Share on
Apologetics for the Masses #529 - An Atheist Asks: Why Try? My Response...
Unsubscribe/Subscribe
https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter
https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter
Topic
An atheist presents what he sees as a cogent argument for not seeking truth. This is my response.
General Comments
First, I meant to have this newsletter out this past Friday, but annual IRS filings for a non-profit took a whole lot longer than I had originally anticipated. Isn't there some talk of abolishing the IRS? That would be the answer to a prayer...or two.
Still no word from the guy in South Africa that I featured in Issue #527 (Apologetics for the Masses #527). Hopefully he'll respond with something soon so that I can put it in my next newsletter, but, if not, I have plenty of other topics I can dive into.
Introduction
Okay, last week I told you about Barry the Atheist. He somehow got on the subscriber list for this newsletter. I first heard from him back in March when he wrote me an email after receiving a newsletter where I was taking Dave Armstrong to task over the supposed "dogma" of Papal Indefectibility. Barry accused me of "word wrangling" - the type of which, according to Barry, had been forbidden by St. Paul in 2nd Timothy 2:14. He said that he had done intensive study on the subject and that I was, for all intents and purposes, definitely guilty of "word wrangling". So, we went back and forth a couple of rounds and then I don't know if I just got tired of word wrangling over word wrangling or if the dialogue just sort of slipped off of my radar screen - which happens a good bit with dialogues since I get involved in so many of them - either way, the dialogue fizzled out.
Anyway, after the newsletter I sent out a couple of weeks ago, Barry sent me another email. In it, he makes an argument for why it isn't reasonable, for him, to search out the gospel "truth". I gave you Barry's argument as a "homework" assignment in the last newsletter. I heard from a number of you as to what you thought the issues were with his argument. In this issue, I'll give you how I am responding to Barry's argument. As always, I don't claim my way is necessarily the best way, I just claim it as being one possible way to respond to him. I'll re-print his argument, with my response interwoven amongst his words.
Challenge/Response/Strategy
Barry the Atheist
Protestant apologists tell me to avoid evangelism from Catholics, for evangelism by heretics is often how an unbeliever becomes a heretic.
Protestant apologists tell me to avoid evangelism from Catholics, for evangelism by heretics is often how an unbeliever becomes a heretic.
Catholic apologists tell me to avoid evangelism from Protestants, for evangelism by heretics is often how an unbeliever becomes a heretic.
My Comments
My Comments
First of all, I am unaware of any Protestant apologists who say to avoid "evangelism from Catholics," but that's a function of my not really knowing what the heck Protestant apologists say to other Protestants - outside of their apologetics arguments - more than anything else. I do, however, know of any number of Protestants that I have personally engaged with who, when confronted with sincere, rational, logical, and biblically-based questions about their beliefs, by this Catholic, will follow the path of brave Sir Robin from Monty Python and bravely run away away. They quite often refuse to engage with my questions and arguments.
Secondly, none of the Catholic apologists that I know of tell Catholics to "avoid evangelism from Protestants". There may be some out there who do so, but, again, I am unaware of them. Catholic apologists exist, for the most part, to teach Catholics how to respond to the evangelizing Protestant, not to run away from them. In my case, I tell Catholics to do their best to seek out Protestants who will evangelize them. Why? Well, for one thing, because truth does not fear error. For another thing, I tell Catholics that they can take the Protestants' zeal to evangelize them, and turn it around and actually evangelize the Protestants. The judo principle: Use your opponent's force against him. In my opinion, there is no need; whatsoever, for a Catholic to avoid a Protestant evangelist. There is a need, however, for the Catholic to know his faith so as to counter the errors of the Protestant's arguments.
All of which is to say, that I believe your argument, at it's inception, is weakened by a supposition that, if not outright false - at least from the Catholic side of things - is the exception and not the rule in regard to Catholic apologists. That particular supposition, however, does not outright invalidate your entire argument, so let's move on to your next point.
Barry the Atheist
Secondly, none of the Catholic apologists that I know of tell Catholics to "avoid evangelism from Protestants". There may be some out there who do so, but, again, I am unaware of them. Catholic apologists exist, for the most part, to teach Catholics how to respond to the evangelizing Protestant, not to run away from them. In my case, I tell Catholics to do their best to seek out Protestants who will evangelize them. Why? Well, for one thing, because truth does not fear error. For another thing, I tell Catholics that they can take the Protestants' zeal to evangelize them, and turn it around and actually evangelize the Protestants. The judo principle: Use your opponent's force against him. In my opinion, there is no need; whatsoever, for a Catholic to avoid a Protestant evangelist. There is a need, however, for the Catholic to know his faith so as to counter the errors of the Protestant's arguments.
All of which is to say, that I believe your argument, at it's inception, is weakened by a supposition that, if not outright false - at least from the Catholic side of things - is the exception and not the rule in regard to Catholic apologists. That particular supposition, however, does not outright invalidate your entire argument, so let's move on to your next point.
Barry the Atheist
If spiritually alive Catholics and Protestants have strenuously disagreed about gospel "truth" for centuries, despite both sides constantly quoting the bible, appealing to the original Greek, appealing to the "immediate context" and using bible inerrancy as a check on the accuracy of interpretation (your interpretation cannot be correct unless it harmonizes with everything else the bible says), then wouldn't both groups have to be fools to seriously expect spiritually dead people to manifest more accurate discernment?
My Comments
In these words of yours, there is an assumption which, essentially, constitutes the core of your argument, and which actually does miss the entire point of the disagreement between Catholic and Protestant. And this erroneous assumption does a great deal of violence to your overall argument. Yes, Catholic and Protestant (spiritually alive or otherwise), have "strenuously disagreed" about gospel "truth" for centuries. Five (5) centuries to be exact. For the first 1500 years of Christianity, though, there was no disagreement about gospel "truth" between Catholic and Protestant. You know why? Because there was no such thing as a "Protesant" during that time. Protestantism began, more or less, in the early 1500's with Martin Luther's break from the Catholic Church.
Which means that any claim, of any Protestant, as to what is or is not the gospel "truth," contra any particular Catholic claim of such, has to be tempered by the fact that the Protestant is making that claim untethered to the historic roots and teaching of Christianity. This, in fact, is where the problem with your assumption lies. The issue between Catholic and Protestant is not, at least on the Catholic side of things, an issue of whose personal interpretation of Scripture is the most convincing. The issue, the central issue in all disputes between Catholic and Protestant, can be boiled down to, essentially, one word - authority. Who has the authority to decide what is, or is not, authentic Christian teaching and practice? Who has the authority to decide what is, or is not, an authentic interpretation of Scripture?
For the Protestant - with the Sola Scriptura banner waving from the tallest spires of their churches and draped over each and every one of their pulpits - the answer to those two questions is: Everyone. Every single individual within Protestantism who has the ability to read, has the power to determine for themselves, as they feel they are being led by the Holy Spirit, in accord with their own private interpretation of the Bible, what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine and dogma. Yet, not a single one of them has the authority to bind any other one of them to their particular interpretation of the Bible. Does any given Protestant church have the authority to bind any one of even their own members, much less all of Christendom, to any particular private interpretation of the Bible? No. Does any pastor or any deacon or any council or committee of deacons have such authority? No. Which means, within Protestantism, each individual is, in essence, the Pope, Pastor, and Theologian of their own private church. Tell me, does that make very much sense to your rational atheist mind?
For the Catholic, however, any authentic Christian teaching or practice, is that which is taught by the Church...the 2000-yr. old church...that was founded by Jesus Christ...that has been guided over the centuries by the Holy Spirit...the Catholic Church. Any authentic interpretation of Scripture is that which does not stray outside the bounds of the teaching of that same church. The Catholic does not rely upon his personal interpretation of Scripture to determine authentic Christian doctrine and dogma. To do so would be courting spiritual suicide. The only reason you see us arguing about the interpretations of Scripture that Protestants make, is because Scripture is the only authority Protestants accept. They don't accept the authority of the church...any church. So we are, basically, simply engaging them on their playing field.
This, then, is my main issue with your argument - it is conceived upon a false premise. You seem to believe that the determination of authentic gospel "truth" is based upon the accuracy of any given person's private interpretation of the Scriptures. That is a thoroughly Protestant position to take. The Catholic, however, knows that the determination of authentic gospel "truth" is based solely on the teaching of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Period. No arguments between individuals. No personal interpretations.
Which means your question: "...wouldn't both groups have to be fools to seriously expect spiritually dead people to manifest more accurate discernment?" misses the mark entirely. The Catholic Church does not believe it is up to the individual to read the Bible for themselves in order to discern who has the "correct" interpretation of this or that passage of the Bible so as to determine authentic doctrine and dogma - whether it be amongst the myriads of different and contradictory Protestant interpretations competing for the title, or whether it simply be in regard to the overall teaching of the Catholic Church in regard to Scripture as a whole. The Catholic Church does not expect any individual - spiritually dead or alive - "to manifest more accurate discernment" than the Church itself.
And an important point to ponder here, is that you need to realize that all the Protestant churches say they get their beliefs "from" the Bible. In other words, the Bible had to have existed before the beliefs of their particular church had been formed. Which means, logically, the Bible did not come from any Protestant church, right? They all came into existence at some point in time after the Bible had been written. Which begs the question: If Jesus started a church before the Bible was written - which the Bible itself tells us - and if no Protestant church existed before the Bible was written, then which church did Jesus start? There is only one possibility. The church that doesn't say we get our beliefs "from" the Bible but, rather, the church that says the Bible reflects what was taught to it by the Apostles. In other words, what that church believes...what was taught to it by the Apostles as the Word of God...was put "into" the Bible, not taken "from" the Bible. The Catholic Church.
Now, let's see if we can close this out.
Barry the Atheist
If so, then they wouldn't act like fools, thus, they wouldn't expect spiritually dead me to manifest more accurate discernment, and at that point, I have the perfect excuse to ignore Christianity: If spiritually alive people cannot even come to agreement on gospel truth, I would have to be foolish to deem my spiritually dead self as having any chance of discerning such "truth", and I have no more rational reason to even try, than I have any rational reason to attempt any other feat that is equally certain to fail, such as jumping over the moon.
My Comments
So, again, the question is not whether we think someone who is spiritually dead can accurately discern the "correct" interpretation of Scripture amongst all the claimants to the title; rather, we believe in asking an entirely different question - or set of questions. The primary question should be: Do we think the answer to the question of whether or not God exists is the most important consideration of man's existence? And, if it is, then isn't determining the answer to that question something on which the individual should spend a serious amount of time, thought, and effort?
The Catholic Church says, "Yes," to both of those questions. Which means, if the Catholic Church is right, then it would not be the act of a fool to expect you to try and find an answer to that primary question, even if you are "spiritually dead". In fact, the Church would consider you foolish if you choose not to try and find an answer to that question. Your "perfect excuse for ignoring Christianity" is anything but. Instead, it is the ultimate rationalization for spiritual laziness.
Furthermore, in trying to determine the answer to that question, the Church believes God grants grace to those who seek Him with an open heart and an open mind, even if they be spiritually dead. The Church believes that God has placed an inherent desire for truth in the heart of every person, and that the stifling of that desire is at the root of much of the woes of our modern world. It is only through seeking that truth that we can become spiritually alive.
So, do not speak to me of the rationality of not seeking gospel "truth," when, in fact, it is the height of irrationality not to do so. If you are comfortable in your spiritual darkness, then do not try to wrap your complacency in the cloak of rationality. Do not try to justify your fear of discovering that which you do not want to exist by pretending your inaction is the model of sanity. Simply admit that you are uncomfortable with the thought of there being a God who may require of you sacrifice that you are not prepared to make. A God who may require of you to give up your personal godhead and submit your mind, heart, will, and body to the demands of the Eternal Godhead. Just admit it and go about your not-so-merry way.
But, I have to think, the very fact that you are taking the time to make such arguments to me, a perfect stranger, is an indication that the heart that beats inside of you is seeking the truth that God has created it for, and you are giving your utmost to stifle it.
Barry the Atheist
Thus, when I fail to even try, this is the most reasonable reaction in the circumstances. Thus, failing to consider gospel "truth" is reasonable in the circumstances.
My Comments
I will close by saying, again, the question you ask about expecting accurate discernment from a spiritually dead person is irrelevant. The question for you to answer instead is: Does God exist? That question is indeed worthy of your time and effort. It is indeed rational to pursue its answer. It is irrational to not consider the question. It is most unreasonable to not pursue the answer.
Regarding the truth between Catholic and Protestant, there is no rational question as to which to believe. I have shown, with simple logic, that there is not a single Protestant church that can claim to be the original church; that can claim to be more than 500 years old; that claims to have the authority to definitively decide, for all Christians, or even just their own members, what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine or dogma; and that can be said to have doctrine or dogma that is determined by anything other than the private, fallible, interpretations of man. The only question for you to answer in that regard is: Are the claims of the Catholic Church - regarding its founding, tracing its authority back to Jesus through the Apostles, the source of its teachings, its miracles, and so on - are these claims valid or not? If you can prove the claims of the Catholic Church to be invalid, then you have proved Christianity itself to be invalid and, thus, unworthy of your time. If, however, the Catholic Church has evidence to back up its claims, then it should be a pea under the mattress of your spiritual deadness.
My Comments
In these words of yours, there is an assumption which, essentially, constitutes the core of your argument, and which actually does miss the entire point of the disagreement between Catholic and Protestant. And this erroneous assumption does a great deal of violence to your overall argument. Yes, Catholic and Protestant (spiritually alive or otherwise), have "strenuously disagreed" about gospel "truth" for centuries. Five (5) centuries to be exact. For the first 1500 years of Christianity, though, there was no disagreement about gospel "truth" between Catholic and Protestant. You know why? Because there was no such thing as a "Protesant" during that time. Protestantism began, more or less, in the early 1500's with Martin Luther's break from the Catholic Church.
Which means that any claim, of any Protestant, as to what is or is not the gospel "truth," contra any particular Catholic claim of such, has to be tempered by the fact that the Protestant is making that claim untethered to the historic roots and teaching of Christianity. This, in fact, is where the problem with your assumption lies. The issue between Catholic and Protestant is not, at least on the Catholic side of things, an issue of whose personal interpretation of Scripture is the most convincing. The issue, the central issue in all disputes between Catholic and Protestant, can be boiled down to, essentially, one word - authority. Who has the authority to decide what is, or is not, authentic Christian teaching and practice? Who has the authority to decide what is, or is not, an authentic interpretation of Scripture?
For the Protestant - with the Sola Scriptura banner waving from the tallest spires of their churches and draped over each and every one of their pulpits - the answer to those two questions is: Everyone. Every single individual within Protestantism who has the ability to read, has the power to determine for themselves, as they feel they are being led by the Holy Spirit, in accord with their own private interpretation of the Bible, what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine and dogma. Yet, not a single one of them has the authority to bind any other one of them to their particular interpretation of the Bible. Does any given Protestant church have the authority to bind any one of even their own members, much less all of Christendom, to any particular private interpretation of the Bible? No. Does any pastor or any deacon or any council or committee of deacons have such authority? No. Which means, within Protestantism, each individual is, in essence, the Pope, Pastor, and Theologian of their own private church. Tell me, does that make very much sense to your rational atheist mind?
For the Catholic, however, any authentic Christian teaching or practice, is that which is taught by the Church...the 2000-yr. old church...that was founded by Jesus Christ...that has been guided over the centuries by the Holy Spirit...the Catholic Church. Any authentic interpretation of Scripture is that which does not stray outside the bounds of the teaching of that same church. The Catholic does not rely upon his personal interpretation of Scripture to determine authentic Christian doctrine and dogma. To do so would be courting spiritual suicide. The only reason you see us arguing about the interpretations of Scripture that Protestants make, is because Scripture is the only authority Protestants accept. They don't accept the authority of the church...any church. So we are, basically, simply engaging them on their playing field.
This, then, is my main issue with your argument - it is conceived upon a false premise. You seem to believe that the determination of authentic gospel "truth" is based upon the accuracy of any given person's private interpretation of the Scriptures. That is a thoroughly Protestant position to take. The Catholic, however, knows that the determination of authentic gospel "truth" is based solely on the teaching of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Period. No arguments between individuals. No personal interpretations.
Which means your question: "...wouldn't both groups have to be fools to seriously expect spiritually dead people to manifest more accurate discernment?" misses the mark entirely. The Catholic Church does not believe it is up to the individual to read the Bible for themselves in order to discern who has the "correct" interpretation of this or that passage of the Bible so as to determine authentic doctrine and dogma - whether it be amongst the myriads of different and contradictory Protestant interpretations competing for the title, or whether it simply be in regard to the overall teaching of the Catholic Church in regard to Scripture as a whole. The Catholic Church does not expect any individual - spiritually dead or alive - "to manifest more accurate discernment" than the Church itself.
And an important point to ponder here, is that you need to realize that all the Protestant churches say they get their beliefs "from" the Bible. In other words, the Bible had to have existed before the beliefs of their particular church had been formed. Which means, logically, the Bible did not come from any Protestant church, right? They all came into existence at some point in time after the Bible had been written. Which begs the question: If Jesus started a church before the Bible was written - which the Bible itself tells us - and if no Protestant church existed before the Bible was written, then which church did Jesus start? There is only one possibility. The church that doesn't say we get our beliefs "from" the Bible but, rather, the church that says the Bible reflects what was taught to it by the Apostles. In other words, what that church believes...what was taught to it by the Apostles as the Word of God...was put "into" the Bible, not taken "from" the Bible. The Catholic Church.
Now, let's see if we can close this out.
Barry the Atheist
If so, then they wouldn't act like fools, thus, they wouldn't expect spiritually dead me to manifest more accurate discernment, and at that point, I have the perfect excuse to ignore Christianity: If spiritually alive people cannot even come to agreement on gospel truth, I would have to be foolish to deem my spiritually dead self as having any chance of discerning such "truth", and I have no more rational reason to even try, than I have any rational reason to attempt any other feat that is equally certain to fail, such as jumping over the moon.
My Comments
So, again, the question is not whether we think someone who is spiritually dead can accurately discern the "correct" interpretation of Scripture amongst all the claimants to the title; rather, we believe in asking an entirely different question - or set of questions. The primary question should be: Do we think the answer to the question of whether or not God exists is the most important consideration of man's existence? And, if it is, then isn't determining the answer to that question something on which the individual should spend a serious amount of time, thought, and effort?
The Catholic Church says, "Yes," to both of those questions. Which means, if the Catholic Church is right, then it would not be the act of a fool to expect you to try and find an answer to that primary question, even if you are "spiritually dead". In fact, the Church would consider you foolish if you choose not to try and find an answer to that question. Your "perfect excuse for ignoring Christianity" is anything but. Instead, it is the ultimate rationalization for spiritual laziness.
Furthermore, in trying to determine the answer to that question, the Church believes God grants grace to those who seek Him with an open heart and an open mind, even if they be spiritually dead. The Church believes that God has placed an inherent desire for truth in the heart of every person, and that the stifling of that desire is at the root of much of the woes of our modern world. It is only through seeking that truth that we can become spiritually alive.
So, do not speak to me of the rationality of not seeking gospel "truth," when, in fact, it is the height of irrationality not to do so. If you are comfortable in your spiritual darkness, then do not try to wrap your complacency in the cloak of rationality. Do not try to justify your fear of discovering that which you do not want to exist by pretending your inaction is the model of sanity. Simply admit that you are uncomfortable with the thought of there being a God who may require of you sacrifice that you are not prepared to make. A God who may require of you to give up your personal godhead and submit your mind, heart, will, and body to the demands of the Eternal Godhead. Just admit it and go about your not-so-merry way.
But, I have to think, the very fact that you are taking the time to make such arguments to me, a perfect stranger, is an indication that the heart that beats inside of you is seeking the truth that God has created it for, and you are giving your utmost to stifle it.
Barry the Atheist
Thus, when I fail to even try, this is the most reasonable reaction in the circumstances. Thus, failing to consider gospel "truth" is reasonable in the circumstances.
My Comments
I will close by saying, again, the question you ask about expecting accurate discernment from a spiritually dead person is irrelevant. The question for you to answer instead is: Does God exist? That question is indeed worthy of your time and effort. It is indeed rational to pursue its answer. It is irrational to not consider the question. It is most unreasonable to not pursue the answer.
Regarding the truth between Catholic and Protestant, there is no rational question as to which to believe. I have shown, with simple logic, that there is not a single Protestant church that can claim to be the original church; that can claim to be more than 500 years old; that claims to have the authority to definitively decide, for all Christians, or even just their own members, what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine or dogma; and that can be said to have doctrine or dogma that is determined by anything other than the private, fallible, interpretations of man. The only question for you to answer in that regard is: Are the claims of the Catholic Church - regarding its founding, tracing its authority back to Jesus through the Apostles, the source of its teachings, its miracles, and so on - are these claims valid or not? If you can prove the claims of the Catholic Church to be invalid, then you have proved Christianity itself to be invalid and, thus, unworthy of your time. If, however, the Catholic Church has evidence to back up its claims, then it should be a pea under the mattress of your spiritual deadness.
Closing Comments
Please pray for Barry the Atheist, that God will plant a desire for the truth in his soul.
Donations
The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at:
https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations
or send a check to:
Bible Christian Society
PO Box 424
Pleasant Grove, AL 35127.
Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!
Unsubscribe/Subscribe
https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter
https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter
Share this newsletter on:
