IT IS FOOLISH TO DEBATE WITH AN ATHEIST
By: Robert T. Lee
Numerous atheists have invited or challenged me to debate with them about the existence of God. I always turn down such invitations. Such a debate is like them denying their own existence and me debating with them about their true existence. It is a waste of time trying to convince someone that they exist while they deliberately deny it. The debater becomes a greater fool than the denier. Atheists (fools) have said that there is no God (Psalms 14:1). But true Christians should never answer fools according to their folly (Proverbs 26:4-5).
Oh dear. Well Lee may think that will justify himself but we all know that he is actuallly not capable of a rational debate.
Evidence of God's existence is so overwhelming that it far, far exceeds any of the evidence any true Christian can present in a debate. Since the greater evidence is denied, there's no convincing by the lesser.
So something is so obvious, that it cannot be seen? Sorry, but there is no evidence of god or any evidence of a 'god effect'.
What is this overwhelming evidence? God has supplied all mankind with atleast two great witnesses of His existence. It is the existence of the vast HEAVENS and all therein and the EARTH and all hereon. These two contain more evidence than can ever be fully known and understood by man. Nothing that exists could have brought itself into being out of its none existence. The Almighty God had to therefore create it (Psalms 102:25; Genesis 1:1).
Many religions, in fact over half the world would beg to differ on that point.
Also, no part of God's creation can sustain itself apart from God sustaining it. God is the fountain and sustainer of all things (Colossians 1:16; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 11:12). So just the mere existence of the heavens and the earth is overwhelming proof of God's existence.
A slight break from fundamentalism here. You would have to be a complete idiot to deny the existence of other planets in this solar system, yet the bible makes no mention of them. Other suns? Other planetry systems? Interesting how a book that is *claimed* to be written by god should ignore the sheer vastness of the universe and the possibility of other life. Why, it didn't even mention dinosaurs!
But atheists discount this overwhelming proof while asking for proof. Since they deny the overwhelming evidence, much of which they can monitor through their senses and through technological innovations - their own existence included, no debate that presents the proof will convince them. Therefore it is utterly worthless for true Christians to debate with atheists about the existence of God.
Lee is obviously a man of strong faith. Yet he is unwilling to attempt to enlighten us heathens despite that Jesus in the bible tells him to. Pity.
Since atheists rejects the overwhelming evidence, we see proof that atheism is a deliberate rejection of the evidence and His existence. This clearly proves that atheism is not about proof and evidence, but is about rejecting the fundamental principles of life. Atheism's chief purpose of existence is to deny the existence of God in the midst of overwhelming proof. No atheist will admit these facts. But again, this is the nature of satanic atheism: to refuse to admit the truth.
No. Atheists do not refuse to admit the truth. They often seek the truth. Some will ridicule religion. Some have turned from religion for various reasons. Most have very strong moral convictions and are very outspoken when faced with bigotted statements.
Atheists do not have a purpose. Atheism is a religious stance, a philosophical viewpoint or a moral ground. All atheists are different and may not agree with my definition! We do not make it our life objective to destroy every religion! We have our own lives. For the most part our atheism is a non-event.
The day that christians refuse to debate with atheists is the day that they deny their faith.
BACK
I would like to make it clear that all texts by Mr Lee are not altered in any way to make my claims any stronger. Spelling mistakes are as they were in the originals. And the intellectual copyright for each article remains with Mr Lee