Another Response To An Atheist

Following is an article I created in response to an atheist gentleman who had publicly posted on a couple of my articles. His comments are in || brackets. May this be a blessing for you!

Welcome back, Vel! Glad we can continue our conversation on these important subjects. Let’s dig in, shall we?

//I put value on friendships. I don’t randomly claim strangers as my friend just to pretend I have lots of them.//

I am sure that your friends truly value your friendship. I believe in the axiom, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” which may sound familiar to you. I try to live by that. Fortunately for you, I will treat you as a friend. A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity (Proverbs 17:17). And faithful are the wounds of a friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful (Proverbs 27:6). I will give you the truth of God’s Word, even when you respond with hostility and bitterness.

//Again, nope, no evidence children know that there is a powerful creator, they only assume that. I do deal with the studies you present and I know that they don’t support your nonsense. Like most Christians you intentionally misrepresent them in your desperate need for evidence that your imaginary friend is real.//

“SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH on children’s developing minds and supernatural beliefs suggests that children normally and rapidly acquire minds that facilitate belief in supernatural agents. Particularly in the first year after birth, children distinguish between agents and nonagents, understanding agents as able to move themselves in purposeful ways to pursue goals. They are keen to find agency around them, even given scant evidence. Not long after their first birthday, babies appear to understand that agents, but not natural forces or ordinary objects, can create order out of disorder. Before children start school, they see the natural world as purposefully designed—even in ways that religious parents would not teach or endorse. This tendency to see function and purpose, plus an understanding that purpose and order come from minded beings, makes children likely to see natural phenomena as intentionally created. Who is the creator? Children know people are not good candidates. It must have been a god. Gods are not just humans with the ability to make mountains, trees, and butterflies, however. Early default assumptions about minded agents make it easy for children to understand gods as having full-access knowledge, superperception, superpower, immortality, and perhaps moral goodness. In fact, on some of these dimensions, children show the capability of reasoning in a theologically accurate way before being able to reason accurately about human beings on the same dimensions. This collection of religious ideas is among the features of what I call natural religion. In this chapter, I describe natural religion and also how it deviates from theological beliefs. Though children have strong natural tendencies toward religion generally, these tendencies do not inevitably propel them toward any one religion. They still have a lot to learn.” (Justin L. Barrett, Born Believers: The Science of Children’s Religious Belief, 135-136 (Kindle Edition): New York, NY: Free Press)

I await your response.


Are you capable of having a reasonable discussion without insult and childish behavior?

//Yep, eveyr theist claims that they alone have “proof” of their gods and every theist fails. Unfortunately for you, no, Christianity has no more evidence than the rest. I know other religions too, so I know how your claims fail yet again.//

Vel, I have noticed a continual theme in your responses. Despite the amount of evidences that I present, you continue to claim that there is no evidence and that everyone who disagrees with you is a mindless cult member and/or a liar. Just so you will have a clear record of the evidence, I will now present the evidence that I have presented that you continue to ignore.

1. The research of psychiatrist Justin Barnett which documents scientific findings over years of study that children have an understanding from the time that they are very young that there is a supernatural God.

2. The testimony of the famous world-renowned (former) atheist Antony Flew, and the logical reasons which he presented of why he turned his back on the foolishness of atheism.

3. The testimony of agnostic astronomer Robert Jastrow that at least three evidences-the motions of the galaxies, the laws of thermodynamics, and the life story of the stars-show that the universe had a beginning.

4. The details from John Blanchard focusing especially on the implications of the laws of thermodynamics and the origin of the universe.

5. The testimony of Dinesh D’Souza regarding the laws of thermodynamics and the origin of the universe.

6. The logical qualities of the uncaused First Cause derived from His Nature.

7. The “fine-tuning” of the universe attested to and documented by NASA scientist Leslie Wickman’s book.

8. The numerous quotations from Albert Einstein that there is a God.

9. The testimony of Ray Comfort regarding the complexity of DNA.

10. The testimony of Francis Collins (head of the Human Genome Project) regarding how the complexity of DNA clearly points to the existence of God.

11. The fact of objective and prescriptive morality, shown especially in how every culture shares the same basic morality regardless of religion or upbringing. Evidence was presented from C.S. Lewis and John Burke.

12. Evidence of the Incarnation of Christ Jesus into this world of sinful man (I will have more for you on that soon).

13. The logical response of Norman Geisler to the problem of evil, pain, and suffering which rightly points out that just because God has not acted in the way petulant humans demand on their timetable does not mean that God will not act in His time.

14. The December 9, 2004 Associated Press headline about Antony Flew’s status as a world-renowned atheist who abandoned atheism.

15. The testimony about Antony Flew from another (former) atheist scientist named John Kinson.

16. The testimony of the hostile Jewish rabbis from the first century attesting to the basic facts of Jesus, including His existence, miracles, crucifixion, and reported resurrection from the dead.

17. The testimony of former skeptic Gary Habermas who presented a total of 45 ancient sources outside of the New Testament which document the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth and some 129 facts facts of His life which also corroborates the historical reliability of the New Testament.

18. The testimony of former Muslim Nabeel Quereshi, who converted to Christianity after an intense study of the historical reliability of the New Testament and the identity of Jesus Christ.

19. The continual setting aside of the most basic and proven laws of logic and science (so far, the Law of Rationality, the Law of Causality, the Law of Identity, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the Law of Probability).

20. The testimony of Christian apologist, Thomas B. Warren, in his refutation of Flew’s atheism in ‘the debate of the century.’

21. The logical extrapolation from Paul Ferguson of the Nature of God based on the cosmological, teleological, and moral arguments.

22. The testimony of Michael Heiser regarding the alleged contradictions in the Bible regarding “God” and “the gods.”

23. The testimony of scholar Gleason L. Archer who discussed how a lifetime of study of alleged Bible contradictions led him to a firmer faith in the inspiration of the Bible as the Word of God.

24. The hundreds of scientists and organizations comprised of Christians who hold prestigious places in academia presented by (former) atheist scientist John Kinson.

25. The logical reasoning from William Lane Craig and Paul Copan discussing the foolishness of the proposition that “something can come from nothing.”

26. The testimony of several scientists who document the origin of the universe as presented by Gordon Leidner.

27. The testimony of (former) French atheist, Guillamue Bigon, regarding the origin of the universe (and especially of the Laws of Thermodynamics with this).

28. The examples of how an infinite regress would lead to an infinite number of contradictions which would make life impossible, as documented by Doug Powell.

29. The evidence of scientists like John Eccles and Roger Penfield in their demonstration of the existence of the human soul and the falsity of the doctrine of materialism, as documented by Dave Hunt.

30. The testimony of Josh McDowell dealing with alleged Bible contradictions.

31. The testimony of Stephen Joseph Williams regarding the amazing fine-tuning needed for life in our universe and how this screams of Divine design.

32. The testimony of Joe White with Nicholas Comminellis regarding the complexity of DNA and how there is a greater chance mathematically of a man jumping to the moon than for DNA evolving by chance (still waiting on you to jump to the moon to prove your atheism).

33. Still waiting for evidence of your claim that C.S. Lewis, Ray Comfort, Robert Jastrow, Garry Habermas, Lee Strobel, and Eben Alexander are all liars.

34. The testimony of famed scholar and informational statistician Werner Gitt acknowledging that DNA points to the existence of God.

35. The statistical impossibility of DNA evolving by chance and of spontaneous generation as documented by Joe White and Nicholas Comminellis.

36. The testimony of Antony Flew regarding how the scientific studies of DNA made a major contribution to his acknowledging that there is a God.

37. The testimony of J. Budziszewski regarding the existence of the moral law.

38. The testimony of Eben Alexander and Lee Strobel regarding materialism and near-death experiences.

39. The illustration presented by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli regarding the connection between human sin and suffering in our world.

40. The discourse of Timothy Keller regarding how the death of Jesus Christ presents a powerful response of God to the problem of evil, pain, and suffering.

41. The testimony of (former) atheist scientist, Mike McHargue, regarding the scientific evidences which played a powerful role in his rejection of atheism.

42. The testimony of Aldous Huxley, Watson, and More regarding how atheism is often embraced because of personal antagonism towards the God of Christian morality and His message of coming judgment.

43. The several articles shared regarding the supernatural unity of the Bible.

44. The several articles shared regarding the scientific foreknowledge of the Bible writers.

45. The several articles shared regarding archaeological confirmation of the Bible.

46. The testimony of Tacitus regarding the historicity of Jesus Christ and which also provides a powerful confirmation of the New Testament.

47. The testimony of McDowell and Wilson documenting the historical accuracy of Tacitus.

48. The testimony documenting the honorable and scholarly character of Gary Habermas in light of your allegations that he is a “liar.”

49. The testimony of (former) atheist, Lee Strobel, whose investigations led him to the conclusion that the Bible is true and Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

50. The testimony of (former) atheist J. Warner Wallace whose utilization of his skills as a recognized authority in cold-case homicides led him to the conclusion that the Gospels are historically reliable.

51. The testimony of (former) atheist J. Warner Wallace regarding the amazing testimony of Jesus Christ from ancient sources outside of the New Testament.

52. The testimony of (former) atheist J. Warner Wallace regarding the ways that alleged contradictions and errors within the Gospels are readily explained by things such as unintentional witness corroboration.

53. The documentation of how you twisted several Scriptures out of context to try and create contradictions in the Bible.

54. The testimony of Craig Keener presented by Lee Strobel regarding many documented miraculous events in the modern world connected with prayer in Jesus’ name.

Quite an impressive list of evidences and facts that you have ignored, Vel. Maybe you will address these matters?

Let’s look now at some of your new claims.

//Humans change religious teams constantly, so claiming someone converted from Islam to christnaity is no more impressive than a Christian converting to islam. Unfortunately, the prophecies made by both cults fail, despite the claims of the believers. There is no reason to think either “holy book” is from supernatural origins.//

Regarding prophecy and fulfillment, there are many examples of how this evidence may be used to demonstrate that the Bible is the Word of God. I will again share several articles for you to consider in your response, as well as for anyone else who is studying along with us.

Perhaps you would like to consider the evidence of prophecy in more detail? Let’s consider the testimony of famous professor, Peter Stoner.

“In the Old Testament, there are sixty major messianic prophecies and approximately 270 ramifications that were fulfilled in one person, Jesus Christ. It is helpful to look at all these predictions fulfilled in Christ as His “address.” You’ve probably never realize how important the details of your name and address are-and yet these details set you apart from the five billion other people who also inhabit this planet. With even greater detail, God wrote an address in history to single out His Son, the Messiah, the Savior of mankind, from anyone who has ever lived in history-past, present, or future. The specifics of this address can be found in the Old Testament, a document written over a period of a thousand years, which contains more than three hundred references to His coming. Using the science of probability, we find the chances of just forty-eight of these prophecies being fulfilled in one person to be right at one in 10157 (a one followed by 157 zeros!)…The following probabilities are taken from that book (Peter Stoner, Science Speaks, M.T.) to show that coincidence is ruled out by the science of probability. Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to just eight prophecies, “we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 1017.” That would be 1 in 100, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000. In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that…”we take 1017silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he mist pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote in their own wisdom. Now these prophecies were either given by the inspiration of God or the prophets just wrote them as they thought they should be. In such a case the prophets had just one chance in 1017 of having them come true in any man, but they all came true in Christ. This means that the fulfillment of these eight prophecies alone proves that God inspired the writing of these prophecies to a definiteness which lacks only one chance in 1017 of being absolute.” (Josh McDowell and Bill Wilson, A Ready Defense: The Best Of Josh McDowell, 210, 213; Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers)

Prophecy and fulfillment is one of the many evidences that the Bible is the Word of God.

//History doesn’t support either cult, with no one noticing the nonsense claimed in either. For both, there is no evidence for their claims, and evidence that entirely different things were happening at any date give by the believers.//

I have presented several evidences that demonstrate the historicity of the New Testament which you have thus far ignored. I will now give you some more.

“First, let me share with you the story of Sir William M. Ramsay (1851-1939), famed as the once-skeptical New Testament scholar and archaeologist who became a staunch believer in the historical accuracy of the New Testament. He was educated in Scotland (University of Aberdeen) erdeen) and England (Oxford University), during which time he became enamored with the extremely critical scholarship of the F. C. Baur school of Tubingen, Germany. As a result of this, in 1890, he embarked on a journey through the biblical lands in order to confirm the historical errors rors of the New Testament writers. To his great surprise, he found that, at point after point, archeological data and sound historical scholarship confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament authors, and he wrote several important volumes that are still used to this day.95 Subsequent scholarship over the last century has brought further confirmation to Ramsay’s writings.” (Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections To Jesus: Volume Four-New Testament Objections, 41 (Kindle Edition); Grand Rapids, Michigan; Baker Books)

Here is still more evidence of the historical reliability of Christianity, Vel. Will you address the intense research of Ramsay and his final embrace of Christianity due to what his research revealed about the historical factuality of the New Testament?

Or, will you add him to your list of alleged liars and mindless followers of “the cult?”

//Christians are also told that the bible hasn’t changed, and yet it has. Entire stories were added, like the nonsense about the adulterous woman. Christianity was very fluid with many different versions at the earliest points, confirmed by Paul’s tantrum about people teaching other than what he baselessly claimed as true.//

This demonstrates a misunderstanding of the textual transmission of the Bible manuscripts, Vel. There were not “entire stories” added to the New Testament. We know this for several reasons. First is the genuineness of the New Testament (i.e., the New Testament was written by its’ purported authors). Evidence of this may be marshaled from the superscript of the Gospels, the testimony of the church fathers, the early Gnostic sects, and the early enemies of Christianity. Second, evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament may be adduced from the credibility of its’ writers. Let me share the testimony of famed scholar, Simon Greenleaf, regarding the credibility of the Apostolic testimony found in and through the New Testament.

“The great truths which the apostles declared, were, that Christ had risen from the dead, and that only through repentance from sin, and faith in him, could men hope for salvation. This doctrine they asserted with one voice, everywhere, not only under the greatest discouragements, but in the face of the most appalling terrors that can be presented to the mind of man. Their master had recently perished as a malefactor, by the sentence of a public tribunal. His religion sought to overthrow the religions of the whole world. The laws of every country were against the teachings of his disciples. The interests and passions of all the rulers and great men in the world were against them. The fashion of the world was against them. Propagating this new faith, even in the most inoffensive and peaceful manner, they could expect nothing but contempt, opposition, revilings, bitter persecutions, stripes, imprisonments, torments and cruel deaths. Yet this faith they zealously did propagate; and all these [pg 026] miseries they endured undismayed, nay, rejoicing. As one after another was put to a miserable death, the survivors only prosecuted their work with increased vigour and resolution. The annals of military warfare afford scarcely an example of the like heroic constancy, patience and unblenching courage. They had every possible motive to review carefully the grounds of their faith, and the evidences of the great facts and truths which they asserted; and these motives were pressed upon their attention with the most melancholy and terrific frequency. It was therefore impossible that they could have persisted in affirming the truths they have narrated, had not Jesus actually risen from the dead, and had they not known this fact as certainly as they knew any other fact. 53”. (Simon Greenleaf, LL.D., An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists, by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. With an Account of the Trial of Jesus, 1356-1372 (Kindle Edition); A. Maxwell & Son, 32, Bell Yard, Lincoln’s Inn; W. Smith, 113, Fleet Street; Hodges & Smith, Dublin; T. & J. Clark, Edinburgh. England)

A third evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament may be included regarding the vast manuscript support that authenticates its’ transmission. Evidences may be brought forth from the Greek manuscripts, the early versions, and the testimony of the church fathers. Ask me for some of this, and I will provide you some more evidence for you to ignore.

Regarding the account of Jesus and the adulterous woman of John 8, the textual evidence is in support of its reliability.

“John 7: 53-8: 11 is omitted by the Westcott/ Hort, United Bible Societies, and Nestle Greek texts, by the American Standard Version, the New American Standard, the New International Version, and the Revised Standard Version. It is single-bracketed [of doubtful origin] in Today’s English Version. It is double-bracketed [extremely dubious inclusion] in the Common English Bible and the English Standard Version. It is included in the Textus Receptus, and the Majority Greek texts, and in the King James Version, the Living Bible and the New King James Version….The passage is found in twelve (12) uncial manuscripts [dating from the 6th through the 9th centuries] and thirty-five (35) minuscules [dating from the 9th through the 15th centuries], plus the majority of the Byzantine manuscripts, which are not included in the above count. This brings the count of manuscripts to more than nine hundred (900) which include the passage. The majority of the passage (8: 1-11 in one, and 8: 3-11 in the others) is found in six (6) lectionaries, though it is missing in the majority of lectionaries. However, this is not surprising since lectionaries only include select readings. The passage is found in fourteen (14) ancient versions [Syriac, Coptic, Old Latin, Armenian and Ethiopic–dating from the 2nd century to the 13th century]. Seven (7) early writers quote the passage [from the 3rd century to 430 a.d.]. It is interesting to note that from the 9th century on, the passage is firmly accepted on the evidence available. It waits until the 19th century to say the passage is fraudulent. The manuscript evidence, excluding the Byzantine texts (which comprise the vast majority–up to 95%–of manuscripts extant), is numerically seventy-five (75) to fifty (50) in favor of the inclusion of the passage. Once the testimony of the Byzantine texts is added, the result is more than nine hundred (900) manuscripts, plus versions, lectionaries, and early writers in favor of the passage….“Consider all the tests to which the text should be placed–and the answer is clear: the passage belongs in the New Testament. It is a part of the Gospel of John.” (Roderick Ross, Does It Belong in the New Testament?: Omissions from the New Testament (Preservation of the New Testament Book 1), 201-211 (Kindle Edition); Charleston, AR; Cobb Publishing)

//Sharia law is as silly as the nonsene of the commandments from Christians. //

I agree that Islam is irrational.

//No evidence for jesus, or the cruxifiction or the resurrection.//

The historicity of Jesus and His crucifixion have been documented and you have subsequently ignored such.

//Just claims in the bible and claims from Christians, no eyewitnesses, and curious how those 500 “witnesses” simply vanish after Paul make the claim about them.//

Regarding the resurrection of Jesus, I have already shared the testimony of several skeptics who were converted by the historical evidences of the New Testament and Jesus of Nazareth. Now I will share some more for you to chew on. The first evidences of the Resurrection of Christ that we could look at would be the Apostles of Jesus themselves.

Acts 2:32-This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses.

Acts 10:39-43-And we are witnesses of all things which He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, whom they killed by hanging on a tree. 40  Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, 41  not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42  And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead. 43  To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.”

1 John 1:1-3-That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life—. 2  the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3  that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.

What do you think of the testimony of the Apostles of Christ, Vel?

The second testimony of a former hater of Jesus Christ, who we know as Saul of Tarsus. Let’s see what he says of the matter.

Acts 22:1-16-Brethren and fathers, hear my defense before you now.” 2  And when they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, they kept all the more silent. Then he said: 3  “I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers’ law, and was zealous toward God as you all are today. 4  I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women, 5  as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished. 6  “Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me. 7  And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ 8  So I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ 9  “And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me. 10  So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.’ 11  And since I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of those who were with me, I came into Damascus. 12  “Then a certain Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good testimony with all the Jews who dwelt there, 13  came to me; and he stood and said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that same hour I looked up at him. 14  Then he said, ‘The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth. 15  For you will be His witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. 16  And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

What do you think of the testimony of the Apostle Paul, Vel?

The following excerpts are from a Jewish (former) agnostic who devoted his life to Christ because of the evidence of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. I will enjoy seeing how you respond to this testimony.

“Did Jesus rise from the dead? I still remember that fall evening back in 1997 when I attended my first Bible study. One of the Bible study’s leaders had read from 1 Corinthians where St. Paul stated emphatically that if Jesus never rose from the dead, then the Christian faith is in vain. At the time I self-identified as a Jewish agnostic. I was a skeptic. I listened attentively and I debated forcefully. I was convinced that nothing like what Christians claim concerning Jesus’ resurrection could actually have happened in reality.” (Jeffrey L. Morrow, Jesus’ Resurrection: A Jewish Convert Examines the Evidence (Principium Institute Historical Background to the Bible Book 1), 79-85 (Kindle Edition); Toledo, Ohio; Principium Institute)

“One of the pivotal moments was when my Bible study leaders arranged for me to participate as a panelist in an open forum debate on Christianity. I protested that I didn’t believe any of this stuff. They asked me to do it anyway, because I knew the arguments better than anyone available. In the end I agreed but only because I hoped that I might find someone in the audience who could help me disprove Christianity. So I presented the basic claims of Christianity, and I gave some of the more powerful arguments in its favor. There were a number of students present, from all different majors, including graduate students. At one point one of the graduate students shouted, “you’re only arguing this because you already believe in Christianity.” At which point, I shot back, “no I don’t, I’m Jewish and an agnostic. I don’t believe any of these, but I was hoping I could find somebody to help me shoot it down.” I didn’t dare add, “at this point, it seems the Christian arguments are most persuasive,” because I wasn’t ready to admit that to myself.” (Jeffrey L. Morrow, Jesus’ Resurrection: A Jewish Convert Examines the Evidence (Principium Institute Historical Background to the Bible Book 1), 169-174 (Kindle Edition); Toledo, Ohio; Principium Institute)

“The fact that Jesus’ followers believed Jesus had been raised bodily from the dead coupled with the fact that the tradition identifies women as the first to discover Jesus’ body missing, supports about as conclusively as anything in ancient history, that Jesus’ tomb was in fact empty. The fact of the burial and empty tomb, coupled with the numerous accounts of the actual appearances of the risen Jesus, make it likely that He rose from the dead. If we were to limit ourselves to historical investigations governed by the canons of modern historical inquiry, then we would have to conclude, along with the Jewish scholar Geza Vermes: “in the end, when every argument has been considered and weighed, the only conclusion acceptable to the historian must be that . . . the women who set out to pay their last respects to Jesus found to their consternation, not a body, but an empty tomb….The Orthodox Jewish historian of the New Testament, Pinchas Lapide, for one, eventually came to the conclusion, through studying the historical accounts offered in the Gospels in light of the historical evidence, that Jesus actually rose again from the dead. Lapide writes that, “I accept the resurrection of Easter Sunday not as an invention of the community of disciples, but as an historical event.”[116] Lapide never became a Christian, and he explicitly denied that Jesus was God or the Messiah, but he believed simply that, based upon the historical evidence, God raised Jesus from the dead.” (Jeffrey L. Morrow, Jesus’ Resurrection: A Jewish Convert Examines the Evidence (Principium Institute Historical Background to the Bible Book 1), 639-651 (Kindle Edition); Toledo, Ohio; Principium Institute)

What are your thoughts on Morrow’s investigation, Vel?

//Hilariously, both cults are based on nonsense. And both ignorant sets of believers claim tht their “truth” is worth dying for. Then of course, you lie and claim that people can only be sincere and earnest if they believe in your baseless nonsense. That’s what all cults claim too.//

The truth of Who Jesus is is most definitely worth dying for. I have suffered many hardships for Jesus and am still awed at His love and grace to me during my sufferings. Without His grace to sustain me, and His blessings during those times of trial, I never would have made it. I have no doubt that it is the prayers and support of my God -help given by Him through many different ways-that I am still alive and able to serve Him. Yet these sufferings are not a drop in the bucket compared to what Jesus willingly and lovingly endured for you and I at Calvary.

//No one is reading these posts other than us, dear.//

Perhaps, or perhaps not. Either way, the truth of God is being proclaimed and that is always cause for celebration.

//And funny how you have no evidence his cult is true nor that I am wrong. I’m still waiting for evidence for your god that isn’t the same nonsense than any cultist gives. I’ve debated Ray and I’ve debated you, and unsurprisingly, you both have nothing.//

Yes, I am sure that Ray found you as formidable an adversary as I have. I wonder if he also has a list of evidences that he presented to you which you ignored?

//I’m sure you are desperate for me to agree with you, dear. Most Christians are desperate for external validation sine they have no actual evidence for their god to support their claims.//

No, I am not desperate for you to agree with me. Sad for you, and also hopeful for your soul’s sake. But my validation comes from the Lord. He is the One that I want to please more than any other.

//Yep, there is a possibility of a god, but not yours.//

Glad you are still wise enough not to affirm the foolishness of atheism.

//So your desperate hope is crushed. You then do very typical Christian bit of nonsense, trying to pretend that if I am open to some “god”, then I must believe in yours or at least be simply agnostic about it. Nope, I am an atheist when it comes to the ignorant and petty christain god. Nope, it’s not foolish at all to know that your imaginary friend doesn’t exist since you have no evidence for it.//

You certainly sound more like an agnostic to me.

//It’s always so great to see christains lie about Anthony Flew, who was a deist, and didn’t believe in their lies. I do know that your god doesn’t exist. //

No lies were presented about Flew from me. Do you need to hear his testimony again? I know it is a torment to you, but let’s have it once more.

“Moving on now from the parable, it’s time for me to lay my cards on the table, to set out my own views and the reasons that support them. I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence. I believe that this universe’s intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God. I believe that life and reproduction originate in a divine Source. Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than a half century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from modern science. Science spotlights three dimensions of nature that point to God. The first is the fact that nature obeys laws. The second is the dimension of life, of intelligently organized and purpose-driven beings, which arose from matter. The third is the very existence of nature. But it is not science alone that has guided me. I have also been helped by a renewed study of the classical philosophical arguments. My departure from atheism was not occasioned by any new phenomenon or argument. Over the last two decades, my whole framework of thought has been in a state of migration. This was a consequence of my continuing assessment of the evidence of nature. When I finally came to recognize the existence of a God, it was not a paradigm shift, because my paradigm remains, as Plato in his Republic scripted his Socrates to insist: “We must follow the argument wherever it leads.” (Antony Flew & Roy Abraham Varghese, There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, 88-89 (Kindle Edition); New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishing Inc.)


“But the three items of evidence we have considered in this volume—the laws of nature, life with its teleological organization, and the existence of the universe—can only be explained in the light of an Intelligence that explains both its own existence and that of the world. Such a discovery of the Divine does not come through experiments and equations, but through an understanding of the structures they unveil and map. Now, all this might sound abstract and impersonal. How, it might be asked, do I as a person respond to the discovery of an ultimate Reality that is an omnipresent and omniscient Spirit? I must say again that the journey to my discovery of the Divine has thus far been a pilgrimage of reason. I have followed the argument where it has led me. And it has led me to accept the existence of a self-existent, immutable, immaterial, omnipotent, and omniscient Being.” (Antony Flew & Roy Abraham Varghese, There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, 155 (Kindle Edition); New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishing Inc.)

No one is claiming that Flew became a Christian. Instead, we are pointing out what he himself said: there is a God!

//And poor Warren is just lying like you do. Your god isn’t some vague nonsense under a rock on another planet. And that’s all this claim of agnosticism gets to. Repeating Flew’s argument for a vague god doesn’t show your god exists. Repeating a baseless lie doesn’t make it true.//

Answered in detail.

//That that are natural laws is no evidence for any god. They simply may just be. That life arose is also no evidence for any gods, it again may be just what natural laws do, which can be just as “eternal” as any god.//

For those reading these exchanges, please notice again the way that logic and reason are set aside by self-proclaimed atheists in order to hold their worldview. We have noticed how according to atheism:

The universe somehow just popped into existence out of nothingness…without the only Cause sufficient to make it (i.e., God);

The fine-tuning of the universe is somehow just right…without a Fine-Tuner;

The DNA code just sprang up….without a Programmer;

The moral code just came about….without the Moral God;

And now…

Natural laws exist….without a need for the Lawgiver!

Vel, you are doing such a wonderful job making my case for me.

//And gee, every cult claims that the existence of the universe is evidence for their particular god and still no evidence those gods exist or are creators. It’s great that you think such baseless nonsense is a great argument for your imaginary friend. Funny how each of those “arguments’ can be used for any god.//

Actually, the implications that result from the cosmological, teleological, and moral arguments show us the falsehood of several religious tenants. What we learn from these arguments shows that atheism, polytheism, paganism, satanism, Wicca, Druidism, Islam, and other religious systems are not true.

//ROFL. And now you try to use a logical fallacy that more time will result in a different answer. Sorry dear, reality doesn’t work that way. Again, you try to appeal to authority when there is no authority to be had and no evidence.//

I actually presented mathematical evidence that demonstrates clearly how the complexity of the universe testifies of Divine design. In regular fashion, you ignored said testimony.

But let’s have some more evidence for you to ignore, shall we?

The following is from (former) atheist, Ralph Muncaster, who carefully examined the mathematics of the things we are discussing. His work is especially intriguing since he was a recognized expert in the field of statistical analysis

“Incredible! The odds of winning a typical state lottery with a single ticket are about 1 in 10 million, or one in 107. So the odds of assembling simply the correct molecular orientation for the first bacterium (using a very conservative number of base pairs and amino acids) would be like winning more than 43 million state lotteries in a row with the purchase of a single ticket for each! Just to write that number down would fill 100 encyclopedia-sized books and would take almost ten years, if you wrote at a pace of a digit a second…“…Just for a single cell to appear, infinity would be necessary. And this presumes there is some natural means to add life to basic matter (“spontaneous generation”). This is something that has never been observed, nor do human beings have the slightest idea of how to add life to matter. So even if there had been infinite time to allow the first cell to be put together, we know of no way that evolution could bring such a cell alive. And in the absence of a naturalistic theory that relies upon random chance, the only alternative is some form of intelligent design-supernatural creation-or what is commonly defined as “God.” (Ralph Muncaster, A Skeptic’s Search For God: Convincing Evidence For His Existence, 98, 109; Eugene, Oregon; Harvest House Publishers; emphasis added)

//Funny how it seems you don’t believe in multiple gods, despite the claim you do. I know what context is and gee, one more set of nonsense from a Christian who tries to lie to me about his bible. No, the term god doesn’t have different meanings, so again you fail in your lies. In the bible the same term of god that this imaginary friend of yours uses to describe itself is the same as used for other gods. And again the cosmological argument never gets to your imaginary friend. Quoting more baseless claims from Christians doesn’t make your, or their lies, true. It’s great to see christains being hilariously deceitful in their circular argument of “god is necessary, and as defined, only our god is necessary”. No evidence of your petty god being timeless, “non-spatial”, personal, unimaginably powerful, supremely intelligent, etc. Per the bible, this god is an idiot, unable to figure out the most basic things like “keep the snake out”. No evidence your god exists, much less created anything at all. No reason a pantheon can’t do what your god supposedly did.//

Addressed in full (and ignored by you).

//Unfortunately for you, infinities are weird things and yep, more than one infinity can exist, so Paul is simply lying.//

Paul dealt with the existence of an infinite regress?

Or did you mean Powell, the author I introduced whose examples of the impossibility of an infinite regress you also ignored?

So now we may add Doug Powell to your list of alleged liars?

//It’s also hilarious when christains think that if they can claim to be a lawyer, a former police officer, etc that makes their lies about their cult any more true. Yet another appeal to authority not earned.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//yep, your bible tells you all sorts of ridiculous things, like magic fruit exists, your god made humans amoral and Eve is the one who gave morality to humanity, that bird blood can cure skin diseases, and that large cities will vanish from the knowledge of men (funny how Tyre didn’t). Every cult has a lunatic imaginary friend that makes all sorts of baseless claims in their fairy tales.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//Yep, you were lying when you claimed to believe in many gods, with your attempt to claim that those gods weren’t “really” gods. Not one of those verses calls those angels and Nephilim “gods”.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//Harmonization is hilarious too. The lies told by Christians who pick and choose what they want to believe out of their bible, merrily changing words and lying about it. It’s no surprise you run to yet another lying Christian, Michael Heiser.//

So now we can also add Michael Heiser to your list of alleged liars? This really is tiresome, Vel. Do you have anything rational and of value to add to your discussion? You must really have had Ray Comfort and Gary Habermas trembling in fear of your powerful arguments against Christianity.

//Every ignorant cult claims their god is the “highest”, and gee, no evidence at all to support that. It’s also notable that christains themselves don’t agree on the nonsense Heiser invented. Yahweh is one invented bit of nonsense among many, depicted as a very needy creature who has to claim how much. better it is. Yep, as needy as Babylon and Nineveh. Unsurprisingly, it isn’t amazing when a chritsian simply makes up nonsense again. The contradictions still stand.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//Funny how there is no evidence in linguistics, archaeology or science to support Christian lies, so Archer fails within the first sentence of his nonsense. Nothing in any writings from Egypt, Sumer or Akkad support the bible. Unsurprisingly, neither you, nor he, can show these supposed references. Unsurprisnigly, it is nothing new to see a christian lie about my responses to their arguments. You keep sharing “testimonies” aka baseless nonsense and they all fail since the various “logical arguments’ never get to your god, dear. I have repeatedly explained how the cosmological, teleological and moral arguments for your imaginary friend fail. It’s curious that you seem to think your imaginary friend won’t notice these deliberate false claims about me.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//Then you try to pretend I’ve not read apologetics, have not studied the matter “carefully” and that I discount supposed “well known people” and their claims. I certainly do since I have shown how their claims fail. Well-known doesn’t’ mean their lies are true. Unsurprisingly, you cannot show that your claims are any better than the next theists, despite my request for you to do so.//

I don’t need to pretend that you have not studied apologetics. You have been thoroughly schooled here in several evidences of Christianity, and your response is the same: if people don’t agree with you, they are mindless members of “the cult” or just “liars.” You have nothing of substance: just bitterness and sarcasm.

//Again, you give yet more walls of text from someone who I don’t know, yet again trying to claim that if someone is famous, I should believe them.
Yep, plenty of Christians with advanced degrees, that doesn’t make their claims about their imaginary friend true. That’s no more than yet another appeal to authority. The American Scientific Affliiation is a invented organization to try to lie and claim that they are a scientific group when they are nothing more than a front for cultists of one type, Christians. The same holds with “Christians in Science”, “Christain medical fellowship”, etc but at least their names are honest. Again, nothing more than appeals to authority in your desperation to show your imaginary friend to exist. Scientists, doctors, lawyers, etc can all be cultits too. That’s the effect of compartmentalization.//

No appeals to authority here, Vel. Simple evidence from experts in their fields about how the evidences which they have studied and provided have demonstrated the truths of various aspects of theism and Christianity.

But why bother dealing with all that when you can just say everyone who doesn’t agree with you is a mindless cult member or liar?

To those who are reading along with this discussion: please notice that the position advocated by Vel is not a reflection of his weaknesses. It is rather a powerful demonstration of the weakness of the system. Vel is doing as well as any atheist could in trying to uphold his positions: and his failures are demonstrating clearly why Christianity is intellectually and evidentially superior to atheism.

//Eben Alexander is a well-knonw fraud with his lies about his “near death experience”. You see, I’ve read about him too. Cuirious how his claims don’t’ match with what the medical professionals who treated him know.//

Another liar?

Well, then I guess you wouldn’t mind me sharing some of his testimony here.

“As much as I’d grown up wanting to believe in God and Heaven and an afterlife, my decades in the rigorous scientific world of academic neurosurgery had profoundly called into question how such things could exist….In fact, I would have loved to have enjoyed some of it myself. The older I got, however, the less likely that seemed. Like an ocean wearing away a beach, over the years my scientific worldview gently but steadily undermined my ability to believe in something larger. Science seemed to be providing a steady onslaught of evidence that pushed our significance in the universe ever closer to zero. Belief would have been nice. But science is not concerned with what would be nice. It’s concerned with what is.” (Eben Alexander III M.D., Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Journey into the Afterlife, 34-35 (Kindle Edition); New York, NY; Simon & Schuster)

“On November 10, 2008, however, at age fifty-four, my luck seemed to run out. I was struck by a rare illness and thrown into a coma for seven days. During that time, my entire neocortex—the outer surface of the brain, the part that makes us human—was shut down. Inoperative. In essence, absent. When your brain is absent, you are absent, too. As a neurosurgeon, I’d heard many stories over the years of people who had strange experiences, usually after suffering cardiac arrest: stories of traveling to mysterious, wonderful landscapes; of talking to dead relatives—even of meeting God Himself. Wonderful stuff, no question. But all of it, in my opinion, was pure fantasy. What caused the otherworldly types of experiences that such people so often report? I didn’t claim to know, but I did know that they were brain-based. All of consciousness is. If you don’t have a working brain, you can’t be conscious. This is because the brain is the machine that produces consciousness in the first place. When the machine breaks down, consciousness stops. As vastly complicated and mysterious as the actual mechanics of brain processes are, in essence the matter is as simple as that. Pull the plug and the TV goes dead. The show is over, no matter how much you might have been enjoying it. Or so I would have told you before my own brain crashed. During my coma my brain wasn’t working improperly—it wasn’t working at all. I now believe that this might have been what was responsible for the depth and intensity of the near-death experience (NDE) that I myself underwent during it. Many of the NDEs reported happen when a person’s heart has shut down for a while. In those cases, the neocortex is temporarily inactivated, but generally not too damaged, provided that the flow of oxygenated blood is restored through cardiopulmonary resuscitation or reactivation of cardiac function within four minutes or so. But in my case, the neocortex was out of the picture. I was encountering the reality of a world of consciousness that existed completely free of the limitations of my physical brain. Mine was in some ways a perfect storm of near-death experiences. As a practicing neurosurgeon with decades of research and hands-on work in the operating room behind me, I was in a better-than-average position to judge not only the reality but also the implications of what happened to me. Those implications are tremendous beyond description. My experience showed me that the death of the body and the brain are not the end of consciousness, that human experience continues beyond the grave. More important, it continues under the gaze of a God who loves and cares about each one of us and about where the universe itself and all the beings within it are ultimately going.” (Eben Alexander III M.D., Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Journey into the Afterlife, 8-9 (Kindle Edition); New York, NY; Simon & Schuster)

Near death experiences provide another fascinating insight on the falsity of materialism.

//Asher is just one more creationist, and surprise, Christians can’t even agree about how this “creation” of theirs happened, each contradicting the others: young earth creationism, old earth creationism, theistic evolution, etc, all contradicting the next. They can’t all be true and no reason any are true, since none hve any evidence to support them.//

Differences of interpretation regarding old earth/young earth topics are irrelevant to the fact that logic and science demonstrate that there is an eternal God Who designed the universe.

//Neither Hawking nor Einstein believed in your god, so it’s just great when christains try to lie and use their words.//

Nobody said that Hawking or Einstein were Christians, Vel. Please stop dodging the issues here.

//Yep, they are mindless followers of a cult. That doesn’t prevent them from doing research. Again, look up psychological compartmentalization. Unsurprisingly, lots of jews are scientists, Muslims are scientists, and I’m sure you are convinced they are wrong in their religion.//

Getting tiresome, Vel.

//You seem to think “testimony” is evidence. Funny how you don’t’ accept it from other theists than your own cult. Again, you only hve an appeal to authority fallacy. Scienitsts have investigated Islam, etc and have found that to be true too. Does that mean those religions are as valid as yours?//

I have presented “testimony” of scientific evidences from experts in their respective fields which demonstrate that there is a God.

But hey, everyone who doesn’t agree with you is a mindless cult member or a liar, correct?

Friends, please notice again the absolute failure of atheism. In order to be an atheist, a person must set aside the laws of logic and science in order to hold to this worldview. Notice the contrast with Christianity, which is based upon words of “truth and reason” (Acts 26:25).

//Yep, I’m sure you stand with the baseless claims you’ve made. That doesn’t make it true and surprise, you can’t show that christainity isn’t a splintered contradictory mess with each claiming that their version is true, the opposite of rationality.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//As for the various logical argument for your god, you’ve presented the argument and again, your god isn’t required as I have repeatedly demonstrated. You keep on with the same baseless insistence that “omniscience, omnipotentence, etc” is needed for the universe. Again, show how and why these are required. All you have is presuppositions, dear. You assume that this god exists, you assume it has an “eternal nature”, and thus you assume it has certain qualities, that you have no idea if they are needed or not, but you must claim they are.//.

Answered in full (and ignored).

//We already know that something can come from nothing in physics. As always, the cultist must keep ignorant of actual science. Look up the Casimir Effect. Look up “Coherently amplifying photon production from vacuum with a dense cloud of accelerating photodetectors” by Hui Wang and Miles Blencowe, 10 June 2021, Communications Physics. DOI: 10.1038/s42005-021-00622-3”. Again, the ignorance your cult requires fails you. And of course, you tried to move the goalposts even before you got an answer. The example of a entire universe came from nothing is the one you are standing in right now. The same physics that allows your GPS to work, your computer to work says this is the case.//

Finally, something that we can look into!

The Casimir Effect is not actually an example of “something coming from nothing.” The “nothing” that these particles actually originate from come from something that is very real!

“Sometimes it is said that quantum physics furnishes an exception to premise (1), since on the sub-atomic level events are said to be uncaused. In the same way, certain theories of cosmic origins are interpreted as showing that the whole universe could have sprung into being out of the sub-atomic vacuum or even out of nothingness. Thus the universe is said to be the proverbial “free lunch.” This objection, however, is based on misunderstandings. In the first place, not all scientists agree that sub-atomic events are uncaused. A great many physicists today are quite dissatisfied with this view (the so-called Copenhagen Interpretation) of quantum physics and are exploring deterministic theories like that of David Bohm. Thus, quantum physics is not a proven exception to premise (1).36 Second, even on the traditional, indeterministic interpretation, particles do not come into being out of nothing. They arise as spontaneous fluctuations of the energy contained in the sub-atomic vacuum, which constitutes an indeterministic cause of their origination. Third, the same point can be made about theories of the origin of the universe out of a primordial vacuum. Popular magazine articles touting such theories as getting “something from nothing” simply do not understand that the vacuum is not nothing but is a sea of fluctuating energy endowed with a rich structure and subject to physical laws. Such models do not therefore involve a true origination ex nihilo.” (William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, 114 (Kindle Edition); Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books)

It is worth noting again that you cannot provide a single example of something coming from nothing: yet you want everyone to believe that this is how the universe came into existence. Your claim that the universe we are in came from nothing because we are here is the height of foolishness. The very universe that you appeal to and which began to exist has operational laws which show that it is impossible for something to come from nothing!

Why don’t we see things popping into existence out of nothingness if an entire universe can do that, Vel?

Friends, do you see the way that adherents of atheism readily throw out the laws of thought and science when these laws contradict the irrationality of atheism?

//Your argument from personal ignorance doesn’t mean something isn’t true. WLC and Copan, use the same thing as you do, depend on lies and ignorance. Funny how a universe isn’t a horse or an eskimo village. Nice to see how Christians often whine about false comparisons and then do it themselves.

Funny how scientific experiments show that WLC and Copan simply lie.

Again, you appeal to people who aren’t there, dear. Christianity isnt’ honoring anything at all, but only lying about reality. It’s agreat that you choose to lie again.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//The appeal to the first cause argument, yet again, fails since this god isnt’ needed. Lies about the laws of thermodynamics still fail since we don’t know if the universe is a closed system or not. As always, presuppositions that cannot be supported end up with claims that are false.//

I provided the testimony of several scientists who documented how several evidences (including the laws of thermodynamics) show that the universe had a beginning. Here are some more!

Please notice the qualifications of Jeremy Walker.

“Dr. Walter is head of the Engineering Analysis and Design Department within the Energy Science and Power Systems Division at the Applied Research Laboratory (ARL) at Pennsylvania State University. He holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering with highest distinction, an M.S. in mechanical engineering, and a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, all from Pennsylvania State University. He was a 1975 recipient of a prestigious National Science Foundation Fellowship, funding graduate study at the institution of his choice. At ARL, Dr. Walter has been the leader for a number of undersea propulsion development projects for the U.S. Navy. His research involves multi-disciplinary development and testing of advanced air-independent engines and thermal power systems for various autonomous undersea vehicles.” (John Ashton, In Six Days: Why Fifty Scientists Choose To Believe In Creation, 9 (Kindle Edition): Green Forest, AR: Master Books)

Now Vel, lets’ see what his studies of the laws of thermodynamics have revealed.

“The law of causality logically leads to the conclusion that human beings (an effect that has the qualities of life, intellect, emotion, and volition) should have a cause which is greater in quantity and qualitatively superior in life, intelligence, emotion, and will. In spite of such basic arguments, naturalistic evolution claims that the forces of nature and the passing of time are sufficient to produce the order and complexity of life without such a cause. Do the observed laws of nature support that claim? What is known about the general effects of the passing of time? The implications of the science of thermodynamics were instrumental in convincing this author that long periods of time are not only unnecessary, but also lethal to the theories of gradual and natural development of intelligent design. Applying the laws of thermodynamics, especially as they relate to fluid flows and the conversion of energy into useful work in heat engines, is an important part of mechanical engineering. However, the laws of thermodynamics (usually numbered zero through three) have broader and more philosophical implications that are relevant to the study of origins and the development of order and complexity. The four classic laws can be logically derived from fewer general principles, 3 but the discussion in this context will be limited to the classical first and second laws. The first law is one of conservation, and implies that the substance of the universe (matter and energy) is a constant. The second law additionally constrains the possible states that a given system can attain by a defined process, precluding perpetual motion machines and the spontaneous creation of the “availability” of energy. All real processes are shown to be “irreversible” by the implications of the second law, resulting in a decrease in energy available to effect further processes. Alternatively stated, real processes result in a net increase in the “entropy” of the universe, a property defined in thermodynamics as movement toward a final stable equilibrium where all processes cease. The implications of these two laws are profound. The first law states clearly that no matter or energy is currently being added to our universe, and the second law states that, given infinite time, the universe will come to final equilibrium, where no processes can occur. That final state has been described as a heat-death of the universe. Since that condition has not yet been reached, the universe must have a beginning.” (John Ashton, In Six Days: Why Fifty Scientists Choose To Believe In Creation, 13-15 (Kindle Edition): Green Forest, AR: Master Books)

//Funny how Jastrow can’t show a god is needed just like you. As I already stated “Thermodyamics fails since we have no idea if the universe is a closed system. Those laws only work in closed systems. The galaxies only show that space expands, no god needed, and the stars do have lifespans, again, no evidence a god is needed for that either.”//

Answered in full.

//Do show how any of these support your god. Jastrow can show a beginning. He cannot show a god is involved.//

Wow, so now Jastrow isn’t lying?

Which is it, Vel?

Was Jastrow lying, or wasn’t he?

//Gee, more baseless walls of quotes. And gee, the same appeal to authority to try to get this god to exist. I use the word ignorant for Christians since you are.//

Not baseless, only inconvenient for your worldview.

You can call me ignorant as often as you would like, Vel. I am hanging in this with you trying to reach you. I am also hopeful that others will be able to see the rationality of Christianity through this exchange.

//Yep, the universe apparently began, no evidence it was “created”//

Well, this is progress.

We now have you admitting that the universe began to exist. So you acknowledge the second premise of the cosmological argument, “The universe began to exist.”

Yet you maintain that the universe just somehow created itself out of nothingness. Pretty amazing that an entire universe can create itself out of nothingness, Vel, considering that you can’t provide even a single example of anything else in this entire universe creating itself out of nothingness.

I must point out again the irrationality of the atheist position. My apologetics professor used to tell us, “Men don’t turn against reason, until reason turns against men.”

You are making an excellent case of the truthfulness of his words, Vel.

//No need for a god shown. Funny now there was no light in the big bang, photons didn’t exist yet. So your bible fails too.//

You are again demonstrating your misunderstanding, Vel. The Bible is very clear that God Himself is light (1 John 1:5). The Bible does not say that light is a direct result of the sun. You actually remind of a humorous story from George DeHoff.

““All men once held with Sir Isaac Newton the idea that light is an emanation from the sun and other luminous bodies, but in recent years men think they have proved that light existed before the sun. There are many theories concerning light but all scientists are apparently agreed that light existed before the sun was made its governor. Since this was discovered, many pseudo-scientists have ridiculed the “old Bible idea that light comes from the sun.” While an undergraduate in college one of my professors explained his favorite theory of light and ended by saying, “Well, this completely upsets the old Bible idea that light comes from the sun. In fact it just proves that book to be out of date.” “Doctor Blank, where does the Bible say that light comes from the sun?” I asked. “Oh, I don’t know,” he replied. “Everybody knows it’s there.” At my insistence a Bible was brought and the professor read from the first chapter of Genesis: ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and God said, Let there be light and there was light…” He read on to verses 17 and 1S where God later made the sun, moon and stars to control this light and to act as our chronometers. Seeing that Moses was perfectly scientific, the learned doctor said, “Well, that makes a donkey out of me.” I agreed with him heartily but doubted the expediency of saying so at the time.” (George DeHoff, Why We Believe The Bible, 644-654 (Kindle Edition): McLoud, OK: Cobb Publishing)

//So again, your cult fails. Alas, you also now lie that I somehow can’t make up my mind. The universe that we have had a beginning, and the laws of thermodynamics don’t work as you try to claim. And gee, yet more lies and ignorance from cultists. The universe as we ese it will change and end as a cold dark place. As far as we know, it’ll still be here.//No evidence that your god never had a cause or exists. Again, nothing more than special pleading for an enity you can’t even show. As always, the baseless presupposition guarantees the argument will fail.//

Answered in full (and ignored).

//Meslier has a point (where and when does god come from), and his point, with the fact that if you are “outside of time” you have no idea when to start something, shows that this garbage bout a god fails. Cultists keep inventing baseless claims to excuse their failed claims.//

“God can be timeless prior to his creation of the universe, and then can be time-related (he bears a time-related relationship with the physical universe) once he has created the physical universe. So once he creates the universe, he can act in time (in the physical timeline of the universe).” (John M. Kinson, God & Atheist Objections: An ex-Atheist Scientist responds to 130+ Atheist Objections (God & Science Book 11), 12915 (Kindle Edition))

Vel, thank you again for the fascinating discussion. My prayer continues to be that you will see the truthfulness of Christianity and devote your life to Christ Jesus.

To everyone who has been reading this exchange: please consider these logical defenses of the Christian faith (1 Peter 3:15). Turn your life to the Son of God today by believing in Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:1-8), repenting of sin in your life (Luke 13:3), confessing Him (Acts 8:37), and being buried with Him in the waters of baptism (Romans 6:3-40).

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.

Leave a Reply

Powered by

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: