Showing posts with label Agnosticism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Agnosticism. Show all posts

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Why Atheistic Agnostic Apostates Maintain that Their Former Faith was Genuine

Any thinking person should ask and answer this question: why do atheistic agnostic apostates maintain that their former faith was genuine? If their new-found truth is real, that there is no God, why should it matter what one believes? Why doesn’t the atheistic agnostic apostate just say, “My former faith wasn’t of the biblical saving type?”

There is one primary reason that this type of apostate will never concede the truth that he never had the belief that saves – he would knowingly establish the veracity of the Bible and its Author. This he could never do because it would prove his present worldview false and the Bible and its Author true.

Therefore, the apostate MUST maintain that his former faith was genuine or else the Bible is true. Specifically the Bible says concerning this type of apostate, “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us” (1 John 2:19). If he admits that his former faith wasn’t genuine he would now knowingly establish the truthfulness of the Bible.

So the apostate attempts to make people believe that there is nothing different from what he believed and what those who are genuinely saved believe. The reason is too obvious – if he admitted to not having believed then what reason would you trust his current belief? Therefore the apostate plays the “sincerity” card. He was sincere in believing and as such should have been just as much saved as anyone else. This means that his basis for salvation was his sincerity and not that God had actually shown him that these things are really true.

Now the apostate has double trouble. He wants you to believe that he was sincere when he claimed faith and love for Christ, faith and love for God’s Word, and faith and love for God. But now he admits that he was sincerely wrong then. How does he know that he isn’t sincerely wrong now? He doesn’t!

Be sure to get this – the apostate admits to being sincerely wrong about his former beliefs and wants you to believe him on his current beliefs because of his sincerity.

The apostate cannot and will not admit that his former faith was not of the biblical saving type because he would then establish the veracity of the Bible and its Author. The apostate can only claim that he was formerly sincerely wrong which means you have absolutely no basis for believing him now.

The apostate is unbelievable!

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Unwittingly Establishing the Veracity of the Bible and its Author

This is a response to Ken Pulliam, Ph.D. over at Why I De-Converted from Evangelical Christianity about his unwittingly establishing the veracity of the Bible and its Author in his post about Ken Daniels, A Former Missionary with Wycliffe Translators is now an Agnostic Atheist.

There are several problems in this post that are working against Ken Pulliam's truth claim rather than for it. Unwittingly he is establishing the veracity of the Bible and its Author instead of nullifying it. Both his testimony and Ken Daniels’ testimony are perfectly and accurately described in the Bible.

Ken Daniels said, “If I could patch things up by forcing myself to believe again, I would do so in a heartbeat. Unfortunately I have tried that several times, only to be besieged again by doubt, and have come to the conclusion that attempting to will myself to believe that which in my heart I do not believe is futile.”

The Bible declares that no man can will himself to believe – “Who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13 NASB). This verse not only does away with Daniels’ false notion that a man can believe of his own accord but also does away with his false credentials that you have put forward as evidence that Daniels was once a true Christian.

Daniels is right in this conclusion – “attempting to will myself to believe that which in my heart I do not believe is futile.” And what is necessary to be a genuine Christian? The Bible says, “That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9 NASB). The word confess, means to speak the same and be of one mind (same logic), which means that confession of Jesus as Lord is to say the same thing about Him that God says about Him because of illumination and not imitation. It’s the difference between a parrot saying that Jesus is Lord without understanding what it is saying and a person saying that Jesus is Lord with full understanding and logic so that the truth he is declaring is inline with what he believes in his heart.

The part of Romans 10:9 that says, “And believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead”, is the part that gives rise to the confession of Jesus as Lord. There is no confession of Jesus as Lord without the accompanying belief in the heart that God raised Him from the dead. The only alternatives are for one to say, “If God raised Jesus from the dead then Jesus is Lord”, or, “I sincerely know that the resurrection of Jesus from the dead is false.”

For the person that says, “If God raised Jesus from the dead then Jesus is Lord”, there is no belief in the heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and therefore there is no confession (speaking the same thing and being of the same mind) of Jesus as Lord but only parroting Jesus as Lord. The person that does not confess Jesus as Lord and believe in his heart that God raised Jesus from the dead is not a genuine Christian. He or she may profess saving faith but does not possess saving faith.

One who professes faith but does not possess faith may be sincere in his belief that he is a true Christian and as such would classify himself a “sincere Christian” but would nonetheless not be a true Christian irregardless of his sincerity.

So the combined testimonies of Ken Daniels and Ken Pulliam are this: Ken Daniels, “Attempting to will myself to believe that which in my heart I do not believe is futile”, and, Ken Pulliam, “You cannot force yourself to believe something that you sincerely know is false.”

Now if either one of you claims that your confession of Jesus as Lord was a result of believing in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, how did that belief in your heart come about? Did you will yourself to believe for a while against all sound reasoning? On what did you base your belief in the heart that God raised Jesus from the dead?