Today Is National Atheist's Day - Come Celebrate Their Religion

The Bottom Line invites you to join in today's celebration of the religion of Atheism. Denmark's very own Kristoffer Haldrup will be conducting free lectures on how to sound scientific while burying your head in the sand at the same time. Kristoffer will be taking up an offering during his lecture. You will also be able to come and listen to world renowned atheists vent their hatred for the God they don't believe in. Dr. Terry Tommyrot will also be presenting his thesis on why he doesn't believe in Richard Dawkins . . .



The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. (Psalm 14:1a)

A Great Christopher Hitchens Moment

If I were to ask you what is more evil (or dangerous) between an atheist and a "liberal christian" how would you answer? I know how I would answer - I would rather deal with a wolf that dresses like a wolf!

I recently posted an obituary to express my reflections and sadness over the recent death of fervent atheist Christopher Hitchens. I thought it worthwhile today to add one closing postscript on the life of Hitchens. There is some sort of delicious irony when an atheist schools a professing Christian on Christian doctrine. I have featured posts on this before, most particularly when Penn Jillette (a very publicly recognized and vocal atheist) rebuked professing Christians who don't evangelize and/or warn about hell. There was also the stunning moment when Kirk Cameron schooled Stephen Hawking on the scientific method!

Today, I will share a great Christopher Hitchens moment when he does a better job of exposing "liberal theologians" for the frauds they are than many others who fill pulpits that are silent on the issue. I was unable to find the video of this so we will have to settle for the transcript of this beautiful exchange between Christopher Hitchens and a liberal priest.

Liberal Priest: The religion you cite in your book is a generally fundamentalist faith of various kinds. I’m a liberal Christian, and I don’t take the stories from the scripture literally. I don’t believe in the doctrine of atonement (that Jesus died for our sins, for example). Do you make any distinction between fundamentalist faith and liberal religion?

Hitchens: I would say that if you don’t believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and Messiah, and that he rose again from the dead and by his sacrifice our sins are forgiven, you’re really not in any meaningful sense a Christian.

Sewell: Let me go someplace else. When I was in seminary, I was particularly drawn to the work of theologian Paul Tillich. He shocked people by describing the traditional God—as you might, as a matter of fact—as “an invincible tyrant.” For Tillich, God is “the ground of being.” It’s his response to, say, Freud’s belief that religion is mere wish fulfillment and comes from humans’ fear of death. What do you think of Tillich’s concept of God?

Hitchens: I would classify that under the heading of Statements That Have No Meaning—At All. Christianity, remember, was really founded by Saint Paul, not by Jesus. Paul says, very clearly, that if it is not true that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, then we the Christians are of all people the most unhappy. If none of that’s true, and you seem to say it isn’t, I have no quarrel with you. You’re not going to come to my door trying to convince me. Nor are you trying to get a tax break from the government. Nor are you trying to have it taught to my children in school. If all Christians were like you, I wouldn’t have to write the book.

I'll take a Hitchens any day over a cowardly and passive "minister". He will be missed and I sincerely hope that Hitchens repented of his wicked rebellion and trusted in Jesus Christ before his heart stopped beating.

Christopher Hitchens Now Knows That God Is Great

My friend, Joshua Williamson, recently alerted me to the sad news that the famous staunch atheist Christopher Hitchens has died from cancer. What Josh said is worth repeating and a good reflection of the Christian worldview:

Sad news. Leading atheist Christopher Hitchens has died aged 62. He was the author of the book, "God is not great". Mr. Hitchen's now knows that God is indeed great. I hope that Christopher placed his trust in Christ before he died.

It is true that Christopher now knows that God is great beyond his comprehension. Christians led the way during Hitchens' battle with cancer praying for him and writing to him in pleading calls for repentance. Christopher was clearly taken aback by the compassion of Christians who had been the subject of his vitriolic scorn for many years. Hitchens wrote in Vanity Fair in September 2010:

These are my first raw reactions to being stricken. I am quietly resolved to resist bodily as best I can, even if only passively, and to seek the most advanced advice. My heart and blood pressure and many other registers are now strong again: indeed, it occurs to me that if I didn’t have such a stout constitution I might have led a much healthier life thus far. Against me is the blind, emotionless alien, cheered on by some who have long wished me ill. But on the side of my continued life is a group of brilliant and selfless physicians plus an astonishing number of prayer groups. On both of these I hope to write next time if — as my father invariably said — I am spared.

Ultimately none of us are spared from the ultimate statistic - that one out of one people die. I cannot take any moral high ground over Hitchens for all his years of fist shaking at God. I was no better - God's grace to me was unmerited favor so why should I pontificate? Like Josh, in the wake of Hitchens' death we can do nothing else but fly the flag of hope that God can save the worst of sinners at the latest of moments. Death bed conversions should not be treated as normative, nor should we plan on seeking God later in life after we have sown our wild oats. Romans 1 serves as a stern warning against those who persist in sin to the point of God "giving them over" to hearts so hardened that they, like Esau, cannot find repentance.

Spurgeon once preached to his congregation on why he believed the Bible contains only one death bed conversion - that being the thief on the cross. Spurgeon suggested that God only included one of these stories in the Bible to remind the complacent that it is very rare, and remind the hopeless that we are never without hope.

I do hope to see Christopher in heaven. God derives great glory from saving the worst of sinners. How do I know this? Because He saved me!

Kirk Cameron Lands Some Punches

Stephen Hawking - the world-renowned theoretical physicist - finds no room for heaven in his vision of the cosmos. In a recent interview, the 69 year old said that the human brain is like a computer that will stop working when its components fail.

There is no heaven or afterlife for broken-down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark," Hawking told the paper. It's not the first time the world-renowned thinker has made controversial statements about religion and the existence of God. In "Grand Design," a book Hawking published last year, the physicist declared that it was "not necessary to invoke God ... to get the universe going."

For Hawking, the concept of religion is in constant conflict with his life's work - science, and understanding the most basic ways in which the universe works - and it's almost impossible to reconcile the two. In an interview with Diane Sawyer last June, Hawking noted that "there is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win, because it works."

He has maintained this position since very early in his career, telling German newsmagazine Der Speigel in 1988 that "what I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began."

Kirk Cameron, in an interview, took exception to Hawking's comments which, in turn, invoked the wrath of cyberspace. Criticizing a man with a physical disability is akin to touching a sacred cow in the eyes of many, hence the barrage of criticism and mockery pointed in the direction of Kirk Cameron. All of this commotion prompted Kirk to post this comment on his Facebook page:

To say anything negative about Stephen Hawking is like bullying a blind man. He has an unfair disadvantage, and that gives him a free pass on some of his absurd ideas. Professor Hawking is heralded as “the genius of Britain,” yet he believes in the scientific impossibility that nothing created everything (Sir Isaac Newton called atheism “senseless and odious”) and that life sprang from non-life. To speak on issues of science and violate it’s essential laws is like playing checkers with a someone who changes the rules when he’s losing. Why should anyone believe Mr. Hawking’s writings if he cannot provide evidence for his unscientific belief that out of nothing, everything came? He says he knows there is no Heaven. John Lennon wasn’t sure. He said to pretend there’s no Heaven. That’s easy if you try. Then he said he hoped that someday we would join him. Such wishful thinking reveals John and Stephen’s religious beliefs, not good science. They may imagine all they want, but I lost my faith in atheism long ago and prefer to stay within the realm of reality.

That was an outstanding response - certainly landed a few punches there! But more importantly, kudos to Kirk for having the courage to weigh into a debate like this at risk of looking mean and, furthermore, exposing himself to the giant intellect of Stephen Hawking. At risk of sounding unloving by actually giving the most loving response. At the heart of all this I think Kirk, like many of us, realizes that atheism has no arguments for the non-existence of God. Rather they have a lot of rhetoric for why they hate God . . .

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools . . . (Romans 1:18-22)

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. (John 3:19-20)

Here is a great interview from Way Of the Master's web based program On The Box where Tony Miano questions Kirk Cameron about the whole controversy surrounding his comments about Stephen Hawking:

Reverse Your Thinking

Watch this all the way through. Creative with a twist that I've never seen before!



Wow!!! Atheism really is good theology in reverse!

Angry Atheist Christopher Hitchens And His Mortality Memo (Part 2)

In Friday's post we listened to Todd Friel interview angry atheist Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens exhibited enormous liberty in his desire to blaspheme and mock the God he doesn't believe in. But since that interview, Hitchens received something my old Bible college lecturer called a "mortality memo" in the form of a cancer diagnosis. Based on Hitchens' recent article in Vanity Fair magazine it would seem that his tone has lost much of the earlier hostility . . .

(Excerpt from Vanity Fair September 2010) The notorious stage theory of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, whereby one progresses from denial to rage through bargaining to depression and the eventual bliss of “acceptance,” hasn’t so far had much application in my case. In one way, I suppose, I have been “in denial” for some time, knowingly burning the candle at both ends and finding that it often gives a lovely light. But for precisely that reason, I can’t see myself smiting my brow with shock or hear myself whining about how it’s all so unfair: I have been taunting the Reaper into taking a free scythe in my direction and have now succumbed to something so predictable and banal that it bores even me. Rage would be beside the point for the same reason. Instead, I am badly oppressed by a gnawing sense of waste. I had real plans for my next decade and felt I’d worked hard enough to earn it. Will I really not live to see my children married? To watch the World Trade Center rise again? To read—if not indeed write—the obituaries of elderly villains like Henry Kissinger and Joseph Ratzinger? But I understand this sort of non-thinking for what it is: sentimentality and self-pity. Of course my book hit the best-seller list on the day that I received the grimmest of news bulletins, and for that matter the last flight I took as a healthy-feeling person (to a fine, big audience at the Chicago Book Fair) was the one that made me a million-miler on United Airlines, with a lifetime of free upgrades to look forward to. But irony is my business and I just can’t see any ironies here: would it be less poignant to get cancer on the day that my memoirs were remaindered as a box-office turkey, or that I was bounced from a coach-class flight and left on the tarmac? To the dumb question “Why me?” the cosmos barely bothers to return the reply: Why not?

The bargaining stage, though. Maybe there’s a loophole here. The oncology bargain is that, in return for at least the chance of a few more useful years, you agree to submit to chemotherapy and then, if you are lucky with that, to radiation or even surgery. So here’s the wager: you stick around for a bit, but in return we are going to need some things from you. These things may include your taste buds, your ability to concentrate, your ability to digest, and the hair on your head. This certainly appears to be a reasonable trade. Unfortunately, it also involves confronting one of the most appealing clichés in our language. You’ve heard it all right. People don’t have cancer: they are reported to be battling cancer. No well-wisher omits the combative image: You can beat this. It’s even in obituaries for cancer losers, as if one might reasonably say of someone that they died after a long and brave struggle with mortality. You don’t hear it about long-term sufferers from heart disease or kidney failure.

Myself, I love the imagery of struggle. I sometimes wish I were suffering in a good cause, or risking my life for the good of others, instead of just being a gravely endangered patient. Allow me to inform you, though, that when you sit in a room with a set of other finalists, and kindly people bring a huge transparent bag of poison and plug it into your arm, and you either read or don’t read a book while the venom sack gradually empties itself into your system, the image of the ardent soldier or revolutionary is the very last one that will occur to you. You feel swamped with passivity and impotence: dissolving in powerlessness like a sugar lump in water.

It’s quite something, this chemo-poison. It has caused me to lose about 14 pounds, though without making me feel any lighter. It has cleared up a vicious rash on my shins that no doctor could ever name, let alone cure. (Some venom, to get rid of those furious red dots without a struggle.) Let it please be this mean and ruthless with the alien and its spreading dead-zone colonies. But as against that, the death-dealing stuff and life-preserving stuff have also made me strangely neuter. I was fairly reconciled to the loss of my hair, which began to come out in the shower in the first two weeks of treatment, and which I saved in a plastic bag so that it could help fill a floating dam in the Gulf of Mexico. But I wasn’t quite prepared for the way that my razorblade would suddenly go slipping pointlessly down my face, meeting no stubble. Or for the way that my newly smooth upper lip would begin to look as if it had undergone electrolysis, causing me to look a bit too much like somebody’s maiden auntie. (The chest hair that was once the toast of two continents hasn’t yet wilted, but so much of it was shaved off for various hospital incisions that it’s a rather patchy affair.) I feel upsettingly de-natured. If Penélope Cruz were one of my nurses, I wouldn’t even notice. In the war against Thanatos, if we must term it a war, the immediate loss of Eros is a huge initial sacrifice.

These are my first raw reactions to being stricken. I am quietly resolved to resist bodily as best I can, even if only passively, and to seek the most advanced advice. My heart and blood pressure and many other registers are now strong again: indeed, it occurs to me that if I didn’t have such a stout constitution I might have led a much healthier life thus far. Against me is the blind, emotionless alien, cheered on by some who have long wished me ill. But on the side of my continued life is a group of brilliant and selfless physicians plus an astonishing number of prayer groups. On both of these I hope to write next time if — as my father invariably said — I am spared - Christopher Hitchens

What a great testimony to the grace of God that the subjects of Hitchens' years of scorn are the ones upholding his name in prayer to the Great Physician!

Hitchens hates God . . . but so did I!

Hitchens deserves God's wrath . . . but so did I!

God delights in gaining glory by saving the worst of sinners - I know this is true because he saved me. Please Christopher, God is rich in mercy, humble yourself before the One Who has numbered your days.

Angry Atheist Christopher Hitchens And His Mortality Memo (Part 1)

I can remember attending a Bible college in the late 90's that, in hindsight, was rather lacking in biblical teaching. There was, however, one elderly lecturer who was a product of far more puritanical times. He was a true Christian statesman and someone who taught me many things that I'll never forget. One thing he always reminded the young men was to always be mindful of the mortality memos that God sends. What he meant by this was that life always, eventually, dishes up circumstances and experiences that remind us of our terminal condition as sons of Adam and the fate that awaits us. These experiences can serve as precious sobering fuel in our eternal perspective tanks. I find nothing more frightening than listening to delusional people who gleefully defy God's law and mockingly shake their fist at Him. Christopher Hitchens is one such man from the ever increasing, ever brazen, band of angry atheists. Like all atheists the real issue is never a lack of evidence for God's existence, it is always that they love sin and hate God. When Hitchens was interviewed by Todd Friel I think you can hear this truth come to the surface:



Not long after that interview Christopher Hitchens received a very loud "mortality memo" - he was diagnosed with cancer. His tone has changed and I am left wondering if God has caught Hitchens' attention. On Monday you will get to read Hitchens - post cancer diagnosis - and hear this change in tone. It makes for interesting reading . . .

America's Pastor Or The Atheist - Who Is Telling The Truth?

Political correctness seems to be spiralling out of control in the USA right now. A stark example of this is all the politicians falling over themselves to accomodate, approve, and allow the construction of a mosque right next to ground zero in New York. Are they out of their mind? What is even more disturbing is how this polical correctness is infiltrating modern evangelical churches. Rick Warren gave us a grand display of this during his inauguration prayer for President-elect Barack Obama . . .



So where do I turn to hear some truth and clarity regarding Islam and the teaching of the Quran? To an atheist, not only that but an english atheist!!! This atheist not only knows how to launch into a spectacular anti-Islamic rant, he also trumps "America's Pastor" in the good Berean discernment stakes . . .



So what are we to make of this as Christians? The call to follow Christ is a call to uncompromising devotion to the exclusive claims of Christ. He is right and everyone else is wrong. He is truth and all other religions are man-made lies. Let's abandon pragmatic man pleasing cleverness in favor of bold faced God ordained truth.

For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. Christ the Wisdom and Power of God. For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord."

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.
(1 Corinthians 1:17-2:5)

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 6)

Continued from yesterday. Observations concerning witnessing to atheists based on the debate between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron vs Atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" as screened on ABC Nightline. Ray and Kirk were widely criticized by many Christians for not pulling out the heavy apologetic artillery in fighting the cause of the existence of God. But is that criticism biblically informed. Today is the final installment of this series and fifth observation on how we should evangelize atheists:

OBSERVATION 5
People don't reject the Gospel because it wasn't presented in a clever or attractive manner, people reject the Gospel because they love darkness and hate the light.

Again, John 3 explains to us why people reject the Gospel. It is amazing how much neglected yet important information is contained in the verses following John 3:16. Information so important in fact that a working knowledge could have saved many "seeker sensitive" pastors a lot of time and effort with how they approached evangelism.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Again, I commend Ray and Kirk for avoiding the conventional route of clever argument and instead choosing to reason of sin, righteousness and judgement. It's not rocket science - people love sin and therefore hate the light of God's Holiness. With this in mind and knowing our own sinfulness and the incredible mercy extended to us by God, let us approach the task of evangelism with deep humility but strong urgency to show the sinner (as lovingly as we can) that his deeds are evil and his primary need is not happiness but righteousness. Reasoning from God's law is the only way to show the sinner his exceeding sinfulness and warn of the coming judgement as Paul did in his sermon to the pagan culture of his time

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

In the Old Testament God continually reminded the Israelites that they should remember that they were once strangers in Egypt. We Christians should humble ourselves in the memory that we were once strangers from God and that our redemption had nothing to do with our own merit (because we have none) but by God's grace so that we could never boast in anything but the cross of our risen Saviour. With this in mind may we plead with lost souls appealing to the Holiness of God, the wretchedness of man, the justice of God in punishing sin, that God punished Himself in our place, sealed our eternal hope through His resurrection, and that all men must respond in repentance and faith.

Go Back To Part 5
Go Back To Part 1

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 5)

Continued from yesterday. Observations concerning witnessing to atheists based on the debate between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron vs Atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" as screened on ABC Nightline. Ray and Kirk were widely criticized by many Christians for not pulling out the heavy apologetic artillery in fighting the cause of the existence of God. But is that criticism biblically informed. In the following days I will be publishing five observations concerning the debate and how we should evangelize atheists. Here is my fourth observation:

OBSERVATION 4
The atheist already has knowledge of God and his conscience bears witness that he is alienated from Him.

The atheist can deny all he wants and try to argue from an intellectual standpoint. It is both foolish and futile to war on this front because knowledge is not the issue and some atheists are a lot smarter than I am. But try as he may, the atheist cannot explain why his conscience opposes his human nature. But we know why because God's Word tells us that God's law is written on everybodies heart and our knowledge of right and wrong testifies both to God's existence, and man's alienation from this God.

Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
Rom 2:15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.

By explaining God's moral law via the ten commandments prior to explaining the Gospel message Ray and Kirk actually gave the necessary point of reference in order to understand the Gospel and in so doing avoided futile reasoning on the intellectual level. I do not mean to discount the use of the intellect but rather to use it only when an individual is humbled before God. Brian Sapient and Kelly may have mocked and laughed but they have the knowledge of God and suppress it in unrighteousness, this I know for the Bible tells me so.

It seems ironic that in a land with so many "seeker sensitive" mega churches built on a catch cry of "relevance" that they have neglected to fully explain the universal guilt of mankind. I can't think of anything more relevant than the fact that "all have sinned". Sure it might get mentioned from time to time, but rarely is it explained. Sin by definition is transgression of God's law (I John 3:4) and I fail to see how an individual could fathom their sinfulness without an understanding of God's law.

Concludes Tomorrow - Observation 5

Go On To Part 6
Go Back To Part 4
Go Back To Part 1

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 4)

Continued from yesterday. Observations concerning witnessing to atheists based on the debate between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron vs Atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" as screened on ABC Nightline. Ray and Kirk were widely criticized by many Christians for not pulling out the heavy apologetic artillery in fighting the cause of the existence of God. But is that criticism biblically informed. In the following days I will be publishing five observations concerning the debate and how we should evangelize atheists. Here is my third observation:

OBSERVATION 3
The atheist already has knowledge of God but suppresses it in unrighteousness.

It is worth asking ourselves the question at this point as to whether it is a worthwhile exercise investing time in dazzling the unbeliever with wizz bang apologetics concerning God's existence when the issue is not one of knowledge but of sin.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

These verses from Romans 1 tell us "that which may be known of God is manifest" in the unbeliever "for God hath shown it unto them". They are holding "the truth in unrighteousness". And what is it that testifies God's existence to sinful men? Verse 20 tells us the answer. The "invisible" things of God are "clearly seen" in God's creation "even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse". Put simply, the creation compellingly testifies to the Creator God Himself. My disappointment with Ray and Kirk in using the argument of creation instead of "deeper and more profound apologetics" was one of biblical ignorance on my part (it is interesting to not that some atheists did call in to talk back radio after the debate and concede that they did find the creation argument compelling). It is clear to me that Ray and Kirk showed great wisdom in realising that the atheist already has knowledge of God's existence and time is better spent trying to awaken this knowledge rather than try and win an argument with him. Because the atheist's problem is not a lack of proof concerning God's existence, but rather one of human pride and a love of sin. Understanding this has helped enormously with my witnessing activities because I have stopped wasting time arguing over God's existence and spent time trying to awaken the unbelievers conscience through God's moral law that brings the knowledge of sin which leads to my next observation.

Continued Tomorrow - Observation 4

Go On To Part 5
Go Back To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 3)

Continued from yesterday. Observations concerning witnessing to atheists based on the debate between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron vs Atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" as screened on ABC Nightline. Ray and Kirk were widely criticized by many Christians for not pulling out the heavy apologetic artillery in fighting the cause of the existence of God. But is that criticism biblically informed. In the following days I will be publishing five observations concerning the debate and how we should evangelize atheists. Here is my second observation:

OBSERVATION 2
A healthy understanding of our own depravity dissipates our desire to deliver a knockout punch and raises our urgency to plead with those who are lost.

Romans 3:9 asks the question "are we better than they?" and goes on to say "no, in no way" for we are "all under sin". The following verses go on to tell us that "there is none righteous" (v10), "none that seek after God" (v11), "none that do good" (v12), that the law of God "stops every mouth" from justifying and leaves the whole "world guilty before God" (v19), and that God's law brings "the knowledge of sin" (v20). A healthy grasp of this passage destroys any remaining traces of self righteousness and, with that, the need to compete with an ungodly adversary. But this passage does serve to remind me of my own guilt, that it is only an understanding of God's moral law that will stop the sinners futile self defense and, in turn, awaken his guilt before God. With this in mind, I see the biblical soundness of Ray and Kirk's approach in explaining God's moral law via the Ten Commandments prior to presenting the Christian Gospel.

Continued over the next three days - The observations that really took me by surprise.

Go On To Part 4
Go Back To Part 2
Go Back To Part 1

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 2)

Continued from yesterday. Observations concerning witnessing to atheists based on the debate between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron vs Atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" as screened on ABC Nightline. Ray and Kirk were widely criticized by many Christians for not pulling out the heavy apologetic artillery in fighting the cause of the existence of God. But is that criticism biblically informed. In the following days I will be publishing five observations concerning the debate and how we should evangelize atheists. Here is my first observation:

OBSERVATION 1
As a Christian our primary calling is to preach the Gospel because the wrath of God is poised to slay our "opponent" at any moment and condemn them to eternal conscious punishment.
Most professing Christians can quote John 3:16 but are unfamiliar with the rest of the chapter. One who is familiar with John chapter 3 understands that "he that believeth not is condemned already" (John 3:18) and that "the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36). The atheist spends every day on the brink of eternal torment and the cruelest approach a Christian could take would be to engage in a debate without ever proclaiming the Gospel. I applaud Ray and Kirk for leaving their egos at the door and focussing first and foremost on giving a clear proclamation of the Christian message which is the (already condemned) atheist's only hope of escaping God's wrath.

Continued Tomorrow - Observation 2

Go On To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

The Wolves in Wolves Clothing (Part 1)

Last year, after viewing the debate on ABC between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron and the atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" I found myself initially walking away with mixed emotions. The chest beating male in myself saw it as a contest of Tyson v Holyfield proportions and was cheering for my guys (Ray and Kirk) to kick some serious atheistic butt. Having been heavily influenced by Ray and Kirk's ministry I was well aware that both Ray and Kirk are fine Christian apologists who have deep familiarity with the Scriptures and are very capable at going "into the ring" with the angriest of atheists. As I watched them argue primarily from the basis of creation and human conscience pointing to a creator I found myself screaming on the inside begging them to pull out the heavy argumentative artillery and teach these atheists a lesson. Many Christian commentators felt the same and launched some stinging attacks on both Ray and Kirk and suggested that they did a poor job of defending the case for a Creator.

My thoughts were that I loved Ray and Kirk and their ministry but I was disappointed that they didn't "go for the jugular" with their opponents. They failed in their attempt to convince the American public of God's existence......... or did they. It was at this time that I was slowly working my way through the book of Romans and the Gospel of John. By the time I'd hit chapter 3 in both of these books I was convinced that my initial impression of the debate was wrong and that Ray and Kirk actually did the right thing in appealing to the idea that creation proves there is a Creator, and that the conscience reveals God's moral law written on the human heart. No one has asked me to write this, but my hope is that it would serve as a reminder as to what Scripture tells us about sinful man and what our priorities should be as the body of Christ, sinners saved by grace, embarking on the great commission.

So what happened in my travels through the early chapters of John and Romans? Over the next five days I will be discussing Five Observations about witnessing to atheists drawn from these chapters of Scripture as well as the debate that occurred between Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, and those angry atheists. I hope that they will serve to galvanise and transform our evangelistic endeavors in the future.

Starting tomorrow: Observation 1

Go On To Part 2

Bananaman vs Alienman

Ray Comfort has just lifted his offer to $20000 dollars for 30 minutes of Richard Dawkins' time to debate the existence of God. Dawkins doesn't believe in God or "the flying spaghetti monster" but he does seem to believe in "Bananaman" - so much so that he's afraid to meet him.



Ray Comfort's recent book "You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence But You Can't Make Him Think" has caused quite a stir among the faith community of atheists (it takes a lot of faith to believe we came from nothing) and rocketed to #1 in Amazon's atheist category. This, of course, prompted a smear campaign of atheists bombarding Amazon's website with one star ratings for a book they've never read. Ray Comfort has done a lot of interviews and debates with respect to his book and from those I have heard so far he is doing a sterling job. I must admit, though, that you have to feel sorry for atheists in a debate - after all it's hard to argue that everything came from nothing, that order can come out of chaos, and that my great great grandmother had a hairy back. It certainly takes a lot of faith to be an atheist!

Ray Comfort was also the subject of a recent story on New Zealand's version of the current affairs program "60 Minutes". It is a really positive media piece on an evangelist. But the best part is seeing Ray riding his kid's bike to work!

Atheist Confessions About Witnessing - Penn Jillette

Well known Las Vegas comedian/magician and atheist Penn Jillette is known for being outspoken in his atheism (In January 2007, Jillette took the "Blasphemy Challenge" offered by the Rational Response Squad and publicly denied the existence of a Holy Spirit).

In this video Jillette recounts an encounter with a Christian who gave him a Bible and witnessed to him. Penn waffles a little at the start of the video but watch it through because his comments contain some very revealing (and convicting) information about what many atheists think about "lukewarm" Christianity. Check it out . . .

Scientists Discover "Belief in God" Gene

Well it was a long time coming but finally it's here. Scentists have finally unearthed the explanation as to why "dim" people (people who aren't as smart as Richard Dawkins) feel the need to believe in a Deity.



Romans chapter one tells us that this really is the great big cosmic duh!!

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools (Romans 1:18-22)

Next time you talk to an atheist remember that the issue to contend over is not knowledge but morality. The atheist loves his sin and suppresses the truth in unrighteousness. Their only hope is that God would open their eyes to their need for the righteousness found only in Christ. The Lord Jesus said "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied" (Matthew 5:6). My precious brother in Christ, Kirk Cameron, says that "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink . . . but you can salt his oats". That salt for the atheist is the fervent preaching of sin, righteousness, and judgment using the law of God as a mirror to help them see their true wretchedness. They need to see that it is their love for sin and not the lack of evidence that causes them to deny God's existence.

It is also important to remember that a belief in God does not translate to someone becoming a Christian. Belief in God is akin to stating the obvious and an outward sign that the atheist has finally humbled himself. He must be born again in response to hearing the Christian Gospel.

1Co 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

The Day I Came Out (Part 3)

The Battlefront of the Conscience (continued from yesterday)

The atheist can deny all he wants and try to argue against God's existence from an intellectual standpoint. It is both foolish and futile for the Christian to war on this front because knowledge is not the issue and some atheists are a lot smarter than I am. But try as he may, the atheist cannot explain why his conscience opposes his human nature. But we know why because God's Word tells us that God's law is written on everybodies heart and our knowledge of right and wrong testifies both to God's existence, and man's alienation from this God.

Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
Rom 2:15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.

"The evidence is not the problem Niels, it's because you love your sin too much". Niels, the atheist, stood there staring at me (actually he was sitting). I was at Defcon One preparing myself for a flying fist coming my way at any moment. I could see that my comment had really detonated a bomb somewhere inside of Niels. But then, suddenly he looked down somewhat embarrassed and said "I guess that's true".

From there I pleaded with Niels to look into the mirror of God's moral law and see his sinfulness. I reminded him that he will answer to the Creator one day Who sees everything he has ever done, spoken, and even thought. Niels could see that he had lied, stolen, lusted (which is adultery in God's eyes), and hated (murder in God's eyes), and that if the Bible is true then he deserved Hell. From there I had a reference point to make sense of the Cross and the hope of the resurrected Christ.

It seems ironic that in a world with so many "seeker sensitive" mega churches built on a catch cry of "relevance" that they have neglected to fully explain the universal guilt of mankind. I can't think of anything more relevant than the fact that "all have sinned". Sure it might get mentioned from time to time, but rarely is it explained. Sin by definition is transgression of God's law (I John 3:4) and I fail to see how an individual could fathom their sinfulness without an understanding of God's law.

Niels was shaken but not stirred to repentance, at least for now. But at least he now goes to sleep at night no longer deluded that his unbelief is based on lack of proof but rather his love of sin. I hope he wrestles with this reality and that it will ultimately drive him to his knees crying out for salvation. Pray for Niels, and for boldness in the mission field of atheism, and for wisdom to fight the battles that matter.

Reasoning from sin, righteousness, and judgment is effective with all sinners. Because they all have a common Maker, and what He says about them is always true.

Go Back To Part 2
Go Back To Part 1

The Day I Came Out (Part 2)

In the Trenches with an Atheist

In part 1 I discussed my recent adventure of going outside the four walls of a church building to do some open air preaching at a rock festival in Denmark. But there is another story from that day about a witnessing encounter with an atheist called Niels that I want to recount.

Yesterday this witnessing encounter was quickened to my memory as I helped a friend of mine Jens-Peter with renovating his house. We were making very good time so he stopped to ask me some questions regarding how I witness to people who don't believe in God. His assumption was that reasoning of sin and righteousness and judgment with a complete heathen would be a waste of time because they reject God's existence. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As I was handing out Gospel tracts (at the rock festival) a guy (Niels) spoke to me in an Australian accent. It turned out that he was Danish but had spent a year living down under. We got chatting about Australia and traded stories. He then asked me about the tracts I was handing out and I told him they had the answer to the million dollar question (it was a million dollar bill). He asked me what the million dollar question was and I asked if he knew where he would go when he died. It turned out he was an atheist and I started witnessing by revealing the proof of God's existence through creation.

Always in the back of my mind is the truth that the atheist already has knowledge of God but suppresses it in unrighteousness. This is why I didn't invest time in dazzling Niels with wizz bang apologetics (I'm not smart enough for the wizz bang apologetics anyway) concerning God's existence when the issue was not one of knowledge but of sin.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

These verses from Romans 1 tell us "that which may be known of God is manifest" in the unbeliever "for God hath shown it unto them". They are holding "the truth in unrighteousness". And what is it that testifies God's existence to sinful men? Verse 20 tells us the answer. The "invisible" things of God are "clearly seen" in God's creation "even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse". Put simply, the creation compellingly testifies to the Creator God Himself. I am not opposed to apologetics but in a situation like this, persuasion is not the problem. The atheist already has knowledge of God's existence and time is better spent trying to awaken this knowledge rather than try and win an argument with him. Because the atheist's problem is not a lack of proof concerning God's existence, but rather one of human pride and a love of sin.

As I spoke with Niels he told me that he didn't believe the witness of creation. Trusting God's word I then stepped out in faith and said something quite provocative to him. I told him "the evidence is not the problem Niels, it's because you love your sin too much". Time stood still for a moment as I beheld the shock on his face, I prepared myself to duck in case his fist came hurtling my way. One thing was for sure - now I had Niels' undivided attention!

To be continued tomorrow - The Battlefront of the Conscience

Go On To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

The Bottom Line With Atheists

Last year, after viewing the debate on ABC between Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron and the atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" I found myself initially walking away with mixed emotions. The chest beating male in myself saw it as a contest of Tyson v Holyfield proportions and was cheering for my guys (Ray and Kirk) to kick some serious atheistic butt. Having been heavily influenced by Ray and Kirk's ministry I was well aware that both Ray and Kirk are fine Christian apologists who have deep familiarity with the Scriptures and are very capable at going "into the ring" with the angriest of atheists. As I watched them argue primarily from the basis of creation and human conscience pointing to a creator I found myself screaming on the inside begging them to pull out the heavy argumentative artillery and teach these atheists a lesson. Many Christian commentators felt the same and launched some stinging attacks on both Ray and Kirk and suggested that they did a poor job of defending the case for a Creator.

My thoughts were that I loved Ray and Kirk and there ministry but I was disappointed that they didn't "go for the jugular" with their opponents. They failed in their attempt to convince the American public of God's existence......... or did they. It was at this time that I was slowly working my way through the book of Romans and the Gospel of John. By the time I'd hit chapter 3 in both of these books I was convinced that my initial impression of the debate was wrong and that Ray and Kirk actually did the right thing in appealing to the idea that creation proves there is a Creator, and that the conscience reveals God's moral law written on the human heart. No one has asked me to write this, but my hope is that it would serve as a reminder as to what Scripture tells us about sinful man and what our priorities should be as the body of Christ, sinners saved by grace, embarking on the great commission.

So what happened in my travels through the early chapters of John and Romans? I would like to plead with the reader at this point to biblically consider these following observations in the hope that they might galvanise and transform our evangelistic endeavors in the future.

OBSERVATION 1
As a Christian our primary calling is to preach the Gospel because the wrath of God is poised to slay our "opponent" at any moment and condemn them to eternal conscious punishment.
Most professing Christians can quote John 3:16 but are unfamiliar with the rest of the chapter. One who is familiar with John chapter 3 understands that "he that believeth not is condemned already" (John 3:18) and that "the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36). The atheist spends every day on the brink of eternal torment and the cruelest approach a Christian could take would be to engage in a debate without ever proclaiming the Gospel. I applaud Ray and Kirk for leaving their egos at the door and focussing first and foremost on giving a clear proclamation of the Christian message which is the (already condemned) atheist's only hope of escaping God's wrath.

OBSERVATION 2
A healthy understanding of our own depravity dissipates our desire to deliver a knockout punch and raises our urgency to plead with those who are lost.
Romans 3:9 asks the question "are we better than they?" and goes on to say "no, in no way" for we are "all under sin". The following verses go on to tell us that "there is none righteous" (v10), "none that seek after God" (v11), "none that do good" (v12), that the law of God "stops every mouth" from justifying and leaves the whole "world guilty before God" (v19), and that God's law brings "the knowledge of sin" (v20). A healthy grasp of this passage destroys any remaining traces of self righteousness and, with that, the need to compete with an ungodly adversary. But this passage does serve to remind me of my own guilt, that it is only an understanding of God's moral law that will stop the sinners futile self defense and, in turn, awaken his guilt before God. With this in mind, I see the biblical soundness of Ray and Kirk's approach in explaining God's moral law via the Ten Commandments prior to presenting the Christian Gospel.

The following observations really took me by surprise.

OBSERVATION 3
The atheist already has knowledge of God but suppresses it in unrighteousness.
It is worth asking ourselves the question at this point as to whether it is a worthwhile exercise investing time in dazzling the unbeliever with wizz bang apologetics concerning God's existence when the issue is not one of knowledge but of sin.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

These verses from Romans 1 tell us "that which may be known of God is manifest" in the unbeliever "for God hath shown it unto them". They are holding "the truth in unrighteousness". And what is it that testifies God's existence to sinful men? Verse 20 tells us the answer. The "invisible" things of God are "clearly seen" in God's creation "even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse". Put simply, the creation compellingly testifies to the Creator God Himself. My disappointment with Ray and Kirk in using the argument of creation instead of "deeper and more profound apologetics" was one of biblical ignorance on my part (it is interesting to not that some atheists did call in to talk back radio after the debate and concede that they did find the creation argument compelling). It is clear to me that Ray and Kirk showed great wisdom in realising that the atheist already has knowledge of God's existence and time is better spent trying to awaken this knowledge rather than try and win an argument with him. Because the atheist's problem is not a lack of proof concerning God's existence, but rather one of human pride and a love of sin. Understanding this has helped enormously with my witnessing activities because I have stopped wasting time arguing over God's existence and spent time trying to awaken the unbelievers conscience through God's moral law that brings the knowledge of sin which leads to my next observation.

OBSERVATION 4
The atheist already has knowledge of God and his conscience bears witness that he is alienated from Him.
The atheist can deny all he wants and try to argue from an intellectual standpoint. It is both foolish and futile to war on this front because knowledge is not the issue and some atheists are a lot smarter than I am. But try as he may, the atheist cannot explain why his conscience opposes his human nature. But we know why because God's Word tells us that God's law is written on everybodies heart and our knowledge of right and wrong testifies both to God's existence, and man's alienation from this God.

Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
Rom 2:15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.

By explaining God's moral law via the ten commandments prior to explaining the Gospel message Ray and Kirk actually gave the necessary point of reference in order to understand the Gospel and in so doing avoided futile reasoning on the intellectual level. I do not mean to discount the use of the intellect but rather to use it only when an individual is humbled before God. Brian Sapient and Kelly may have mocked and laughed but they have the knowledge of God and suppress it in unrighteousness, this I know for the Bible tells me so.

It seems ironic that in a land with so many "seeker sensitive" mega churches built on a catch cry of "relevance" that they have neglected to fully explain the universal guilt of mankind. I can't think of anything more relevant than the fact that "all have sinned". Sure it might get mentioned from time to time, but rarely is it explained. Sin by definition is transgression of God's law (I John 3:4) and I fail to see how an individual could fathom their sinfulness without an understanding of God's law.

OBSERVATION 5
People don't reject the Gospel because it wasn't presented in a clever or attractive manner, people reject the Gospel because they love darkness and hate the light.
Again, John 3 explains to us why people reject the Gospel. It is amazing how much neglected yet important information is contained in the verses following John 3:16. Information so important in fact that a working knowledge could have saved many "seeker sensitive" pastors a lot of time and effort with how they approached evangelism.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Again, I commend Ray and Kirk for avoiding the conventional route of clever argument and instead choosing to reason of sin, righteousness and judgement. It's not rocket science - people love sin and therefore hate the light of God's Holiness. With this in mind and knowing our own sinfulness and the incredible mercy extended to us by God, let us approach the task of evangelism with deep humility but strong urgency to show the sinner (as lovingly as we can) that his deeds are evil and his primary need is not happiness but righteousness. Reasoning from God's law is the only way to show the sinner his exceeding sinfulness and warn of the coming judgement as Paul did in his sermon to the pagan culture of his time

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

In the Old Testament God continually reminded the Israelites that they should remember that they were once strangers in Egypt. We Christians should humble ourselves in the memory that we were once strangers from God and that our redemption had nothing to do with our own merit (because we have none) but by God's grace so that we could never boast in anything but the cross of our risen Saviour. With this in mind may we plead with lost souls appealing to the Holiness of God, the wretchedness of man, the justice of God in punishing sin, that God punished Himself in our place, sealed our eternal hope through His resurrection, and that all men must respond in repentance and faith.

Cameron Buettel 12 February 2008