Dialogue Between A Christian And Negative Atheist:
This dialogue is fictional but inspired by the comments in this blog. Enjoy the dialogue between Christian, Negative Atheist, and Positive Atheist.
Christian: I have offered you six arguments for existence of God, what do you think about them.
Negative atheist: They are flaw, can you not see that? If you can’t then maybe that is your problem.
Christian: How are they flaw?
Negative atheist: There is NO evidence that can prove ANY god exists
Christian: But can you at least show me where the flaw in these six arguments for existence of God?
Negative atheist: It is just flaw, haven’t you read the mocking, jeering, and insulting of on these arguments found in the”clever atheistic bloggers and youtube clips, the arguments are just flaw, they have being refuted! Can you not see that?
Christian: Please share at least one flaw from these atheistic bloggers
Negative atheist: Kalam argument example, Everything that begin to exist has a cause. Where does god come from…what caused him to exist??
Christian: I think you misunderstood the argument. It does not argue for everything that exist has a cause, but everything that BEGIN to exist. God did NOT BEGIN to exist thus needs no cause.
Negative atheist: Then kalam argument is just another God of the Gap, everything that you believers can not explain is easily blamed to God. “God did it!”
Christian: That is false, Kalam argument leads as to a beginningless, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, immaterial cause of the beginning of time and material( the Universe) we, Christian call God.
Negative atheist: Yah yah! Have you not read that scientists can show that something can come from nothing given the laws of physics.
Christian: Is that not amazing, what part of nothing do “your” science sources do not understand!
Negative atheist: Well, molecules collided together and boom, we have the big bang.
Christian: Well, but there we already have something “Molecules”. How could that be something from nothing?
Negative atheist: Well, I am not a physicist, but I still think, kalam argument is a flaw
Christian: Yet you failed to show how so.
Negative atheist: Aha! this moral argument is just another “flaw”. Who say I need God to be good, I have being an atheist and good folk for over 40 years without believing in God.
Christian: Again you misunderstood the argument. If God does not exist, objective moral value and duties do not exist. The argument is not about whether you believe in God or not, but on God existence. It does not matter whether you belief in God or not. Example 2+2 =4 whether we belief it or not.
Negative atheist: Bla bla bla, the problem with you is that you keep saying I misunderstood the argument. My youtube, wikipedia and bloggers atheists friends agree with me that Christianity is just a myth, you do not have any arguments, we atheists are so clever not to waste our precious time with you non-logical people. It’s impossible to debate with you deluded believers.
Christian: Okay! Let say I am non-logical self-deluded Christian, Can you give good arguments/reason for me being an atheist?
Negative atheist: I am a negative atheist, I do not have to give any argument!
Christian: Oh! Okay, so I could as well be negative Christian, in that way I do not have to give any arguments for Christianity.
Negative atheist: No, the burden of proof is always on the believers, are you not a believer?
Christian: Yes, but a negative believer then. Because I have absence of believe in atheism.
Negative atheist: I suppose you could do that!
Christian: Okay, is that then not two rabbits in the hole? that we all now hold beliefs that needs no supported
Positive atheist: I have support! If God exist, then why so much evil! Evil and suffering proves that God does not exist
Christian: How is the presence of evil and suffering eliminate God?
Positive atheist: Your God is a all-loving, all-knowing and all-power. If that is true then your God will not allow people, mostly innocent little children to suffer.
Christian: That is a big assumption of God your making. How do you know what God will or will not allow?
Positive atheist: Because “he/she/it” is all-loving then he will not allow suffering.
Christian: Could God in His all-loving allow suffering for a purpose/reason?
Positive atheist: I do not see any reason why God would allow suffering!
Christian: My question is not If we can know or see God’s reason, but could God allow suffering for a reason?
Positive atheist: May be!
Christian: Well then the presence of evil does not eliminate God. More over, one has to assume that we are God’s pet and all that God want is to make His pets happy, is that not a huge assumption?
Positive atheist: Is that not what Christian’s say, “God wants us happy“.
Christian: In deed, but that is not the whole truth. Happiness that Christian God wants, according to the bible is the delight in Him in the midst of everything, including suffering.
Positive atehist: Oh, that is new!
Christian: More over, if God does not exist, suffering and evil is really at the bottom a delusion.
Positive atheist: How so?
Christian: Have you not read The Dawkinist Delusion, book, He say “at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.” Thus I think the presence of evil is an argument for God and not against.
Positive atheist: Yeh! But what about evolution!
Christian: Even if evolution is true, it does nothing to the existence of God. Could not God create a universe that evolved?
Positive atheist: But the creationist sites say God created the world in 24 hour-7 days.
Christian: I think one is not bound in reading the Biblical account of creation literal. Both Saint Augustine of Hippo(A.D 354 – 430) and Philo of Alexandri(20 BC – 50 AD), a Jewish scholar argued for allegorical reading of the account.
Positive atheist: Well, God is just a wishful thinking, one grows out of it, just like I did.
Christian: It being wishful thinking does not make God existence true or false. Can we look at the arguments I present.
Positive atheist: What arguments? there is just no proof for God. Which part do you not understand?