Do Your Kids Know Why They Should WANT God to Exist?

By Natasha Crain

I’ve written over 250 blog posts here since 2011. People still come across my old posts by searching for something on Google, so nearly every day I receive new comments on a wide variety of old posts. Many of the comments are from atheists.

Kids Existence of God

As I read the latest comments this week, I noticed a running theme.

The vast majority of atheists who comment here don’t seem to want God to exist.

They talk about the “freedom” of no longer believing in God, how nice it is to be self-reliant, how great it feels to get rid of guilt, how they’ve found more meaning in life without God, how they can better enjoy all that life has to offer, how the world will be a better place when religion is gone, and so on.

If I saw God—and a godless existence—in the way most of these commenters do, I wouldn’t want to believe He exists either.

But I don’t think those who prefer the atheistic picture of reality have given it enough thought; no one shouldwant atheism to be true if we really draw out the implications of what that means for our existence. If people considered that more deeply, I think there would be more atheists saying, “I sure wish God existed, but there just isn’t enough evidence!” rather than, “There’s no evidence for God…and that sure is great!”

To be clear, wanting something to be true doesn’t make it true. But this isn’t a post about the evidence for the truth of any one worldview. This is a post about appropriately understanding the logical implications of a worldview.

With more than 60 percent of young adults rejecting their Christian faith today, and many becoming atheists, I have to wonder how many did so thinking atheism was actually more attractive…and not understanding these implications.

As parents, we should not only show our kids why there’s good reason to believe God exists, but why they should be thrilled that He does.

Let’s see what reality would look like in a world without God.

  1. Life has no objective meaning in an atheistic world.

In an atheistic world, our universe and everything in it developed by strictly natural forces. There’s no creative or sustaining intelligence behind it, and no ultimate reason for its existence. It just is.

It follows that there can be no objective meaning of life in such a world because there’s no Creator with the authority to say what that is. People can create theirown meaning, but there’s no meaning which applies to everyone.

Now, many people are enamored by that thought, but we should ask how meaningful that meaning can ever be. Without God, we’re just chemical specks in a vast, indifferent universe. You can choose to find meaning in saving the endangered Hawksbill turtle, but ultimately the Hawksbill turtle is just molecules in motion like you and every other living thing—why bother? You can choose to find meaning in art, but scientists say the sun will eventually explode and swallow the Earth—do paint patterns on canvas really matter? You can choose to find meaning in ending human suffering, but if humans have no more inherent value than rocks, why not just end those lives instead?

There’s no reason to celebrate the ability to live according to our small, self-defined meanings when ultimately such an existence leads to nothingness.

  1. Life has no special value in an atheistic world.

Astronomer and agnostic Carl Sagan said in his bestseller Cosmos, “I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan. You are a collection of almost identical molecules with a different collective label.”

Sagan appropriately sums up the value of life in an atheistic world: it has no more inherent value than its chemical components. Nothing exists apart from the basic matter of which we—and everything else in the universe—are comprised. In a world without God, we’re simply molecular machines.

  1. There’s little reason to believe we could actually make free choices in an atheistic world.

If all we are is our biology, a logical implication is that our decisions are driven by strictly physical impulses—we’re bound by the shackles of physical law. As molecular biologist Francis Crick said, “‘You,’ your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.”

Yet belief in the reality of some degree of free will fundamentally shapes how we live. Questions like What should we do with our lives? What is our responsibility to other people? and How should we make sense of evil?—have meaning because they presume humans have the ability to make choices that matter. That ability is highly questionable, however, in the context of an atheistic world.

  1. No way of living is better than any other way of living in an atheistic world.

If God doesn’t exist, there’s no objective reason why anyone should live in any particular way. Shouldimplies a moral obligation. But if we’re all just molecules in motion, to whom would we be morally obliged? To other molecules in motion? Clearly not. In an atheistic world, no one can prescribe a way of living for anyone else because there’s no moral authority, and, therefore, no objective basis for doing so. How a person “should” live his or her life can only be a matter of opinion. One way cannot be morally better than any other way.

  1. No one has a responsibility to anyone else in an atheistic world.

If life has no special value because it’s the product of purely natural forces, and there’s no moral authority to establish relational obligations, the idea of responsibility to one another is senseless. Molecules can’t owe other molecules anything.

Despite this implication of a world without God, many atheists consider themselves “humanists” and stress the importance of believing in human dignity and equal rights. It sounds good, but there’s a logical problem with the humanist position. If God doesn’t exist, natural rights that are equally held by all people also don’t exist. A “right” is something to which a person is entitled, and you can’t be entitled to something unless someone entitles you to it. Who has the authority to give rights to humankind if God doesn’t exist?

  1. There is no such thing as evil in an atheistic world.

On any given day, you can scroll through news headlines and read about people being murdered, children being abused, women being raped, and much more. It’s part of our most basic intuition to categorize such things as “evil.” But in a world without God, there’s no objective standard for calling anything evil. Without a moral authority, any one person’s view of murder, child abuse, and rape can only be a matter of opinion.

To be sure, atheists can feel as much moral outrage at the evil in the world as anyone who believes in God. They just have no objective basis for appealing to others to feel the same way. It can only be something they don’t like, not something that’s actually wrong.

  1. Life is ultimately hopeless in an atheistic world.

To recap, here’s a basic picture of reality in a world without God:

  • Life is an accident with no objective meaning.

  • We’re chemical specks in a vast, indifferent universe with no more inherent value than rocks.
  • There’s little reason to believe we can freely make choices.

  • No one should live in any particular way because it makes no moral difference.

  • No one has a responsibility to anyone else because we’re just molecules in motion with no moral obligations.

  • There’s no such thing as objective moral evil, so we can’t even condemn even the worst actions of society as objectively wrong.

Such a picture is undoubtedly hopeless in any meaningful sense. Sure, atheists can have “hope” in life, if we’re talking about hope for things like good parking spots or rain. Some hopes may have greater significance for a while—the hope of getting married, finding a good job, beating cancer, or having a family—but all of these hopes end in the same place after being realized: a grave.

Compare all this with a world in which God exists:

  • Life is precious and is the product of a purposeful Creator. All living things were meant to be here—no cosmic accidents involved.

  • Every person’s life has objective meaning: to know our perfect God and make Him known.

  • We have the ability to make choices and moral accountability for the choices we make. What we do actually matters.

  • Living a morally good life is the natural outcome of our belief in, knowledge of, and relationship with our perfectly good Creator.

  • There’s an objective basis for equal human rights because every human is created in the image of God and is therefore equally valuable.

  • Evil is an objective reality worthy of condemnation.

Instead of a grave, those who have put their trust in Jesus enter the glorious presence of the Lord and live with Him forever in a place free from pain and suffering (Revelation 21:4). This is a “new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade” (1 Peter 1:3-4).

That is hope.

Does it mean God exists or that Christianity is true? No. Again, that’s another subject.

But anyone who has thought through such a comparison of worldviews should want God to exist.

Original Blog Source:


Free Resource

Get the first chapter of "Stealing From God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case" in PDF.

Powered by ConvertKit
56 replies
  1. Andy Ryan says:

    “No one should live in any particular way because it makes no moral difference”
    My kids don’t believe in God. They care about and love other people. They empathise with the suffering of others. I think these are good reasons to treat others well, don’t you? Seriously, do you think my children are stupid for believing this?
    “No one has a responsibility to anyone else”
    If you’re taking part in society then you have a responsibility to others.
    “Compare all this with a world in which God exists: Life is precious”
    Then why are so many Christians trying to take away health insurance from millions of Americans? If you all truly believed life was precious, that what you did mattered, that you should care for others, why act as if money was more important than people? I mean, it’s fine if you truly believe healthcare should just be for the rich and that the ‘law of the jungle’ is the true American way, but stop pretending that you’re motivated by Christianity and the teachings of Christ.

    • Terry Lewis says:

      I think these are good reasons to treat others well, don’t you?

      Andy, you’re begging the question and/or equivocating. “Good” reasons can either mean utilitarian goodness (it helps me get what I want), or moral goodness (it’s what I should do). If you mean the former, then it would be just as good to kill someone as to save them if it helped you get what you want. If you mean the latter, then you need to show why such moral goodness exists in reality without God. If you hold that it’s your opinion that it’s better to save someone than to kill them, then you’re back to utilitarian goodness.

      If you’re taking part in society then you have a responsibility to others.


      Then why are so many Christians trying to take away health insurance from millions of Americans?

      Gross generalization, appeal to emotion, and equivocation between healthcare and the means of providing healthcare. NO ONE that I’m aware of has said that they don’t want all Americans to have health care… but they may want to find another way to provide it. I’m not taking a position on either side of that debate here… just pointing out that there’s more than one means to an end. Wanting to change the means doesn’t imply desiring a different end.

      • Andy Ryan says:

        So Terry, are you saying that loving and caring about other people is a BAD reason to treat them well? It strikes me as a great reason. My children understand it pretty easily too.
        “Gross generalisation”
        Nope Terry, it’s pretty simple. It’s fine if you back the attempt to repeal the ACA – just admit that selfishness is at its heart. I would applaud your honesty.
        ” there’s more than one means to an end”
        Sure – a single payer system would be another means to providing people with healthcare. But the system being advanced to repeal the ACA would directly lead to tens of millions fewer people having healthcare. You either care about that or you don’t.
        “then you need to show why such moral goodness exists in reality without God”
        Non sequitur – what’s the existence of God got to do with whether moral goodness exists? You’ve shown no connection between the two.

        • D says:

          I think what Terry means is that there is no moral foundation as to WHY that is good. Just like Dawkins said? “Good and evil are just a matter of opinion.” If you are just a lump of cells, are you not just dancing to your own DNA?

          • Andy Ryan says:

            Who mentioned a moral foundation? I said my children care about and love other people. They empathise with the suffering of others. If you think these don’t count as good reasons to treat others well then I don’t know what you mean by ‘good reasons’. Those strike me as the best reasons one could have for caring about others.

            If you started telling my kids that they should care about the suffering of others because a God exists they’d wonder what the connection between the two was. You might as well tell them they should drink apple juice because there are fairies at the bottom of the garden. If there were two sets of people, one made by God and one not, all other things being equal as far as capacity to hope, dream, feel fear, pain, and hope etc, why should I care more about one set than the other?
            “Good and evil are just a matter of opinion”
            You put that in quotes – can you tell me exactly where and when Richard Dawkins said that?

      • KR says:

        ” “Good” reasons can either mean utilitarian goodness (it helps me get what I want), or moral goodness (it’s what I should do).”

        In what category would doing something out of a sense of compassion fall? I suppose it could be argued that it would be utilitarian in the sense that it would satisfy my need to feel good but wouldn’t that make pretty much all actions utilitarian in some sense?

        “If you mean the latter, then you need to show why such moral goodness exists in reality without God.”

        If we call it moral goodness to do something out of compassion, why would this require a deity? It seems we’ve been through this many times before and my position is that the best explanation for our behaviour as social beings is to be found in our biological and cultural history. The fact that we in general tend to value compassionate and co-operative behaviour seems perfectly explainable by natural causes we know exist rather than appealing to supernatural causes for which we have no evidence.

      • Lance Drake Mandrell says:

        My only question for you, Terry, is why do you not question the points made by your side of the argument as deeply as you question Andy’s? You are correct in pointing out the logical flaws in Andy’s argument, but many of the points in the above article also fall apart with that simple word, “Why?” All I’m saying is, before you point out Andy’s splinter, examine your own log.

        • Andy Ryan says:

          What logical flaws in my argument? I’ve always said that when arguing why something is moral, the other side can always just keep asking ‘why’ endlessly. The theist can’t end it simply by saying ‘Because of God’s nature’ or whatever – one can still ask ‘why’ to that too, and so on.

          As for my own argument, I never made a case for why it was morally obligatory for my children to treat others well. Rather I explained why they would have good reasons to do so, including their empathy and caring for others. That’s like explaining why someone should eat by making reference to the fact that they’re hungry and want to look after their own health.

          If you want to find out WHY they care for others then you’re asking a different question. An interesting one, for sure, but not one one needs to answer in order to address why someone should treat others well. If you want to find out what to make for dinner you might ask what food you have in stock and what your family want to eat. While it might be interesting to find out WHY you have that food in stock and WHY your son happens to like sausages, neither questions need to be answered in order to work out what you’re cooking tonight. It’s enough to know that you HAVE sausages and your kid would like to eat them.

    • esbee says:

      it is a good thing that your children care for others and treat them well….(I have made a value judgement based on my world view) but Mr. Nonbeliever’s kids across town say mean things to crippled kids and their parents shrug it off and think they are just as ok as your family. I can look at both your lives and say the only thing in common is they do not believe in god. So as another unbeliever, whose example should I follow? Yours? Mr. Non? or my own or someone else’s entirely? The answer t may depend on which social circle I want to be accepted by.
      P.s. I know a Christian family that is not able to afford Obamacare because there would not be enough money to pay bills or feed their 3 kids but the law says they have to pay the fine for something they cannot afford. how is that a good thing? do any atheists think Obamacare is a bad thing? and those who do–does that make them selfish too?

      As a non believer and most likely non-practicer, what do you know about christianity and the teachings of Christ? Do you also go to sites about jews, buddhists, muslims, etc and argue with the inconsistencies in their faiths? inquiring minds want to know.

      • Andy Ryan says:

        “Mr. Nonbeliever’s kids across town say mean things to crippled kids and their parents shrug it off and think they are just as ok as your family. I can look at both your lives and say the only thing in common is they do not believe in god”
        I know believers whose kids are like that too. So you find unbelievers who are kind and others who aren’t, and likewise for believers. So it sounds like theistic beliefs or lack or it has little influence on whether people care for others or not.
        As for what I know about Christianity, most likely more than you. On average atheists do have a better knowledge of, for example, the Bible. That’s often why they become atheists in the first place. Regarding your other questions about me, strikes me you’re just going down a road to ad hominem. Consider my arguments instead – the rest is irrelevant.

  2. Susan Tan says:

    Some people are motivated to have a relationship with God and can share a testimony in graphic detail and some people can’t.

    An argument does not over rule a person’s subjective and objective experiences.

    There is an interesting video on youtube that I am watching now called “Derek Prince – The Man Behind the Ministry.”

    Prince directly experienced a lot of supernatural things. He has probably had more supernatural experiences than most but lots of people have them.

    Some people want to meet God and actively seek Him through prayer and the Bible and some don’t.

    Why let an unmotivated person’s arguments deny another person access to a holy source when you could need that source some day?

    The last question is a rhetorical question. It’s not up for debate. You don’t have to debate important matters with strangers that don’t even care about you and may want to just self validate their own opinions or because they need or want attention. Not when you can deliberate on them for yourself and arrive at your own conclusion.

    In my opinion there is no arguing someone else’s experience. We can only observe it though some people attempt to control and dismiss other people’s experiences by playing armchair psychologist.

    Faith is experiential. Don’t be conned by the people who refused to form and have a relationship with God out of having one yourself if you want one and aren’t too afraid to have one.

    It takes two active parties to build a strong relationship.

    A lot of people aren’t good at forming relationships so don’t let their success at forming a good relationship with God become your failure, too.

    Why take advice from people who can’t maintain a relationship? It doesn’t make sense but then you see people doing that a lot in this world.

    People consult and exchange opinions all the time with other people about their relationships. But many of those people give bad advice because they aren’t good at having and sustaining a relationship themselves.

    How many men are there out there who are afraid of serious relationships from comparing notes with people who didn’t know how to manage and stay in a committed relationship?
    This fear of a commitment thing could be learned.

    People are just bad at forming relationships sometimes.

    It doesn’t mean a relationship to God can’t be formed because they are formed every day.

    And no I am not debating. I am just putting in my observation and mentioning Prince’s testimony which is long for anyone who wants to watch it.

    If you keep dismissing God then you can’t form much of a relationship with Him can you?
    And He knows who is dismissing Him because he has supernatural intelligence so He can choose to whom He reveals Himself to.

    Why would God choose to show Himself to someone hardhearted and callused against Him and willfully so?

    As a person do you choose a person callused against you as a partner?

    The Gospel is the message that allows people to be saved through a relationship with God.

    So why entertain the arguments determined to destroy your spiritual relationship with God?

    Doubt is a killer in any relationship. It destroys trust which engenders faith in another person.

    2 Corinthians 10:5New International Version (NIV)

    5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

    A Christian doesn’t have to entertain any argument from the world at all. Do you willingly subject your relationships and family to the meddling of outsiders and the world?

    If they want to learn about God from you that is one thing but if the genuine desire to learn isn’t there and they want to tear down your faith then leave them alone. They have already self determined to refuse to do what a believer can do.

    Some people can’t turn around their lives until they have fallen on their faces or came close to destroying themselves from sin or stubborn pride.

    But their false ideas don’t destroy a Christian’s witness as Derek Prince’s witness proves. He had quite a relationship with God and plenty of supernatural validation through events and circumstances over the course of a long life and long walk with God.

    Testimony IS evidence. Go listen to what Prince has to say and stop listening to the inexpert opinions of armchair psychologists and think for yourself!

      • Susan Tan says:

        No, I am not. I am saying he has a testimony that people can witness.

        I don’t know why anybody submits to the scientific method when he can use his own mind to examine independently for himself.

        Prince talks about how he did that.

        Basically a lot of atheists rule out forming a godly relationship because they have replaced their own senses and judging facility with a man made method.

        Christians could just be the best people at forming a relatiionship with God.

        Tyoically atheists play what I call “lump a religion”.

        They like to claim you can’t tell the truth because of the sheer number of the religions.

        They themselves won’t enter any of these “religions” to test anything really so they are outsiders looking in.

        But Christianity isn’t really a religion. It is a relationship with God and Christians are claiming a true relationship with Him.

        How do we know true relationships with God exist. Well one of the clearest examples of this are the people willling to stay with God through even extreme persecution and there are millions of instances of them worldwide on a daily basis. So why would anyone hang onto God in the midst of extreme persecution? Because they have formed a strong relationship with God.

        So what does atheism do? It labels the relationship a “delusion” and precedes to assault people’s relationship by insisting their bias for the scientific method should control other,people’s assessments.

        But an atheist is an outsider. He can never disrupt the relationship of the true Christians because some people know you don’t substitute a man made method for a supernatural relationship.

        So Prince shows how he formed a strong bond with God. He has his personal evidence and really he didn’t have to share it with anybody but there are a few videos on it so he did share it with the public which is interested.

        I don’t argue religion any more because I think philosophy and science are not the right approach to use to learn about God.

        Christians have let this charade go on long enough. But really arguing is just the world that wants to meddle with your relationships showing up on your door trying to sabotage them or destroy them.

        As a Christian I am in the relationship building business. That is what evangelists do. Help people obtain a relationship.

        So there is no point to me sitting around arguing with people determined to saw off other people’s relationships is there?

        I know God exists. I have my own evidences to back things up, too

        You should shelve all this worldy claptrack cloaked inaccurate and false philosophical terms, parading around in scientific hubris and start finding out how people actually obtain this relationship.

        There should be more relationship “counselors” helping atheists obtain a good relationship with God and less arguing. But the counselors are the people the most under attack now.

        So why do I point to Prince? Because he’s one of many people who managed to shrug off the whole worldly system and let God get personal with him.

        It is easy to observe him in youtube and he has books in print.

        It could be harder for some people to shed their old learned natures to let God get real with them but Prince did it. A lot of people have for thousands of years now.

        So if you want to play philosophcal burden of proof games instead of sloughing off your old sin nature like a snake shedding his skin and letting God get real with you then that is up to you.

        But God won’t handle anyone personally who hasn’t received Jesus Christ as per Romans 10.

        So faith is by hearing.

        The only way anyone “knows” is by submitting to God and doing things His way.

        Hope this helps. I may not be able to post much soon. Certainly not enough to “argue” which is a long drawn out process that just interferes with a person’s ability to form a supernatural relationship. There is too much competition which stokes pride in some people when they argue and we need humility to draw closer to God.

        Moses could be used by God because he was humble. Also he had divested himself of his worldly trappings and went into the desert similar to what Prince did.

        So be careful not to lose your humility in all these arguments.

        God gives grace to the humble.

      • esbee says:

        the bible itself says “there is wisdom in a multitude of counselors”…that is also a fail safe because some will make the mistake of listening to one teacher only and they is dangerous if the teacher is all screwed up or has devious motives. by listening to others’s comments one can make a decision that best suits them. (I am not talking morality but the little stuff like where to go to church, or to go to church at all, what to wear, eat, who to marry etc.) in a legalist religion, these things, down to the littlest detail are already decided for you. and that is not a good thing as it turns the believer into a robot, not able to think or make their own decisions.

        • Susan says:

          I think you’re right there is a lot to be learned comparing what counselors say. I do it a lot.

          I have been researching into OT law a lot lately because strong cases can be made for or against observing the law.

          My latest find was an online article by Ernest L. Martin called “The Law Was Given by Angels”.

          It is an interesting article because I have read strong cases for observing the OT law but I also read another Christian who claimed the Sermon on the Mount replaces the OT law. Still the OT law contains a lot of wisdom.
          The diet is based on healthy principles according to medical doctors. Also the OT law is described as spiritual and perfect.

          I even met a Jehovah’s Witness once who said the OT law helped protect human genetics and I think he had a good point on that.

          But there are maturity factors that come into play in bible studies. Some people claim the OT period was like an elementary stage of human spirituality and the NT is the next higher stage of it.

          I think all the doctrinal questions could be God building the mind of Christ in people through doctrinal meditation and exercise. See Psalm 1. We have to learn to interpret and reason from God’s principles then apply them.

  3. Susan says:

    I think we should teach our kids that God exists by the way we live our lives because our kids are watching us. We don’t convict them but we could influence them into becoming better seekers.

    A better seeker won’t be fooled by the false evidence claims and denials by the world.

    If you can accept the simple belief that God exists and that He has an opponent, Satan and his angels, then that makes taking God at His Word even more imperative.

    Evidence can be tampered with and biases can be encouraged and learned from God’s enemy which is Satan because Satan is the god of this world and he can be working anywhere while in this world. He can even be on social media.

    That is one of the reasons why God is so sublime in starting His people out with faith. Unshakeable faith is the gift of God. So if you have a rock solid relationship with God then your faith will be unshakeable.

    Now some people could still be busy over validating their senses and coming up with an error message on the existence of God question. If they want to be ignorant and do that then how can you convince them that is not a safe course of action? Only by warning them there are eternal consequences for this. God saves each in His own order. Personally, I am not an eternal tormentist but imagine you are determined to deny God exists then that places you squarely in the world and under Satanic influence while in the world. You may get away with things for a while but where is your God given protection from Satan while in this world?
    Also there is an order to being saved. There are two resurrections for one thing. Who is going to make it into the first and who makes it into the second?

    Christians are in God’s camp. The rest of the world isn’t. Any god not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a false deity and you only learn to recognize false deities when you meet them from an intimate acquaintance with the Bible because the Bible defines God’s nature.

    A lot of other gods natures aren’t defined by God Himself. Like the Greek gods. Did the Greeks have a text. No so the gods were given attributes by men.

    In the case of the Bible the text was given by divine inspiration to men that God selected to be His prophets.

    So by all means raise your kids to believe in God if possible. They are innocent and they are going to need all kinds of protection from evil influences while in the world. These days with all the sexual predators in the schools and neighborhoods you can’t even protect them by riding them to the school or the bus stop.

    So the children are going to need every ounce of protection they can get.

    • Andy Ryan says:

      “Any god not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a false deity ”
      That’s funny – all the other religions say you’ve got a false one.

      • Susan says:

        You will have to test hundreds of thousands of religions y’know because you called into question the perception and judgment capability of the human mind. If the human mind is good enough to make a correct judgment then no one has to humor philosophy or science which tries to insert themselves as final arbiter ahead of the individual.

      • esbee says:

        Actually the other religions acknowledge Jesus in some form or other. They may not accept his deity but do say he was a great teacher or prophet.

        But only one is real. Which one is it? Do you know? Only one offers an actual solution to sin and it involves God reaching down to men. All the others involve the person working their way up to God or godhood which no one can do

        • Andy Ryan says:

          “Actually the other religions acknowledge Jesus in some form or other”
          Some do, many don’t. I said: “all the other religions say you’ve got a false one” and that remains true. Muslims may say Jesus was a prophet but they still think Christianity is a false religion. In fact most Muslims I have spoken to see Christianity as tantamount to polytheism.

  4. Susan Tan says:

    Lol…very funny Andy except how would they know? Did any of them ever dare to enter into a relationship with God and try to pass His tests?

    No, the Dawkinses of this world are quitters and it’s easier for them to quit if they tell themselves lies about God’s nature. What is all that blaming and complaining that atheists do that they like to dress up in false garments like they are arguing intellectually?

    Try being fearless for once in your life and do what Prince did. Seek God’s favor but that will involve you putting yourself squarely in God’s hands and taking direction from Him.

    So you will have to find a way to learn humility otherwise you will just sit up on message boards making weak arguments against His existence never getting to know who He is.

    So Christians aren’t claiming because people actually know from experiencing a full fledged relationship with God.

    Now if you believe all this world’s lies about God then that is pure worldliness on your part and God does not desire His children to be worldly. He wants His children to be like Jesus Christ.

    Did Jesus Christ ever dicker around arguing with people? No he cut through all their traps, lies and complaints with the truth.

    That is what the truth is….a sword that cuts away lies and subterfuge.

    So go ahead learning the world’s ways. It wouldn’t surprise me if Dawkins is an evil angel. He seems to be really in love with himself and if his own self is his own created idol then how is he going to hear from God when he is blocking God’s revelation with an idol?

    God knows Dawkins has blocked him. Not only has he blocked God. He has raged against Him from a position of ignorance.

    If that is who atheists learn from then I want to part of that.

    Intellectual pride is no substitute for God given humility.

    And yes God can choose to reveal Himself to anybody He wants to and He may not approve of pride, fearfulness and a few other things that people refuse to give up.

    So if God chooses who He wants to when He can read heart motives who is any person to complain?

    He passed over all of David’s brothers before choosing David.

    So God has a sovereign will and it behooves us to submit to His rule and will or else we are none of His.

    The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a god of unity and peace but if He decides He wants to make a personal peace with people one person at a time then really who are atheists to complain.

    Complaining doesn’t make a very good impression on God does it. Look at Job and compare him with the complaining children of Israel in the wilderness. Is there a difference there?

    Arguing and bringing complaints is just a form of whining and complaining for some people.

    If people could keep their minds stayed on Jesus in oerfect peace then there wouldn’t be so much time for arguing, whining and complaining would there?

    Faith is a process. Some people are going to take it serious and others won’t and if you don’t have God given discernment how can you tell the real believers from the unbelievers and the real life giving truth from mere religion.

    Christianity is God given truth.

    Religion is man made.

    It’s too bad Christians even consent to referring to itself as a religion. It really is not. It is a relationship but some people are in more mature relationships with God than others. That is for sure.

    So keep your confusion over which religion is true to yourself.

    Some people aren’t confused.

    Since when did it make sense for the confused people who can’t tell the difference between religion to take a stand and try to control religious people? It doesn’t.

    So all you can really do as an atheist is to separate yourself from their confusion and become a genuine seeker like Prince did.

    He was a King’s Scholar who studied logic and wrote a dissertation on it.

    But he had enough presence of mine to establish the truth for himself. Maybe he was clearheaded enough to see both sides had a point so he let God establish His point.

    Now which will require more of you? Following the world or establishing God’s truth for yourself?

    Personally, I don’t take pointers from people who lack expertise and atheists demonstate they have no relationship with God.

    Since that is a very important relationship to have I study along with the best people I can locate. I am on a very limited budget you’d be surprised. Some of the very best teachers of God’s Word make their services available for free.

    Like I said. There is no need to argue. I don’t consult people who lack expertise on an incredibly complex subject like how to pursue and have a relationship with God.

    There is some really incredibly bad advice out in the world especially today.

    God Bless! May His Grace Abound To You!

    • Andy Ryan says:

      “very funny Andy except how would they know? Did any of them ever dare to enter into a relationship with God and try to pass His tests?”
      Look, there are hundreds, perhaps even thousands of religions around right now. There are half a dozen big ones with hundreds of millions (or more) followers. All think they’re the ‘only one’. You say “I’m saying claiming God exists, I’m asserting the truth that he does”. Hindus and Jains can say the same about their Gods. And Muslims and Sikhs could ask if you ever ‘dared’ to enter into a relationship with their God. You’re not saying anything they couldn’t also say about the Gods they believe in.

      • Susan Tan says:

        Well I am sure you have everything wrong. But your biases are learned and I am not going to overcome your will so I am not going to argue further.

        I feel sure you and a lot of atheists are victims of the world’s psycho babble. That’s just my considered opinion after dialoging so long with you.

        Biases are not people’s enemies. You can’t even form a relationship without a bias. All people contain many, many cognitive biases and the choice to love is a bias and the Bible says God is love. So He must be biased by His own nature and the Bible says He loves His creation.

        But science takes the creation. Sets it ruthlessly on it’s head and says “removal all bias”. Some evolutionary twit like Dawkins in contradiction to most psychiatrists calls faith a “delusion”.

        So pick your experts wisely.

        If you are going to use all religions as your defense it is lame unless you go out and personally test and experience all of these religions and there are millions of them so you’d better get busy testing all of them before you sit up here opining on a message board.

        We’ll talk after you’ve finished testing half a million, ok?

        You wouldn’t want to be guilty of not testing all these claims would you if you’re trying to deny my truth claim….you might be wrong….so go get the testing evidence.

        • Andy Ryan says:

          “If you are going to use all religions as your defense it is lame unless you go out and personally test and experience all of these religions and there are millions of them”

          Right. But you were the one saying your religion had something the rest of them didn’t, so it’s you who needs to personally test all of them to back up that claim!

          “I am not going to argue further”
          I make this perhaps the seventh or eight time you’ve said that.

          Which of Dawkins’ books have you read, by the way?

          • Susan says:

            Why is Dawkins even important?

            God is the most important Person to consult in this world.

            If nothing is impossible with God than get with the experts who know God the best.

            Dawkins is just person embodying. another worldly counter-culture movement against God’s rule and order.

            God establishes peace in people’s hearts one person at a time.

            Why would I want to disple the love of God which brings peace to my heart so I can study nature?

            Nature is wild and needs taming.

            Jesus Christ calmed the seas so he can calm human nature, too.

            But you have a choice to follow him and become a peacemaker like he is or you can keep everybody stirred up like Dawkins does trying to make waves against God.

            It is your choice who you prioritize to listen to.

            Dawkins or God.

            Your choice.

            What do you want? Social evolution and learning how to be a proper gentleman like Christ in Phillipians 2 or do you want to identify with chimps which is regressive mentally.

            How are you really rational without self control? Read the Fruit of the Spirit passage. God gives His people spiritual attributes.

            But Dawkins doesn’t. His weak comparisons with animal nature keep people weak and prone to sin and sins are not good for people.

            If you want to stay in sin then stick to Dawkins.

            If you want to be an overcomer though you learn from Christ and practice God’s ways.

            Christ is a lot more progressive than Dawkins.

            Read the Sermon on the Mount. That is supernatural admonition to goodness.

          • Andy Ryan says:

            “Why is Dawkins even important?”

            You brought him up, not me. I was wondering what experience you had with his work such that you sum it up as “His weak comparisons with animal nature”. What bothers you about him – his intellect, his compassion, his curiosity, his joy about nature?

          • Susan says:

            We’re claiming a relationship with God, Andy.

            Religion doesn’t interest me. I only used to study false religions to debunk them.

            But i gave the debunking up in favor of getting an even better relationship with God.

            Would you rather have an even better relationship with God and know His ways and learn from Him or use all your time debunking false religions?

            Those false religions if God ever used them in the past are no help now.

            We have a superior gifting from God in Christianity. So why waste those gifts testing other religions claims when I could be working iwith and improving my God given gifts and talents?

            That is what we have that makes us different.

          • Andy Ryan says:

            “So why waste those gifts testing other religions claims”
            You told me I should be testing those other religions’ claims. But you say it would be a waste of time for you to do the same. Your hypocrisy is hilarious, Susan.

        • Andy Ryan says:

          Susan Tan then: “You resort to an ad hominem attack and throw the first punch at a person personally”
          Susan Tan now: “Some evolutionary twit like Dawkins” … “victims of the world’s psycho babble” … “rock hard lazy obstinancy in those atheists hardheads”

          I guess we can add consistency to burden of proof in the list of things you loftily consider yourself to be above.

          • Susan Tan says:

            I should qualify before leaving. I am too busy learning and teaching God’s ways because I believe they are better than the world’s.

            The world produced philosophy and psychology.

            But Paul said philosophy is vain.

            For a start on comparing what God’s Word says versus worldly psychology read:

            Christianity versus Modern Psychology at the

            Or look at the short article: Christianity vs. Psychology at Andrew Wommack ministries site.

            Modern psychology teaches something different from the Bible.

            I hope all this helps. A good part of the Christian world has given up on converting atheists because they see you as hard cases beyond being saved but I know nothing is impossible with God.

            You also should google and read a short essay called ” If God Could Save Everyone, Would He?” by Dr. Stephen E. Jones.

            And read ” Creation’s Jubilee” by Dr. Stephen E. Jones. In my humble opinion this is the most important book ever written after the Bible because it corrects free will and explains other doctrinal errors that concern everyone but that atheists especially like to object to.

            You are important to God y’ know. Christ died on the Cross to save you so that means God values us highly though we do have a sin nature that He intends to rectify.

            Read the right works so God can do His work in rectifying you early.

            All of this salvation work depends on God and only a little on men’s handling and people can certainly mishandle things.

            Don’t let the mistakes of some of God’s men keep you from establishing a relationship with God. It is much too important a relationship to have. It governs every aspect of human existence.

            God Bless and Peace Be With You!


        • Andy Ryan says:

          Tracey, you need to do better than just telling someone their argument is dumb. I wasn’t saying Muslims and Sikhs had anything more in common than subscribing to religions that were no Christian.
          Also, you’re calling someone dumb while offering posts such as: “So your a believer of the Islamic doctrine?. I wondered a much?”
          Trying to wade through the poor punctuation and grammar, I’ll guess you’re (not ‘your’) asking me if I’m a Muslim. I’m not.

          • Tracey. says:

            No I wrote, it isn’t too bright. If your had knowledge of the two other religions you pegged under the one god, then you would understand the response, and while we are on the subject of your work, how about you read your work; editor.
            And I have worked with many children who have Speech and Language Disability, Dyslexia, Dyscaculia, Learning Disorders, so, this is why I don’t assume the person has competent Language skills, hence the reason why I have not brought this to your attention.
            Why do I write this, the person who I let type the pieces for me, (sometimes, I dictate and they type, why? to give them experience alwhilst they are in a safe environment), has the above Disabilities, I do not, edit/check the work, I fully am aware so I let it go through. Now within this forum, I have not read any criteria stipulation, all material submitted, is to be, grammatically, and punctuated, correctly; or at least I haven’t found, please point me to it, if it is on this site.
            And as to the article, yes I agree, without God, Jesus Christ Our Lord and Saviour, morals well they’d be, anything you want; unanimous agreements, possible, but, not probable, self driven desires, foremost.

          • Andy Ryan says:

            ” If your had knowledge of the two other religions you pegged under the one god”
            I didn’t peg them under one God, Tracey. I’ll say it again: I wasn’t saying Muslims and Sikhs had anything more in common than subscribing to religions that were no Christian. Your reaction to my post deviates to what I actually said so much I’m wondering if you actually meant to reply to someone else.
            “how about you read your work; editor”
            What have I written that isn’t concise and easy to understand? You say that you’re actually dictating this to a child disabilities to type out. That explains a bit. Are you getting them to read my posts to you too? If so that would explain why you keep failing to parse them correctly. I’m now feeling very sorry for the child who has to listen to and type out your poor arguments!

    • jcb says:

      I wonder if Susan ever dared to enter into a relationship with Zeus, or Vishnu, and tried to pass their tests. Susan, what did Zeus say when you spoke with him? Did you pass the tests? Were they multiple choice?

  5. Susan Tan says:

    I am not arguing. Burdens of proof are philosophical language that come from the mind of man.

    I stopped playing philosophy a while back. Partly because it wasn’t my forte but God’s way is better any way.

    You would be surprised how much evidence I gathered in the past making the pro-God case but that was several years ago and I caught a lot of flack for it. None of the atheists I showed it to seemed to appreciate it or all the effort that went into locating it and presenting it.

    So I must conclude most of them are lazy and unappreciative. Or we’re afraid of their lives being changed around in some way.

    From God’s persepective the evidence seeking burden is on you. Not me. I did all I can and I ran into rock hard lazy obstinancy in those atheists hardheads so I will never go that route again.

    I feel like I violated a spiritual principle by trying to be overly helpful.

    Being overly helpful just lets the spiritually blind stay blind. It is like therapy. If you want to progress at therapy you will have to work at some things yourself and stop being so lazy.

    God says He is a rewarder of diligent seekers.

  6. Susan Tan says:

    What bothers me about Dawkins is he is trying to keep people from seeking to have a relationship with God by classifying religion as a “delusion” or mind virus.

    I name people and works on the board so if there are any open minded people around they can seek to know more about God.

    I have run into a lot of people who inadvertently steered me the wrong way in Christianity but I only learned that by being open minded to a certain degree and researching Christian beliefs.
    Now occasiionally I run into a Christian calling me a heretic because I hold an opinion different from them on the afterlife but I think I just don’t limit God in my inner being as much as they do.

    You can worship the Big God or the little god in your own mind.

    I can’t do everything, know everything or get everything right in this life. Nobody can except God.

    Who you identify with could make you or break you in this world.

    Basically I feel Dawkins has meddeled with the prospects of people.

    If you believe him then you have to give up God’s promises.

    What if God is spearheading a whole new social order we call the kingdom of God but if you won’t listen to God and heed people in His place then you could end up at the bottom of God’s order.

    Philippians 3
    No Confidence in the Flesh
    3 Further, my brothers and sisters, rejoice in the Lord! It is no trouble for me to write the same things to you again, and it is a safeguard for you. 2 Watch out for those dogs, those evildoers, those mutilators of the flesh. 3 For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— 4 though I myself have reasons for such confidence.

    Christians receive a heart circumcision that gives us a new nature to sustain until maturity. We put no confidence in the flesh and materialism is the flesh in many people’s thoughtlife.

    We can’t risk weakening this new nature by feeding it from tainted worldly sources can we? Not any more than you can feed a baby just anything and expect him to grow properly to maturity.

    That is why Christians meditate on the Word of God. It is a sort of biblical feeding for us.

    Dawkins is ignoring the most basic human right to be born again by placing the idea that there is no God in people’s minds and willfully reinforcing it and arguing over it.

    Read John 3. This is where Jesus says we MUST be born again.

    But to accept your new spiritual birth you must trust the deliverer.

    So Dawkins has reclassified everything to instill distrust in people’s heads especially people who have an inordinate affection for the sciences and philosophy.

    His thinking effectively blocks some people thinking for themselves if they don’t have the mental and moral courage to seek to know as much as possible.

    Our minds are never totally free of other people’s or the world’s ideas are they?

    Sometimes we have to set ourselves free by an act of the will based on our own judgments.

    • esbee says:

      saying the people are delusional because they believe in god is not a new ruse…it was used by the communist leadership in Russia —anyone who proclaimed to believe in god could be arrested and put in a mental hospital or killed. I find it ironic that the world’s greatest killers were/are atheist govts, millions upon millions who did not agree with their political views put in prison or killed and today we have North Korea which is one big concentration camp. Yet the atheists insist on pointing out ancient history citing those killed in the OT (those people are still at war in the same part of the world) or the crusades which are history and shown the moslems were the aggressor yet totally miss the 20th century annihilations perpertrated by those who publically proclaimed there is no god.

      • Susan says:

        It’s the labels game. They said they were communists so Western atheists blow the fact off that Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were all atheists. You have to research into their backgrounds, statements, beliefs and actions as well as research state dogma and then you will know.

        When you think about it some of the biggest criminals would be narcissistic atheistic dictators because if life has no meaning, there is no God to hold anyone accountable and you are in love with yourself to the point that no one is your equal then that is a serious combination of mental states where the worst crimes against people can be self permitted.

        I read a very interesting book once by Richard Wurmbrand called Marx & Satan. Wurmbrand was a Romanian Jew who converted to Christianity back in the 30’s or 40’s and tried to evangelize the Red Army. Eventually the Red Army took him prisoner and sent him to a prison in Moscow for 14 years while they told his wife that he was dead. He went through a lot of torture while isolated there. He was tortured so long and so hard that he says he forgot all the Bible verses yet he still had Jesus and had a very life altering epiphany, too.

        Later on after being released they video taped him and put his videos on youtube. He had all sorts of scars but he still had Jesus after all that torture and he still had enough motivation left to start the Voice of the Martyrs organization.

        His book is a fascinating read and you can read it online if you can find it for free. He heavily researched into Marx’s background after being jailed by the communists and came up with a lot of info that seems to indicate that Marx was really a Satanist masquerading as an atheist.

        But to determine strange things like the fact that Marx was really not an atheist but most likely a Satanist requires a lot of research and most people would prefer to argue with you than do the extra research that reveals the truth.

        So all the communist atheists like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. were all duped into falling in love with and following the political reasoning of a Satanist. But then an atheist skeptic who isn’t on his guard against the occult wouldn’t even know what to look for to spot a Satanist hanging around a group of atheists. I wouldn’t know how to identify one either but Wurmbrand knew how.

        Marx let his whole family starve while he wasted time constructing his political theories. They say he could have made money as a language interpreter but he would rather philosophize and let his family starve than work for a living.

        • Andy Ryan says:

          “When you think about it some of the biggest criminals would be narcissistic atheistic dictators because if life has no meaning, there is no God to hold anyone accountable”
          And others, like Hitler or the Inquisition, or American slavers in the 18th and 19th century, were theists who figured they could torture or kill millions because God was on their side so that made it all right. Turns out some people are just horrible and they’ll justify it regardless of their beliefs.

          • Susan says:

            All those groups probably were motivated by different reasons and could have been duped also.

            Hitler was an occultist who most likely suffered from child abuse and PTSD so it’s no wonder he was so strange. Xenophobia (racism) is a serious mental disorder caused by a fear of people not like oneself and fearful people might tend to react more extremely than others and could become more controlling and domineering like Hitler was with all his paranoid ideations. I doubt it was his religion that drove his paranoia. His paranoia just picked a religious excuse to bond itself to so it could create an internal political enemy inside Germany and justify him in grabbing more political power. There’s quite a lot of Nazi roundtable discussions that show many of the higher ranking Nazis were counterfeit Christians and they planned eventually on phasing Christianity out of the Third Reich. The group exclusive mentality of Nazi xenophboia contradicts the group inclusive mentality of Christianity which is evangelical in nature. Nazis only wanted Aryans in their group but Christianity accepts all racial groups. So Hitler manipulated the public perception of German Christians. He jailed and killed plenty of priests because priests answer to another authority than Hitler and anyone that couldn’t be controlled by Hitler was a threat to him. The Jehovah Witnesses, the gypsies and communists were all perceived as threats by the Third Reich so he classified them also as Germany’s enemy and jailed them, too.

            Unfortunately, a lot of the world is a victim of either a poor biblical education or no biblical education at all.

            Quite a few Catholic priests didn’t know the scriptures or read them regularly in the Dark Ages. They just did as the pope told them to do.

            Universal education wasn’t even around in the U.S. until the early 1900s so a lot of people couldn’t read so if they couldn’t read how could they check their beliefs against the Bible?

            But it’s strange nobody seems to factor that into these historical incidents.

          • Susan says:

            Go study Richard Wurmbrand. He had an unbreakable spirit and that is proof of God.

            The communists certainly tried to break his body and they tried to break Wurmbrand’s spirit as well through isolation tactics.

            But they failed.

            Most people would be crazy after 14 years of torture but not Wurmbrand. He came out strong and sane. and that is living proof of a strong spirit but then Wurmbrand was a fully dedicated man of God.

            And if you come back with a rationalization to blow him off after studying Wurmbrand’s life then you’re not capable of seeking the truth but just weak rationalizations attempting to dismiss and control it to serve your own purposes but not trying to arrive at a true intellectual conclusion.

            The truth is brave just like Wurmbrand shows by his life and actions.

            Give God the Glory because His Truth is brave.

        • jcb says:

          There is no god. There is no ultimate (godly) accountability. It doesn’t follow that life has no meaning. And, that assertion contradicts your other assertion: if life had no meaning, then people would never act to become dictators, use language, or anything else (if it was all without any meaning)

  7. Susan Tan says:

    The kids should want God to exist because the more people that believe God exists the more moral fiber there is in the world. Societies are sustained by moral fiber.

    But it could be there are less and less parallels between the subjective and the objective in human nature so that is why the family unit is disintegrating because people don’t even have the basic virtues to do what is right any more.

    And no I don’t want to argue. I am just voicing my opinion and can do that in a free society.

    I don’t believe in allowing just anybody to form or shape my perspectives when I can have God do it and if I do consult anyone then they meet certain standards first.

    One of the problems in this world is there are too many egos giving voices to opinions from positions of ignorance.

    If you don’t know for a fact then why argue at all?

    Christians in my opinion should be ignoring atheists because the people who know don’t have to defer to the ignorance of those who don’t know and are so willfully ignorant that they claim not to be able to distinguish between religions.

    But in Christianity we have Bible teachers and teachers teach because they know a subject and the subject of Bible teachers is God so they know God both subjectively and objectively.

    You don’t argue with a blind person fighting for control of who will steer who.

    You establish control and take authority over the blind person and lead him the right way.

    In the spiritual realm God is over all the blind people of this world but some of the blind people act less blind and are wise enough to allow Him to direct their steps cf. Proverbs 3.

    If you want to be a spiritually dead blind materialist then go be one but don’t try to make me take you seriously because I know and I have the evidence. Both objectively and subjectively and your scientific bias dosen’t over rule my relationships or my evidence no matter if you argue like apes or not.

    You don’t argue like apes to learn godly self control. You have to submit to God to learn it.

    Whether or not you personally like it God is the highest authority in this world. If you want to rebel and argue it then do it with someone else. I am just voicing my opinion which in the world I grew up in was a hard thing for a woman to do in the church. So I voice it in the world now. No need to argue about things these are just my God given thoughts on the matter.

    Now go ahead and ignore my God given thinking because you have your science/logic idol to serve.

    Thanks for reading.

    Now if you have any brains you’ll google Tim Kellers video ” Getting Out ” and watch it because understanding the objective and the subjective in Christianity is difficult.

  8. Susan says:

    Atheists are the ones that think religious claims have to be tested by science.

    I don’t think that but If you keep asking “which religion is right ?” and think science can determine the truth then that places the burden on you of having to test them.

    I already said my mind is good enough to decide on whether to believe or not without any reference to science at all.

    I simply trust my own judgment and observations of the world when I hear and read God’s account.

    I don’t need the scientific overlay but if you do then testing all the religions is the logical conclusion of that thought.

    Good luck at coming up with a testing methodology that is actually accurate enough to test every religion because right now you don’t have even have the testing criteria and method in place and since the testing job is so big it is likely no one will have a correct methodlogy in the forseaable future.

    So in my opinion you have to rely on your own judgment. So thank God I can read God’s Words and take a look around this world and make my mind up for myself.

    I really don’t think arguments are persuasive one way or another on the belief question.

    Mainly what arguments do is point out the flaws in people’s thinking.

    I don’t think there is an argument though that can deny human perception.

    But if you want to allow for an illegal substitution of a naturalist method to substitute for metaphysical claims and your own mind’s judging capability then that is up to you.

    I don’t have enough faith in the human mind to substitute human methods for God’s methods.

    Faith is by hearing so in God’s opinion the human mind through the sense of hearing is all that a person needs to determine to believe Him or not.

    But this world likes to tinker with people’s minds and force them down paths of thinking that are of the world’s making.

    I have always trusted God more than people so I am not likely to substitute manmade science for what He says and reveals am I?

    That’s why I don’t argue any more. The shortcut is to simply tell the truth. I may not be the most logical person in the world but there is nothing wrong with my perception.

    So what if I am wrong occasionally.. Didn’t God build me with a reasoning capability and can’t I think for myself without substituting other people’s biases?

    I don’t trust other people’s motives so I am going to continue to think for myself and rely on my own perception. It is what gets me through this world whether I have science or not.

    • toby says:

      “So thank God I can read God’s Words and take a look around this world and make my mind up for myself.”

      You’re reading men’s words. Men’s words that are pretty much written anonymously. Get that squarely into your head. You think everyone is fallen from birth. Fallible men wrote the book you ascribe to god. How can you trust anything about it when you know nothing of who they were, what their motivations were, what they wanted?

      • Susan says:

        John 7:17. King James Bible

        If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

        • toby says:

          Ah! So the bible is true because the bible says it’s true. Based on this logic we can assume Huck Finn was a real person.

  9. Susan says:

    The Bible is true because the Bible was given by divine inspiration. Huck Finn wasn’t.

    Psalm 119:89

    89 For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

    It’s not circular to reason from God’s revelation because God giving revelation breaks the circle and it becomes an explanation from one person to other persons. We also have the heavenly constellations validating the Gospel account.

    Other religions attempt to claim divine revelation. However, they have neither the life of Jesus Christ or the constellations validating their accounts.

    Plus only Christianity and Judaism have a prophetic line of revelation in the Bible extending back over 1500 years.

    So if you want to play mind games denying 1500+ years of God given revelation then you must have your own motives for that.
    Please leave me out.
    The circular reasoning shtick that Christians routinely hear from atheists on message boards is a logical fallacy.
    We don’t claim men wrote the Bible.
    We claim God gave the Bible through men and that is quite a different claim from the one you get circular reasoning from.

    • toby says:

      “The Bible is true because the Bible was given by divine inspiration. Huck Finn wasn’t.”
      Says the bible. Huck Finn could have been as well for all you know.
      “It’s not circular to reason from God’s revelation because God giving revelation breaks the circle and it becomes an explanation from one person to other persons.”
      Revelation cannot be distinguished from subconscious thoughts arising into consciousness or someone interpreting their thoughts as being external.
      “Plus only Christianity and Judaism have a prophetic line of revelation in the Bible extending back over 1500 years.”
      People wrote a prophecy and years later people wrote that it was fulfilled. You have so much faith in the thousands of years dead anonymous writers. You read what they wrote, accept it, and then infer that they were trustworthy based on that acceptance.
      “We don’t claim men wrote the Bible.”
      Then you’re incorrect.
      “We claim God gave the Bible through men and that is quite a different claim from the one you get circular reasoning from.”
      This seems to just be a semantic trick.

      Tell us about your revelation. What was it?

  10. Susan says:

    Personal revelations that I received are much too personal for a message board. Try researching divine revelation and you might learn something.

    Anybody can learn to parrot another person’s argument. That doesn’t make their argument sound.

    If you draw a schematic diagram then you can see that divine revelation isn’t circular. It comes down from God in heaven before it circulates. So it is not strictly circular.

    Be a seeker and you will learn more if you research and approach things with an open mind.

    If you learn from all the closedminded people to object before you do your own seeking then you really didn’t get a chance to establish truth for yourself personally if God exists, did you?

    The best thing you can teach anybody to be on a message board is to be a truth seeker for themselves.

    That way you are developing your own spiritual mind off your own evidence. It’s ironic if you think about it. All evidence is from God since He created everything and He doesn’t mind you looking for evidence of Him. He created the whole world for you to play around in and He says he can be seen in His creation.

    Some people are just borrowers of other people’s arguments and evidence though.

    But if you actively seek to know the truth for yourself then aren’t you a lot closer to a man that God can approve of?

    Watching arguments is a passive activity….absorbing but never really establishing the truth for oneself.

    I believed in God but I know Him a lot better and more personally now because I actually did research that originated from my own questioning mind.

    While everyone else was spouting off book learned arguments and things they learned in school I was actually out trying to locate the truth and thinking about it for myself.

    So I have a lot stronger case for what I believe than most.

    The stronger my case gets the less I need to argue it.

    Because people can do their own search like Josh McDowell did. I have never even read McDowell’s book but I see from his bio he did something similar to what I did.

    He did it to check his beliefs. I did it just to get evidence for unbelievers which was wrong of me because it just kept the unbelievers in a passive mental state when they needed to be actively seeking to know God and confirm His existence for themselves.

    People from all sorts of backgrounds and motives can approach evidence with preconceived ideas about it.

    So I say be an original and get your own evidence then you can actually own your own beliefs instead of borrowing things said by other people that may or may not be sound.

    I have changed around beliefs just because I bothered to check things out. Sometimes I turn up things most Christians would disagree which puts me in a minority position but so what at least I was a genuine truth seeker and not a mindless parrot and I could still change my position over time.

    The difference between a genuine Christian truth seeker and any researcher is that we reason along with God and locate the evidence that validates His biblical claims.

    I could have just rested my case for believing on my own perception and observations about human nature.

    But I went the extra mile and have really reinforced my beliefs now.

    • Tracey says:

      Divine revelations are completely up to God no use stamping feet to demand one.
      Atheist choose to cling to, there is no god so its their loss.
      What more can one say.
      But to pray for them.
      They seem to be trailing after Christians like lost humans wondering if, we know the way to their chosen home?
      I wouldn’t have a clue I’m not an Atheist, praise be to God.
      So who are the lost sheep?
      I know why I read articles on this site and other God information articles but why do Atheists only to be bristly when they don’t gain a convert.
      Good Lord save us.
      How happy is anyone who fears God. Psalm.112.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *