Debating an Atheist

[CThomas]

All right, now I'm starting to wonder if this is all an elaborate hoax. This could not possibly be someone seriously trying to present reasoned argument, could it? If it is a parody then I apologize to "Truman" for failing to get the joke sooner.

CThomas

[backwoodsman]

Do you see anything there that you think someone trying to communicate with you might find frustrating, or that might make them think it's pointless to try to have a discussion with you?

Backwoodsman, it is typical for Christians to avoid engagement in hearty discussion.

I guess that would be a 'no'. Well, let us know if you figure it out. Several Christians here tried pretty hard to engage you in hearty discussion, and found it impossible for reasons several of them tried pretty hard to explain to you. I'm guessing you're going to keep on ignoring all that and believing whatever you've chosen to believe about God and Christians, but I'd prefer to be proven wrong.

[TrumanSmith]

All right, now I'm starting to wonder if this is all an elaborate hoax. This could not possibly be someone seriously trying to present reasoned argument, could it? If it is a parody then I apologize to "Truman" for failing to get the joke sooner.
CThomas

Not very "Christ-like" of you to post like that.

[paulespino]

Hi Truman,

I Corinthians 1:18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

I stand by this verse.

[TrumanSmith]

Hi Truman,
I Corinthians 1:18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."
I stand by this verse.

When I was a Christian, I would reach out to atheists in an effort to be a vessel of God to them with the gospel. One atheist told me I'd never change because I'm too hard-headed. Then I changed from Christian to atheist because a natural worldview makes more sense to me. It shows that his judgment was wrong. Why be so judgmental? It is just an excuse for not wanting to communicate.

[backwoodsman]

When I was a Christian, I would reach out to atheists in an effort to be a vessel of God to them with the gospel. One atheist told me I'd never change because I'm too hard-headed. Then I changed from Christian to atheist because a natural worldview makes more sense to me. It shows that his judgment was wrong.

To the contrary, he had you pegged pretty well -- you certainly are hard-headed. His statement that you'd never change was simply an educated guess based on available evidence and past observation; those are often right, but sometimes wrong. He couldn't have understood -- just like you can't understand now -- that your religion consisted merely of an intellectual adherence to a belief system, without any real power of God behind it, but instead supported mostly by that hard-headedness. Based on that, had I known you at the time, I'd have made a different educated guess: That, sooner or later, you'd eventually stop professing Christianity, because hard-headedness is a very poor reason to call oneself a Christian, and isn't enough to maintain a belief system in the long term. Don't imagine you're the first I've seen follow the same course for the same reason -- far from it.

Why be so judgmental? It is just an excuse for not wanting to communicate.

And yet, it's you, not anyone else here, who's dropped the ball on communication. You say it's "typical for Christians to avoid engagement in hearty discussion" -- but time after time, you've simply ignored responses to your claims, while still insisting you're right and we're all deluded, can't answer your claims, etc. You did the same in the two debates of yours I've listened to (Steve Gregg & Fuz Rana). So who here is really making excuses for not wanting to communicate?

In case you're wondering why I'm staying with this thread, it's because I think there's a chance you're sincere, and you really believe you're open-minded and logical, and you really just can't see the hypocrisy and irrationality in your thinking and behavior. If my efforts turn out to be wasted, that's OK; it's not really that much effort.

[TrumanSmith]

And yet, it's you, not anyone else here, who's dropped the ball on communication. You say it's "typical for Christians to avoid engagement in hearty discussion" -- but time after time, you've simply ignored responses to your claims, while still insisting you're right and we're all deluded, can't answer your claims, etc.

I thought I answered all questions for me. Which question do you want me to answer? Which response do you think I'm ignoring? I'd be happy to continue.

When I was a Christian, I was very much into evangelism and apologetics. I used to preach the gospel on the internet and local cable TV for many years. I think that those who want to stop the discussion don't care for one or both of those activities (evangelism and apologetics).

Also- when I was a Christian and an atheist said I was too hard-headed and would never change my mind; I think he was just sharing his own frustration in not being able to convert someone on the spot. It takes time for people to absorb new information, and I'm willing to work with everyone here. We can learn from each other if you want to seek the truth.

[Bud]

Hi Truman, how are you?

You said a couple posts back:

It is just an excuse for not wanting to communicate.

I've been following this thread. I would like to communicate with you.

Though, I should warn you I am the least in wisdom here.

I am a Jesus follower, I am prepared to give you "an answer for the hope that is within me". But I really know next to nothing about evolution so I would for the sake of discussion grant you that evolution is a good theory. Do you really want to communicate?

(By the way I did hear yours n' Steve's recent debate)

If you do, I would next say, I follow Jesus because I have received the testimony of good men n' women who say that Jesus was crucified for our sins and was raised from the dead for our life.

Now for the sake of this possible discussion I will now grant you that evolution is tru, Truman. So my next question to you I suppose should be, Why is it I should stop following Jesus? (Assuming that is one of your thrusts).

God bless you,
Bud

[Jason]

Truman, perhaps I can shed a little light on why some have found communication with you frustrating. I just listened to your debate with Steve and you made several statements that appear very naive, at best, and arrogant, at worst. At one point you stated that perhaps Steve should have gone to seminary (like you did) to learn the Bible better. Although I've never engaged in formal debates, I understand that it's normal to at least read a short bio of the person you'll be debating beforehand so as to not make careless remarks. Steve has a lengthy bio at his website, and about a thousand free lectures on his website, going verse by verse through the entire text of the bible with remarkable depth. Yet, you'll find seminary graduates who've never even read through the bible, much less had occasion to expound on every single verse with depth.

My pastor has a degree from a seminary, but I doubt he knows a quarter of what Steve knows about the bible. Now my pastor is a good man, and unusually humble, so I have quite a bit to learn from him. But can you now see (by the above example) how your remarks sound arrogant to some? You were, in a not-so-subtle manner, suggesting that Steve should go to school and learn the bible... a book he's been studying and teaching for 50 years. That would be like a newly-converted creationist telling Richard Dawkins to go learn some science. This kind of attitude will shut down any attempts at honest, beneficial discourse. I think you can do better, sir.

[jriccitelli]

Truman, reading back through this to see where it went wrong, I think too many issues came up, and I too am tired of ad hominem statements that go nowhere. Non the less I would be interested on hearing your answers. I did notice that Steve already made the point I was going to make, that if you said you ‘had’ a relationship with God, and now you say you did not, then I would have to think you did not (i.e. Because a mans 20 dollar bill was not genuine, does not mean all 20 dollar bills are phony).
Still, I do agree I would not use that (personal experience) as a proof in any debate, as people have also seen flying saucers and Elvis.

I have built hot rods, worked in commercial construction for many years, and I work as an industrial electrician now. Throughout my life I have had to build and look at complex plans and schematics, yet when I glance inside a book on biology I see plans and designs far far far far more complex and interwoven than anything man has ever been able to design or construct (or imagine).

Do you see that, and how did that happen?