Does Anyone Here Post in Atheist Forums?

[Phil 1:21]

I respect the fact that you spend time there, and truthfully, I'm glad there are people who go to places like that in the name of grace. But I find I better relate to atheists is they are seeking information as opposed to simply arguing against it.

Keep the faith, brother.

 

[CDF47]

I respect the fact that you spend time there, and truthfully, I'm glad there are people who go to places like that in the name of grace. But I find I better relate to atheists is they are seeking information as opposed to simply arguing against it.

Keep the faith, brother.

Yeah, that is probably a better way to handle it.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Yeah, that is probably a better way to handle it.

That's just me. We are all blessed by God in different ways, given different gifts. Yours may very well be to spread the good news in hostile environments. I wouldn't reject that just because someone else is not capable of being effective in that venue.

 

[CDF47]

That's just me. We are all blessed by God in different ways, given different gifts. Yours may very well be to spread the good news in hostile environments. I wouldn't reject that just because someone else is not capable of being effective in that venue.

Good point. Still thinking about whether it is worth returning there or not.

 

[Targaryen]

No I don't personally try speaking with atheists on their own forums, simply for the reason I find they are getting increasingly what I call "Richard Dawkins" syndrome and frankly these days, I have as much disinterest dealing with fundamentalists of any stripe.

I have friends that are atheist and can generally agree on a fair bit when it come to factors other then faith or my belief in Intelligent Design to evolution, but I simply have no reason to deal with the hostility and sheer disrespect I would receive from hardliners.

 

[CDF47]

No I don't personally try speaking with atheists on their own forums, simply for the reason I find they are getting increasingly what I call "Richard Dawkins" syndrome and frankly these days, I have as much disinterest dealing with fundamentalists of any stripe.

I have friends that are atheist and can generally agree on a fair bit when it come to factors other then faith or my belief in Intelligent Design to evolution, but I simply have no reason to deal with the hostility and sheer disrespect I would receive from hardliners.

Yeah, it's a bit rough in those forums. They are real extreme over there. They don't even care to listen about Intelligent Design.

 

[Targaryen]

Yeah, it's a bit rough in those forums. They are real extreme over there. They don't even care to listen about Intelligent Design.

To be frank, they have chose not to listen cause the fact that you are speaking about a concept that is still foreign and sadly, even repugnant to them. Divinity. For most atheists I know, it's a non-starter. And I don't know many of that persuasion that have been saved from their error other then their personal lives hitting a crisis point. And you can't evangelize a personal crisis.

This sounds very doom and gloom,I know but faith is tricky that way. Paul's own conversion happened when his own life was in the midst of crisis. It may take their own opening of ther eyes in the literal sense to understand. Evangelism comes in many forms. Sometimes a simple personal faithful witness combined with observation is all that's required.

 

[mark kennedy]

For the past 1 1/2 years or so I've been posting in atheist forums to discuss the Word of God and Intelligent Design science. Does anyone here post in those forums?

Specifically, I post at The Thinking Atheist Forum. Would be helpful if others joined in there.

I've never tried that one, spent most of my time on here since 2003, discussing creation and evolution. I find atheists fascinating and spent a lot of time on genetics and origins. The philosophical basis appears to go back to the French Enlightenment. What you will end up exploring when interacting with this worldview is almost pure rationalism.

 

[CDF47]

To be frank, they have chose not to listen cause the fact that you are speaking about a concept that is still foreign and sadly, even repugnant to them. Divinity. For most atheists I know, it's a non-starter. And I don't know many of that persuasion that have been saved from their error other then their personal lives hitting a crisis point. And you can't evangelize a personal crisis.

This sounds very doom and gloom,I know but faith is tricky that way. Paul's own conversion happened when his own life was in the midst of crisis. It may take their own opening of ther eyes in the literal sense to understand. Evangelism comes in many forms. Sometimes a simple personal faithful witness combined with observation is all that's required.

Very true. The last atheist I talked into accepting God was in a crisis. He lost his apartment and was in big debt with no where to go.

 

[CDF47]

I've never tried that one, spent most of my time on here since 2003, discussing creation and evolution. I find atheists fascinating and spent a lot of time on genetics and origins. The philosophical basis appears to go back to the French Enlightenment. What you will end up exploring when interacting with this worldview is almost pure rationalism.

Yeah, it often feels like a waste of time posting in those forums but in other ways it feels worth it. It's usually not to enjoyable. You meet heavy criticism which I can take but not when they speak bad things about the LORD.

 

[mark kennedy]

Yeah, it often feels like a waste of time posting in those forums but in other ways it feels worth it. It's usually not to enjoyable. You meet heavy criticism which I can take but not when they speak bad things about the LORD.

I don't think taking an atheist on, one on one would be productive. I've engaged a few times on subjects like Biblical history and at times it can be very interesting. I choose Creationism because I believe science is neutral with regards to history and origins and found a wealth of support from paleontology and genetics. I kept going back because I always learned something, generally something striking. Some gene comparison, something about one of the fossils. If there were a way to engage atheists philosophically I'd love the exchange but haven't found one that well read or patient.

They say bad things about the God of the Old Testament in particular, I have found I can roll with that. I always try to find a point of interest and most importantly, a line of evidence that they would never dispute. Genetics is perfect for something like this and fossils, with some limitations is also very good. You have to get out of their frame of reference and use their venerated sciences against them. I also think it's benign since Creationism doesn't really get into the existential aspects of theology or the underlying epistemology of natural science. At least that's my approach.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Targaryen]

Yeah, it often feels like a waste of time posting in those forums but in other ways it feels worth it. It's usually not to enjoyable. You meet heavy criticism which I can take but not when they speak bad things about the LORD.

Challenge to faith and viewpoint is always good, it weeds out errors,adds things you didn't know provides the facts and sources of said facts are sound, but it can get overboard. Trust me, part of the reason why I took a sabbatical from CF was there was no sane ground to speak about Theology for a while, which is why I'm thankful for TT existing. My advice is to take a break until you can either feel up to the challenge again or to simply re-evalute and find what you actually need.

 

[CDF47]

Challenge to faith and viewpoint is always good, it weeds out errors,adds things you didn't know provides the facts and sources of said facts are sound, but it can get overboard. Trust me, part of the reason why I took a sabbatical from CF was there was no sane ground to speak about Theology for a while, which is why I'm thankful for TT existing. My advice is to take a break until you can either feel up to the challenge again or to simply re-evalute and find what you actually need.

Sounds like good advice to me. I usually take breaks in posting there and will probably do the same right now. I was thinking of leaving that site but I always end up going back there.

 

[thecolorsblend]

For a lot of skeptics, their atheism and humanism are matters of fundamental identity. I'm not saying it's impossible to reach them. But I'm pretty sure that isn't my charism.

Still, some people are really good at reaching entrenched atheists. I don't think that's a lost cause by any means. Priests like Fr. C. John McCloskey seem to have a gift for converting even the most difficult people.

But whatever it is that atheists need to hear, I obviously don't know what it is. I have had better success in reaching people with other views and affiliations.

 

[CDF47]

For a lot of skeptics, their atheism and humanism are matters of fundamental identity. I'm not saying it's impossible to reach them. But I'm pretty sure that isn't my charism.

Still, some people are really good at reaching entrenched atheists. I don't think that's a lost cause by any means. Priests like Fr. C. John McCloskey seem to have a gift for converting even the most difficult people.

But whatever it is that atheists need to hear, I obviously don't know what it is. I have had better success in reaching people with other views and affiliations.

I agree, it is definitely a difficult bunch to reach. I think Christians need to be able to speak science to them and intelligent design, as well as Christianity, and then pray for them.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I agree, it is definitely a difficult bunch to reach. I think Christians need to be able to speak science to them and intelligent design, as well as Christianity, and then pray for them.

I'm not sure I completely agree with that. Talking about matters of scientific fact (real or perceived) might lead to a debate over those facts.

Rather, the core atheists that I've seen convert (such as Bernard Nathanson or Robert Bork) did so with philosophical and intellectual rhetoric rather than anything scientific. At the end of the day, one's salvation doesn't hinge on their views concerning intelligent design.

 

[kepha31]

A dyslexic atheist lies in bed every night and wonders if their really is a Dog.

 

[CDF47]

I'm not sure I completely agree with that. Talking about matters of scientific fact (real or perceived) might lead to a debate over those facts.

Rather, the core atheists that I've seen convert (such as Bernard Nathanson or Robert Bork) did so with philosophical and intellectual rhetoric rather than anything scientific. At the end of the day, one's salvation doesn't hinge on their views concerning intelligent design.

It does lead to debate but they claim to like scientific materialist facts and that is what ID provides regarding the specified complexity of the cell and the fine-tuning of the super-symmetrical universe. There are complex molecular machines, DNA,.... Not sure why they try to debate these facts.

 

[CDF47]

A dyslexic atheist lies in bed every night and wonders if their really is a Dog.

Dogs are real. I have two next to me right now as proof.

 

[Aldebaran]

O, i see.
I've been away from CF for 11 months, was just gonna look for an atheist sub forum that i didn't yet know about.

I assumed he was talking about the sections of CF where atheists are allowed to have their debates. The political forums, and so forth being what I'm referring to. I see God's Word being spelled out clearly there by Christians, but the same responses come back about how nothing has been proven, or that things in the bible has been shown to not be true, etc. The big problem I have is when people who call themselves Christians are there saying those same things.