A Measured Argument for Atheists to Consider

I understand the basic argument of the atheist. For an atheist, God is intangible. The existence of God cannot be proven by rational thought, by scientific reasoning. Ergo, it is irrational to believe in an unseen Authority. However, despite me being a Christian, I will not try to dissuade the atheistic way of seeing the Universe.

However, for the atheist, I have a few ideas I would like you to consider. Does love exist? There is no tangible way to prove the existence of love. Yet we have all felt love, all seen it. One does not doubt a mother's love for a child. Yet we cannot prove that love in a rational way. Acts attributed to a mother's love can just as easily be attributed to the instinctual need to ensure the survival of the species, even when an act of love can have a negative effect on one's own ability to survive.

Despite this, we still believe that love is a real thing.

The connection to God is similar to the feeling of love. As many religions would say, God is Love. While we may not be able to prove God in a scientific way, those who are moved by religion can feel God in a way that is beyond rational understanding.

People are more than just rational beings. We are capable of the abstract. Art, music, even the creative thought we use to solve scientific problems, these derive from some irrational part of the human mind. If we can accept that there is more to the world than simply what is reasoned and rational, then an abstract God may not be much of a stretch of the imagination.

I will admit there have been shortcomings in organized religions. Terrible things have been carried out in the name of religion, be it the Inquisition, Al Qaeda's reign of terror, or any number of atrocities that atheists are sure to list. Religious organizations have slowed or stopped the flow of scientific or progressive ideas. men can easily use the name of God behave according to their own will.

I also admit that a rational and enlightened person can be morally upstanding without the threat of retribution from a supernatural authority figure. However, these items are beside the point.

I do not believe in God because someone told me to. I do not believe in God for want of Heaven or fear of Hell. I believe in God because I have felt God, and I have seen His Work in my life. So have billions of others. Now the belief of others is no reason to believe something yourself. All that I ask is that you stop for a moment, quiet your mind, and see what you feel. If you are searching for meaning, for something more than the shortcomings of the world you can see, taste, feel, smell, and hear, then open your heart to something greater than yourself.

A Prayer for Guidance

Oh Lord, hear my prayer

In You all things are possible

You nourish my mind, body, and soul

Yet I remain as selfish as ever

You have given me guidance and talent

Yet I seak only my own glorification

Forgive me, Lord

Lord, I humble myself to Your will

I pray, use my talents for your will

Guide me, oh Lord

Allow me to an example of Your Way

Guide me Lord, by Your will

Without You, I am nothing Lord,

The embodiement of selfish mediocrity

Lord, take charge of my life

This I ask of you

In Jesus precious name,

Amen

I Believe in God. I also Believe in Evolution. The Two Can Exist Together

I am still new in my reconnected walk with Christ. I am not a new believer, I believe I have my basics down. However, it has been 10 years since I was a regular church goer, and there are some things I am seeing that I did not run into in my youth.

The first thing I am seeing is a belief in Creationism. I have only tried two churches in the 2 months since I rededicated my life. Both churches interpret the Bible as the literal history of the planet. They believe that Man was created as we are now, that there was no evolution. I respectfully disagree.

However, there is something of an issue with my disagreement. Now, I am making an assumption here, but it seems that people may think that my lack of belief in a literal interpretation of the Bible implies that I lack true belief, or that I am still in some sort of rebellion against God.

First of all, I do not feel in conflict with God. I feel I am following His lead. I feel He is working in my life, and I humble myself to His Majesty. However, I do think that believing the Bible as entirely literally accurate is intellectually lazy.

I have no doubt that the Word of God is 100% true. Allow me to stress that statement. I have no doubt that the Word of God is 100% true. However, the Word of God is not the same as the words of God. Please take note of the distinction.

The Word of God is His Divine Message to us. It is a Message of Salvation from Sin, a Message of Love. The actual words are a means of delivering the Message, but they are not The Word in the way it was meant to be understood.

Allow me to illustrate. The Bible teaches us that Jesus Christ was the Word of God made flesh:

John 1:14 (New International Version)
14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Does this mean that Jesus was made from words and sentences? No, that is absurd. That passage does not make sense if you are speaking of the Word as just words and sentences. However, if you see that Jesus is the physical embodiment of a revelation of the nature of God, then it rings true.

The stories in the Bible, especially in the early Old Testament, were not meant to be taken literally. Whoever the scribe who wrote Genesis was, could he have understood the complex processes that God set in motion to craft the world as it is? NO. Could he create a metaphorical story to explain things? Yes.

Looking at some of the Bible as metaphor and some as history, the question is asked, how do we tell the difference? This was the question asked of me. I explained my belief that the Creation Story, Noah and the Ark, the Tower of Babel, these are metaphors. I was asked how do I tell the metaphors from what I believe are actual history, such as the reign of King David?

The argument I received was since we cannot draw a distinct line between metaphor and actual fact, then we must take it to be literal, otherwise, the actual Truth in the Word could be ignored as metaphor. I refute this.

I believe that the planet is billions of years old. I believe that man evolved from a primitive life form. I believe in God, and in His Word. These are not exclusive of one another.

I also believe that in order to read and understand the Word, we cannot blindly assume it is all literal fact. We must be more sophisticated in our understanding. It is imperative that we be able to understand the context in which the texts were written. To quote author Karl Giberson,

"The early chapters of Genesis do not read like history. They have a different sort of character to them. People who read Hebrew and understand the ancient Near Eastern worldview, and the cosmology that informed it, have given us ample reasons why you would not read Genesis that way, even if you weren't worried about reconciling it with a billion-year-old planet."

God gave us tremendous capacity for sophisticated thought, why would He ask us to suspend that ability when dealing with His Word? I believe in science, geology, and evolution, yet I still believe in God, in His ability in our lives. I believe in Sin. I believe in Christ.

I do not begrudge anyone who believes in the Bible as literal history. However, I do think that is a lazy attitude to take. God gave us great capacity for reason and logic. I do not think that we should suspend that when we are trying to be close to Him.