Witnessing to Atheists

[Christianbookworm]

Conspiracies are weird. Don't think the government is competent enough to pull one off.

[Carrikature]

I think you're selling short the work of the Holy Spirit. Naturally, this is probably due to the fact that you believe He doesn't exist*. It's the principle of "fruit that remains".


*if, in fact, that's what you believe

I don't believe the Holy Spirit exists, though I suppose there's few here who know what it is I truly believe anymore.

I don't sell the work short, however. In this particular case, it strikes me as more akin to agreeing to jump at the first glimmer of turbulence in the flight before having ever been handed the parachute. I could, were I so inclined, use the occasion of a funeral to really drive several points home relevant to Christian belief in an afterlife (pretending for a moment that I believed such things). Planting a seed, as mentioned, would be easily done with a little prudence, as the soil itself is already wet with tears and freshly turned for burial.

[Paprika]

My apologies to all those who interpreted my earlier post as an attack on their beliefs. This was not my intent. Clarification is in order.

I've reread the post. The criticism in my previous post is not relevant now, and I retract it.

[Christianbookworm]

Pascal's wager isn't really that good in that it just picks between two worldviews. So, better argument? Because quite a lot of arguments from both sides seem to be circular. Is it correct that both sides use arguments that only apply if their side is correct?

[Paprika]

Pascal's wager isn't really that good in that it just picks between two worldviews. So, better argument? Because quite a lot of arguments from both sides seem to be circular. Is it correct that both sides use arguments that only apply if their side is correct?

Not always. For example, any cosmological arguments can be marshalled for Islam or Judaism.

[Christianbookworm]

Not to mention, even the demons believe that God exists, so just being a theist is not good enough. Necessary but not sufficient?

[Anchor]

The OP relates an instantiation of Pascal's wager. My referenced post, in response to the OP, was not intended as a condemnation of non-YEC Christians, but rather as an instantiation of the general rebuttal to Pascal: What if you've chosen the wrong god? If one wishes to witness to atheists, one should be aware there are more gods than just the one within the ring. The choice is not merely whether to believe in Pascal's God, but in which god one should vest their belief. Choosing the wrong one could lead to disastrous consequences, as detailed.

I'm sure the OP would consider it a step in the right direction if the only victory claimed was that the atheist at least began to consider "which god?" rather than "no god".

[Christianbookworm]

Not to mention straw-god. Know who he is? The evil, sadistic god that some atheists think we believe in.

[Juvenal]

I'm sure the OP would consider it a step in the right direction if the only victory claimed was that the atheist at least began to consider "which god?" rather than "no god".

Not to mention straw-god. Know who he is? The evil, sadistic god that some atheists think we believe in.

Oh, I get it now. Y'all are trying to give examples on how not to witness to atheists. Well played.

[Christianbookworm]

Or we could agree to disagree and just point out the options. I'm sure you already know what they are.

[Cow Poke]

I'm sure the OP would consider it a step in the right direction if the only victory claimed was that the atheist at least began to consider "which god?" rather than "no god".

Well, yeah, but it was a little more interesting than that, in that the atheist in question had grown up as a Jew, so it's not only accepting that there IS "a God", but that Jesus was His son. Not an easy thing for a Jew to consider, let alone that God is "real". And, I guess part of my point was that I never had to "preach" to her, or argue the point -- I was simply "living the testimony", and she was starting to "get it".

[Christianbookworm]

Well, yeah, but it was a little more interesting than that, in that the atheist in question had grown up as a Jew, so it's not only accepting that there IS "a God", but that Jesus was His son. Not an easy thing for a Jew to consider, let alone that God is "real". And, I guess part of my point was that I never had to "preach" to her, or argue the point -- I was simply "living the testimony", and she was starting to "get it".

Yeah, wonder why they're so upset about that! It's almost like they want to convert us to atheism! (I'm kidding, unless that is what you atheists want.)

[Doug Shaver]

Yeah, wonder why they're so upset about that! It's almost like they want to convert us to atheism! (I'm kidding, unless that is what you atheists want.)

That is exactly what many atheists want, but I'm not among them. What I want to convert people to is the kind of thinking that made me an atheist. It doesn't always lead people to atheism. It usually does, but when it doesn't, I'm OK with that.

[Tassman]

Yeah, wonder why they're so upset about that! It's almost like they want to convert us to atheism! (I'm kidding, unless that is what you atheists want.)

I guess that some atheists have a missionary zeal. But my main concern is that religious values are not given priority in the legislature over and above the equal civil rights of all citizens.

[JohnnyP]

Pascal's wager isn't really that good in that it just picks between two worldviews. So, better argument? Because quite a lot of arguments from both sides seem to be circular. Is it correct that both sides use arguments that only apply if their side is correct?

The position on Pascal's Wager from an Annihilationist view such as mine is if you don't believe in God, no loss, you go into non-existence just as you believe. But why do so many atheists still complain that God is unfair to send them into a non-existence they already expect?

That's what I don't get. To me that shows an underlying belief in eternal life, and a jealousy that it is not given to them.