Learning from Atheists: Strengthening Our Christian Faith

In this thought-provoking video, we explore valuable lessons that Christians can learn from atheists. By examining the critiques of atheists like Penn Jillette and Sam Harris, we gain insights into living a more authentic and evidence-based faith. We'll discuss the importance of integrity, critical thinking, and the Great Commission, emphasizing how Christians can better reflect Christ's teachings. Join us as we delve into these crucial topics, ensuring our faith is active, genuine, and deeply rooted in truth.

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgment as to the reality of any particular god until sufficient credible evidence is presented. My position is that *_I currently have no good reason to acknowledge the reality of any god._*
And here is why I currently hold to such a position. Below are 11 facts I must consider when evaluating the claim made by certain theists that a particular god exists in reality. To be clear, these are not premises for any argument which _concludes_ there to be no gods. These are simply facts I must take into account when evaluating the verity of such a claim. If any of the following facts were to be contravened at a later time by evidence, experience, or sound argument, I would THEN have good reason to acknowledge such a reality.
1. I personally have never observed a god.
2. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god.
3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity.
4. I have never been presented any _valid_ logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality.
5. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that can not be demonstrated to be true.
6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon.
7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._
8. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event.
9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity.
10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as _falsifiable._
11. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god.
ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the reality of any particular god.
I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding such acknowledgment until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstantiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._*
I welcome any cordial response. Peace.

[@LGministry]

Hello,
Thank you for sharing your perspective and your willingness to engage in a cordial discussion. As a Christian, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your points. While I understand your position, I believe that your criteria for acknowledging the existence of God would also prevent you from accepting many historical and existential realities that you might otherwise consider true. Let's explore some of these points in detail.
Observability and Historical Knowledge
1. I personally have never observed a god.
2. I have never encountered any person who has claimed to have observed a god.
3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity.
If we applied the same standard of personal observation to historical figures or events, we would be compelled to dismiss the existence of many individuals and occurrences that we accept as true. For instance, none of us have observed George Washington, yet we believe he existed based on historical records, testimonies, and artifacts. These are forms of evidence that, while not direct observation, are widely accepted as credible.
Logical Arguments and Fallacies
4. I have never been presented any valid logical argument, which also introduced demonstrably true premises that lead deductively to an inevitable conclusion that a god(s) exists in reality.
5. Of the many logical syllogisms I have examined arguing for the reality of a god(s), I have found all to contain a formal or informal logical fallacy or a premise that cannot be demonstrated to be true.
Logical arguments for the existence of God, such as the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the moral argument, have been debated extensively. While you may find them unsatisfactory, it's important to recognize that these arguments are philosophical in nature and not purely empirical. They aim to provide a rational basis for belief rather than empirical proof, similar to how philosophical arguments are used in other areas of knowledge.
Necessary Antecedents and Phenomena
6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon.
This point assumes that all phenomena must have a natural explanation. However, many people, including scientists and philosophers, see the existence of the universe, the fine-tuning of its constants, and the existence of moral values as pointing toward a transcendent cause, which points to a Creator.
7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered vice versa.
While natural explanations have replaced supernatural ones in many cases, this does not rule out the existence of God. Rather, it highlights our growing understanding of natural processes. Many believers see natural laws as mechanisms through which God works rather than as replacements for divine action.
Personal Experience and Supernatural Claims
8. I have never knowingly experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event.
Based on what the Bible teaches, you will not experience such things because the miraculous ended in the first century. Once we received God’s completed Word, miracles and demon possession would end (1 Cor. 13; Zech. 13). As a side note, when these types of miraculous things were happening, only a handful of people experienced them. T
9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have emerged from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created ex nihilo - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity.
The concept of creation ex nihilo (creation out of nothing) is a theological assertion that aligns with the Big Bang theory, which suggests the universe had a beginning. However, it is interesting that you most likely accept evolution as to how we began, yet your list of rules would cause you to deny evolution as well. Not even evolutionists can prove that we came from some alleged cosmic egg, and they certainly didn’t observe it, nor can they reproduce it.
Falsifiability and Definitions
10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have been presented have either been refuted to my satisfaction or do not present as falsifiable.
11. I have never been presented with a functional definition of a god.
The falsifiability criterion is essential in science but not always applicable to metaphysical or theological claims. For instance, many aspects of our understanding of consciousness, ethics, and aesthetics are not easily falsifiable yet are considered meaningful areas of inquiry. Additionally, definitions of God vary, but a common one is "the omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent creator of the universe."
Conclusion
While I respect your commitment to rational inquiry, it's worth considering that your criteria might exclude many forms of knowledge that we accept as valid. Historical knowledge, philosophical reasoning, and personal experiences are all ways in which humans have understood and interpreted reality. Belief in God, for many, is a synthesis of these forms of knowledge rather than a single empirical proof.
I appreciate your openness to discussion and hope this response provides a perspective that bridges some of the gaps between our views.
Peace be with you.

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

@LGministry Thank you for your detailed and heartfelt response. May I ask, do you agree these 111 items are _factual?_

[@LGministry]

@@Theo_Skeptomai What 12 items? You gave 11 points and responded to those 11 points. So, I am not sure what you are specifically asking about.

[@Theo_Skeptomai]

@@LGministry Sorry, that was a typo. I meant 11. I am blind and typing on a blindshell android device. I corrected the question.

[@LGministry]

I am glad you are able to communicate online using such tools. If you are asking if I think the 11 items you have listed are factual, the answer is, no. As, I pointed out, you couldn't even know if George Washington was a real peson or first president using your list. I always find it helpful if I am making an argument that I apply it across the board not just to religion or the Bible.