Romans 1: Are atheists without excuse?

Romans 1 is a theistic fav when it comes to "showing atheists the error of their ways". Here is the specific passage:

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes, his eternal power and divine nature, have clearly been seen, being understood through what he has made, so they are without excuse.

Ultimately, this is a cosmological argument for the existence of God. So according to Christians, the cosmos provides evidence for the existence of a Creator, leaving atheists without excuse on judgment day. But what on earth could we derive by simply looking at nature?

The text says that God's attributes are seen in creation. What attributes? We know from the Bible that these attributes includes jealousy, wrath, anger, love, kindness, peace. His eternal power? Omnipotence. And divine nature? Outside of time and eternal. So by looking at the birds and trees and stars can we derive the idea that there is a God who has these attributes? Even if it was possible, it wouldn't matter. What do I mean?

Christians over the centuries have made the standard of salvation clear: we have to believe on Jesus Christ as the Son of God who was sent from God as the propitiation for the sins of the world and that he was buried and raised from the dead and that he is seated at the right hand of the Father as Lord. Now tell me this: how on earth can any human being derive that from looking at creation? It's impossible.

Simply looking at the cosmos, at best, just tells us that there is a god. But Christians will claim that faith without works is dead and that just having a mental acknowledgement of God's existence is no better than the demons acknowledging God, hence the verse, "even the demons believe and tremble."

So if believing that there is a God is not good enough to make it to heaven then how does the existence of nature leave me without excuse on judgment day? Unless, the Christian is willing to compromise and say that someone can go to heaven only with just believing that there is a God, granted that they have never heard the gospel. However, this position undermines Jesus' words in John 14 where he says, "no man comes to the Father but by me."

Indeed, if there is no compromise from the standard of salvation which is confessing Jesus as Lord and believing in your heart that God raised him from the dead then atheists are with excuse come judgment day, or more correctly, if a day even exists.

Religion or Relationship?

I'm not sure if most Christians are aware of this but most atheists, namely American atheists used to be theist. But I suspect they might not be since in conversing with them, they speak to you as if your a lost sinner who has never experienced salvation or the Christian life before.

One of the main things that I do in my discussions with Christians is to immediately let them know that I was a believer for most of my life. I do this to prevent them from talking to me as if I have no idea what it is like to be a true genuine believer. In every case, I am accused of not being truly saved to begin with. This is a classic response from someone who believes in OSAS, or once saved always saved. They make all types of excuses as to why someone who claims to have been a believer was never "truly" a believer, but a false one. But I do find it odd as to how I could have been a believer for almost 20 years but never "truly" believed on Christ.

They typically respond by stating that I was merely just part of a religion and that I never had a relationship. What do they mean by this? Well, to the Christian mind, just being part of a religion means just that, being part of it. They consider you to have been someone who just simply went to church, partook in the rituals such as water baptism, church activities, etc. But, unlike someone who has a true relationship with Christ, your heart was not for Christ. Yeah, maybe you went through the emotions when the pastor was speaking heart warming words from the Bible with soothing background music but you never actually took the time to truly believe in Christ from the heart and receive him as your Lord and Savior and to have a real relationship with him.

So it is no wonder that they still continue to talk to you as if you are brand new to the Christian faith because in their eyes, you were never saved to begin with, you never truly had a relationship with Christ, you were just merely a member of the church and went through the emotions. And now as they talk to you they are trying to get you to go from one who used to be part of a religion to one who has a relationship with Christ, since to them, having a relationship with Christ compared to just being in a religion is like night and day.

I think any sensible person can see the immediate problem with their approach. They are forced to say that all "former" believers were never truly believers to begin with to maintain the integrity of their beliefs. Otherwise they would have to admit that maybe there is nothing supernatural behind their "gospel" message. But is this fair? They are essentially presupposing from the get go that there is no possibility for their beliefs to be wrong and they then shield themselves by convincing themselves and then trying to convince you that the problem lies in you, not in their beliefs.

But as my personal experience shows, I did in fact have a relationship with Christ. And I say that as a former believer, not as an atheist looking at it retrospectively since I do not believe in any of the supernatural claims of christianity. So, retrospectively I view myself as having a relationship with an imaginary character, the same way that children may talk to their invisible friend. And I usually demonstrate that I did have a true "relationship with Christ" by the fact that any verse that you can think of which speaks of how to be saved, I did it, and I did it genuinely from the heart. I was not merely just part of a church, but I truly had a deep love for God and Christ. I prayed to Christ, I thought about Christ and his sacrifice for our sins continually everyday, I read his word, I had faith in him, I meditated on him, I did my best to put it all into practice, I fellowshipped with other believers. That is not just merely being part of a religion, that is actually doing all the things that characterizes a true genuine relationship with Christ, at least by Christian standards.

After I finish explaining all this to a Christian, they are usually hard pressed at finding a problem, but it is obvious that they trying to find a hole somewhere so they can say, "Aha, that's where you went wrong, therefore you never truly got saved." If they are not able to find a hole in your experiences, what they will do is temporarily stop saying that you never were saved and appear to give you the benefit of the doubt. Then, as they let you share your current viewpoints as an atheist, they immediately use what you say as ammunition to discredit you and to vaguely tie that in to the fact that you probably never got saved to begin with.

I suspect that it is their primary objective to lump you in with those who have no experience whatsoever with having a "relationship with Christ" so they could try to lead you to Christ by traditional means. But this just shows that they only want to put you in a box so they can function in their comfort zone. Because if they did believe that you truly were a believer, then they would be forced to try to provide evidence, as opposed to just using the traditional methods of recruiting people.

basic theistic criticisms

Another long day at school with the constant stress of working on procrastinated assignments but yet I still managed to find time to get on Paltalk in the beloved Christianity section. For those of you who do not know, Paltalk is a chat network that allows you to speak on the microphone in a chatroom. It is way more structured and organized than yahoo chat. In Paltalk there is order, to talk, you have to wait in a line by raising a hand next to your nickname and the rooms are run by owners who have power to silence you or boot you out of the room.

Anyways, after dialoging and listening to many theists I have noticed that they almost always ALL use the same layman type of criticisms against atheism or atheists in general. I will lay out a few of the popular ones and give my 2 cents on them.

1. Atheists know in their heart that there is a God but they suppress the truth in unrighteousness, mainly because they want to live a sinful lifestyle.

Response:

This is a groundless assertion. On what basis does the theist make this huge claim about what's in the heart of all atheists? Do they think they are God now and that they can search the hearts and minds of men? Or did God somehow give them this secret revelation about the real truth of atheists.

In my opinion, this assertion is rooted in the fact that theists cannot fathom the idea of there being no God so they assume that everyone else is the same. But not being being to fathom something doesn't mean it is not possible. I cannot fathom fasting for 30 days, but yet its been done by many.

With the millions of atheists that exist on this planet, are we to assume that ALL of them are lying about their atheism? And that they ALL really do believe in a God but just simply suppress that knowledge in unrighteousness? Another problem which never seems to catch the theists attention is that if it is merely our desire to live sinful lives guilt free, then we do not need to go as far as being an atheist to do it. I can choose to be a Deist, for example, and live however I want without guilt. It's kind of awkward as to why one would go the lengths of atheism if all they have to do is pick one god out of the pool of thousands that will allow sinful behavior.

2. Atheists believe in nothing.

Response:

My immediate reply to the theist is to tell them that I do in fact believe in something. I believe that there are no gods.

3. Without God there is no reason to be moral

Response:

If were dealing with morals such as murder, theft, rape, etc.. then the simple reply is that prison sentences is a perfectly good reason to abide by the law. We as humans are social creatures, and we have to get along with our fellow man if we want some type of peace and harmony. Not wanting any trouble from people is another obvious reason to do good without a god. There are other reasons but these will suffice.

4. Atheism is a religion and one of its main beliefs is evolution.

Response:

This one demonstrates that the theist has not taken the time to look up the term 'religion' in a dictionary. Here it is:

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

Atheism simply means a LACK OF belief in a god. That's it. By definition, it is not a set of beliefs and practices. And believing in evolution is not a prerequisite to being an atheist. For instance, I can be an atheist and believe that life on earth was started by ET's. The idea that atheism is a religion is a huge myth which is embedded in the mind of just about every theist. It is a vampire myth, it just will not die.

5. Atheists who hang around and debate Christians are deep down inside seeking God and wanting to believe.

Response:

To add more clarity to this one, typically theists tell me that if I truly do not believe in a god then I should never go in a christian chatroom and talk to them and I should live my life never talking about God because who spends so much time debating something that they do not even believe in? Sometimes the theist will ask if I ever debate the existence of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

Obviously, it is not fair to compare the issue of God to Santa Claus. Why? Because while I agree that both concepts are myths, it does not change the fact that there are religions everywhere promoting this god concept. Theists try to spread their religious messages via street witnessing, international missionaries, prisons, politics, schools. They are IN MY FACE. And yet they expect me to just stick my head in the sand and stay quiet? I do not debate them because i am seeking a god, but because I am responding to their nonsense which they try to inject into the fiber of society. It is called standing up for what is right.

Later I will take a closer look at the issue of morality and demonstrate that the theists charge of how we are "borrowing from their worldview" is absolutely ridiculous and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the atheistic worldview of morality.

Peace.

Why Atheism?

Okay, so it's pretty clear that the vast majority of people (along with those before us) believe in a god. Belief in a god in our world seems perfectly normal, so normal to where most people do not even question it. Theists come up with all types of reasons as to why belief in a god is justified. So why consider or choose atheism? Or more specifically, why did I choose atheism?

Unlike what religion says, atheism encourages doubt, uncertainty, skepticism, and humility. It is the embodiment of open mindedness. Why deviate from the norm and begin to be skeptical to begin with? Well, it could be said that truth is the highest virtue, but it has become clear to me that living truthfully is still higher.