Jim – I have two questions that I would like to require you to respond fully to prior to continuing this discussion. They are appropriately highlighted. Please realize that my time is way to short to continue to engage this topic with the devotion I’ve shown of late. But please respond and be as helpful as possible, so that we might wrap up and find something productive from this endeavor.
You said
Your premise is false. The object of the atheist's faith is not "no gods exist."
Your claim is false, your statement is not true, my “premise” is not much more than an observation of the obvious and is accurate.
Jim says
What is the object of the atheist's faith? Identify that and you will understand my complaint against unbiblical argumentation.
That is about one vague question. (FYI you are often detailed to the ultra microscopic level if you are trying to debunk others, but if you are defending yourself, you get laid back and make wide-open statements.) That depends upon what angle you are contextually concerned with. If it’s about truth, then the object of their faith is a false faith, if it’s the nature of their claim, then the object of their claim is to deny that any supernatural God exists, if it’s concerning their sinful unrighteousness, then it’s their rebellion against the living God of the Bible, if the angle is about why they want a world without a God, then their object is to relieve themselves from their inextricable guilt. But please explain forthwith what you have on your mind on this issue. I do not have much time here, this is not a game, it’s not a dress rehearsal, say what it is that you have to say!
Jim said
The difference between idolators and atheists is that the former has a faith system and object of faith that they themselves affirm. The atheist denies this is true about them also, which is a lie. There is no such thing as a true atheist.
Jim, please give chapter and verse or even just a general bible implied teaching, where claiming to have a system of faith makes some sort of a moral difference between them, and those who have a system of faith but do not claim to have one. If both idolaters and atheists are lying to themselves about the truth of the God of the Bible, then who cares what form the lies come in? They are each deluded and fools for not believing in the true God. And again, you say that there is no such thing as a true atheist, but your reasoning does not support your claim, because God also teaches that the reality of idolaters faith does not exist, but God’s word says that idolaters and atheists both exist.
Jim, you sadly said.
No, the atheist claims to not have belief. He claims to not have faith. That is impossible, and to affirm the atheist's claim of not having faith is basically dishonest.
You know your opponent is on shaky grounds when he pulls something like this. Jim, a belief is a belief is a belief. If you say that atheists are non-believers, then we would not even know what they believe, or more particularly, what they do not believe. By definition, an atheist is that which “believes” that the answer to the question, is there a god, is no. And it doesn’t matter if they are mistaken about that belief, it’s still a belief, just as the bible says, the fool says in his heart, there is no God.
QUESTION 1
Is the following truth claim a statement of atheistic faith/belief?
There is no God.
Yes or No?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Jim said
What logical problem do you have with this? If I spend pages showing that evolution is false, does that affirm that it is actually true? Showing that the anti-theistic claim of having no faith is fallacious does not, by any stretch of the imagination, affirm the existence of true atheists.
that was your response after quoting me saying
And btw, that you even have a position of understanding on atheists denies your claim that atheists do not exist. You claim your position is based on God’s word, but at the same time you claim that atheists actually do not even exist, so your position on atheists, which has taken up pages and pages to describe and promote and defend, is according to your claim, all about something that does not even exist in the first place.(!)
I can’t believe you Jim, your response doesn’t even sound like it relates to my charge against you with the exception that you used the words God and atheist in your response. Your position is that atheists do not exist, you have judged against us Christians for even debating an atheist on the grounds that it is wrong for us to debate with an atheist because atheists do not exist. You see a tacit affirmation that they actually believe there is no God, and you disagree with that allowance, even though God gives it in the bible. But then you respond to that by your mish mash, I don’t even want to read it again, it gave me a headache just trying to figure out how you could get so twisted and off track from my point.
Jim says
I agree with you. Atheists do not exist. Anti-theists do.
When I see you in heaven, I will get to make you ware a large sign and I will paint your slogan on the top portion
Atheists do not exist, Anti-theists do.
But then, I will also add the following for the enlightened and curious onlookers.
:Help: Please poor water into this my cup and see how much water it holds. : )
Yep, you’ll be saying things like, do you server towels with your showers, and, I hate to be a wet blanket but, and, is it raining now, :rain: and, oh, a little water never hurt anyone. Etc. etc. etc. :crackup:
Jim says
Then refute the scriptures I've quoted.
I agreed with every scripture you’ve offered, you’ve not challenged by understanding of God’s word yet, but you have not even responded to God overtly addressing atheists and idolaters as such, which is in direct denial of your view.
Jim quoted me saying
God by His word refers to idolaters and atheists alike and you are wrong for claiming that it is wrong to do so.
and then said
You are wrong for saying that I claim it is wrong to do so. I do it myself. You need to get your story straight. Can you summarize what my objections to evidentialism are? That would help me to understand why you're not getting this.
You have done this many times, and most importantly in your opening presentation.
By pretending that Zakath is truly an atheist (really there is no such thing), by pretending that God has not already sufficiently revealed Himself to Zakath, by pretending that Zakath has not seen enough evidence to ascertain God's existence, and by pretending that Zakath can actually present a defense of his godless beliefs, Mr. Enyart has answered the fool according to his folly, thus becoming like him (Prov 26:4,5).
When Bob simply agreed to debate an “atheist”, you charge Bob with doing wrong for granting by simple reference that he is an atheist, since you believe that atheists do not exist even though God’s word also addresses the existence of atheists.
You have given me this same charge probably on several occasions and I would bet lunch that you have given this same charge perhaps dozens of times in this thread. Your position is that atheists do not exist because by your understanding it is impossible to be an atheist because God removed that option from mankind by His various forms of self-revelation, so for anyone to grant that a person is an atheist, is to deny your fundamental precept that stipulates that they do not exist. Now, here’s a test to see if I am right or not about my understanding of your view on this issue, answer the following.
Question 2
Do you believe that atheists really exist?
Yes or no?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
