So You Call Yourself an Atheist

Response to comment [from atheist]:  "Don't believe in Santa Clause."

Pr 19:29

Response to comment:  "I call myself an atheist, but I'm not a man who says there is no God. I'm a man who doesn't believe in any God.

Unfortunately, many people don't understand that's what atheists often mean when they refer to themselves."

Usually, they know there is a God but they just hate him.  Usually they hate him because they don't know him. 

Response to comment:  "Well I don't mean the old "there evidence all around you" line. Something that proves beyond a shadow of any doubt. Something indisputable. Something that would hold up as evidence in a court of law. If your god is so real you should not have any trouble."

God will make himself known to men when they are interested in his righteousness (Mt 6:33).   

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I can quote the Bible too!"

That's nice.  You will not understand the Bible until the Holy Spirit is your teacher (2 Ti 2:15).  That takes humility (2 Thes 2:11).

"...All you can say is Yes, Yes, or No, No! Anything beyond that is evil!...I know and understand plenty about the Bible..."

Thank you for that clarification Momo.  I believe that you believe you know the Bible.  I believe that only makes you a clever devil (2 Ti 2:15, 2 Thes 2:11).

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I was interested at one time, I prayed with a Christian one time for him to come into my heart. She said I was supposed to feel something. I felt nothing. No change in me what so ever."

Were you speaking with a Christian?  Sounds like a the Church of Latter Day Aints.  When a person prays to receive Christ, he/she does not necessarily feel any differently.  Ron Rhodes took twelve seconds of his life to pray a prayer to the Lord.  He was an atheist.  But with a genuine heart, he asked the Lord if he was real, to make himself known to him.  He challenges any atheist or agnostic today because he says, what do you have to loose?  Twelve seconds of your life?  Today, Ron Rhodes is a great apologist of the faith.  He posed every question imaginable to the Lord.  He has written several books which answered his own questions--the same questions most of us have asked by the way.  

 Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "Your posts are some of the most simple-minded garbage I've ever seen. You have the intellectual dexterity of a pencil."

Pencil The intellectuals are all smarter than the rest of us (1 Cor 1:27).  If I am a fool, I am in good company (1 Cor 2:4).   

Response to comment [from an agnostic]:  [Usually know there is a God but hate him...]  "So you think I know there is a God? What's your evidence?

I cannot say that any person knows there is a God but is pretending otherwise.  What I can say is that there is enough evidence for any man to believe in God (internal [Ro 2:15]; external [Ps 19:1] plus scripture).  I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.  Knowing there is a God and hating him means you are in rebellion.  Not knowing that there is a God means that you are a fool.  God said that (Ps. 53:1).  I did not say that.  I think that atheists and agnostics are honest for the most part with what they believe.  I take them at their word.     

"So your qualification of your 'usually' statement is nothing except for giving people the benefit of the doubt that they are rebellious and not fools? You then go on to say that you think atheists and agnostics are mostly honest, meaning that you believe that they do not know there is a God.. Which is the exact opposite of your first statement.

They honestly tend to be in rebellion. 

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Give me objective criteria that would prove [God's] existence. You issue a fine challenge in theory, but what would satisfy it?"

Good question.  What is the point of evidence if your bias will reject anything that you do not wish to hear?  What will it take for you to believe in God?  God coming out of time and eternity to make himself known?  God proving his love for you (Ro 5:8)?  God performing signs and wonders?  (Lk 16:29).  If only this...and if only that...Men rejected and despised Jesus then.  They do the same today. If the judge is corrupt then why present evidence in the case?   

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I'm not corrupt at all. Since the prosecution refuses to provide evidence I rule that God is innocent of the charge of existing."

The judge will say differently (Re 20:11 [internal (Ro 2:15; external (Ps 19:1) plus scripture]).  You won't need a lawyer with an omnipotent God who knows your every thought and deed.  You'd be wise to throw yourself on the mercy of the court.  We live in an age of grace when you can do that but judgment day is coming.  Then, it will be too late.     

"I won't be pleading for mercy at Judgment Day (especially since there are no gods to judge me). Even if you are 100% right in all of your beliefs (especially if you are right) I want nothing to do with the monster you worship. Better to roast in Hell for eternity than spend one minute in the presence of your God."

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I find it relieving to know that your tone, your source of knowledge of your God, has been thoroughly demonstrated to contain thousands of contradictions and errors of fact, effectively negating all of this primitive, fear-mongering nonsense."

What errors.  

I don't know what level of fear you have.  But peace only comes from the author of peace, Jesus (Isa 48:22). 

Response to comment:  "The rebellious state is identified, by you, not by me, by their denial of knowledge of God...[M]ost agnostics and atheists won't say that they're in rebellion."

God would like us to have faith in him.  It takes no more, no less than a simple belief (He 11:6). 

I do not assume that atheists and agnostics are lying.  Most are honest about what they believe.  There are people who post at atheists sites who do believe in God but they hate him.  They are honest in claiming--even if there is a God, he is not worthy to worship.  They have admitted as such. I try to convince them otherwise.  God is good and he is worthy of worship.

It is possible to be rebellious but not admit it. I hear rebellion in some arguments coming from atheists and agnostics.  If God were as they believed he is, they would have every right to be rebellious toward him and I would agree with them.  But they believe lies about God.  Most of the time it stems from a misreading of the Bible. 

You classify yourself as an agnostic.  You are free not to answer, but was there ever a time that you believed in God? 

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "[Peace comes from God (Isa 48:22)]  "I'm not in the mood to have my intelligence insulted. I am, after all, a legend you know...

...I meant...to refer to you as a spreader of fear...As for peace: I'm of the opinion that it is better to be miserable and right-headed than it is to comfortable and deluded."

I am not insulting your intelligence.  I accuse atheists of being analytical not foolish.  God accuses atheists of that (Ps 14:1).  You are a legend, no argument there.

You claim that the Bible has "thousands of obvious contradictions and errors"--where are these contradictions and errors?

An unregenerate person can claim that they have peace, but I don't believe it (Isa 48:22).  They may not have a proper fear of God (Ro 3:18, 1 Jn 4:18), but they don't have peace.

You accuse me of being a spreader of fear.  I've spread the remedy for fear.  Peace is found in Christ (Isa 48:22).

Response to comment [from other]:  "[T]here are no living gods."

If God was here at one time, what happened to him? What made it ok to dismiss him?

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I don't claim that the Bible contains thousands of contradictions and errors. I'm simply reaffirming what has already been discovered."

What errors?

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  [What made it ok to dismiss God?]  "The fact that he no longer smites people for doing so."

Solomon noticed that too.  We tend to get comfortable because God does not judge us immediately.  J. Vernon McGee wrote:  

Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil [Eccl. 8:11].
What a picture of that which is happening in our contemporary society! When judgment is not executed, men do more and more evil work, because evil is in the hearts of men. Even men who call themselves Christian continue in sin, saying, “Look, I’ve been in sin for five years, and God has done nothing about it!” Well, that already reveals His judgment upon you. He has done nothing about it because He is way down the road waiting for you. In fact, He can wait until eternity—you can’t. “… Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. 6:2). God grants you today so that you can turn to Him.
McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 3:127

Response to comment:  [Immediate judgment for sin] "Why do you suppose God stopped doing that? It was a very effective way to keep folks in line...Sadly, that hasn't worked particularly well, particularly when one considers how vastly the goats outnumber the sheep."

Goats do outnumber the sheep (Mt 7:13).  God has done all that he can do (Ro 5:8).  Even though the sheep suffer today,  when we get to know all that the Father has gained for the kingdom, we won't be able to imagine eternity without them. They are worth the wait (Re 22:20).  I'd rather be battered and bruised in the here and now but on the winning team in the end.

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "I know there exists no God that created the Earth in six literal days several thousand years ago."

To know this you would have to be God.

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "Serpentdove, don't ask me a question and then ignore me when I give you an answer."

I'm sorry allsmiles.  I didn't mean to ignore you.  What did I miss?  This little maze is hard to follow.  

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "[U]ncivilized barbarians thousands of years ago?"

Do you think we are more civilized now? 

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  [No reason to believe]

What God don't you believe in?  What would convince you that God exists? 

Response to comment [from an other]:  "So shall I call you Noah?"

God covered them with animal skins (Ge 3:21); The boat provided a covering during the flood (Ge 7:16); God is a hiding place (Isa 32:2); Get your oil (Mt 25:1); Get your robe (Isa 61:10); Eternal life is only by the blood of Jesus (1 Jn 5:6).

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  [Lost in the maze] "busting my chops..."

Are you kidding?  Look at those chops.  I'm afraid to bust them!  More power to you-- you track your way through this maze of threads better than I do.   

"Yes, we are more civilized now."

Mankind has always been wicked, but I would not say that we are getting better in anyway.  It seems that God is giving us time to prove to ourselves that life without him doesn't work.  I don't think the world needs more proof.  The cup of wrath is fuller than I would like it already.  This world is winding down.  It did not come in with a bang but its going out with one.

[What God don't you believe in?]  "I'm an atheist, do the math."

Who was God before you rejected him?  Was he anything like the God of the Bible:    living, personal, relational, good and loving?  I think people reject a different god.  I'm sure you've heard the outlandish charges against him. 

We are called apologists.  If someone asks a man why he married his wife, he begins to explain.  That makes him an apologist for his wife.  He proceeds to tell what he knows about her, why he loves her, why she's so great.  I think, if men knew God, they would love him.  But they believe lies.  God must be used to being hated.   

I don't think he needs apologists.  He could convince the world of his existence without any of us.  He lets us participate in the plan because he is gracious.  Some of the best Christian apologists once  believed like you.             

[What would convince you that God exists?]  "Any god or just your god?"

I can't speak for other gods.  People say we have demons.  I think we have gods (e.g. wealth, security, sex, substances, religion, work, etc.).  Man is religious by nature.  The Creator God seems to have to defeat these lesser gods one by one until a man is left with none (Jer 13:10).

You are intellectually honest.  That is more than I can say for some pious, religious folks.    

Response to comment:  [Repost for the searching-impaired (or else chronically daft)]  "He didn't just claim that the gospels contradicted themselves in this circumstance, he pointed out that they contradicted history: as Luke claims the Jesus was born during the reign of Cyrenius as governor of Syria and Matthew claims he was born during Herod's reign - but the two events don't coincide with one another, as Herod died in 4 B.C.E. while Cyrenius took up office in 6 C.E."

 

Caesar Augustus (27 b.c.–a.d. 14), who brought great reform to the Roman Empire, commanded the registration of his subject population for the purpose of assessing the value of property and levying taxes. Quirinius (2:2) was governor of Syria twice (3–2 b.c. and a.d. 6–7), but neither of his governorships fit with what is known to have been the date of Jesus’ birth (around 5/4 b.c.). Many solutions have been offered for this problem. It is possible to translate 2:2, “This census took place before Quirinius was governor of Syria.” This would place the census around 6/5 b.c., a year or two before Herod’s death. It is likely that Augustus would have wanted to have an estimate of the condition of the state before Herod’s death.

The journey to Bethlehem was necessary to fulfill messianic prophecy (2:4; Micah 5:2). Jesus was born in either an enclosed courtyard or, as tradition says, a cave, because there was no room in the inn (Luke 2:7). The point is that he was born in obscurity and poverty as a son of David.
Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 444
2:2 Quirinius was governing Syria. Fixing a precise date for this census is problematic. Publius Sulpicius Quirinius is known to have governed Syria during a.d. 6–9. A well known census was taken in Palestine in a.d. 6. Josephus records that it sparked a violent Jewish revolt (mentioned by Luke, quoting Gamaliel, in Acts 5:37). Quirinius was responsible for administering that census, and he also played a major role in quelling the subsequent rebellion. However, that cannot be the census Luke has in mind here, because it occurred about a decade after the death of Herod (see note on Matt. 2:1)—much too late to fit Luke’s chronology (cf. 1:5). In light of Luke’s meticulous care as a historian, it would be unreasonable to charge him with such an obvious anachronism. Indeed, archeology has vindicated Luke. A fragment of stone discovered at Tivoli (near Rome) in a.d. 1764 contains an inscription in honor of a Roman official who, it states, was twice governor of Syria and Phoenicia during the reign of Augustus. The name of the official is not on the fragment, but among his accomplishments are listed details that, as far as is known, can fit no one other than Quirinius. Thus, he must have served as governor in Syria twice. He was probably military governor at the same time that history records Varus was civil governor there. With regard to the dating of the census, some ancient records found in Egypt mention a worldwide census ordered in 8 b.c. That date is not without problems, either. It is generally thought by scholars that 6 b.c. is the earliest possible date for Christ’s birth. Evidently, the census was ordered by Caesar Augustus in 8 b.c. but was not actually carried out in Palestine until 2–4 years later, perhaps because of political difficulties between Rome and Herod. Therefore, the precise year of Christ’s birth cannot be known with certainty, but it was probably no earlier than 6 b.c. and certainly no later than 4 b.c. Luke’s readers, familiar with the political history of that era, would no doubt have been able to discern a very precise date from the information he gave.
MacArthur, John Jr: The MacArthur Study Bible. electronic ed. Nashville : Word Pub., 1997, c1997, S. Lk 2:2

Note:  Mt 2:1

2:1 Bethlehem. A small village on the southern outskirts of Jerusalem. Hebrew scholars in Jesus’ day clearly expected Bethlehem to be the birthplace of the Messiah (cf. Mic. 5:2; John 7:42). in the days of Herod the king. This refers to Herod the Great, the first of several important rulers from the Herodian dynasty who are named in Scripture. This Herod, founder of the famous line, ruled from 37–4 b.c. He is thought to have been Idumean, a descendant of the Edomites, offspring of Esau. Herod was ruthless and cunning. He loved opulence and grand building projects, and many of the most magnificent ruins that can be seen in modern Israel date back to the days of Herod the Great. His most famous project was the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem (see note on 24:1). That project alone took several decades and was not completed until long after Herod’s death (cf. John 2:20). See note on v. 22. wise men from the East. The number of wise men is not given. The traditional notion that there were 3 stems from the number of gifts they brought. These were not kings, but Magi, magicians or astrologers—possibly Zoroastrian wise men from Persia whose knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures could be traced back to the time of Daniel (cf. Dan. 5:11).
MacArthur, John Jr: The MacArthur Study Bible. electronic ed. Nashville : Word Pub., 1997, c1997, S. Mt 2:1

Response to comment [from an atheist]: "Consider how small that "winning team" is; the vast majority of human beings who have ever lived are not sheep.  You are in a very exclusive club. I can understand the appeal of that."

There are cults and 'isms that believe that they are the only way to God.  Members have a certain elitist attitude.  If you do enough, they say you can get to heaven.  That is not biblical.  Although God's grace is immeasurable, the depth of depravity of the human heart seems equally immeasurable (Jer 17:9). 

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  [Not getting in Noah's boat] "[S]uch a boat would not be seaworthy with all of the animals it would have to hold. I'm better off with an inflatable raft."

God could fit young animal "kinds" to head that way and get into the boat with room to spare.  Have you taken a look at the specific measurements of the ark?  It was seaworthy.  When you know how to make a sea, you know how to make a boat to survive on it.   

Have you ever seen the Grand Canyon?  Does it look to you like something drastic may have occurred in that area?  They mocked Noah in his day too, but sure enough, the flood came (Lk 17:26).

You've got an inflatable raft, indeed (Pr 16:18).

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "One must first present a clear, precise and non-contradicting definition of such a thing before one can even begin to discuss this question - or else the question is moot."

The God of the Bible then.  From Ge 1:1.

It has often been pointed out that if a person really believes Genesis 1:1, he will not find it difficult to believe anything else recorded in the Bible. That is, if God really created all things, then He controls all things and can do all things.
Furthermore, this one verse refutes all of man’s false philosophies concerning the origin and meaning of the world:
(1)     It refutes atheism, because the universe was created by God.
(2)     It refutes pantheism, for God is transcendent to that which He created.
(3)     It refutes polytheism, for one God created all things.
(4)     It refutes materialism, for matter had a beginning.
(5)     It refutes dualism, because God was alone when He created.
(6)     It refutes humanism, because God, not man, is the ultimate reality.
(7)     It refutes evolutionism, because God created all things.
Actually all such false philosophies are merely different ways of expressing the same unbelief. Each one proposes that there is no personal, transcendent God; that ultimate reality is to be found in the eternal cosmos itself; and that the development of the universe into its present form is contingent solely on the innate properties of its own components. In essence, each of the above philosophies embraces all the others. Dualism, for example, is a summary form of polytheism, which is the popular expression of pantheism, which presupposes materialism, which functions in terms of evolutionism, which finds its consummation in humanism, which culminates in atheism.
Morris, Henry M.: The Genesis Record : A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings. Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Books, 1976, S. 37

Response to comment:  "I don't believe in 'god' concepts yet to be discovered..."

Eternity is set in our hearts (Eccl 3:11).  That is why we think about things like an afterlife. 

At one time, man had perfect fellowship and communion with God.  After Adam sinned, he attempted to hide from God, blame his wife, blame even God for giving his wife (Ge 3:12).  Men do the same still.  Have you considered that our natures are similar to the first man, Adam?  We must seek God (Mt 6:33), get back to our perfect garden so to speak. 

Pascal said men have a God-shaped vacuum in their hearts.  

Response to comment '[from an atheist]:  "Pascal was an idiot who couldn't comprehend that his proposition was simply a false dichotomy that also failed to factor in the costs of beleif."

Whether Pascal was right or not, these are universal concerns:  Why am I here?  What is my purpose?  The Bible has answers for men willing to know.  We are here to love and worship our creator.  We have one purpose in this probationary period that we call life--to know him (Phil 3:10).   

So You Call Yourself an Atheist