panelarrow

Atheist Tuesday: The Faith Clause

| 147 Comments

I felt it necessary at this time to re-post this article from a year ago since so many new and fresh atheists have joined in the cacophony of criticism toward me, this blog, and my faith. This is the Ultimate Answer for all those who would wonder why, why, do I believe. I’m almost certain it will fall short of the answers you are looking for, but that’s okay. If you’ve read this before, unbelieving friend, then I invite you to read it again.

I will never answer the majority of the questions unbelievers have about God, questions that deal with proof that God exists; to do so would violate the “faith clause” that is a condition of becoming a Christian.

This part of the contract, which guarantees that a person who repents of their sins and trusts in Christ for forgiveness will have eternal life and not go to Hell, is not found in the fine print but is actually boilerplate stuff.

Here is the “Faith Clause”:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. (Hebrews 11:6)

You see, this is a problem for the atheist. They want proof that God exists first. But  their demand to “Show thyself!” falls on deaf ears. God inserted that clause after the fall of Adam, after his disobedience to the terms and conditions of the original contract.

Back in that day, God spoke directly to Adam. They were tight. But Adam, even in his unique relationship to God, had a special clause in his contract, too:

“You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” (Genesis 2:16-17)

We know from the Bible that Adam violated the terms of the agreement sending the rest of the human race in a downward spiral of scum and villainy.

Now, for the most part, we no longer hear God’s voice audibly and he rarely shows himself visibly. Still, there are clues that he exists.

As Peter John Kreeft, Ph.D said, “And if that weren’t so, if there were something more or less than clues, it’s difficult for me to understand how we could really be free to make a choice about him. If we had absolute proof instead of clues, then you could no more deny God than you could deny the sun. If we had no evidence at all, you could never get there. God gives us just enough evidence so that those who want him can have him. Those who want to follow the clues will. “The Bible says, ‘Seek and you shall find.’ It doesn’t say everybody will find him; it doesn’t say nobody will find him. Some will find. Who? Those who seek. Those whose hearts are set on finding him and who follow the clues.”*

Then according to the response of the individual to those clues he will make himself known. After that we must fulfill our obligations to the further tenets of the Faith Clause.

We live by faith, not by sight. (2 Corinthians 5:7)

Now, hear this all you non-believers who demand proof! Read these words of Jesus who spoke them to the hypocrites of his day, too:

“A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign [proof]! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.  The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now one greater than Solomon is here.

Are you now ready to sign your life away?

Because you already have.

*****

*Peter John Kreeft Ph.D quote from “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel, P.40, paperback edition.

Now read my article “Damning Proof” to understand why people would still go to Hell anyway if proof were provided.

147 Comments

  1. Aw, now, Stormpuppets. I’m sorry I’m not formal enough for you. But frankly, since I’m pretty sure I’m older than either Stevie or Richie, they should be offering me more respect. (1 Peter 5:5, Leviticus 19:32) But since “Mr Cynic” would just be silly, I figure we can just give the whole thing a rest.

    Richie – well, estimates vary. The Catholics have slightly different numbers than what I’ve seen, as does this guy, but I’m flexible. Since the earliest known fragments of the work are primarily 3rd Century and every other date is an estimate, I’m feeling pretty good about my rough call on it.

  2. Hi Richard,

    Any reason why I should believe the Bible instead of the Quran?

    Any reason why I should believe what you say instead of what a Muslim says?

  3. When the atheist realizes that his opponent has a stronger position, the atheist must revert to name calling and general incivility in order to save face.

  4. To the unbeliever:

    As you have conceded the fact that you are living in sin.

    Now repent and believe the gospel.

  5. These nonbelievers keep asking the same old questions. No answer will satisfy these folks.

    The atheists ask:

    “Why shouldn’t I believe in Allah?”
    “Why isn’t the Quran true?”
    “Why shouldn’t I pray to Zeus?”
    “Why shouldn’t I become Amish?”
    “What’s in Area 51?”
    “How come I’m not happy?”
    “Why is Richard Dawkins so handsome?”

    The questions are just a means for them to argue. Christians cannot answer their questions in a way that satisfies them. They don’t want answers they just want to feel justified in their belief that Christianity and Christians are irrational people.

  6. Well, actually, Stormpuppets, only the first 3 are valid questions that you guys have no answers for. As for the last 4, I am pretty happy, Richard Dawkins really doesn’t do it for me, I like modern conveniences too much, and Area 51 is just an advanced aircraft test site.

  7. Richard wrote:

    As you have conceded the fact that you are living in sin.

    I don’t see where anyone conceded this. Please point it out?

    Stormpuppets wrote:

    The questions are just a means for them to argue. Christians cannot answer their questions in a way that satisfies them. They don’t want answers they just want to feel justified in their belief that Christianity and Christians are irrational people.

    And with this paragraph here you conclusively show that you have absolutely no idea why I ask these questions.

    In short, you’re completely wrong.

    I ask those questions because I honestly want to know Richard’s (or your) answers to them.

    And seriously, lay off the sockpuppets. It was old days ago.

  8. the atheist must revert to … general incivility in order to save face.

    Says the person who uses sock-puppets.

    I’ll say it once again: You don’t have a leg to stand on.

  9. Atheism requires its followers to argue with Christians at least one hour a day.

  10. And apparently Theism requires the use of stormpuppets to post snark on discsussion threads. And?

  11. Atheism requires its followers to argue with Christians at least one hour a day.

    While incorrect, I’ll take that over using sock-puppets any day.

    Did I mention that you don’t have a leg to stand on?

  12. Atheists come on a blog and demand that their questions are answered. They get really angry when nobody takes the bait.

  13. And sadly no meaningful conversation is being had, this is why feeding the trolls is not recommended.

  14. FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLIDAY
    In Florida, an atheist created a case against the upcoming Easter and Passover Holy days. He hired an attorney to bring a discrimination case against Christians, Jews and observances of their holy days. The argument was that it was unfair that atheists had no such recognized days.
    The case was brought before a judge. After listening to the passionate presentation by the lawyer, the judge banged his gavel declaring,” Case dismissed!”
    The lawyer immediately stood objecting to the ruling saying, “Your honor, how can you possibly dismiss this case? The Christians have Christmas, Easter and others. The Jews have Passover, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, yet my Client and all other atheists have no such holidays.”
    The judge leaned forward in his chair saying, “But you do. Your client, counsel, is woefully ignorant.”
    The lawyer said, “Your Honor, we are unaware of any special observance or holiday for atheists.”
    The judge said, “The calendar says April 1st is April Fools Day. Psalm 14:1 states, ‘The fool says in his heart, there is no God.’ Thus, it is the opinion of this court, that if your client says there is no God, then he is a fool. Therefore, April 1st is his day. Court is adjourned.”
    HOORAY FOR THAT JUDGE

  15. What is up???

    Have the unbelieving atheists been defeated or are they sleeping or busy traveling or deeply thinking. Haven’t seen that many posts and was wondering what’s going on? Also one other question, do atheists only post on Christian blogs and sites or do they post on say Buddhists, Hindu, Muslim, or humanist sites? If so could you please post those sites that you frequent so I/people can monitor and post with you my fellow bloggers!!

    At noon Elijah began to taunt them. “Shout louder!” he said. “Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened.” So they shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed. Midday passed, and they continued their frantic prophesying until the time for the evening sacrifice. But there was no response, no one answered, no one paid attention. 1Kings 18:27-29

    At the time of sacrifice, the prophet Elijah stepped forward and prayed: “LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. Answer me, LORD, answer me, so these people will know that you, LORD, are God, and that you are turning their hearts back again.”

    Then the fire of the LORD fell and burned up the sacrifice, the wood, the stones and the soil, and also licked up the water in the trench.

    When all the people saw this, they fell prostrate and cried, “The LORD—he is God! The LORD—he is God!”

    Then Elijah commanded them, “Seize the prophets of Baal. Don’t let anyone get away!” They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.
    1 Kings 18: 36-40

  16. Stormpuppets, I hope you don’t believe that such a thing ever actually happened.

  17. An Atheist Got PWNED got pwned.

    I’m not sure what to make of this.

    1 – You’re so gullible that you believe anything you hear/read as long as it reinforces your beliefs.

    2 – You know this is an urban legend but you don’t care, because it’s okay to spread falsehoods that others may take to be real if you think there’s somehow a ‘greater truth’ being supported by the lie.

  18. Question for Christians – When is it okay to spread lies?

  19. Happy 4th of July!

    Atheists I hope you have a wonderful day too.

    XOXO

    🙂

  20. Pingback: The Faith Card | Unreasonable Faith

  21. Happy 4th of July to my fellow countrymen!

    Can we all agree that it is wonderful that we live in a country where there is religious freedom, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press and freedom of speech?

    Can I get an Amen?

    🙂

  22. @Godfrey

    Another example of old testament love… God’s holy man immediantly executes people for the crime of being wrong about metaphysical claims. Lovely =)

  23. What an awesome story, Godfrey!

    You know, it’s funny. I saw a magician in Vegas do a remarkably similar trick. But that HAD to be coincidence, right?

    And incidentally, if you can show me a place in America that is majority Buddhists, Hindu, Muslim, or humanist – or, for that matter, anyone of any religion other than Christianity who is sincerely attempting to impose their religion on everybody else, you’d have a point.

    (And please – at the risk of setting up a strawman – don’t go into some meaningless rant about “sharia law is coming to Amurika!” that you saw on Glenn Beck or somewhere: those are laughably easy to debunk. You might even be able to do it yourself, if you actually looked at the issue.)

  24. Wow this was when you were really letting the sock puppet trolls run rampent.

    Always excellent examples of the fruit of the spirit.

    • All I see here is true things being said about atheists.

      • How exactly would you know if those things being said about atheists are true, Dog?

        From what I’ve read that you’ve written, your knowledge and understanding of atheists is dismal and skewed, like all the “hedonists” stuff you’ve written.

        Where exactly do you get your information on atheists? It doesn’t seem that you get it from personally interacting with any.

      • Personal interaction might lead to a real conversation and a real exchange of information and insights… these must be avoided!

  25. Ahhhh trolling… when one side concedes the argument and takes up the argument strategy of a child.

  26. There is a lot of wisdom being expressed on this thread. This thread should be renamed Atheism 101.

    Professor Sanchez I’m taking notes. Thanks for bringing this thread to everyone’s attention.

    • Are you honestly pretending that the endless trolling on display in this thread by Christian Sockpuppets displays Christianity in a good light?

      • BathTub,

        What you consider trolling, I’m positive almost everyone else considers people making comments that are true. There are a lot of gems in this thread. Instead of dismissing the comments shedding light on atheism you might want to consider if what is being written is true. I think it is.

      • Schmader,

        So that you understand what BathTub is specifically talking about: here’s the definition of “sockpuppets”.

        Do you now understand what BathTub is talking about regarding “trolling”?

        And no, the only people who think these comments are true are people who have never interacted with an atheist in real life, which I still find surprising; I interact with Christians, even born again Christians, every single day.

        That’s hardly “almost everyone else”.

        Just for my own edification, what do you use to determine that “what is being written [about atheists] is true”? What’s your basis?

      • Thanks Nohm for providing me with the definition of sockpuppets. Now are you certain what you call a sockpuppet is indeed a sockpuppet? I’m looking at these names and they all seem pretty legit to me. Take for instance “T.R. Ohl, atheist expert” sounds like a professional name to me.

        Nohm, I am reading through the comments above and I find myself nodding my head in agreement. Are any of these people around still? They seem to know what they are talking about.

      • Nohm says:

        “And no, the only people who think these comments are true are people who have never interacted with an atheist in real life, which I still find surprising; I interact with Christians, even born again Christians, every single day.”

        Nohm,

        Aren’t you doing failed mind reading? Maybe failed surmisering? I think that anyone who has spent any time with an atheist would probably believe 99 percent of the comments describing atheists in this post.

        Nohm says:

        “How exactly would you know if those things being said about atheists are true, Dog?

        From what I’ve read that you’ve written, your knowledge and understanding of atheists is dismal and skewed, like all the “hedonists” stuff you’ve written.”

        Nohm,

        I think most of the comments match reality so I conclude that they are true. My knowledge of atheists is not dismal and skewed. Can you have dismal knowledge? I’m not sure if dismal is the correct adjective. I knowledge of atheists has led me to believe that they live a dismal life. If that is what you meant then I agree.

        I know a lot of atheists and most of them live a hedonistic lifestyle. If you live for the flesh and not for the Spirit then you are a hedonist. If you live for the material and not for the spiritual than you are a hedonist. Since atheists don’t believe in a Holy Spirit or anything spiritual then they are by default hedonists.

      • Schmader wrote: “Take for instance “T.R. Ohl, atheist expert” sounds like a professional name to me.

        Okay, you got me. For the record, I find it to be annoying when someone does a Poe.

  27. Hi Donald “The Dog”,

    You wrote:

    Nohm says:

    “And no, the only people who think these comments are true are people who have never interacted with an atheist in real life, which I still find surprising; I interact with Christians, even born again Christians, every single day.”

    Nohm,

    Aren’t you doing failed mind reading?

    No, because I’m not telling you what you think. I’m simply questioning, as I have before, how often you interact with atheists. I’ve asked this before, and I’ll ask it again, how and where do you usually interact with atheists? Is it while you’re doing evangelism? Are these people that you know personally as friends or family members? Or are these just people you talk to online? I ask because my bet is that it is the latter, which would result in a warped opinion.

    Maybe failed surmisering?

    Maybe. I think my main problem was my use of the word “never”, which I shouldn’t have used. I don’t think it’s failed “surmisering” because I’ve read everything you’ve written about atheists here on Steve’s blog, and none (or, at least, almost none) of your comments match any of the atheists that I personally know.

    I think that anyone who has spent any time with an atheist would probably believe 99 percent of the comments describing atheists in this post.

    I completely and utterly disagree, especially since some of the comments were written by sockpuppets specifically to get a rise out of the atheists here.

    I mean, c’mon, “T.R. Ohl”? Really?

    Nohm says:

    “How exactly would you know if those things being said about atheists are true, Dog?

    From what I’ve read that you’ve written, your knowledge and understanding of atheists is dismal and skewed, like all the “hedonists” stuff you’ve written.”

    Nohm,

    I think most of the comments match reality so I conclude that they are true.

    So, again I ask, why would you think the comments match reality? Just who are these atheists you deal with in reality? Where do you interact with them? What’s the context?

    My knowledge of atheists is not dismal and skewed.

    It certainly appears to me that it is. What you’ve written about atheists does not match the vast majority of atheists that I personally know.

    Hence, my continued questions of where, how, and so on.

    Can you have dismal knowledge?

    Definitely. For example, my knowledge of motorcycles is dismal. Also, my knowledge of ice hockey rules is pretty dismal.

    I’m not sure if dismal is the correct adjective.

    It may not be the best adjective, but it’s correct. One of the definitions of “dismal” is: “characterized by ineptness or lack of skill, competence, effectiveness”.

    I agree that I could have picked a better adjective. How about “lacking”? Or “erroneously skewed”? Or “horrible”?

    I knowledge of atheists has led me to believe that they live a dismal life. If that is what you meant then I agree.

    For the record, I don’t believe that I live a dismal life. So, there.

    I know a lot of atheists

    For the record, I don’t believe you. But, as you can see, I would love to hear more about how you know a lot of atheists. Where do you meet them? How do you know them?

    and most of them live a hedonistic lifestyle.

    I disagree, but I thought you were using a standard definition for “hedonistic”, instead of some made-up one, like you’re Humpty Dumpty from Alice in Wonderland (“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” ). I find it strange that you question my use of the word “dismal”, and then later in your comment simply make up your own definition for “hedonistic”, which exists in no dictionary that I know of.

    If you live for the flesh and not for the Spirit then you are a hedonist.

    False dichotomy, and you’re making up your own definition for “hedonist”. If you’re going to make up definitions, you might as well just make up new words while you’re at it, to spare us the confusion.

    If you live for the material and not for the spiritual than you are a hedonist.

    Yet again, this is a false dichotomy and you’re still making up your own definition for a word which already has a definition.

    Since atheists don’t believe in a Holy Spirit or anything spiritual then they are by default hedonists.

    And one last time with the false dichotomy and a made-up definition.

    Hedonist: a person whose life is devoted to the pursuit of pleasure and self-gratification.

    Note the words “devoted” and “pursuit of pleasure”. I am not devoted to the pursuit of pleasure, so therefore I am not a hedonist.

    If you only respond to one item in this comment, Donald, please explain where and how you interact with atheists. Thank you.

  28. Hi Guys!

    The article is interesting but unfortunately I met a few muslims who were giving the EXACT same reasoning but with the difference that their point was stronger for the Holy Quran! Good luck in trying to find more gullible souls for your religion of lies. May the truth and peace of Allah shine upon you..

    A new Muslim

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.