FSTDT

(referring to Matt Slick's daughter Rachael)

In her post, even though she does her best to make the case that she couldn't believe something because of feelings alone and that unanswered questions drove her away from Christianity, she either knowingly or unknowingly admits why she really left the faith: the "freedom" to participate in a non-Christian lifestyle that she desired.

"Freedom is my God now, and I love this one a thousand times more than I ever loved the last one."

In other words, she left Christianity because she loved something more than God. Unanswered questions...living something you think isn't true...all these things really had nothing to do with it. She wanted to be "free."

Robin Schumacher #fundie blogos.org

As I said at the beginning, the ability of people to deny the truth about something can be breathtaking. But what's at the heart of such denial? What stops a person from even beginning to think that a particular truth claim could be plausible?

This is obviously a complicated subject, but for many, it boils down to one simple thing: they don't want the matter in question to be true.

Stories are plentiful about people with cancer who ignored the clear warning signs on the side of cigarette packs and the physical symptoms they were experiencing, of young girls who were literally nine months pregnant and who wouldn't believe they were about to have a baby, and even of individuals like David Irving who stood up in a Canadian courtroom and testified: "No documents whatsoever show that a Holocaust has ever happened."[6]

The will to deny truth can be extraordinarily powerful.

When it comes to God, some atheists admit this is the obstacle they face. Thomas Nagel has written: "I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God and, naturally hope that I'm right in my belief. It's that I hope that there is no God! I don't want there to be a God; I don't want the universe to be like that."[7]

Could Christians be guilty of this — of wanting God to exist so badly they turn a blind eye to truth claims that run contrary to theirs? Of course. This is one reason Christian apologists beat their drum so loudly and call on all believers to critically examine facts as the Apostle Paul demands that we do (1 Thess. 5:21).

Robin Schumacher #fundie blogos.org

You'd think at this point it's time for the Pharisees to cry 'uncle' and give credit to Jesus for a true miracle, right? Wrong. Now things get ugly as the Pharisees bring the man back in for round two.

The religious leaders begin by calling Jesus a sinner, which the man brushes off by stating: "Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see" (vs. 25). His reply is terrific because it forces the Pharisees to look past their presuppositions with Jesus and focus on the reality that's staring them (literally) in the face.

I love what happens next. The Pharisees ask the man to repeat his story yet again, to which he responds: "I told you already and you did not listen; why do you want to hear it again? You do not want to become His disciples too, do you?" (vs. 27).

Whenever I feel a discussion with a skeptic or atheist is going around in circles and I'm having to repeat myself with the evidence concerning Christ I've already supplied, I'll ask something along the lines of: "Before we cover this same ground again, let me ask you: what's the bottom line for you in this? Are you truly interested in knowing the truth about Jesus and ready to bow your knee to Him as Lord if your questions are satisfied?" You'd be surprised at the responses I get, a lot of which can be summarized as "No".

The reaction the once-blind man got from the Pharisees on this matter was visceral: "They reviled him" (vs. 28). The Pharisees aren't interested in following Jesus nor are they interested in hearing any more evidence or testimony that validates His Messiahship. They refuse to believe the truth they've found.

Robin Schumacher #fundie blogos.org

The ability for a human being to not believe the truth about something can be breathtaking.

Atheists and skeptics of Christianity consistently say that the reason they don't believe in God is because there is no evidence for Him. If they could just find the truth — good evidence for God and for the historicity of Jesus — atheists say that would make all the difference in the world, and they'd immediately believe.

But is that really all there is to it?

Deborah Lipstadt might have a thing or two to say about believing the truth. Dr. Lipstadt, who is the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University, may not be a Christian or have a dog in the fight of atheism vs. Christianity, but she knows a thing or two about the ability of people to turn a blind eye to evidence when it's offered to them. Lipstadt is the author of Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory, and has spent years studying the ability of people to reject truth.

While most people think that it's only individuals like Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who casts doubt on whether the Holocaust occurred, Lipstadt discovered that the Holocaust's historical validity is questioned by a far greater number of people than might be believed. Moreover, she found such denial has not only continued to gain adherents, but it has become a broad, international movement with organized chapters, supposed "independent" research centers (with cleverly disguised names), and various publications that promote a revisionist view of WWII history.

But what about all the evidence that clearly supports the historicity of the Holocaust? Lipstadt writes: "The attempt to deny the Holocaust enlists a basic strategy of distortion. Truth is mixed with absolute lies, confusing readers who are unfamiliar with the tactics of the deniers. Half-truths and story segments, which conveniently avoid critical information, leave the listener with a distorted impression of what really happened. The abundance of documents and testimonies that confirm the Holocaust are dismissed as contrived, coerced, or forgeries and falsehoods."[1]

In referencing Lipstadt's findings, am I attempting to equate atheists with Holocaust deniers? Not at all. Instead, what I'm trying to get across is the fact that, when it comes to a person choosing to believe or deny something, there is more to that event than meets the eye.

Robin Schumacher #fundie blogos.org

Regarding the persistent atheist complaint about evil, I've had the following exchange with atheists a number of times that helps them think about the thing for which they're really asking:

Me: You think God should remove all evil from this world?
Atheist: Yes, if God existed, He should rid the world of evil!
Me: What if He starts with you?
Atheist: [silence]

Robin Schumacher #fundie blogos.org

Lastly, I became a Christian primarily through the study of Bible prophecy. While studying engineering, statistics, etc., in college, I was confronted with and blown away by the prophecies contained within the Bible. Prophecies such as the destruction of Tyre (Ezek. 26:1-16), the regathering of Israel in our lifetime after thousands of years of dispersion (Is. 11:11-12; 66:7-8), Daniel’s prophecies about the rise and fall of Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, and specific leaders such as Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanies (Dan. 7:1-8; Dan. 8, Dan. 11) are so specific and on the mark that the only way skeptics have tried to refute them is by saying they were written after the fact; however, good historical investigation proves their claims to be false. For more information on these prophecies and others, see Newman’s compilation of evidence from Bible prophecy.[9]

Moreover, the prophecies about the coming of Jesus are simply astonishing. Over 100 distinct prophecies about Christ hundreds of years before His birth were made, which all came true. Peter Stoner, in his book Science Speaks, calculates the odds of just eight prophecies being accidently fulfilled in the life of one man to be 1017 or one hundred quadrillion.[10] Mathematicians point out that anything which exceeds 1050 power is the exact same thing as zero chance, and this probability is exceeded with 20 fulfilled prophecies (and remember, Jesus fulfilled over 100).

Concerning Bible prophecy, Blaise Pascal wrote: "I see many contradictory religions, and consequently all false save one. Each wants to be believed on its own authority, and threatens unbelievers. I do not therefore believe them. Every one can say this; every one can call himself a prophet. But I see that Christian religion wherein prophecies are fulfilled; and that is what every one cannot do."[11] It seems to me we have some pretty extraordinary evidence to substantiate the supernatural nature of the Bible and the God behind that Bible.

I could continue, but you get the idea. I think Christianity has some pretty extraordinary evidence on its side.

But, let’s now stop for a moment and consider the skeptic and atheist worldview. Do they make claims that would seem to necessitate extraordinary evidence?

The atheist claims that a cause (with a beginning all its own) possessing none of the characteristics of its effects created all that we know via time + matter + chance. That’s a pretty extraordinary claim.

The atheist claims that “Living objects . . . look designed, they look overwhelmingly as though they’re designed. Biology is the study of complicated things which give the impression of having been designed for a purpose”[12] but are not designed, and that the information (not data) contained with all of us did not come from an intelligent source. That’s a pretty extraordinary claim.

The atheist claims that either Jesus never existed or all the historical accounts written about Him are inaccurate, exaggerated, and cannot be trusted. Given all the historical evidence refuting such a position, that’s a pretty extraordinary claim.

If extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, then the atheist has some explaining to do. And that explaining needs to involve supplying the same extraordinary evidence that they require of Christians.