Debating with an atheist; need advice.

[dlamberth]

No, like I said, planting a seed is what is important.

Just a little note that it works both ways. It could be that it's the atheist who is planting the seed.

 

[quatona]

No, like I said, planting a seed is what is important.

Yeah, you can at least hope you do.

Arguing or attempting to reason will get you nowhere.

Agreed.

But, when they are all alone with there thoughts they will have something to ponder.

Well, in this case it´s the other way round, apparently: the OP feels he has something to ponder and he can´t find a solution.

But, if I just call them a fool or give some point of reason that they can disagree with I will have gotten nowhere.

Indeed, calling someone a fool will get you nowhere.

 

[Doug Melven]

Just a little note that it works both ways. It could be that it's the atheist who is planting the seed.

That is a good point.
That is also why I make sure I know what I believe.
When Jesus talks about the storms in Matt 24-27 that will beat on the house I don't think He is just referring to the tragedies that may come our way. But also when the devil tries to bring doubts about our faith.

 

[Soyeong]

Recently me and a friend of mine, who came out as an atheist recently have been debating nonstop for the past month or so. I learned that he used to be a Christian himself, until he started reading the bible more mindfully. He was made aware of all the "bad things" that happened, such as God killing people, stoning children, etc. He came across this link: Cruelty and Violence and then decided that Christianity was no longer right for him. He also studied scientific concepts such as big bang, evolution, etc. and just trying to disprove the bible in any way he can. Overall I would consider him a "Strong atheist".

On the other hand, myself, I feel like I'd consider myself a "Weak christian". There are so many questions he asks me that I don't feel qualified enough to answer, and the ones that I do feel like I answer accurately and within reason, he just comes back with a counter-arguement. It just happens every time and I feel like there's nothing that comes to my mind, and there's no reason to continue discussing this. But I care about him so much, and I feel like he at least deserves the respect from me by answering any of his questions/concerns. He respects my beliefs, and I respect his. So overall the discussions are respectful and there's nothing to complain about there, but I tend to give relatively short responses because I just haven't studied the bible enough, nor have I paid much attention in church until recently. But deep inside my heart I know what I believe is truth, but it's difficult for me to express it.

One of the things we discussed was morality. I stated that I think God is the standard for morality, but then he states that if I think God is moral, then ultimately, somehow accept and believe in murder and all the "bad things", and that morality is subjective. Like, how do I even respond to that? It doesn't make sense to me and at that point there's nothing I can contribute to the discussion. I know that if I learn more from church/bible studies/asking you guys, then I can come to a sensible conclusion or response and then we could have more intellectual discussion with each other. I'm tired of one-sided discussions where I have nothing to contribute. I know I'm better than that.

Hello,

In 1 Peter 3:15, we are told to always be prepared to have a defense for the hope that is within us. While it can be good to show atheists that Christianity can be strongly defended, a defense is primarily for the benefit of the defender, so it is good for your own sake to have a solid grasp on these matters and to be able to answer them. This is your opportunity to to start digging into these matters and to grow as a Christian. It is important to understand that countless Christianity have pondered issues like morality and suffering over the millennia, so you are not alone, and we have a wealth of intellectual heritage available to us. There are many resources on apologetics in books or online that are available to you. His comment on morality didn't make any sense to me and I was about planning on asking your to clarify it until you said that it didn't make sense to you either, so I would simply him to do a clarify his argument argument. If you have any questions, feel free to pm me or start a thread about it.

 

[Kenny'sID]

No, you are merely projecting your own antagonizing.

Antagonizing what? Honestly, that made no sense at all. Disagreements don't amount to "picking a fight".

At any rate, I think I made my point clear and nothing has changed here.

 

[Doug Melven]

One of the things we discussed was morality. I stated that I think God is the standard for morality, but then he states that if I think God is moral, then ultimately, somehow accept and believe in murder and all the "bad things", and that morality is subjective. Like, how do I even respond to that? It doesn't make sense to me

What he is saying here is if God could be a killer in the O.T. how can He be the standard of morality?
Do some research on why God had those people killed.
Hint: demon spawn must die.

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

What he is saying here is if God could be a killer in the O.T. how can He be the standard of morality?
Do some research on why God had those people killed.
Hint: demon spawn must die.

Doug ....hate to interrupt what are the requirements for starting a thread.....thank you ,brother

 

[HARK!]

My advice is that you go your way, and let him go his.

What fellowship does light have with darkness?

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

What fellowship does light have with darkness?

Hark. Looks lik Doug is gone....could you tell me how to start a thread. Thanks

 

[HARK!]

That whatever happened in the bible, happened, and for reason.

Indeed! It happened over rebellion to our loving creator.

Can you imagine how wonderful it was for the obedient people living in the time of King David; when they were rid of the wicked under penalty of death?

Does your "friend" take the kind and gentle approach regarding murderers of today? Some people actually sit outside and burn candles for murderers on death row.

Would he choose to live in a world where wickedness is left unchecked?

When left unchecked, it spreads; and it increases in intensity.

 

[HARK!]

Hark. Looks lik Doug is gone....could you tell me how to start a thread. Thanks

Go to the forum appropriate for your subject. Be sure to read the rules for that forum; then click the red "Post New Thread" button, on that particular forum's main page. The rest should be self explanatory. If you have any more questions; feel free to send me a private message. I don't want to derail this thread.
https://www.christianforums.com/forums/christianity-and-world-religion.76/create-thread

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

Go to the forum appropriate for your subject. Be sure to read the rules for that forum; then click the red "Post New Thread" button, on that particular forum's main page. The rest should be self explanatory. If you have any more questions; feel free to send me a private message. I don't want to derail this thread.

Thanks......God bless!,,,

 

[quatona]

Antagonizing what? Honestly, that made no sense at all. Disagreements don't amount to "picking a fight".

At any rate, I think I made my point clear and nothing has changed here.

Your sole "point" was a negative assumption about my intentions, based on your own preconceptions.
The OP asked for advice, I gave mine. He either finds it helpful or he doesn´t. Your hostility is unasked for.

 

[Paleophyte]

Overall I would consider him a "Strong atheist". On the other hand, myself, I feel like I'd consider myself a "Weak christian".

"Strong" and "weak" are highly misleading terms. Some of the strongest believers and atheists are those who have no need of proving themselves to anybody else.

He also studied scientific concepts such as big bang, evolution, etc. and just trying to disprove the bible in any way he can.

Neither of those disprove the Bible. I have worked with devout Christians who were studying the origins of our planet. They had no problem reconciling their scientific work with their beliefs. If you want to see God's fingerprints then get a degree in the sciences.

Recently me and a friend of mine, who came out as an atheist recently have been debating nonstop for the past month or so. I learned that he used to be a Christian himself, until he started reading the bible more mindfully. He was made aware of all the "bad things" that happened, such as God killing people, stoning children, etc. He came across this link: Cruelty and Violence and then decided that Christianity was no longer right for him.

The pitfall of Biblical Literalism is that it works perfectly right up to the instant that it does not. If an individual perceives a single inconsistency or problem it calls all else into doubt. We see a lot of atheists deconvert in this manner. Approaching the Bible as allegory, parable and inspiration is much less rigid and much less prone to result in a loss of faith due to a single issue.

There are so many questions he asks me that I don't feel qualified enough to answer, and the ones that I do feel like I answer accurately and within reason, he just comes back with a counter-arguement. It just happens every time and I feel like there's nothing that comes to my mind, and there's no reason to continue discussing this.

(1) Nobody wins a conversation. Stop approaching it as a debate. Look for understanding instead.

(2) Take a play from the atheists' handbook. "I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. Unless you are clergy or a theologian it is simply unreasonable to expect you to have all the answers.

(3) Your friend is in the process of reconstructing his world view. These arguments are more about him than they are about you or your faith. He's putting himself back together and using you as a sounding board. Be a good listener and try and steer him clear of the worst of it. Russel, Hitchens and Dennet aren't bad. Dawkins can be a sanctimonious prat and anything from Ayn Rand should be shot on sight.

But I care about him so much, and I feel like he at least deserves the respect from me by answering any of his questions/concerns. He respects my beliefs, and I respect his. So overall the discussions are respectful and there's nothing to complain about there

That is an excellent beginning. Keep in mind that your friend will be very worried about loosing your friendship. Many people are not as understanding or as accepting. You are a better friend than many have had. Try and reassure him that this will not end your friendship.

One of the things we discussed was morality. I stated that I think God is the standard for morality, but then he states that if I think God is moral, then ultimately, somehow accept and believe in murder and all the "bad things", and that morality is subjective. Like, how do I even respond to that?

In teaching you quickly discover that if you give a student the answer you'll be lucky if they remember it five minutes later. Tell them where to find the answer and they may remember it to the end of the class. Show them how to find the answers themselves and they'll not only remember it for the rest of their lives but find three new questions to plague you with.

By the same token, if God wrote the Bible as a simple book of rules then most people would have forgotten, broken, or rationalized their way around them before they got out of their teens. On the other hand, if you view the Bible as a Divinely inspired work that is meant to guide you to learn how to ask the right questions then you might immediately suspect that the majority of scripture is not present for the superficially obvious reasons. The blood soaked litany of murder and genocide that your friend objects to may well have been included as a warning against blindly following a theology for which people will gleefully declare the abomination of "holy war". It isn't as if things ended well for the "victors" in most of those stories.

Jesus taught with parables for a reason. You can't lead people to the really big truths. They need to arrive at them their own way. The most you can do is set their feet on the path.

 

[GeorgeJ]

What fellowship does light have with darkness?

It ain't got nothing to do with that.

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

"Strong" and "weak" are highly misleading terms. Some of the strongest believers and atheists are those who have no need of proving themselves to anybody else.



Neither of those disprove the Bible. I have worked with devout Christians who were studying the origins of our planet. They had no problem reconciling their scientific work with their beliefs. If you want to see God's fingerprints then get a degree in the sciences.



The pitfall of Biblical Literalism is that it works perfectly right up to the instant that it does not. If an individual perceives a single inconsistency or problem it calls all else into doubt. We see a lot of atheists deconvert in this manner. Approaching the Bible as allegory, parable and inspiration is much less rigid and much less prone to result in a loss of faith due to a single issue.



(1) Nobody wins a conversation. Stop approaching it as a debate. Look for understanding instead.

(2) Take a play from the atheists' handbook. "I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. Unless you are clergy or a theologian it is simply unreasonable to expect you to have all the answers.

(3) Your friend is in the process of reconstructing his world view. These arguments are more about him than they are about you or your faith. He's putting himself back together and using you as a sounding board. Be a good listener and try and steer him clear of the worst of it. Russel, Hitchens and Dennet aren't bad. Dawkins can be a sanctimonious prat and anything from Ayn Rand should be shot on sight.



That is an excellent beginning. Keep in mind that your friend will be very worried about loosing your friendship. Many people are not as understanding or as accepting. You are a better friend than many have had. Try and reassure him that this will not end your friendship.



In teaching you quickly discover that if you give a student the answer you'll be lucky if they remember it five minutes later. Tell them where to find the answer and they may remember it to the end of the class. Show them how to find the answers themselves and they'll not only remember it for the rest of their lives but find three new questions to plague you with.

By the same token, if God wrote the Bible as a simple book of rules then most people would have forgotten, broken, or rationalized their way around them before they got out of their teens. On the other hand, if you view the Bible as a Divinely inspired work that is meant to guide you to learn how to ask the right questions then you might immediately suspect that the majority of scripture is not present for the superficially obvious reasons. The blood soaked litany of murder and genocide that your friend objects to may well have been included as a warning against blindly following a theology for which people will gleefully declare the abomination of "holy war". It isn't as if things ended well for the "victors" in most of those stories.

Jesus taught with parables for a reason. You can't lead people to the really big truths. They need to arrive at them their own way. The most you can do is set their feet on the path.

As a former atheist,may I offer a friendly correction? When asked by His disciples as to why He spoke He spoke in parables Jesus said He did it to “hide the truth from some—lest they be saved.God doesn’want everyone—-He’s looking for “good soil”.As an atheist,I figured on the off-chance that there “ could” be some truth in that it might be wise to ask God to make sure I was “good soil”. My life has not been the same since then.Try it—-you might be surprised......you may even like it!

 

[Kenny'sID]

Your sole "point" was a negative assumption about my intentions, based on your own preconceptions.
The OP asked for advice, I gave mine. He either finds it helpful or he doesn´t. Your hostility is unasked for.

Yet still, nothing has changed with my view.

Now my disagreement was hostile?

 

[quatona]

Yet still, nothing has changed with my view.

Well, that´s your problem then.

Now my disagreement was hostile?

You hadn´t even voiced disagreement. You simply made false and negative assumptions about my motives and intentions.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Well, that´s your problem then.

You hadn´t even voiced disagreement. You simply made false and negative assumptions about my motives and intentions.

Can't believe I'm saying this, it's just so...well not sure, just not a term I normally use for some reason.

The fact you couldn't see the disagreement would be your problem then.

 

[ViaCrucis]

If one's faith is rooted in the supposed inerrancy of the Bible--with the proposition that each jot and tittle is to be taken as literal history, then yeah the moment anything demonstrates this isn't the case then the jig is up and the house of cards fall. Which is why that can't be the foundation for faith.

A Christianity that depends on saying that science is false is a bad Christianity.
A Christianity that depends on easily demonstrable falsehoods is a bad Christianity.
A Christianity that depends on tribalistic thinking and behavior is a bad Christianity.

Fortunately none of those things is Christianity.

-CryptoLutheran