Apologetics: witnessing to atheists

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).

I grew up with Christian parents and attended church most every Sunday, but when I reached college age I encountered atheism and wondered why the daughter of a missionary became an atheist. This prompted me to request a modern English Bible for Christmas, which I read completely through in order to find answers to atheists' criticisms, because the pastor's weekly sermons about how to be saved had not equipped me for such apologetics.

As I learned biblical teachings beyond the Gospel, I felt led to become a minister and perhaps a pastor so that I could share such truth with Christians who might witness to atheist friends or at least be edified and not deceived by their argumenta. When I became a military chaplain, there was an AKO online forum in which atheists debated Christians, and at one point I was invited to speak at a meeting of the atheists in Austin.

So, now that I discovered this ChristianChat forum, I would like to pass on what the Lord has taught me before I die, especially to those Christians whose experience sitting in church pews has been similar to mine.

Thanks for asking!

It might work better if you simplify the language, here is a quick rewrite:
Paul in Romans 1:20 says that creation shows God’s power and love. Let’s look at different beliefs about the meaning of life and how they compare.

1. Karmaism: Found in Hinduism and Buddhism, this belief says that our actions (good or bad) affect our future lives through reincarnation. While this explains universal morality, it assumes that the basis of meaning is impersonal or natural. Also, if karmaism were true, more people would remember their past lives, which isn’t the case. So, there’s not enough evidence to support it.
2. Naturalism: This view suggests that humans naturally follow moral rules like the “golden rule” (treat others as you want to be treated). However, history shows that humans can also be very evil, so there’s no strong reason to say that good behavior is more valid than bad behavior. This view doesn’t provide a solid foundation for universal morality.
3. Pantheism and Polytheism: Believing that nature is god or that there are many gods weakens the idea of a powerful, single deity, making it similar to atheism. Deism, which says God created the world but doesn’t interact with it, also feels like atheism. Jesus’ cry on the cross (“My God, why have you forsaken me?”) fits this view, but his resurrection (if it happened) offers hope that God is involved in the world.
4. Theism: The New Testament (NT) theism redefines the Old Testament (OT) concept by showing that God is both all-powerful and all-loving. It says God created the world intentionally and communicates through His Word (Logos in John 1:1). This view supports the idea that life has meaning and purpose, as described in Romans 1:25.

I prefer Paul’s method, leveraging the power and simplicity of the gospel.
[1Co 2:2 KJV] 2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

[Jhn 12:32-33 KJV] 32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me. 33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.

I got you, and that makes perfect sense, but when I read "My reason for beginning this thread is simply to share my fallible faith with atheists", it just made me laugh knowing where we are, and then comment trying to share that laugh. I was not trying to criticize at all here, I just thought it funny enough to share. Again I understand what you said and how you meant it, I just hope you see that I was never trying to "get at you" in any way.

Atheist need to be shown love.. .. I don’t believe shouting at them with a megaphone from a corner while standing on a perch is effective.. I have seen preachers go up to individuals one on one asking them if there was anything in their life they needed a prayer for, now that can be effective. Buying a homeless dude a hot meal, will, open their hearts.

I also have found atheists generally to be closed-minded, and Jesus did too in MT 13:14-15.
Still, we all ought to try to be able to witness to atheists like CS Lewis did.

I like your rewrite just fine, and I see what I write as a continuation of Paul’s method. While simplicity is good for most people I think being prepared to explain the reasons for our hope in detail is good for resisting the devil’s arguments.

I also have found atheists generally to be closed-minded, and Jesus did too in MT 13:14-15.
Still, we all ought to try to be able to witness to atheists like CS Lewis did.

I appreciate your explanation and agree that my wording is ironic—because I took it from a book I have written without thinking to change it for this community.

That Matthew verse hearkens back to Isaiah who was told, Make the hearts of this people calloused; deafen their ears and close their eyes. Isaiah also makes plain that it was God who hardened their hearts, blinded their eyes, and made them unable to believe. The John verse I just posted also references back to Isaiah on the same issue. In light of these verses, where or how do you see free will fitting in?

PS~ I am glad to have found this thread! I saw you mention it recently and wondered where it was...

Thanks Magenta. I must say though that Isaiah did not consider whether DT 30:19 applies to everyone which makes people rather than God responsible for their sins.

My reason for beginning this thread is simply to share my fallible faith with atheists, hoping they will find what I have learned helpful for understanding ultimate truth. I am grateful to all people—famous philosophers and anonymous acquaintances—who have helped shape my beliefs.

I believe reality is interconnected or unified, so that it is not necessary to worry about where to start exploring, but I will begin by asking the following philosophical question: Is there some truth which is not debatable; which everyone believes at least implicitly and uses as a common point of departure in discussing ultimate reality? I think there is such axiomatic truth, because in order to study reality it appears that one must (logically or implicitly) begin by assuming at least the reality of the student. Thus, absolute skepticism in philosophy is like absolute zero in physics: it serves as a hypothetical point that is not actually achieved or else nothing would happen (even in ice .

An “ism” affirms some valid part of reality. The truth represented by skepticism is that finite human beings cannot know absolutely, infallibly, perfectly or objectively. I find this truth expressed by the apostle Paul in the New Testament (NT) book of 1 Corinthians 13:9&12, “We know in part . . . We see but a poor reflection” (as in a fogged mirror).

The element of uncertainty does not prevent would-be skeptics from talking as if knowledge with some degree of confidence were possible the moment they attempt to communicate their doubts. An agnostic has “certain” assumptions at least implicitly; so, what do y'all think are three pre-Scriptural axiomatic truths revealed via right logic?

Over...

Thanks Magenta. I must say though that Isaiah did not consider whether DT 30:19 applies to everyone which makes people rather than God responsible for their sins.

There are a lot of moving parts to be sure, and Deuteronomy also tells us that God will circumcise our hearts so that we may love Him... not that we will or have to but may, which is a choice we make after our hearts have been changed. After! For none can choose befire then, they are blinded and hostile and unable to obey and cannot even understand. Although all He calls will come, ... and none can come without beibg drawn... I do not have the verse references off the top of my head and cannot navigate away from this page to get them as I am out for coffee and on my phone at the moment. Jesus also said He will draw all men to Himself, and we also know a time comes when every knee shall bend and every tongue confess that Jesus is LORD. Quite the ball of wax we have! LOL

Well, we do know that God says Atheism doesn't exist. It's more like a religion in itself.

I just might not agree with what you say exactly. I'm not sure if you're implying something...

Fools exist. Jesus came to open the eyes of the blind and raise the dead to life.

And, we are all born fools, right?

Fools exist. Jesus came to open the eyes of the blind and raise the dead to life.