Atheist Tuesday: The Drowning Woman

Our evangelism teams preach the Gospel in many ways: from the tops of walls to inside elevators; at bus stops, inside restaurants, outside beer gardens, in front of the Department of Motor Vehicles and outside Social Security offices. “Why?” some would ask. In answer to that question, and in response to a few insults directed at me after posting two articles called “The Shaadaap! Game” and “Jerky Evangelism,” here’s my response.

A man was out sailing just off the coast of the Big Island when he saw what appeared to be a woman swimming next to her capsized catamaran.

“Are you okay?” he shouted as he slowly sailed by.

“I’m good,” she replied.

“You sure?” he asked again.

“I’m very good!” she assured him.

Having been a lifeguard for many years in Hawaii, he was not convinced. He noticed that she was not really swimming, but just trying to keep her head above water. He saw the strain on her face and the slight panic in her eyes. Anchoring his boat, the lifeguard dove in and made his way toward the oblivious—or self-deceived—woman. “I’m coming to save you,” he called out between the swells.

“I—told—you—I’m—good,” she sputtered, inhaling a mouthful of water.

“Don’t worry,” the lifeguard shouted, “I’m almost there.” He swam furiously, knowing there wasn’t much time before she disappeared beneath the waves.

He reached out to grab her arm but the excited woman batted it away. As he grabbed her roughly with both hands, she escaped his grip, flailed, then slapped at him. Tugging at her hair, he yanked once, pulling her toward him. He put her in a headlock, then tried pulling her to his vessel while swimming on his back.

The drowning woman continued to kick and scream; she hit and clawed in her fury, yet the lifeguard held on even more tightly. He still had her by the throat with one arm, the other holding her hair tightly.

He kicked and kicked and kicked until he pulled her—quite violently— into his craft. She then gouged at his eyes and bit him so hard he had to let go because of the pain.

Under the water she disappeared.

A fishing boat stopped near the sailboat to take in the drama. The fishermen watched the action play out and the rough treatment of the woman as the lifeguard struggled to save her. They watched the rescue, then the death.

After it was over, the crew heaped criticism after criticism upon the lifeguard. “You could have done that a whole lot better,” one suggested.

Another offered, “If you had been swimming alongside her until you got to know her better, she might have listened to you. Then you would have saved her.”

A pleasure cruiser full of  partiers pulled up alongside the sailboat. It’s drunken clients,  senseless and irrational also heaped scorn upon the lifeguard. “You were a real jerk the way you tried to save that lady,” one scolded.

“You were so rude!” another complained. “You should have just let her have her have own personal space.”

The lifeguard listened to everything the fishermen and drunkards said; he thoughtfully considered whether they indeed had a valid point. Then finally, exasperated, he uttered his defense: “I’m a lifeguard. I do what I can to save people.”

Now read an atheist’s response to my analogy called “The Relaxing Man” by clicking here.

Comments (136)

  1. Reply

    Great response Steve. Christians are lifeguards…. wonderful analogy. Reminds me of that ‘lifeguard’ song that Todd Friel plays every once and a while:

    “I am a lifeguard, at a surf beach… I am a surf beach lifeguard.
    I see people swimming, I see them drowning… but I do not help them no.
    Cause I think it’s their fault, that they’re in trouble… and anyways I hate getting wet.
    And what if they want to drown, don’t want to be saved… what if they call me a fanatic.
    There’s too many beaches, too many people drowning… if only I could devise a way of saving them all.
    Or even just one…
    I a lifeguard, at a surf beach… I am a surf beach lifeguard.
    I see people swimming, I see them drowning… but I do not help them… no.”

    As a Christian, I can easily convince myself that by bothering or disturbing or even just saying ‘hi’ to someone in the hopes of sharing the Gospel with them would just be rude, or invading their personal space. That’s a very fleshly feeling to have. But the problem is that I know for a fact that people are dying every day being sentenced to an eternity in Hell because of their sins against a Holy and Righteous God. These people know this in their heart, but they do a good job of pushing it way down inside them so it’s a faint little sound easy to ignore.

    It’s real simple. If I have any care for my fellow human being at all, I should do what I can to help them see their true state before God. Sure as a sinful human, I will make a bad call from time to time and approach somebody in a way that’s not right. I believe Steve has admitted this himself at times. But that doesn’t change the realities of the wrath of God.

    I care enough about others to be obedient to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ when He said to go out into all the world and make disciples. I have been given so much in my salvation… how can I not do what I can to tell others?

    I pray that all those who are not Christians who read this will never forget that we Christians reach out to you in creative ways because we want to see you in Heaven. It’s so Jesus will get the Glory for saving a sinner like you…. a sinner like me.

    And thank you Steve for continuing to encourage me with your blog. May God bless you for it. 🙂

    In Christ,
    -chris

  2. perdita

    Reply

    Gee, I never would have expected this comparison.

    I’m assuming the other fishermen are believers that disagree with you, so thanks for comparing me to the drunks.

    “I’m a lifeguard. I do what I can to save people.” But if your techniques are actually doing more harm then good, you better go back into training.

  3. Azou

    Reply

    Is it Bad Analogy Time?

    Your situation is so unrealistic it boggles the mind. Who criticizes a lifeguard after watching someone die? Not to mention that even WILLING people will thrash and kick while drowning. Even in Boy Scouts I learned to be cautious around a drowning person as panic sets in and they can easily hurt you unintentionally.

    And of course, we have evidence of what happens when humans do not get air in their lungs for a certain period of time. There’s not “Breather requires breath” argument that constitutes the best knowledge we have that drowning kills you. Nope, we have many documented examples of such along with good ‘ol science pokin’ around in our bodies and determining the needs of such via experimentation. No ancient books required. Circular logic not included.

    Least of all, the analogy isn’t accurate. To make it accurate, I would have to be minding my own business when water suddenly appears from anywhere and begins to drown me. But, in all fairness, we can apply this to any emergency, but each one of those will have that pesky evidence and science to back up why those situations ARE emergencies.

    To end this on a more serious note: jerky evangelism is simply rude. Jerky first aid CAN KILL PEOPLE. I learned even there that you shouldn’t mess with a person in serious trouble unless you have a good idea of what you’re doing. Get professional medical help and don’t mess with a seriously injured person. Your demand that we immediately help people personally could result in aggravating a problem or even putting you at risk of injuring.

    So, no surprise to anyone with a functional mind, the analogy is easily sent to Davy Jones’s Locker. It’s another appeal to fear and basic humanity in order to sell general evangelism goods (tracts, classes, etc.).

  4. Whateverman

    Reply

    How does this lifeguard analogy square with the sect of Christian Evangelism that preaches because that’s supposedly what God wants? They don’t preach out of a need to save people – they evangelize because the Bible tells them to.

    As a non-believer, it’s important to me that I identify the difference between people who are trying to help me because it actually helps ME from people who do the same because it helps THEM.

  5. Reply

    I suspect that the Good Analogy/Bad Analogy break down will fall along believers/non-believers line.

    Whateverman, I’ll address your concerns later.

    Azou, I think the analogy still hold up.

    Where’s ExPatMatt when we need him?

  6. Azou

    Reply

    Gee, Steve, thanks for the engaging rebuttal.

    Makes it easy on me, as I can say “Nuh-uh!” as an equally sharp response.

  7. Quasar

    Reply

    (Edited to make it more readable: please delete the original)

    From your perspective, the analogy is valid. You honestly believe there is a sea and that the women is drowning in it.

    From our perspective, we are sitting on a grassy field in the middle of a park casually reading a novel, when suddenly a car screetchs to a halt next to us, and a random guy in speedo’s and a lifeguard t-shirt leans out. He shouts “Are you okay?” in a very loud voice.

    “Um… yeah, we’re okay,” we reply somewhat nervously.

    “You sure?”

    “Yeah, we’re good,” we say, raising an eyebrow and putting the book down on the ground next to us.

    Suddenly, he dives out of the car in a perfect swan-dive. We watch in astonishment as he flails about on the grass, miming a breaststroke, screaming at us. “I’m coming to save you!” As his crazy random movements slowly bring him closer to us purely by accident, we lean away from him and say “I told you I’m good… what are you doing?”

    “Don’t worry, I’m almost there!” he shouts madly.

    Confused, and slightly worried by this weird behavior, we go to stand up, when the man grabs us by our hand. Shocked, we bat him away.

    The situation goes from bad to worse as the apparently insane man starts grabbing at us, pulling at our clothes. Slapping him away, we try to escape his clutches, only to have him grab us by our hair, put us into a painful headlock, and start dragging us towards the car.

    Now fearing for our life, we continue to struggle, kicking and screaming for help. The man continues to violently drag us towards the car, pulling us into the open door. Using the door to kick off, we manage to get a hand free and viciously gouge at his eyes, biting at the hand around our face as we do so.

    The man lets go, and we run some distance away from the car. A quick glance over our shoulder reveals he’s not watching us run: he’s sitting in the car staring at the ground in front of him with a sad and horrified expression on his face.

    Catching our breath, heart still racing and ready to run if the man makes any move towards us, we watch as a similar car pulls up next to the first. The passengers in this car frown at the man and start criticising.

    “You could have handled that a whole lot better,” one suggested.

    “Yeah. We find that if you talk to them for a bit, they don’t react so violently.”

    Watching in disbelief, we realise that these people are suggesting better ways to drag someone into their car. They must be some sort of cult, or criminal organisation. We back away, hoping not to attract their attention.

    Another car pulls up.

    “You’re a jerk!” shouts one of the passangers in the second car. “That was really rude. You should have left her alone!”

    ‘Rude?’ we think. ‘Are you kidding me! He assaulted me and tried to drag me into his car!’

    The guy who apparently thought he was a lifeguard listened with an exasperated look on his face, and appeared to give it some thought. We stood in the middle distance, heart still racing from the terrifying ordeal we had just endured, wondering what sort of drugs he was on and hoping someone sane had called the police by now. Finally, the lifeguard raised his head.

    “I’m a lifeguard. I do what I can to save people.”

  8. BathTub

    Reply

    Wouldn’t a more appropriate analogy be Dozens of lifeguards from different Organizations, and different departments from the same organizations all trying to convince a person standing in the middle of a meadow that they are actually downing and urgently need asistance, but only their particular department/Organization can provide exactly the right assistance to stop them from drowning in th meadow.

  9. perdita

    Reply

    Steve, it’s a bad analogy. Drowning has been observed. We understand the mechanics of drowning. We have been able to developed tactics and safety items to help avoid drowning. By studying what works and what doesn’t, we have also developed techniques and implements to help rescue a drowning victim. And although the person may be too panicked to know what is going on, observers can testify that indeed that person was drowning. This is all observable, demonstrable, measurable.

    Now, what do you have? You have no demonstrable evidence of Hell. You have no observable evidence of danger. Is this why you use loud, aggressive behavior? To hide that you’ve got nothing?

    The louder you yell and the more aggressive you are, the more often you will be repulsed or ignored as bad street theatre or just plain crazy. Is that what you’re going for? You and Carol have convinced me that you don’t care if your techniques work or not. We’re back to square one: The only reason for those aggressive tactics is because you want to be a jerk.

  10. Quasar

    Reply

    Bathtub’s example is more accurate to reality, but I wanted to follow Steves analogy to the letter: i.e. the exact same situation, simply seen from the perspective of the “drowning” woman. Also, how could I possibly resist the opportunity to put a character called Steve in speedo’s, executing a perfect swan dive out of a car seat and onto the ground? It could only be more perfect if he was wearing a cape!

    It’s Speedo Steve, come to save the day! *swan-dive* *face-plant*

  11. Reply

    I totally agree with Quasar on this one. He wrote: “From your perspective, the analogy is valid. You honestly believe there is a sea and that the women is drowning in it.”

    And I really love your analogy, too! Good job!

    Whateverman wrote: How does this lifeguard analogy square with the sect of Christian Evangelism that preaches because that’s supposedly what God wants? They don’t preach out of a need to save people – they evangelize because the Bible tells them to.

    As a non-believer, it’s important to me that I identify the difference between people who are trying to help me because it actually helps ME from people who do the same because it helps THEM.

    My response: You are correct that we evangelize because we are told to by God. We also cultivate compassion as we do it. I tell you this because I love you and your atheist friends.

  12. Thomas Moore

    Reply

    Overall great story Steve!!! I for one like the fire fighter one better that was an episode of the Way of the Master. Very convicting for me, may God help me grow in having more of a concern for the lost! God bless you pastor Steve!

    -Thomas Moore

  13. Azou

    Reply

    You have a really funny way of showing love considering your lazy non-answers and flimsy replies.

  14. Whateverman

    Reply

    But Steve, your analogy clearly states that the lifeguard’s job is to save people, regardless of whether they want to be saved or not. Yours (according to this conversation) is to evangelize. What does love have to do with it?

    It seems to me that you’re trying to make evangelism to be an act of love, but (according to this conversation) it’s not. It’s your obligation. Do life guards save people because they love the swimmers? No – they do it because it’s their job.

    Let’s be honest: you would evangelize regardless of what you felt about the person; you’d do it regardless of whether you were preventing them from dying or from getting to work on time. Correct? So where does this supposed cultivation of love and compassion come from?

    Lifeguards love their job, they don’t love the people they save. I don’t think you would say the same thing.

  15. Reply

    To Whateverman: I love the people and I love my job.

    And you are correct in this:

    Let’s be honest: you would evangelize regardless of what you felt about the person; you’d do it regardless of whether you were preventing them from dying or from getting to work on time. Correct?

    Great understanding on your part. That’s it!

  16. Brian Harris

    Reply

    Disrupting businesses “for the sake of the Gospel” builds walls of resistance to the Gospel. IF you can save some by reaching for the “low hanging Gospel fruit” then you should do this. Beware of undue attention to one’s self IF it is not required to share the Gospel. In my humble opinion steet preaching is honorable. Preaching inside of a business (when there are countless other unsaved OUTSIDE of that business that need saving) is counterproductive and unduly disruptive.

  17. Laura

    Reply

    I like the analogy Steve and I am grateful you are out there and because of your obedience God will use you to save who He wants saved. And who He wants saved is not up to us to decide who that is, we just have to be faithful to throw out the life line to anyone we can. God bless you brother.

  18. Nohm

    Reply

    I don’t really have much to say on this, that I haven’t already said, besides that I agree with BathTub’s and Quasar’s analogies.

  19. Reply

    Wow, haven’t been to your site in a while. You’ve got quite a following of hecklers. You might make Ray Comfort jealous. Keep it up, “pusher”. 🙂

  20. Nohm

    Reply

    So, given that you understand BathTub’s and Quasar’s analogies, what is the effective method to show us that we’re not actually in a meadow or a park, but that we are indeed drowning in the water?

    You believe we’re in water.

    We believe we’re in a park.

    How do you suggest handling that situation?

  21. Reply

    Anybody seen the movie The Guardian? I mean, these people (the Coast Guards) risk their own lives by saving another life no matter what race, religion or his philosophy is. They may even knock the person unconscious just to save that person’s life. They even train to do that sort of thing: knocking the person out, I mean really out, unconscious, or even bleeding… Now, I’m not suggesting doing the same when witnessing or starting up a ‘Knock Down Evangelism Course’ 🙂 But I’m suggesting you watch The Guardian though. And did I mention I love that movie? 🙂

    In response to the story, I would somehow like it if the lifeguard just knocked that arrogant lady out 🙂 She may not appreciate the lifeguard’s heroic act but one day, she will.

    In response to evangelism, I say ‘save others by snatching them out of the fire. And to others, show mercy mixed with fear, but hate their very clothes, stained by their sinful lusts -Jude 23.’ I believe that the only people who are really annoyed and offended are those who are confronted by their sin, no matter what race, religion or philosophy they believe in.

    Some don’t believe in God, Heaven or Hell because they don’t see it. I say confront them with their sin because it is REALLY evident in each of us. Then proclaim, and even shout to the rooftops that there is a way for men & women to be forgiven of their sins and it is through repentance and faith in Christ alone.

    “How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!” –Romans 10:15

    Thanks for the post Pastor Steve!

  22. Reply

    Azou said: To make it accurate, I would have to be minding my own business when water suddenly appears from anywhere and begins to drown me.

    That’s exactly the analogy that is used from the truth of the Flood:

    Matthew 7: 26: 26 “But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: 27 and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.”

    Matthew 24: 38-44: (Jesus speaking)38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and DID NOT KNOW until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. …43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44Therefore you also BE READY, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

    Hebrews 11: 7: 7 By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, gprepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

    You are divinely warned. Repent and believe the Gospel!

  23. dede

    Reply

    I don’t know how well versed some of you are in what Jesus had to say in the Book of Mark, chapter 4:1-12 but here is what He said…

    1Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3″Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times.”
    9Then Jesus said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

    10When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that,
    ” ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
    and ever hearing but never understanding;
    otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'[a]”

    13Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14The farmer sows the word. 15Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown.”

    Whether or not you believe this, we, followers of the Resurrected Jesus Christ, who is the Great I AM, do. The environment we live in is by no way eutopian therefore, you will encounter things that are not up to your standards. What one person may consider “jerky” evangelism may be the words of salvation to another.

    I live in L.A. It is one of the most diverse places to live. yet, in my twenty-six years here, i have encountered probably the most jerkiest of people (mostly but not exclusively on the freeways) to the most loving and kind.

    below are some of my snapshot responses about what you had to say.

    perdita said…
    But if your techniques are actually doing more harm then good, you better go back into training.

    me…
    as i said above, it’s in a forum like this that one can learn and hear the other persons concern on this subject. btw, we are doing something about it…there are evangelism bootcamps that help in how to get the message out. but remember, no one can control what a person does on his/her own.

    Azou said…
    So, no surprise to anyone with a functional mind, the analogy is easily sent to Davy Jones’s Locker. It’s another appeal to fear and basic humanity in order to sell general evangelism goods (tracts, classes, etc.).

    me…
    to your statement regarding appealing to fear. i don’t see this as you describe. For us evangelizing the Gospel, it a “warning” to stop and think about the conseqences of sin and the eternal ramifications.

    i buy tracts to help me get the Word out plus, steve and others have OFTEN made available FREE tract downloads. when i offer a trainging class, i DON’T charge any fee.

    Quasar said…
    ‘Rude?’ we think. ‘Are you kidding me! He assaulted me and tried to drag me into his car!’

    me…
    evangelism…yes, rude sometimes but “assaulted”? i know no evangelist who has physically assaulted anyone by sharing the Words of Life. this is clearly an exaggeration of the word. “and dragged me into his car” is NOT what we do. We don’t take people by force. you must be thinking of islam.

    Perdita said…
    Now, what do you have? You have no demonstrable evidence of Hell. You have no observable evidence of danger. Is this why you use loud, aggressive behavior? To hide that you’ve got nothing?

    The louder you yell and the more aggressive you are, the more often you will be repulsed or ignored as bad street theatre or just plain crazy. Is that what you’re going for? You and Carol have convinced me that you don’t care if your techniques work or not. We’re back to square one: The only reason for those aggressive tactics is because you want to be a jerk.

    me…
    we have all we need…the Scriptures. and although YOU may dismiss the messege, there are others in the crowd that are listening.

    as i’ve admitted to you…i’ve heared what you said about this subject but on the flip side even when i’ve kept an even keel, i’ve had someone thrust a crumbled up tract into my chest and countless name calling with the notorious one finger salute. so no matter how try to come across…the Gospel is an offense to those that are perishing.

    Azou said…
    You have a really funny way of showing love considering your lazy non-answers and flimsy replies.

    me…
    that fact that you don’t know steve personally makes this statement null. and your word descriptions and character assasination are childish. steve, husband, father, pastor of a church and evangelist, has a busy life. this blog is meant for the encouragement of the believers.

    Whateverman said…
    Lifeguards love their job, they don’t love the people they save. I don’t think you would say the same thing.

    me…
    you can not possible know the hearts of evangelizing Christians who not only love our jobs but love those we’re speaking to.

    Brian Harris said…
    Disrupting businesses “for the sake of the Gospel” builds walls of resistance to the Gospel. IF you can save some by reaching for the “low hanging Gospel fruit” then you should do this. Beware of undue attention to one’s self IF it is not required to share the Gospel. In my humble opinion steet preaching is honorable. Preaching inside of a business (when there are countless other unsaved OUTSIDE of that business that need saving) is counterproductive and unduly disruptive.

    me…
    point well taken! but, it’s not just the low lying fruit we should appeal to. we are mandated to just “go…and preach the Gospel”. it’s up to God, to work in the hearts and minds through the seeds of the “Good News”.

    and finally Laura said…
    I like the analogy Steve and I am grateful you are out there and because of your obedience God will use you to save who He wants saved. And who He wants saved is not up to us to decide who that is, we just have to be faithful to throw out the life line to anyone we can. God bless you brother.
    Whateverman said…
    They don’t preach out of a need to save people – they evangelize because the Bible tells them to.

    As a non-believer, it’s important to me that I identify the difference between people who are trying to help me because it actually helps ME from people who do the same because it helps THEM.

    me…
    i love the key words in laura’s comment…”life line”.

    have a great and wonderful day in the Lord.
    chao,

  24. Nohm

    Reply

    Gerry Modesto wrote: “I believe that the only people who are really annoyed and offended are those who are confronted by their sin

    You’d be wrong in believing that. We’re annoyed because it’s anti-social behavior, and you wouldn’t like it if a Muslim did it to you.

    Dru Morgan wrote: “hecklers

    You use that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  25. Nohm

    Reply

    ded wrote: “i’ve had someone thrust a crumbled up tract into my chest and countless name calling with the notorious one finger salute. so no matter how try to come across

    And how did it feel when those people acted in those anti-social ways?

    dede wrote: “the Gospel is an offense to those that are perishing.

    NO, dede, NO. Some people’s ways of presenting the Gospel is offensive.

    Granted, I can only speak for myself, but I definitely do not find the Gospel to be offensive.

    I just don’t find it believable.

  26. Nohm

    Reply

    Betty wrote: “You are divinely warned.

    No, I’m being warned by you. Unless you’re divine, I haven’t received a divine warning.

    The Quran says much of the same thing to you. Do you consider that to be a divine warning? Especially with all of the scientific miracles in that book! (Google “scientific miracles of the Quran” if you don’t know what I’m talking about)

  27. Reply

    Heckle: to harass (a public speaker, performer, etc.) with impertinent questions, gibes, or the like; badger.

    Synonyms: bait, provoke, needle, hector, hound.

    I think Dru knows exactly what it means.

  28. perdita

    Reply

    I know I’m being redundant, but I want to be very clear that my accusation is only toward some tactics that seem to be taught and endorsed here. From the outside looking in, it seems that overly aggressive and provocative behavior is being encouraged.

    dede: as i said above, it’s in a forum like this that one can learn and hear the other persons concern on this subject. btw, we are doing something about it…there are evangelism bootcamps that help in how to get the message out. but remember, no one can control what a person does on his/her own.

    It’s been an interesting conversation to follow. Whether you think I have a point or not, thank you for listening.

    dede: as i’ve admitted to you…i’ve heard what you said about this subject but on the flip side even when i’ve kept an even keel, i’ve had someone thrust a crumbled up tract into my chest and countless name calling with the notorious one finger salute. so no matter how try to come across…the Gospel is an offense to those that are perishing.

    dede, I’m sorry that happened to you. That behavior is inexcusable. You’ve been nothing but respectful towards me and I do listen to what you have to say.

  29. Reply

    Nohm wrote: “We’re annoyed because it’s anti-social behavior, and you wouldn’t like it if a Muslim did it to you.”

    Anti-social behaviour is any aggressive, intimidating or destructive activity that damages or destroys another person’s quality of life.

    Honestly, if a muslim, mormon, athiest or any professing Christian did that to me, I’ll be really annoyed.

    Should any of the above groups promote abortion, homosexuality, prostitution or any forms of immorality really lacks consideration for others and can cause damage to society, whether intentionally or through negligence. Now that’s anti-social.

    Preaching the Good News of God’s forgiveness of sins is considered pro-social behavior.

  30. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn Parker wrote: “I think Dru knows exactly what it means.

    I think you exaggerate.

  31. Nohm

    Reply

    Gerry wrote: “Preaching the Good News of God’s forgiveness of sins is considered pro-social behavior.

    Preaching it by interacting with a person’s property or by ignoring the person because you view your preaching as more important are both anti-social behaviors.

    I am incredibly curious, though, how you would support the claim that homosexuality “lacks consideration for others” and is anti-social.

    Do tell, please.

  32. Reply

    Nohm wrote: “I am incredibly curious, though, how you would support the claim that homosexuality “lacks consideration for others” and is anti-social.”

    It’s the group that promotes homosexuality, abortion or any forms of immorality that lacks consideration for others and can cause damage to the society.

    “Jesus said to his disciples, “Things that make people fall into sin are bound to happen, but how terrible for the one who makes them happen! It would be better for him if a large millstone were tied around his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.” -Luke 17:1-2

    “Surely you know that the wicked will not possess God’s kingdom. Do not fool yourselves; people who are immoral or who worship idols or are adulterers or homosexual perverts or who steal or are greedy or are drunkards or who slander others or are thieves – none of these will possess God’s Kingdom.” -1Cor.6:9-19

    “Law was introduced in order to increase wrongdoing; but where sin increased, God’s Grace increased much more. So then, just as sin ruled by means of death, so also God’s Grace rules by means of righteousness, leading us to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” -Romans 5:20-21

  33. Nohm

    Reply

    Gerry, nowhere in that did I see you explain how homosexuality “lacks consideration for others”.

    Please show how homosexuality “can cause damage to the society”.

  34. Nohm

    Reply

    In other news, as I asked before:

    So, given that you understand BathTub’s and Quasar’s analogies, what is the effective method to show us that we’re not actually in a meadow or a park, but that we are indeed drowning in the water?

    You believe we’re in water.

    We believe we’re in a park.

    How do you suggest handling that situation?

    Anyone?

    • Reply

      I’ll try… later. Time is very limited for me, though. It may be a few days, or next week. I really want to answer. Thanks!

  35. Phil

    Reply

    Thanks Steve, this is really cool. It really puts everything in perspecctive for us. Your webstie never fails to encourage me and one day I can hopefully join you and the team. Until then I will keep the evangalism ministry in my thoughts and prayers.
    keep up the good work 🙂

    Phil O’Connor

  36. SeedSowerJoy

    Reply

    Azou,

    Regarding your long first comment, I almost thought you would make an entire comment without bringing up / blaming it on the need to sell MORE tracts.

    If only you could get beyond that misconception about the motives of Pator Steve and Living Water.

  37. SeedSowerJoy

    Reply

    Laura,

    Regarding your comment that, it’s important to me that I identify the difference between people who are trying to help me because it helps ME from people who are trying to help me because it actually helps THEM.”

    How, exactly does Evangelizing “help” the person who is doing the evangelizing? Just FYI, we don’t earn “Brownie Points”or “Extra Credit” for doing it.

    We do it in obedience to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Chirst, because we love Him and choose to obey His commandments-even the ones that are unpopular with non-belivers. We do not seek the approval of “the world /society”. We don’t need it becaue we already have the approval of the One who matters-the One who gave us the gift of enternal life. We didn’t “earn” it by “doing good works”. It was a FREE GIFT we received by the grace of GOD.

  38. Nohm

    Reply

    I look forward to it, Steve.

    At the same time, I welcome anyone else to give their opinion on how to handle the situation.

  39. Reply

    Hey Virgil,

    Hey Phil, thanks for the encouragement, too!

    I liked what you wrote! Great job!

    C’mon Christians, I’d like you to take up Nohm’s challenge. He totally understands what I mean, but he just wants to see if we know what we mean. Remember, Nohm’s an atheist. And a reasonable one at that!

  40. Nohm

    Reply

    To remove the analogy from the “challenge” (although I wouldn’t call it that), and just be straightforward:

    You’re trying to save us non-believers from an eternity in Hell.

    We don’t believe that such a place exists.

    How do you suggest handling this situation?

  41. Reply

    Nohm says: “Gerry, nowhere in that did I see you explain how homosexuality “lacks consideration for others”.”

    I don’t have to Nohm, nor will I explain any further about it.

    Homosexuality is a sin just like abortion or lying…Funny though you keep on insisting about homosexuality but you never mention about abortion or any forms of immorality like: prostitution, pornography, masturbation, fornication or simply just having sexual thoughts with another person. They are all plain SIN which leads to death.

    If sin is really evident in the ‘clothes, stained by their sinful lusts (Jude 23)’ what use of us Christians not to warn people of the wrath of God that will soon fall upon those who DO these sinful things.

  42. Nohm

    Reply

    Gerry wrote: “I don’t have to Nohm, nor will I explain any further about it.

    Nicely done!

    Funny though you keep on insisting about homosexuality but you never mention about… [list of “sins” that I’m not talking about]”

    Maybe it’s because I think that a better argument (on your part) can be made for abortion, prostitution, or pornography, but not with regards to two women who love each other.

    So, not funny, but pragmatic. On one, I feel confident that you didn’t have an argument (and I was correct), while I could see actual reasons for some of the others.

    Well, until you mentioned masturbation, fornication, or sexual thoughts… not sure how you’d go about defending those being a “lack of consideration for others”, but I think you’d answer the same way you did re: homosexuality.

    If sin is really evident in the ‘clothes, stained by their sinful lusts (Jude 23)’ what use of us Christians not to warn people of the wrath of God that will soon fall upon those who DO these sinful things.

    Not sure when I ever argued against this… oh wait, I never did.

    I have never said that you, or any other evangelist, should not “warn people of the wrath of God”. I’ve only pointed out that “jerky” evangelism is counter-productive, and that you kinda have to have the other person buy into the whole “sin” thing before you can present them with the cure.

  43. Nohm

    Reply

    Gerry, as an aside, do you have an opinion on a way to handle the water/park issue?

    That’s a serious question; I’m not trying to “getcha”.

  44. Rachael

    Reply

    The analogy makes sense. We are trying to share the gospel and people refuse the Saviour. It is foolishness to them but only at their own detriment. They don’t realize that one day they will actually see the Living God. Except the bible says that no man can see God and live. He is a consuming fire. Without Christ, they will be consumed. Right now, non of this stuff seems every important, but on that day they will have wished they had more time and that they had listened and reached out to the Saviour. God is rich in mercy and still offers forgiveness to those who repent and call upon the Saviour.

  45. Reply

    Nohm says:
    “You’re trying to save us non-believers from an eternity in Hell.
    We don’t believe that such a place exists.
    How do you suggest handling this situation?”

    Preach the Gospel. It’s not our job to try to save you or make you believe. Salvation is of the Lord.

    “I WILL sprinkle clean water on you and make you clean from all your idols and everything else that has defiled you. I WILL give you a new heart and a new mind. I WILL take away your stubborn heart of stone and give you an obedient heart. I WILL put My Spirit in you and WILL see to it that you follow my laws and keep all the commands I have given you…You WILL be my people and I WILL be your God.” Ezekiel 36:25-28

    The moment God did that to you, is the moment you got ‘born-again’ or ‘born of water and the Spirit’ (John 3). And the very best thing about God’s work of salvation is this:

    “What I am going to do is not for the sake of you, but for the sake of My Holy Name, which you have disgraced in every country where you have gone.” Ezekiel 36:22

    Again Nohm, salvation is of the Lord.

  46. Nohm

    Reply

    To clarify, Gerry, I’m saying that a better argument can be made for “lacks consideration for others” for abortion, prostitution, and pornography.

    That’s why I focused on “homosexuality”, as it’s my opinion that no good argument can be made for how that “lacks consideration for others”.

    Also, I’m a non-believer, so please understand that the word “sin” is not meaningful to me. I understand that it’s meaningful to you, and I am not trying to make you think otherwise; I’m just asking that you understand that the word holds no weight for people like myself.

  47. Nicholas

    Reply

    As a new Christian, I am reluctant to offer any words of insight or wisdom, for I have no understanding of my own that is worthy of this forum, or any other for that matter. What I write, I pray, is not of my own accord, but from the Holy Spirit, whom our Lord Christ Jesus has baptized all Christians into, we who have been born not of the will of a man or woman, but the will of God, the “born-again.”
    When I say I am not worthy of this forum, I am not only speaking of my brothers and sisters in Christ, yet also of those who would call themselves non-believers, or even atheists. For there is no righteousness in me, my heart, my flesh were born into sin, I am wicked, and it is only through Christ who now lives in me that God may find me blameless, that His righteousness may flow through me, and that I am no longer condemned. I stand convicted, yet not condemned. And your righteousness, even that of the non-believer or atheist, far exceeds that of myself.
    Therefore, in response to Nohm’s eloquent situation, I will first reply in respect to the analogy, and then to the straightforward problem of the existence or non-existence of Hell.
    I submit that Nohm is accurate in his analogy. In point of fact, you, in the flesh (that is the human condition, born of the will of a man or woman to engage in sexual relations or in vitro fertilization, etc.), are in the park reading a book. Moreover, it is my sincerest hope that you may enjoy your book more than any other, or if you are not reading a book but playing frisbee, or walking your dog, or having a picnic with a loved one, that it is the best afternoon of your life, that no harm would befall you, and that you will be at peace. Even still, perhaps you are in the park picking up trash, recycling, getting people to sign petitions to save the rain forests, feeding the homeless, or any other manner of good will, I hope that this too brings you and those you impact a sense of peace, well-being or betterment. I only have three questions for you. The first has two parts. What are you reading about (or what are you doing)? The second part is much more profound- Why are you reading it (or doing what you are doing)?
    The next question, I pray, you will give considerable thought to- that you will be slow to answer. What will happen when the sun sets this glorious afternoon of yours in the park? When there are no more books for your to read, no one left to help, no rain forest that needs saving? (I know you realize I am speaking of your own death- we will all come to this end, atheist and Christian alike).
    As Christians, this is what we see when you see yourself in the park, we see and know that at any moment, it could be our last, that tomorrow is never promised. There is no manner of convincing that you are not in the park- because in all reason you are in the park. It’s was happens when you are no longer in the park that our concern is most profound. For Pastor Steve, his analogy is that you are in the sea, drowning, and this I think, is a metaphor, but the reality is that you are in the park- the sun shines on the righteous and the wicked. You may not see yourself as wicked, and I cannot speak about you either way; I only know that I am wicked. My wickedness is made evident through the Ten Commandments, without which I would not know how wicked I am. I have lied, stolen, used God’s name in vain, committed adultery, murder, idolatry, have had many gods before the One and Only God, been covetous, dishonored my parents, not kept the Sabbath day- all of God’s laws I have broken, and many I continue to break, and if I break one I have broken them all. There is no way I can keep these laws, I will always fall short and there is no way I can atone for these trespasses upon a Holy God. So what? You may say. There is no god… or at least not the way we Christians know Him… yet the wisdom of the wise is folly to the One true God, and only the fool says in his heart that there is no god. If all men, women and children told little white lies, or disobeyed God’s laws in the slightest, as we do, is it no wonder that things in this world have been so corrupt? It is not true Christianity that leads to children growing up with single parents or emotionally abusive homes, with alarming rates of depression, but a lack thereof. You may say that comparisons are not accurate, since divorce rates and other measures of “immorality” are comparable among atheists and Christians, or those who claim to be “spiritual.” Yes, perhaps as many as 80% of Americans would identify themselves as “christian,” yet how many are true Christians, practicing their faith, the faith given to them by God? I would not be surprised if you would be hard pressed to find a true Christian at many church services today, and I myself must be willing and eager to constantly examine my own life, spirit and behavior to be sure that I am living in that faith, living by faith. Since there were only two brothers murder has existed (Cain and Able according to the Bible). Morality to you or I may be very different without God, and how can we reconcile our own definitions? With the sword? A smart bomb? A gun? Civilized conversation? What if my morality does not permit me to be civilized with someone that offends what I believe to be true or threatens my safety?
    But let us speak plainly then for a moment as though I were an atheist or a non-believer- what does is matter if I keep the ten commandments, what does is matter if I tell a few lies, if only to spare someone’s feelings or prevent some harm, if I steal to feed my belly or that of someone else? If I curse God, my parents, envy my neighbor, commit adultery, and have pre-marital sex or lust in my heart for men or women? What does it matter if I don’t hurt anyone, am an upstanding member of society, a contributor to those around me, after all, there is no god, no hell, so what are all of these crazy Christians so concerned with… the Bible? A book written by men! Perhaps… and this is the lie I believed for 28 years… I exchanged the truth of the immortal God for a lie… and now my spirit, born of God’s will through the Holy Spirit, cries for the souls of all those who would die with this same exchange- especially since they do not believe they ever made it, and there is no way that I can do anything to save them, that is not in my power, it is God who gave you ears and eyes, it is He who can open them so that they hear and see, all we can do as Christians is attempt to plant the seeds and till the soil, but it is God who saves through grace, by faith in Christ Jesus, and this not of ourselves, but a gift from God, through which repentance is granted and trust and love in Christ Jesus may flow… but again you may say, I still don’t believe there is a god, only Christians, Muslims, Jews, Baha’i, and other “religions” believe in some god, so we as Christians are left right where we started… but here is the third question, and if you have read this far I hope this one you may answer as well: What if? I am a man plagued by this very simple question, and it is part of what God used to find me, for no matter how much I sought God, I did not find Him, for as I said before, I have no understanding, and what I write I do not write of my own accord, but I pray of the One who prepared it for me to do… So then, what if there is a God? Why would He write a book through men? What do we know of Alexander the Great? The Roman Empire? Babylon, or Egypt? Of the pharaohs? Would you say that we know them from writings? Hieroglyphs? Art? Artifacts? Would you believe anything that is not written down? Solely on word of mouth throughout the ages? What is that book you are reading in the park? A biography perhaps? Or would you believe only God Himself, and He must come down from His Holy Place and make Himself known to you… you see where I am going I am sure… and if He came again, would you or I honor Him and obey Him? Or would we too put Him to death for His righteousness? I am not so presumptuous that I would pretend to know, I have a hope, but in reality I too may have cried, “crucify him!” Perhaps you would not have, and for that, as I said before, your righteousness far exceeds my own…
    So then, if God chose to use our own communication mediums to teach us about Him in this day, a book, the Bible, what do I have to gain from reading it and applying it to my life? What parts of it should I apply? Whoa, some of it is pretty shocking, especially the Old Testament, and some of the New Testament teachings and commands. Well as Christians we read the Old Testament in light of the New Testament, so this gives us some framework for the application of all of the Judeo-Christian Bible. But again, what do we have to gain? In point of fact, as Christians, we are to be pitied above all men if Christ is not resurrected, if He is not the Living One, who was dead but lives forever and ever, Amen! We may stand to lose everything in this life, as true Christians, for the sake of Christ, to the Glory of God the Father. But what good is it to gain the whole world if only to lose our eternal soul? Is it not better to lose the world and gain an eternity in Heaven? Or is this selfish? Perhaps, only God knows our motives, if they are for His glory or our own, if we seek to work for His kingdom or only our own salvation. Are we as Christians only lobsters in a bucket? Well, perhaps, but I pray that I pray an earnest prayer when I pray that for the sake of you, for your salvation, it is better that I be cut off from the body of Christ. If this is in earnest, then perhaps true Christians are not out to only do for themselves, but for others, for the glory of God the Father in Christ Jesus. Again, you may say, I have no eternal soul, so it is of no value, or that life after death will have nothing to do with God, Heaven, or Hell, if any of these exist. Perhaps, and then at least one of us is wrong, the other may be right. Neither of us can prove the other wrong with any application of logic, reason, the scientific method, or philosophy; I think therefore I am may be our perception, and in death I will think and be no more.
    For argument sake let’s say there is a 50/50 chance that we do have an eternal soul that God will either judge to an eternity in Hell, or will find blameless in Christ Jesus to an eternity with Him in Heaven. In this life, chances are that the one judged to an eternity in Hell will live a great life, do many good things, and perhaps be a pillar of society, and the one found blameless in Christ Jesus may have led a pitied life, without the means to do many good things by worldly standards, or even an annoyance to society (the one found blameless may also be able to do some good things if God prepares them for him/her to do- atheists may not have a monopoly on philanthropy no?) So if there is this 50/50 chance, is it worth doing anything about? If I were to offer you a 50/50 chance of a million dollars or the loss of even one eye, would you take it? If I just said I would give you 10 million dollars outright for both your eyes, no need to flip a coin, would you take it? How about a million for a leg? Two legs for 10 million? If you answered no to any of these, and your eyes are simply what your soul looks out at the world through, and your legs the means through which the breath of your life (your soul) get around from this place to that- how much more valuable is the breath of life itself? Eternity is on all of our hearts, no matter how much we attempt to deny it, death may seem natural, but every living creature knows at its core that death is not natural, something to be avoided at all costs. All creation suffers because of the arrogance and disobedience, the sin, of men, women, and children. Yet we as true Christians would make a decision, for Christ, to go to our cross, if it is God’s will, for Christ’s sake, making a decision that only makes sense if there is a resurrection, if there is a Heaven, for the glory of God, only if we owe our very existence to the One true God, through our Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus, God in the flesh, the Living One, the Everlasting Father, Wonderful Counselor, who is, who was, and is to come, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last, God’s Son, the Son of Man…

  48. Reply

    Nohm,

    There is only one way given for us to handle this situation: preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You see, it is not my crafty arguments that can convince and save you. It is not my friendly smile, hand motions, scientific proof, magnetic personality, lifestyle, or anything else a person could do that can convince you.

    Jesus did not say “Go out and try to convince people”. Nor did He say “Go out and have debates about theological matters.” He said “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel”. The Gospel is this: you are a sinner and as such you have offended a Holy God. There is precisely one hope for you: Jesus Christ. You must repent of your sins and put your faith in God’s Son to save you.

    If you don’t do that you will not be saved. To answer your question most concisely: The Bible tells us that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe. That’s it.

    And so “how do we propose to save nonbelievers from an eternity in Hell?” We preach the Gospel. What if you don’t believe? We preach the Gospel. What if you still don’t believe? We preach the Gospel. What if you think we’re nuts for saying the same thing over and over and over and over? We preach the Gospel. What if we are the only ones around who believe what we believe and we might be killed if we mention Jesus one more time? We preach the Gospel.

    The reasons for this are: 1. We were told to do this. 2. There is no other hope for you. So it is really irrelevant whether you want to hear it or don’t believe it: there is no other hope for you.

    I can preempt any other questions about how a Christian plans to do anything at any time: preach the Gospel.

    The fact is you might not ever believe before you die. We still preach the Gospel. Some will be saved and some will not. It is not for us to decide and we do not think everyone will be saved but we will bring along every one that we possibly can.

    Glenn

  49. Nohm

    Reply

    Nicholas,

    That is an enormous wall of text. I appreciate the way in which you wrote it, though.

    Before I respond to it (and I will try to respond to the parts I find most important), please do the following:

    1. Find an atheist in your group of friends or family, and ask them these questions. It seems that you don’t actually understand an atheist’s reasons for disbelief. That’s fair and all; I’m just saying that it might help to learn about this information face-to-face, from someone that you know.

    2. Pleasepleaseplease google “Pascal’s Wager”, and read the problems with it. Your proposed situation is anything but “50/50”. Also, wouldn’t God realize that I was just trying to “hedge my bets”? There are multiple problems with this argument, but I think it’s better if you read through the issues on your own, instead of me blabbing about them on here.

    Regardless, I appreciate your reply.

    Thank you, and be well.

  50. Nohm

    Reply

    So then, Glenn, we’re back at square one:

    You believe that we’re drowning, or in the middle of a freeway with a truck driving right for us, or on a plane going down without a parachute.

    We believe that we’re in a park.

    So it is really irrelevant whether you want to hear it

    I have never claimed that I do not want to hear it. Please do not attempt to poison the well by saying this.

    My point is that, until you have a way of showing us that we’re not in a park, much less drowning, then your evangelism is not effective.

    I encourage you to preach the Gospel to your heart’s content. My point is that until you can deal with this divide, it’s not effective.

    It’s effective on backslidden Christians because they already believe that they’re in the water or the freeway or the plane.

    I’m not suggesting that you HAVE to have a solution; I’m just curious at what ideas people have for a solution. As I’ve said here many times, I would love to see evangelism that targets non-believers.

  51. Bizzle

    Reply

    Glenn Parker says: “The reasons for this are: 1. We were told to do this. 2. There is no other hope for you. So it is really irrelevant whether you want to hear it or don’t believe it: there is no other hope for you.”

    Glenn, without a doubt, that is what we believe.

    I do have to disagree with you on this:

    “What if you don’t believe? We preach the Gospel. What if you still don’t believe? We preach the Gospel. What if you think we’re nuts for saying the same thing over and over and over and over? We preach the Gospel.”

    We only need to preach it. We don’t have to beat someone over the head with it. Preach it. If they think we’re nuts, if they think they’re wrong, that’s their issue with God. Get the message out and move on.

    Now, if they ask questions or want to engage, certainly do that.

    The question that Nohm, perdita, Bathtub and others ask is “why should we believe there’s no other hope?” This is a problem I have with a lot of preaching and preachers. Yes we’re supposed to preach the Gospel. But they are not convinced OUR Gospel, or ANY for that matter, is correct. They need to be given a reason why. Just saying that’s what the Gospel says isn’t going to do it. I know I can’t do it, and so far it’s apparent no one on this board can. SOMEONE can, God has to give us the grace to find them. Is it our place? We can say it’s not. But to me, if I can’t give someone a reason why, then I feel I’ve not done my job. That’s why I don’t preach to them. I know I can’t convince them.

  52. perdita

    Reply

    The analogy makes sense. We are trying to share the gospel and people refuse the Savior. – Rachel

    Rachel, I don’t think there is any controversy over whether drowning actually happens or not. There is no evidence for Hell that compares to the evidence we have of drowning.

    Again Nohm, salvation is of the Lord. – Gerry Modesto

    If salvation is of the Lord, why choose to be a jerk? Does your God need you to be a jerk? I would hope not.

    You see, it is not my crafty arguments that can convince and save you. It is not my friendly smile, hand motions, scientific proof, magnetic personality, lifestyle, or anything else a person could do that can convince you. – Glenn Parker

    Great, if it’s not all that, then why choose belligerent, aggressive behavior when preaching? Why not just put the tracts on the car and not in the car? Why not hand out tracts inside the elevator, and preach outside? Why preach with the sole purpose of getting a “shaddup” from the masses?

  53. Nohm

    Reply

    Bizzle wrote: “Yes we’re supposed to preach the Gospel. But they are not convinced OUR Gospel, or ANY for that matter, is correct. They need to be given a reason why. Just saying that’s what the Gospel says isn’t going to do it.

    While there’s a bit more to my “challenge” (again, I don’t view it as such), I appreciate that you at least get part of it (and it’s possible that you understand the whole of it… I’m just speaking on what you’ve written).

    Thank you, Bizzle.

    Bizzle brings up another point: why should I believe you over the preaching of a Muslim? You’re both convinced that your holy books are divine, but I’m not. You’re both convinced that I’m in water, but I’m not. Yet you also both say that the other person is completely and utterly wrong, to the point that listening to the wrong person will keep me on the path to Hell.

    How do we, as non-believers, determine which is correct? How do we, as non-believers, realize that we’re drowning in water?

  54. Nicholas

    Reply

    Nohm, thank you for the speedy reply and the time you intend to spend addressing the points you find most important- my apologies for the poor formatting, it looked much better when I first pasted it in =), honest! I have been looking at Pascal’s wager and will address its problems once I have had some time to meditate in prayer on it. In terms of finding an atheist to ask these questions to, it is difficult for me among my family and friends- none would call themselves an “atheist.” But I will ask around. From experience so far many would say, “spriritual,” or undecided about God or any particular doctrine/religion (although even I am not religious in is general sense), but all would say they believe there is something or someone out there. For perspective, I am a medical student, 28 years old, and many of my friends and family would subscribe to Darwinian Evolution and the power of nature as their God, not believing God is a personal being, as Darwin himself never denied the existence of God, only denied a personal God. I also like Einstein’s perspectives as well:

    “I’m not an atheist and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.”
    —Albert Einstein

    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” -Albert Einstein

    Perhaps you would be willing to share your reasons for disbelief as an atheist? Could it be the problem of evil? I am eager to hear, and hope you may provide some insight in your response to my original post. I too will respond more fully to the problems with Pascal’s wager, and the “hedge my bets” problem in more detail, upon careful, prayerful, meditation on the Word.

    Glenn Parker,
    Well said, if we have not met, I hope that we may soon, your enthusiasm and obedience to Christ are inspiring!

    Bizzle,
    Your response to Glenn is very well put and thought out, and it has caused me great distress this afternoon. I will spend as much time as I may with this in prayer and in the Word, yet this may take some time, but know that your reply has not fallen on deaf ears.

    Thank you for this forum Pastor Steve! This is an amazing place to sharpen our swords- the Word of God!

    Alive to God in Christ,
    Nicholas

  55. Nicholas

    Reply

    I also meant to post a fitting analogy regarding being a lifeguard. Many of my friends were lifeguards as teenagers, and can you guess one of the first lesson that they learn? I was kind of shocked but then it makes perfect sense. It was eluded to in an earlier post as well. That is, you don’t just run up to someone and save them when they are drowning, you wait until they are just about to go under, just about to pass out from exertion, just about to give up. Then you grab them right before its too late. That’s what God did for me. I was just about to go under, until then I had no room for God. Although I had every material thing, I lacked the one good thing- Christ. Only then could my eyes see and ears hear. This is precisely why the methods that Pastor Steve employs may be so effective- we never know when that time is for people, that time just before they are going to go under, just before its too late for them, just before their death or just before their sin becomes full grown, and their hearts are hardened… and an elevator, a restaurant patio, or the like are as good a place as any, and it generally only takes a few minutes of people’s time anyway, not that I am that bold yet, but God willing, soon… a few weeks ago I asked the million dollar question and did the WDJD script to a man who was robbed at gunpoint just 12 or so hours earlier, he seemed pretty receptive… just food for thought…

  56. Reply

    Bizzle: I am not sure you and I disagree at all, however you must concede that the point at which I am “beating someone over the head with it” is entirely subjective and even situational. If I am one-to-one witnessing and someone asks me to leave, I leave. On the other hand if I am preaching to a crowd and someone tells me to leave, I ignore them.

    Nohm:

    “Effectiveness” is in the eye of the beholder. Millions upon millions of people have been convinced and converted by the very thing that you say isn’t effective. What you call “ineffective”, I would call astounding. Here’s the fundamental problem: you, as an atheist, can’t possibly carry on a discussion with a Christian about God and the Bible at their level of belief and understanding. It would be like having a conversation in German with someone who doesn’t speak German. It would be like taking a Calculus class when you haven’t had Algebra. If you don’t believe in God, OF COURSE you don’t believe the Gospel! The Bible states this explicitly: the natural man does not receive the things of God because they are foolishness to him; he cannot understand them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14)

    I will be happy to direct you to recently-proven mathematical theorems that point to a Creator. In fact, I would love to continue a conversation via email. (If you’re interested, click my name and it will take you to my blog where you can leave a comment. I will send you a message)

    I can logically assert propositions about God and logically proceed to prove them. I am able to do this because I care about WHY I believe what I believe. But, if I answer all your objections, are you willing to repent of your sins? The fact is, there is MUCH scientific and mathematical evidence for a Creator. It is not hard to find, but atheists are not A-Theists for lack of evidence. It is a heart issue, which is precisely the same reason you find the Gospel to be ineffective. And like you said, we are back at square one because heart issues are not solved by debates and epistemological arguments. They are solved by the regenerating work of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

  57. Azou

    Reply

    No I don’t know Steve, but I can read his brief, dismissive non-answers and state my opinion on such. Surprisingly, a person can be a wonderful family man and still post lazy replies that make it seem like I’m wasting my time commenting at all.

    And sorry, Seed, but the simple fact that I cannot post money-related information about LW on their blogs doesn’t help foster feelings of a pure motive. I really am concerned about people being suckered out of their time and money.

    But thanks for reading my replies and taking the time to respond.

  58. Nohm

    Reply

    Nicholas wrote: “Perhaps you would be willing to share your reasons for disbelief as an atheist?

    Because I view the claims to be unfounded, unevidenced, and unsound.

  59. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn Parker wrote: “The fact is, there is MUCH scientific and mathematical evidence for a Creator.

    Ok then, please present the best piece of scientific or mathematical evidence for a Creator, either here or on your own blog (which appears to be linked to your name in your posts… crucifiedpride, right?).

    I look forward to it.

  60. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn Parker wrote: “It is not hard to find, but atheists are not A-Theists for lack of evidence.

    Since you’re not an atheist, I’ll ask you to not presume to speak for us.

    I am a non-believer (aka an atheist) for lack of evidence of the claims by theists.

    You can tell me how I think or believe until you’re blue in the face but no, I actually don’t believe that you have telepathic abilities.

  61. Reply

    The Pythagoreans believed transcendental numbers to be evidence of God’s existence. Of course, modern Christianity rejects the existence of their deity, so I’m not sure Christians should be pointing at pi as being significant…

  62. Reply

    Actually Whateverman, you are stuck in junior high school Algebra.

    Nohm: There are *many* examples of evidence for Creation. However, I will stick to my own field of study (mathematics and engineering): Look up the “No Free Lunch Theorem”, which has only recently been proven. Like all rigorously-proven mathematical theorems, it is irrefutable.

    This theorem has opened the door for the Law of Conservation of Information in evolutionary computing, and in search and optimization in general. The implications look rather grim for atheists.

    If you would like me to explain these results to either of you off-line, I will be happy to.

  63. Nicholas

    Reply

    Nohm, in response to your answer on why you are an atheist, and the definition you give of an “a-theist” as a non-believer in unfounded, unevidenced, and unsound claims, I think this is a good lead into a discussion of the problems with Pascal’s wager. The first tenant of the wager is that the existence of God cannot stand to reason alone, and therefore the impetus to faith is the proverbial wager. The argument against this tenant is that the existence of God can be settled with reason. The problem of evil that I mentioned in the same post you responded to is a common argument for this rebuttal, there are many more, and we can address them in due time. Please, if you are familiar with this philosophical argument, please respond with your thoughts on its validity. If not, please google, “the problem of evil.” Rather than hear why you do not believe in the God of the Bible, I am interested to know why you do not believe in any god, or creator. I was under the impression that an “atheist” did not believe in any god. So please, tell me, what do you believe, or know to be founded, evidenced, and sound?

    Here is the faith given to me:
    God the Father, through God the Son, Jesus Christ, made the heavens and the earth in six days. The Father and the Son are One, for there is only one God, God the One and Only. Adam and Eve, in a state of perfection, disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden, choosing to know evil as well as good; since then sin has entered the world and all creation- especially men, women, children, and infants- suffer for it; for we are all born into sin, will die and be judged by a Holy God, and no one is righteous before Him, and would be condemned. Yet God so loved the world that he gave his only Begotten Son, Jesus, the Christ, who is righteous, and being in very nature God did not consider equality with God something to grasp, so that whoever should believe in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For it is by grace I have been saved, through faith—and this not from myself, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

    Define, faith: being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. The righteous will live by faith.

    Tell me what you believe, what you are sure of, what you are certain of based on founded, evidenced, sound judgment/discernment, and I will tell why I have accepted the faith that has been so freely given to me. God’s Word will speak for what is true wisdom, that which is truly founded, evidenced, and sound. God willing, He will give me the words to show you how- even through the lens of science, philosophy, or Pascal’s wager, as the impetus to faith, not faith itself, but you must first tell me what you believe. God is rational, if you have an open mind; He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

    This same question is posed to Whateverman, Azou, Bathtub, Perdita. What do you believe? What is founded, evidenced, and sound? What is the purpose of life? What happens when you die? Why is there evil in the world? Why are we here? Where did we come from?

  64. Reply

    Nohm says: “Since you’re not an atheist, I’ll ask you to not presume to speak for us.”

    Nohm, I do not presume to speak for anyone. I was simply telling you what your Creator has said about your denial of Him. If you’d like to read it for yourself, check out Romans 1. And keep this in mind: It doesn’t matter what you believe. What matters is whether what you believe is true.

  65. Reply

    Nick and Glenn,

    A word of warning: Even if Nietzsche should rise from the dead, these atheists will not believe. Nevertheless, give it your best shot and wait for my series of articles coming out soon that will demonstrate the most effective way to deal with atheists and other non-believers when it comes to the things of the living God.

  66. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn wrote: “This theorem has opened the door for the Law of Conservation of Information in evolutionary computing, and in search and optimization in general. The implications look rather grim for atheists.

    Yes, I am well-aware of the NFL theorem. I agree with your first sentence, but I don’t see how you arrive at your second statement (regarding its implications for atheists).

    Please show, either here or at your own blog, how we go from the NFL to evidence that a god exists.

    You can’t just shout “NFL!” and expect me to say, “oh wow, I never thought of that”, because I have a similar background.

    Do you consider that to be your best piece of evidence?

    Glenn wrote: “I was simply telling you what your Creator has said about your denial of Him. If you’d like to read it for yourself, check out Romans 1.

    That was St. Paul who wrote that, not “[my] Creator”.

    Yes, I’ve read Paul’s epistle to the Romans many times before.

    Glenn wrote: “What matters is whether what you believe is true.

    I would say the same to you.

    Steve wrote: “Even if Nietzsche should rise from the dead, these atheists will not believe.

    Again telling us how we think. Yeeesh.

  67. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn,

    Hold on a second, you’re not cribbing from Dembski of all people, are you??

    I hope not.

  68. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn,

    I’m hoping that you don’t bring up “specified complexity”, for your own sake.

  69. Nohm

    Reply

    Nicholas wrote: “If not, please google, “the problem of evil.”

    Yes, I know of the argument, but it doesn’t interest me. That’s why I don’t use it. Plus, it puts the burden of proof on me, where it doesn’t belong.

    Rather than hear why you do not believe in the God of the Bible, I am interested to know why you do not believe in any god, or creator.

    My answer was actually in regards to any gods or creators, and not for your specific God. Therefore, the answer is the same: because the claims have not been supported.

    So please, tell me, what do you believe, or know to be founded, evidenced, and sound?

    I exist. My family exists. Oranges can be purchased at the supermarket. I need to fix my bed’s frame.

    Stuff like that.

    The first tenant of the wager is that the existence of God cannot stand to reason alone, and therefore the impetus to faith is the proverbial wager.

    Uh, no.

    The first, and fundamental, problem is that the wager is a false dichotomy. The entire wager falls apart when you consider EVERY alternative.

    What is the purpose of life?

    Survival and reproduction.

    As for me, though, it’s to create.

    What happens when you die?

    We die. Besides that, I don’t know and I don’t have a reason to think that anyone does know.

    Why is there evil in the world?

    Because some people are really messed up in the head.

    Why are we here?

    Because mommy and daddy loved each other very much.

    Where did we come from?

    This question requires further clarification, as it currently doesn’t make much sense.

    Nicholas, with regards to Pascal’s Wager, what if God really loves atheists, but he hates people who call themselves Christians, or fall for the tricks that Satan played when he created the Bible. Wouldn’t it then be better to be an atheist… y’know, just in case?

    (That’s just one of the problems with the wager right there, and it points to the False Dichotomy issue.)

  70. Reply

    Glenn Parker wrote the following to me: Actually Whateverman, you are stuck in junior high school Algebra.

    This looks like a non-sequitur, Glenn. However, I appreciate the suggested reading; I’m googling it now…

  71. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn, I’m hoping that your entire argument does not boil down to:

    “Evolution is near impossible, therefore God exists”.

    Please let me know if you were going somewhere else with this.

  72. Reply

    It seems I’m not going to be able to understand why NFL is held to support ID without reading Dembski’s book. I’ve read the Wikis as well as Wolpert’s paper supposedly debunking the connection – but I can’t fairly claim that I understand either concept enough to agree with one or the other.

    I find the rejection by the scientific community to be significant. There are plenty of Christian scientists who aren’t ID proponents, and like the rest of them, know that providing proof of God’x existence would launch their careers into the stratosphere. It’s telling to me that the scientific community as a whole rejects the NFL/ID connection, as there’s significant incentive to accept the connection if it’s valid.

    Seriously, is there a Christian (or any theist, for that matter) who would hesitate to provide empirical proof for the existence of their God if they could? The answer is clearly “no”.

    Nonetheless, I still don’t understand the NFL/ID connection enough to form an opinion on my own. I’ll see if I can get a copy of Dembski’s book…

  73. Reply

    There are all kinds of non-belief in God’s existence, Nicholas. The first is evinced by a baby, or perhaps by a human who’s never encountered the term before; it’s a lack of understanding that people believe in the existence of God. This is not a rejection of the idea, but ignorance of it.

    The second kind of non-belief is of a person who’s encountered the idea, but rejects specific descriptions of it. A Muslim might reject the Christian God, as an example. Certain atheists simply reject all descriptions they’ve encountered without rejecting the general concept of an intelligent deity who created the universe. These are weak atheists, and they are theoretically open to the idea that deities exist – they simply haven’t found any convincing enough to believe in.

    The third kind, of course, is the person who encounters the term, and rejects the concept as a whole. He/she doesn’t need to research the different flavors of God, because they’re all fallacious (according to him/her). This is a Strong Atheist, and is a position of faith.

    Most atheists are of the weak kind. They merely lack belief, or simply reject the deities that have been explained to them, without rejecting the fundamental idea. This is Nohm’s a-theism.

  74. Reply

    Nohm:

    You do realize that Wikipedia University isn’t accredited?

    You said “Do you consider that to be your best piece of evidence?”

    No I don’t. The best piece of evidence is YOU. Every cell in your body is more complex than any man-made system on the planet. But, you have already rejected that evidence. And, I am sure that although you cannot refute the NFL, you and your buddies will try. And I am sure that you’ll prop up a swiss cheese argument against the conservation of information theorem that you, your buddies, and Richard Dawkins all rolled into one could not prove. But you won’t care. It will be funny.

    You said you are very familiar with the NFL, and you said “I have a similar background”. I really doubt that, but if it is true, then you’ll have no problem explaining to me, in your own words, precisely what the NFL says and how one might define an isomorphic mapping from a search space consisting of ‘n’ iterations until success into an n-fold cartesian product space consisting of a single search. When you can do that, I will proceed to explain what it has to do with you. Incidentally, fitness functions defined on these spaces can be time- (and iteration) invariant or not. It doesn’t matter.

    This will be my last post here with regard to these theories. However, I believe I have made it clear that I will have a long-winded conversation with you via email if you wish. If you don’t wish, then that’s okay too. I am not paid to do this. In fact, there are a lot of things that aren’t getting done while I am chatting with you. But as a Christian, the most hateful thing I could do is refuse to engage you. My intuition tells me that you are another troller looking to stir up Christians. My sincere prayer is that you are really looking for the Truth. You aren’t likely to find it unless you’re looking for it. I hope my intuition is wrong about you.

  75. Reply

    Glenn, I don’t know what you said, but it makes more sense than the persistent questioning of our atheist friends who have ample proof of God’s existence.

    Regardless, here’s my same old proof for their unbelief, which brings us all back to square one:

    Romans: The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

    For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

    Therefore God gave them over…

  76. Nicholas

    Reply

    Pastor Steve, thank you for the caution, it is well received, and it is fitting that I have just begun Romans again today, so Romans 1 has been my meditation. I have followed your link to “square one” and in light of Romans 1 and your sermon, I see I have much to learn. I pray that the Spirit will guide me to God’s will and His understanding of Romans 1 and the scriptures in your sermon, I have a lot to meditate on with this. Thank you! May God bless you and yours, and may you persevere in the good fight.

    Whateverman, thank you for the your clarification of an “atheist.” I can appreciate that the strong atheist recognizes that he stands on a position of faith, although I imagine your definition of faith would differ from that of Hebrew 11:1 that I posted earlier. But this is very interesting- I will pray for you, for this position in atheism is more of a “religion” than Christianity itself, and my spirit is concerned for your soul- regardless if you believe you do or do not have one. Also, you asked:

    Is there a Christian (or any theist, for that matter) who would hesitate to provide empirical proof for the existence of their God if they could?
    Yes. I am such a Christian. God’s existence is already revealed, as Pastor Steve has so eloquently pointed out with scripture. Even if God could be proven with the scientific method, in terms of experimentation (since God is already revealed through observation, and atheists simply “suppress the truth”), why would we? “The righteous will live by faith.” And it is written, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” So, yes, all true Christians would refuse to empirically test God’s existence, and thus would not provide any evidence that is not already written in God’s word. Yet we can debate science all we want for evidence of the validity of the Bible, and that is the beauty of it, science, meaning, “to know.” Yet is it rooted (science) in man’s wisdom, and the wisdom of the wise is folly to God, the Creator of all things, and therefore what is fact today may very well be fiction tomorrow. Science is always changing, it is always evolving, and science only reveals the glory of God. I am a scientist, and a medical student, so I am not speaking from a position of ignorance on the scientific method. Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated.

    Nohm, I appreciate your answers to the questions I posed, and from them I wonder if you read my posts very carefully. I said that the first tenant of the wager was that God’s existence could not stand to reason alone. As in “tenant of the wager” this is an argument for the wager, then I gave an argument against, and your argument against, as in the EVERY alternative argument, meaning more columns and rows in the argument’s matrix, would render the wager invalid is well taken, yet Pascal would argue that if you won’t wager for God, then you are wagering against God, either way there is some wager at time, t, when you make a decision to live a particular way. For example, deciding to live by faith in Christ Jesus, or not, you have already proven the wager valid as an impetus to faith, not faith itself, regardless of what probability or expected value you assign it, and in this case you are right that it is not 50/50. For Christians, it is 100%. And all that needs to be said has been said, especially from reading many of your dialogues with Pastor Steve, all I can do now is pray for you, Christopher from California, thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated. Hopefully I will still see you from time to time on this blog, and if you still post any responses to my original post (the long block of text), I will be happy to follow-up.

  77. dede

    Reply

    for some, this might not make any sense to you and for others you just might dismiss it altogether but, one empirical [provable, verifiable] proof that God exists is in the nation of ISRAEL.

    for lack of time, i wish i could give all the examples of the prophesies regarding my answer. a person would have to be living in a cave not to see/hear about what’s happening in the area that is known as “the center of the universe”. everyday, the media/news has it’s eyes looking and reporting (though many times falsely) about that nation.

    if you so care to dig deeper, the on-line Jerusalem Post can give you tons of information.

    i’ve said my piece today…have a peace-filled day today.

  78. Nohm

    Reply

    Nicholas wrote: “Nohm, I appreciate your answers to the questions I posed,

    You’re welcome.

    and from them I wonder if you read my posts very carefully.

    I did.

    I said that the first tenant of the wager was that God’s existence could not stand to reason alone.

    And I said that you were wrong in thinking that this was the first tenant.

    As in “tenant of the wager” this is an argument for the wager, then I gave an argument against, and your argument against, as in the EVERY alternative argument, meaning more columns and rows in the argument’s matrix, would render the wager invalid is well taken,

    Thank you.

    yet Pascal would argue that if you won’t wager for God, then you are wagering against God,

    And my answer is: which God? Why aren’t we including Allah? Or any of the Hindu gods? And so on.

    either way there is some wager at time, t, when you make a decision to live a particular way.

    That’s not how the wager works.

    You have now changed the argument to a different one.

    For example, deciding to live by faith in Christ Jesus, or not,

    I would be in the “or not” camp.

    you have already proven the wager valid as an impetus to faith, not faith itself, regardless of what probability or expected value you assign it,

    Uh, how does THAT work?

    Again, the problem with the wager is that it’s a false dichotomy. You are suggesting that the ONLY two possible outcomes are that you are right, or that I am (theoretically) right. You don’t consider the possible outcome that neither of us are right.

    and in this case you are right that it is not 50/50.

    Exactly, because we’re not considering whether or not Ahmed al-Harith is right, or whether or not a hindu is right, and so on.

    For Christians, it is 100%.

    Which is absolutely irrelevant when using the wager on a non-Christian, as you did.

    And all that needs to be said has been said, especially from reading many of your dialogues with Pastor Steve, all I can do now is pray for you, Christopher from California, thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated.

    Thanks. I take that this is your goodbye to me?

    Hopefully I will still see you from time to time on this blog, and if you still post any responses to my original post (the long block of text), I will be happy to follow-up.

    It’s my opinion that I have already responded to what was relevant in that block through other posts that you wrote. If there’s something specific there, please let me know and I’ll respond to it.

  79. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve wrote: “Glenn, I don’t know what you said, but it makes more sense

    Wait. You don’t know what he said, but you do know that it makes more sense?

    How does THAT work?

    than the persistent questioning

    Apples and oranges there, Steve.

    of our atheist friends who have ample proof of God’s existence.

    So you say. I say otherwise.

    It’s one thing to say that we have ample “proof” (you’re actually using that word incorrectly, Steve, but it’s no big deal), and it’s another to actually try to explain just what that “proof” is.

    I don’t think anyone here has succeeded with the latter.

  80. Nohm

    Reply

    You do realize that Wikipedia University isn’t accredited?

    Who said anything about “Wikipedia University”? Try “California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo”. That’s accredited, right? Right.

    Regardless, do you have any specific problems with the description of the NFL theorem given on wikipedia? I would bet that you don’t.

    You said “Do you consider that to be your best piece of evidence?”

    No I don’t.

    Then why did you bring it up? I asked for the best piece of evidence and you bring up… something that you don’t consider to be the best piece of evidence?

    What kind of sense does THAT make?

    The best piece of evidence is YOU.

    Then why not bring that up in the first place?

    Every cell in your body is more complex than any man-made system on the planet.

    Then I’m sure that you’ll be able to show your work that shows the complexity (CSI, in particular) calculations that you used to make this claim.

    Right?

    But, you have already rejected that evidence.

    Ah, and here you go, speaking for me. You are right in that I have rejected that as evidence of the claim “God exists”, because you haven’t shown how we get from A (I exist) to C (God exists).

    Right?

    And, I am sure that although you cannot refute the NFL, you and your buddies will try. And I am sure that you’ll prop up a swiss cheese argument against the conservation of information theorem that you, your buddies, and Richard Dawkins all rolled into one could not prove.

    Nice strawman there, Glenn.

    I’ll go back to what I wrote a little bit ago:

    Glenn wrote: “This theorem has opened the door for the Law of Conservation of Information in evolutionary computing, and in search and optimization in general. The implications look rather grim for atheists.

    Yes, I am well-aware of the NFL theorem. I agree with your first sentence, but I don’t see how you arrive at your second statement (regarding its implications for atheists).

    See, Glenn? Note that I have absolutely no problem with the NFL theorem. I have no argument against it. I agree with you that it “has opened the door for the Law of Conservation of Information in evolutionary computing, and in search and optimization in general.”

    I’m just asking how you get from NFL to “God exists”. That’s the part that you haven’t mentioned.

    But I had a pretty good idea that you were just cribbing from Dembski, and it’s now looking like I was right.

    If so, please google “Information Theory, Evolutionary Computation, and Dembski’s “Complex Specified Information”” by Elsberry and Shallit.

    They didn’t get their degrees at Wikipedia University, either.

    But you won’t care. It will be funny.

    So you say, Glenn. Yet you appeared to make the mistake in incorrectly assuming that I have a problem with the NFL theorem, even after I made it clear that I don’t. You just haven’t shown what the NFL theorem has to do with God’s existence, specifically the God of the Bible.

    You said you are very familiar with the NFL,

    Correct.

    and you said “I have a similar background”.

    Correct. I also have an engineering background with degrees from California Polytechnic University, a very strong engineering school.

    I really doubt that,

    LOL! Are you serious, Glenn? Are you actually trying to do a diploma-measuring contest here?

    but if it is true,

    Which it is.

    then you’ll have no problem explaining to me, in your own words, precisely what the NFL says and how one might define an isomorphic mapping from a search space consisting of ‘n’ iterations until success into an n-fold cartesian product space consisting of a single search.

    Which is irrelevant. I have already said that I have no problems with the NFL. You are not using words that are “big words” to me. You just haven’t shown what the NFL has to do with God’s existence.

    When you can do that, I will proceed to explain what it has to do with you.

    Nice goalpost maneuver there.

    Incidentally, fitness functions defined on these spaces can be time- (and iteration) invariant or not. It doesn’t matter.

    Again, irrelevant. What does the NFL have to do with God’s existence.

    Look, Glenn. It’s pretty obvious that you’re just copying from Dembski here. Why not be honest about it?

    This will be my last post here with regard to these theories.

    Brave, brave Sir Robin, he bravely ran away.

    However, I believe I have made it clear that I will have a long-winded conversation with you via email if you wish.

    Why not have it here, or on your blog?

    If you don’t wish, then that’s okay too.

    I don’t wish to do it in email because I’d like others to see your explanation also.

    I am not paid to do this.

    Neither am I.

    In fact, there are a lot of things that aren’t getting done while I am chatting with you.

    Same here.

    But as a Christian, the most hateful thing I could do is refuse to engage you.

    And I find it fascinating to engage you. So it’s working for both of us.

    My intuition tells me that you are another troller looking to stir up Christians.

    Goodness.

    Seriously? Just what exactly would I have to gain by doing that?

    Glenn, I enjoy talking with people who don’t think like I do. That has always been my reason. If you go back through my posts here, you’ll see that I always give that reason.

    Because it’s the truth.

    My sincere prayer is that you are really looking for the Truth. You aren’t likely to find it unless you’re looking for it. I hope my intuition is wrong about you.

    Uh, thanks? Kinda patronizing, don’tcha think?

    In that, I could say the exact same thing about you.

    Regardless, I hope you eventually put up on your blog how we get from the NFL (which I have no problems with) to “God exists”.

  81. Nohm

    Reply

    dede, I agree that Israel exists.

    How is that evidence that God exists?

  82. Bizzle

    Reply

    Genn Parker says: Bizzle: I am not sure you and I disagree at all, however you must concede that the point at which I am “beating someone over the head with it” is entirely subjective and even situational. If I am one-to-one witnessing and someone asks me to leave, I leave. On the other hand if I am preaching to a crowd and someone tells me to leave, I ignore them.

    I took your initial post that I responded to as one-on-one preaching. In my (admittedly limited) experience with open-air preaching, people just seem to laugh at the preacher or ignore them completely, so I focus on one-on-ones. If I took it out of context, and it appears I did, I apologize. Of course if you open-air, I would imagine you would ignore them.

    By the way, Stevem I understand what Romans says and why you feel that Nohm and other atheists are suppressing the truth. While I don’t purport to be as learned in the Holy Word as you (as I have no formal training/schooling), I think your interpretation is somehow off. I don’t see one shred of evidence that says he knows Jesus is Lord but chooses to deny it. He has been nothing but truthful and made his intentions known, so I sincerely doubt he is lying about his knowledge of our Lord as savior. He has acted with nothing but maturity and respect on these boards. He’s actually better than some “Christians” I know. I’m not saying you’re a bad preacher or don’t know what you’re talking about, because that’s certainly not the case. I just wanted to share my thoughts.

  83. Nohm

    Reply

    Bizzle, if you go back (and I can look for the post, if you’d like), there was a whole confusion about this point as Steve claimed that I was aware that I know that God exists, but I didn’t believe that God exists.

    After a lot of back-and-forth about how that didn’t make any sense, because it was a contradiction, Steve finally just admitted that he thinks I’m lying about my non-belief.

    Why I would lie about my non-belief, I don’t know or understand.

    I’ll point it out again that that’s just St. Paul writing that (“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness“) in his epistle to the Romans, and I’d ask everyone to please consider the context and intended audience of that epistle.

    Bizzle wrote: “I don’t see one shred of evidence that says he knows Jesus is Lord but chooses to deny it.

    And I think we can agree, Bizzle, that if I did that, it would be stupid and not make any sense. If Jesus is Lord, why would I want to deny THAT? And what good would it be to deny it?

    I’m simply not convinced by the claim.

  84. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve, please correct me in that last comment I wrote (directed at Bizzle) if your opinion has changed since then or if you think I misrepresented the situation.

  85. BathTub

    Reply

    “I don’t understand them words, but as you are a Jesunaut it must be better than teh athiest!”

    Classic Steve.

  86. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn, as for your “trolling” remark, I just recently wrote a comment at Steve’s site in the “Jerky Evangelism” post about that very issue. In fact, you commented in that exact same thread of comments (but it’s still possible that you missed it, as your last comment in that thread was before my explanation).

    You can view it here.

  87. Nicholas

    Reply

    Nohm, in light of your comments, and your opinion on addressing my original post, I will spend some time in meditation and prayer of our discussion thus far, and will write, God willing, responding to all of your comments and questions posed back to me, if not for your sake, then for others reading these blogs and perhaps my own. I ask that you may spend some time re-reading my original post (again, the “block of text”), you may be surprised at what is actually there. Have a great week, hopefully I will be able to respond by the end of the weekend, or by Tuesday of next week, God willing, at the latest. Until then, I leave you, for now, with these thoughts, from the Bible:

    “My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry… Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like… If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless. Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”
    James 1:selected from 19-27 for brevity

    I do not know that I have been quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to become angry, so that is what I will pray for. I know I am frustrated, and in anguish about all those who reject Christ, but am I angry? Am I angry with you or even my fellow Christians? I pray that God is not done with me yet, but only just beginning… for the glory of Christ, that God the Father may be glorified and edified in the hearts of all men, women, children and infants…

  88. dede

    Reply

    to nohm,

    before i gather up some information to answer your question regarding the evidence that God exists through the nation of Israel, may i ask if you’ve read the Bible in it’s entirety? if not in it’s entirety then, what part(s) of the Bible have you read?

  89. Nohm

    Reply

    Nicholas wrote: “I know I am frustrated, and in anguish about all those who reject Christ, but am I angry?

    For the record, I think you’ve been very polite in our discussions.

    Also, I don’t reject Christ; I reject the claims that others have about the being you call “Christ”. There’s an important difference, there.

    Lastly, I have re-read your “wall of text”, but I’ll read it again. As I said, I feel that I’ve responded to the parts that are relevant to me, but if you can think of something specific that I have missed, please bring it up and I’ll be sure to respond.

    Thank you, and be well.

  90. Nohm

    Reply

    dede wrote: “before i gather up some information to answer your question regarding the evidence that God exists through the nation of Israel, may i ask if you’ve read the Bible in it’s entirety?

    Yes, I have. Whether you consider me to be a false convert or not, there was a long time in my life that I called myself “Christian”, and I’ve always been a voracious reader, so I’ve read the (entire) Bible a few times.

    Obviously, there are books and chapters that I’ve read far more often than others. For example, I’ve read 1 Samuel more often than 2 Kings and Numbers combined, and I’ve probably read the four gospels more often than any other books in the Bible.

    As for the Israel -> God exists discussion, I’m really hoping that you don’t bring up the whole “Ezekial predicted when Israel would be re-established” prophecy (Ezekiel 4:3-6), where you have to multiply by 7 and switch from a 360-day year to a modern year to get 2,484 years, which is supposedly the number of years from 536 BC to 1948 AD.

    Because, even if I accept the reasons to multiply by 7 and switch from 360-days-a-year to our modern system (and I don’t accept those reasons), there’s still a really funny math error there. Do you see it?

    If it’s something else, and not Amos 9:14-15, or Ezekiel 37:10-14, or Isaiah 66:7-8, or Ezekiel 37:21-22, or Jeremiah 16:14-15, or Ezekiel 34:13, or Jeremiah 31:10, or Leviticus 26:3, 7-8, or Deuteronomy 30:3-5, then I’m definitely listening.

  91. dede

    Reply

    i’ll admit i’ve never heard the theological community express the mathematical exercise you described in regards to the year Israel became a nation. curious…where in the world did you hear/find that information from?

    i will keep in mind that you are interested in further information other than the verses you mentioned above but first, i need to re-read the Scriptures you noted to refresh my memory and then i’ll comment soon.

  92. Reply

    Incidentally, Nicholas, you asked me several questions (directly & indirectly), and I haven’t responded to them. I apologize, for this is the first time I realized you’d asked them. I’ll try to type something up today. Alternately, I’m more than willing to send you the response via email, if you’d prefer; if so, send me your email address at [email protected].

    If I don’t hear from you, i’ll respond here. I’m trying to be careful of spamming Steve’s blog with off-topic stuff.

  93. Nohm

    Reply

    dede wrote: “i’ll admit i’ve never heard the theological community express the mathematical exercise you described in regards to the year Israel became a nation. curious…where in the world did you hear/find that information from?

    Actually, this is relatively well-known, and was “discovered” by Grant Jeffrey… it’s possible that you’ve watched his tv show on TBN.

    He’s a bible prophecy guy.

    If you do searches for “Israel prophecies”, his name will come up, especially regarding this particular prophecy that I mentioned above.

    I think I originally learned about this particular prophecy 10 years ago or so.

  94. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve wrote: “If nice guys could get to Heaven, you’d be on the list. Sadly, though…

    I appreciate the thought, Steve.

  95. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn wrote: “Nohm, in referring to Romans, you said St. Paul wrote it.

    I’m just curious: how do you know that?

    Because both secular and non-secular biblical scholars agree on that issue.

    In addition, my own research into this issue, both when I was a believer and later as a non-believer, led to that answer as well.

    We could all be wrong. If you have evidence that it was written by someone else, I’m all ears (well, eyes, but you get the idea).

    Since I’m pretty sure that you’re not in disagreement with this, besides maybe trying to make a point that it was “directed by God” and then written by Paul, I’m curious why you asked this.

  96. Nohm

    Reply

    Actually, I should have written:

    Because both Christian and non-Christian biblical scholars agree on that issue.

  97. Reply

    Well, I just find it curious that you could believe what people have said about Paul (e.g. that he wrote that book, that he existed, etc.) but you don’t believe anything that Paul himself said?

  98. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn wrote: “Well, I just find it curious that you could believe what people have said about Paul (e.g. that he wrote that book, that he existed, etc.) but you don’t believe anything that Paul himself said?

    Of course, just as you believe that Muhammed existed, that he contributed to (if not wrote) the Qur’an, yet you don’t believe anything that Muhammed himself said.

    Or just as you believe that L. Ron Hubbard existed, that he wrote the main Scientology books and methods, but you don’t believe anything he said.

    Or just as you believe that a person claiming that they were kidnapped by aliens in a UFO exists, but you don’t believe their claims.

    If Paul was saying, “the sky is blue”, I would have no problem believing that. When Paul says “these people believe in God, but lie and say they don’t”, I have a major problem believing it.

    Glenn, it all has to do with the claims, the source, any possible agenda that the source might have, and how closely the claims match my experiences.

    For example:

    Joe: Hi Nohm, I just was walking down the street, and no one was around.

    Nohm: Ok, I believe that.

    Joe: I found a five dollar bill and picked it up.

    Nohm: Ok, I believe that.

    Joe: The five people walking down the street started yelling at me.

    Nohm: Huh, I thought you said no one was around, but whatever. Please continue.

    Joe: One of them pulled out an AK-47 and started dancing with it.

    Nohm: Uhhhh… okay? This is starting to become hard to believe.

    Joe: I threw the five dollar bill at him from 30 feet away and knocked him clean out.

    Nohm: Hrmm, this is really getting hard to believe.

    Joe: Pegasus then showed up and we flew away.

    Nohm: Ok, I think I’ve heard enough.

    So, Glenn, the claim that a Hellenistic Jew named Paul wrote that letter (Romans) is pretty trivial, as it matches with the reality that I know. That is, that people trying to spread their religion, and build up others in the religion, will say that people who think differently are wrong and blinded… note that the Qur’an makes the same claims.

    The claim that these people (myself included) are actually blinded, or “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” even though they know the Truth, not only makes no sense to me at all, but it doesn’t match the reality that I know.

    So I don’t believe it, until I see persuasive evidence that would change my mind, same as the “five dollar bill” story above.

  99. Nohm

    Reply

    Glenn, it really comes down to this: no one has telepathy.

    When someone who doesn’t know me tries to tell me how I think, it becomes difficult to take that person seriously.

    I would bet you feel the same way.

    If I said that your favorite band is Bad Religion, and you say it’s not, and I say that, no, it really is your favorite band… how seriously are you going to take me, especially with regards to your musical tastes?

    Or even more to the point: Glenn, you’re really a Muslim, but you call yourself a Christian because you think you can hide from Allah. But you can’t hide from Allah, even though you know that’s what you’re doing.

    Wouldn’t you pretty much write me off as being bonkers?

    So, when Paul says that I, Nohm, really know that God exists, yet I lie about it… I can’t take him seriously.

    • Reply

      I like this explanation from Dr. John MacArthur that answers the “suppressing the truth” or “who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” question, at least to my satisfaction:

      “This phrase could easily be rendered, ‘who are constantly attempting to suppress the truth by steadfastly holding onto their sin.’ Unrighteousness is so much a part of man’s nature that every person has a built-in, natural, compelling desire to suppress and oppose God’s truth.

      “As Paul declares in the following verse, “That which is known about God is eveident in them; for God made it evident in them” (v.19 of Romans 1). His point is that all people, regardless of their relative opportunities to know God’s Word and hear his gospel, have internal, God-given evidence of his existence and nature, but are universally inclined to resist and assault that evidence.”

  100. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve, before I go further with this, I want to know if you agree with Dr. MacArthur that

    every person has a built-in, natural, compelling desire to suppress and oppose God’s truth

    and

    [every person has] internal, God-given evidence of his existence and nature

    Do you agree with those two claims?

    If so, is one stronger than the other, or are they of equal strength?

    Also, I’ll note that he says: “God-given evidence of his existence and nature, but are universally inclined to resist and assault that evidence

    And so I’ll ask, even though he’s unfortunately not around (but maybe you have impressive connections, Steve):

    What’s the best piece of this evidence? How does it support the claim, “The God of the Bible, exists”?

    (PS: For the record, if you think that “resist and assault” the “evidence” of the Bible or Christianity, you haven’t seen how I treat things that I want to believe in. I’m brutal to ideas that I immediately like.)

    • Reply

      Nohm wrote: Steve, before I go further with this, I want to know if you agree with Dr. MacArthur that

      every person has a built-in, natural, compelling desire to suppress and oppose God’s truth

      and

      [every person has] internal, God-given evidence of his existence and nature

      Do you agree with those two claims?

      If so, is one stronger than the other, or are they of equal strength?

      Me: I agree with those two claims. I would assume that man’s desire to resist the truth of God’s existence/evidence is stronger due to his sin nature.

      Nohm: Also, I’ll note that he says: “God-given evidence of his existence and nature, but are universally inclined to resist and assault that evidence”

      And so I’ll ask, even though he’s unfortunately not around (but maybe you have impressive connections, Steve):

      What’s the best piece of this evidence? How does it support the claim, “The God of the Bible, exists”?

      Me: *SIGH!* We’re back to square one, from months ago: Design. Design.

      And at this point it doesn’t necessarily support the assertion that the God of the Bible exists, just that there is a God as far as this specific passage of Romans is concerned. But read a little bit further, as in Chapters 2 and beyond, you’ll see who this merciful, loving god is.

      But here’s the bottom line: You can’t come to Him, you can’t believe in Him, unless He draws you. You can’t believe in Him unless He has chosen you, if you are elected to believe. So it doesn’t matter to me that you can’t see the evidence of God’s design, his handiwork, in the terms of these arguments. It causes me great grief, though, that you as a person will perish, because (at this point, anyway), you will die in your sins.

      So Nohm, I do not feel compelled in anyway to try to prove to you anything else. I can answer a precious few of your questions, (after all, I am a college drop-out). But the reality is, and I mean this as no insult, I am indeed casting my pearls before swine.

  101. Nohm

    Reply

    Hey, if I’m not elected to believe, then what choice do I have in the matter? I’m damned from birth, or even before, it appears.

  102. perdita

    Reply

    …you haven’t seen how I treat things that I want to believe in. I’m brutal to ideas that I immediately like.)

    Nohm brings up a very good point (he’s pretty good at that). The truth of a matter should be able to stand up to our scrutiny. If an idea is really appealing to me, I need to verify that I’m not being led astray.

    But here’s the bottom line: You can’t come to Him, you can’t believe in Him, unless He draws you. You can’t believe in Him unless He has chosen you, if you are elected to believe. So it doesn’t matter to me that you can’t see the evidence of God’s design, his handiwork, in the terms of these arguments. It causes me great grief, though, that you as a person will perish, because (at this point, anyway), you will die in your sins.

    Steve, you are saying that I’m not saved because God doesn’t want me. Just so we can be clear. Because if I’m not saved because God didn’t pick me, then it’s not my fault I’m not saved.

    I had no choice in being born. According to your beliefs, I had no choice in being born with a sinful nature. You also say that I have no choice in my salvation. Yet, if I’m condemned to Hell it’s my fault. That’s really messed up, Steve.

    So Nohm, I do not feel compelled in anyway to try to prove to you anything else. I can answer a precious few of your questions, (after all, I am a college drop-out). But the reality is, and I mean this as no insult, I am indeed casting my pearls before swine.

    Steve, being a college drop-out is no excuse for intellectual laziness. If you can’t answer some basic questions, then maybe you shouldn’t preach to the unconverted. I really like the last part, you can’t answer some questions, yet you’re convinced that your info is ‘pearls’ and we’re ‘swine’. Nice, Steve.

    “No insult intended.” lol

  103. Reply

    Nohm wrote: Hey, if I’m not elected to believe, then what choice do I have in the matter? I’m damned from birth, or even before, it appears.

    Perdita wrote: Steve, you are saying that I’m not saved because God doesn’t want me. Just so we can be clear. Because if I’m not saved because God didn’t pick me, then it’s not my fault I’m not saved.

    I had no choice in being born. According to your beliefs, I had no choice in being born with a sinful nature. You also say that I have no choice in my salvation. Yet, if I’m condemned to Hell it’s my fault. That’s really messed up, Steve.

    Me: In a sense, yes. But on this side of the eternity, you have a choice, don’t you? If you repent and trust in Christ today for forgiveness of sins, then you are chosen. Simple. If not, you are condemned already. This is the great debate in Christianity, as you well know. Most Christians would just love to throw out Romans chapter 9, but it’s there for all to see… and despise.

    Perdita wrote: Steve, being a college drop-out is no excuse for intellectual laziness. If you can’t answer some basic questions, then maybe you shouldn’t preach to the unconverted. I really like the last part, you can’t answer some questions, yet you’re convinced that your info is ‘pearls’ and we’re ’swine’. Nice, Steve.

    “No insult intended.” lol

    Me: Jesus said the swine comment in reference to the limited understanding that a pagan hastoward the things of God. I’m just echoing Him.

    As far as answering basic questions, I’ve referred you atheists to some of the best Christian thinkers and writers; from Strobel to Koukl, from The Discovery institute to the Institute for Creation Research—and more. No matter what I say, or they say, it will always be discounted by you and your ilk; these are the pearls cast before swine. Besides Scripture says that these things can only be spiritually discerned; so I acknowledge—and accept—that I will never convince you even if I used “wise and persuasive” words. But I’ll continue to try in my feeble, ignorant, uneducated ways—because I love you. Look for my future series of articles: “Of Pagans, Pearls and Pork.” Coming soon.

    Proverbs says two things: “Answer a fool according to his folly,” and “Don’t answer a fool according to his folly.” In regard to the atheists on this blog, I’ve done both.

    As ole ExPatMatt (who picked up his marbles and left the game) used to write:

    Cheers,

    (BTW, if you travel in his circles, say “Hi” for me. And that I miss him.)

  104. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve wrote: “As far as answering basic questions, I’ve referred you atheists to some of the best Christian thinkers and writers; from Strobel to Koukl, from The Discovery institute to the Institute for Creation Research

    Your problem is that those are not “some of the best Christian thinkers and writers”; in fact, the ones you listed aren’t even close.

    Also, you’re not supposed to link “The Discovery Institute” to Christianity… ixnay on the eligionray is what they’d tell you. That’s how the entire ID thing got busted during the Dover trial.

    Steve wrote: “No matter what I say, or they say, it will always be discounted by you and your ilk

    Just like no matter what Imams say, it will always be discounted by you and your ilk.

    Just like no matter what an evolutionary biologist says, it will always be discounted by you and your ilk.

    So, we’re in the same boat. Let’s not get hypocritical, here.

    Also, for the record, I’ve given reasons why I don’t accept their claims, but you don’t tend to respond to those reasons.

    So, it’s not like I’m just waving it aside; I’ve seriously considered their arguments, and discounted them due to pseudoscience or logical fallacies.

    Steve wrote: “In a sense, yes. But on this side of the eternity, you have a choice, don’t you?

    If God didn’t elect me to believe, then how do I have a choice? The decision’s already been made, right?

    If you repent and trust in Christ today for forgiveness of sins, then you are chosen. Simple.

    Been there, done that. No evidence of God.

    Jesus said the swine comment in reference to the limited understanding that a pagan hastoward the things of God. I’m just echoing Him.

    You can call me a swine all you like. Compared to accusing me of lying about my non-belief, the word “swine” is a compliment. 😉

    Besides Scripture says that these things can only be spiritually discerned; so I acknowledge—and accept—that I will never convince you even if I used “wise and persuasive” words.

    How incredibly convenient.

    (BTW, if you travel in his circles, say “Hi” for me. And that I miss him.)

    I do travel “in his circles”, and I’ll be sure to post this comment for him.

    Be well.

  105. perdita

    Reply

    But on this side of the eternity, you have a choice, don’t you? If you repent and trust in Christ today for forgiveness of sins, then you are chosen. Simple.

    is not,

    But here’s the bottom line: You can’t come to Him, you can’t believe in Him, unless He draws you. You can’t believe in Him unless He has chosen you, if you are elected to believe.

    Which is it?

    I’ve referred you atheists to some of the best Christian thinkers and writers; from Strobel to Koukl, from The Discovery institute to the Institute for Creation Research—and more

    That not-so-truthful article on evolution we debunked not long ago: Discover Institute or Creation Research?

    I’ve not read Koukl, but I’ve read Strobel, Zacharis and Lewis. If I discount what they say its because I find glaring errors, half-truths and emotional appeals over substance. Truth should stand up to our scrutiny.

  106. Bizzle

    Reply

    Steve, I think you need to re-word these phrases:

    You can’t come to Him, you can’t believe in Him, unless He draws you. You can’t believe in Him unless He has chosen you, if you are elected to believe.

    If you repent and trust in Christ today for forgiveness of sins, then you are chosen.M

    That didn’t come across right at all, IMO.

  107. Bizzle

    Reply

    The reason that didn’t come across correctly, IMO, is because in one sentence you’re saying that only a chosen few will get to Heaven (that’s Calvinism), then the second statement, you say all you have to do is repent and trust in Jesus. It appears, to me, that you’re contradicting yourself.

    • Reply

      Bizzle,

      No contradiction at all. God chooses. But on this side of things, it’s our choice, is it not? When we choose God, we then know that He actually chose us. If you stubbornly refuse to trust in Christ and repent, you die in your sins, and end up finally, horribly, in torment, then you understand that you were not chosen. Simple.

      I like to live this way: It’s 100% God, 100% me.

      And I evangelize with this mind set: That no one else is sharing their faith and that God doesn’t save.

      BTW, I’m not going to try to solve the Arminian/Calvinism question here; I know what I believe. It’s okay, as a Christian, to disagree with me. This 500 year-old debate will not be settled here, that’s for sure.

      Good comments, Bizzle. I like the way you think. Are you an evangelist by the way?

  108. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve,

    I’m curious… are you a Calvinist, or an Arminianist?

    I always just assumed you were a Calvinist.

  109. Nohm

    Reply

    Ok. Do you consider biblical Christians to be either Calvinists or Arminianists? Or maybe some other option?

  110. Nohm

    Reply

    Oh, and by the way, Steve. You say “design” is the evidence.

    Let’s say, for the sake of discussion, that you’re correct.

    Design only identifies that a “Designer” exists. It says nothing about who that Designer is (in fact, that’s the exact spiel of the Discovery Institute). At best, you have a “Creator”, but there isn’t anything about the design that would allow us to know that the “Creator” is the God of the Bible instead of Allah, or a god that a deist would believe in.

    Unless you know of something else.

  111. Reply

    Nohm: I lean towards Reformed Theology for the most part.

    And yes, Arminians would consider their theology biblical, too.

    And I would agree with you that design only points to a Designer, not necessarily to Christ.

    The end of Strobel’s book, “The Case for a Creator” gives a great argument for a specific Designer. (I know you don’t care for that book, though.)

  112. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve, I’ll look up what Strobel’s argument was (I don’t remember it off-hand), but would you mind nutshelling it for me?

  113. Nohm

    Reply

    Hrm, my copy of the book is in storage, and I’m not able to find chapter 11 anywhere online; other chapters are viewable through Google’s book preview, but not chapter 11.

    So, if possible, I’d like your help in reminding me what his argument was for a specific Designer.

  114. Reply

    Nohm,

    If you ever get to the point of believing there’s a God, I will be happy to explain why He’s the God of the Bible, and not someone else. It’s fairly straightforward logic and no, I won’t use circular arguments. However, since you’re not convinced of a Designer, I’ll wait for your conviction.

  115. Nohm

    Reply

    I completely understand, Steve.

    In the meantime, if anyone else has the book handy, I’d appreciate some help here.

    Thanks in advance. 🙂

  116. Bizzle

    Reply

    Hi Steve,

    I apologize, it seems my comment wasn’t clear. Your comments are not a contradiction to me. I was trying to say that I can see how an atheist/Jew/Muslim would see that as contradictory especially those educated to the various denominations. I wasn’t trying to trip you up.

    As for the evangelism question, I would have to say I evangelize passively, but I’m not sure that’s a correct description. I’ve tried to preach and it doesn’t work for me and there are two reasons for that.

    First I don’t actively evangelize more because I frankly don’t have the answers that folks like Perdita, Nohm and others are looking for (at least not yet!). I don’t feel I’m doing my job unless I can start them down the road to conversion. To me, just preaching the Gospel is like going to paint a room and only applying primer. If you can’t go all the way, why bother?

    The second reason is that I’ve actually opened more people to God’s Word through my day-to-day behavior. I’ve had people ask me how I can act with compassion and good will in such a world and then I tell them about my faith. I won a scholarship for college because I was deemed by the HS staff to be the best living example of faith in my graduating class (Not trying to brag, just showing how that was the seed of how I share my faith).

    One of my best friends is an atheist, and he has told me that if he were to convert, it’d be because of the way I live my life more than any preaching I have ever done. He considers me a living example of my beliefs. As an aside, he thinks a lot like Nohm does, and I thought it was him for a while, but I live in PA. I do hand out tracts, but usually only when I get them first or people hand me literature.

    • Reply

      Bizzle,

      I’m am going to post your comment as an article in a few weeks, that way many can respond, including myself.
      Thanks!

  117. Reply

    No contradiction at all. God chooses. But on this side of things, it’s our choice, is it not?

    You don’t see that as a contradiction? Because I’m pretty sure you just told me that I can’t choose God, unless God has already chosen me. Therefore, no matter what it looks like from inside time and space, it isn’t – and never was, and cannot be – my choice.

    Am I missing something here?

    I mean, I get that the Almighty doesn’t want His representatives competing to see who can save the most souls; and I can see why He wouldn’t want His reps to feel like they themselves had the power to save people from Hell.

    (On the other hand, that might explain why God doesn’t answer me. If I’m not one of the Elect, then He has known since before I was born that I’m destined to spend eternity in Hell.)

    • Reply

      Hi Mike,

      Sorry for the long delay in responding.

      Yes. You are right. If you are not elect, then you cannot choose. BUT! “Whoever…” That’s a key word in John 3:16… and other places. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

      I talked with a Communist party official in Vietnam. He said that there is a phrase that says”Seeing is believing.” “But as far as Christianity is concerned,” he paused to take a breath, “believing is seeing.”

      Is anyone stopping you from believing right now?

      If you don’t choose to believe, then you are not chosen. If you choose to believe, then you are chosen. If you choose to do nothing, you’ve made your choice.

      It’s pretty simple.

      • Nohm

        So Steve,

        Why didn’t you ever do that for Islam?

        If a Muslim said “But as far as Islam is concerned, believing is seeing”, how would you react? How would you have reacted before you became born again?

        You expect others to do something that you yourself have not done; that is, to accept the statements of someone that has a belief that you do not currently have.

        I find that bizarre.

        As for anyone stopping me from believing? I guess it would be me, for the same reason I’m not believing in Islam. Or Hinduism.

      • Hm. Assuming you’re right about this, then John 3:16 should really read, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever the Lord chooses to allow to believe in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

        Calvinism is a problem for me. It’s not that it can’t be supported scripturally; as far as I can tell, it can, though I wouldn’t read the text that way myself. Mainly, though, Calvinism presents God as a monster while insisting that He is perfectly, absolutely good.

        Is anyone stopping you from believing right now?

        It seems quite possible, based on what you’ve just said, that God Himself is.

        If you don’t choose to believe, then you are not chosen.

        …And now you’ve inverted the order of importance. Because, again, if I’m not chosen – that is, if I’m not Elect – then I can’t choose to believe – which means it’s not actually my fault that I’m bound for eternal Hell. It can’t be, because the decision is ultimately God’s.

        On a related note:
        I’m not sure “choose” is exactly the word I’d use in relation to religious beliefs (or lack of them). Did you “choose” to believe, in the sense that you might, say, choose to eat a salad instead of ordering a hamburger? Or did you reach the conclusion that you were a worthless sinner, but that Jesus’ death could redeem you if you believed in him?

        I realize that modern Christianity consistently presents belief as a choice, but it seems to me that doing so both misrepresents the way this transition usually works, and understates the importance of the process. I think that trying to look at it as a “choice” actually makes it harder to see why people might “choose” (or reach conclusions) differently.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *