I got into a twitter conversation with an atheist named Alex a while back and found the conversation worth a read. Alex continues to try to push the conversation into the area of science and knowledge, yet had already admitted that he may be wrong about everything he thinks he knows. Ã‚Â If you engage in a conversation with an atheist, and he or she admit doubt about everything they think they know, the debate is over because you have demonstrated that the atheist has no knowledge. It is puzzling to discover why atheists would want to debate knowledge after they have admitted that it is possible they don’t have any.
I have learned that this is the Biblical method we should use to engage atheists. There is no reason to argue over the Grand Canyon, the Age of the Earth, the Flood, or Dinosaurs. Ã‚Â This is all a debate for people that realize we can have knowledge and truth. Ã‚Â The atheist is not at the place where he can admit knowledge and truth because to admit we have absolute knowledge would require belief in a God. You see, without someone who knows everything, we would be forced to say that we could be wrong about what we know. If we could be wrong about what we know, then we would have to say that we can not be absolutely sure about anything. Because the atheist denies the one who knows everything, they are forced to say that they can’t know anything.
If you would like to learn the basics of proving your faith, make sure to get the new “Think” CD.
Let the 140 character per statement debate begin.
Lewishamdreamer said: Eric A wise man doesn’t deal in absolutes like ‘the truth’ and takes responsibility for thinking for himself. 10/13/11 12:13 AM
Lewishamdreamer said: Eric It’s hugely disturbing that you’d disagree with a word I wrote. 10/13/11 8:58 AM