2:6)
5. “When I was a child… I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.” (1CR 13:11)
6. “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.” (1PT 3:15b)
These passages indicate that we should think and attempt to learn the best beliefs/opinions or solutions regarding issues including the arguments or accusations of atheists:
The Spirit brings an end to the logical argument and the reasonable doubts.
Once, someone told me I worshiped a dead Jew. I told him, "You should have said an alien, zombie Jew born of a virgin. That's a better headline. Any way, He's my Lord and Savior." He just stared at me. Didn't know what to say.
Reason is good for what reason is good for. But science and reason give way to the Spirit when pressed to their limits.
Only because he could not teach a message to the mature. The Corinthian believers were carnal.
Well yes, because the HS = GW/Logos. When I was ignorant of GW beyond the basic Gospel, I tended to buy the atheist claim that they had reasonable doubts and certain/scientific disproof of faith in God, but as I LGW (via which the HS leads us to all truth) I came to see that their doubts were illogical and that they too walk by faith or I-dolatry.