An "urgent request" about proving something.

[A]

[First of all, I am aware that the church has been having full discussions on various matters(which I have never attended) over Skype. I do not know whether the topic I am going to discuss here has already been discussed already or not. My apologies if this is indeed an inconvenience.]

If I am an atheist/agnostic/nihilist/etc. and if you wanted to convince me that:
1. The Christian God of the Bible exists and is the only true God that exists.
2. The KJV Bible is the preserved and 100% accurate Word of God and the so-called "contradictions" are not actually contradictions.(i.e. it is the absolute truth)
How would you do so?

I have tried to prove them, but I got nowhere absolutely, because the laws of logic do not justify themselves. Can anyone help me? This is rather an "urgent request"

[TheChickenWhisperer]

Chris helped to design this tract for people in prison, but it might help you.
https://www.creationliberty.com/downloads/TRACTprison.pdf


It the first paragraph, it gives proof that God is the one true God and that the Bible is the True Word of God.  I hope that helps.

[Jeanne]

First of all, YOU cannot convince anyone of the Truth; the Holy Spirit is the only one Who can do that. All you can do is deliver the message. If Stephen couldn't convince the religious leaders of his day that Jesus was the Christ, (Acts 7) nothing you say to anyone is going to convince them, either.

The same goes for the veracity of the King James Bible. Chris wrote a book-length article on why it is the ONLY preserved Word of God in the modern day.

https://http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/kingjames.php

He has also written a number of articles on some of the supposed contradictions. In fact, there's a whole section titled 'Contradictions' under the 'Articles' tab on the website.

I would not recommend Ray Comfort to anyone because there's a lot of leaven in his ministry, but the title of one of his books rings true: You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think.

[creationliberty]

But I wrote an article and did an audio teaching called "Everything You Need to Know About Atheism," but did everyone forget about that, or was it so boring no one knew it was there? I did send it to Nathaniel when he wrote me this same thing in email, but he gave no indication that he has read/studied it. That's why I gave him the link and did not respond further. I can lead a Christian to teachings, but I can't make them read.

[A]

Well, Mr.Johnson, I've actually read it quite a number of times, if I did not make this clear already in the past. I've honestly tried to arrive at the answer on my own on this issue, but I couldn't figure it out yet.

As far as I remember of it, what's relevant to this topic is:
- Without the Christian God of the Bible it's impossible to prove anything. This is due to the laws of logic
- However, the laws of logic are not justified in themselves. So, the scoffer can simply claim that he does not need to follow the laws of logic and walk away.

Well, that's the problem.
So, is there any way that we can justify the laws of logic or any thing else to prove such things?

[creationliberty]

Oh, okay... you never said "Yes, I've read that, and I would like to discuss some things in it." To the point that you're trying to address, I would say Jeanne had the right answer. The problem is you, not them. The problem is that you're trying to convert someone from your own intellect, which is not possible. You cannot fix their spiritual problem. You told them the truth, they denied it, so wish them a great day and depart. If they choose to deny or ignore the laws of logic, they are hypocrites because they don't live the way they claim to believe. At that point, leave them be and let them go on their way.
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
-Mat 15:14

However, based on previous conversations, I'm not necessarily certain that you are actually having a real conversation with someone because usually, a person who is actually having a conversation with someone brings up the details of the conversation and the arguments made to reason the matter out with all of us. Based on the history of what you've written me, you normally just speak "hypothetically," and if that be the case, then I would say you need to go find someone who says these things or makes these arguments, have that conversation with them, and then come back to discuss it.

So to your point #1, I thoroughly explained that in the teaching. I'm not sure what it is you did not understand. That's why I don't want to sit here and rewrite the entire teaching for you. You have to be more specific with your questions, which is something I have been telling you for years now.

To your point #2, why do you need to prove the preservation of God's Word in the KJB to an atheist who claims to not believe in God in the first place? The reason the transcendental argument requires a KJB is so that we will not be found as hypocrites when we stand on the presupposition of the Christian God (i.e. perfection requires a perfect God and a perfect Word), but for them, it does not matter because the law of God is written in their hearts, and by through the topic of morality, the truth in them is revealed.

Unless you provide some tangible details, no one will be able to help you understand this.

[Kenneth Winslow]

So, is there any way that we can justify the laws of logic or any thing else to prove such things?

How about the fact that your "atheist" used the logical law of non-contradiction as a basis for his objection to the supposed contradiction in the Bible?
If he's NOT going to use the laws of logic then he SHOULDN'T be objecting to contradictions in the Bible.

[creationliberty]

How about the fact that your "atheist" used the logical law of non-contradiction as a basis for his objection to the supposed contradiction in the Bible?
If he's NOT going to use the laws of logic then he SHOULDN'T be objecting to contradictions in the Bible.

Amen; that man would be a hypocrite.

[anvilhauler]

Even if someone doesn't approach an atheist and talk to the "atheist" about God and Christ they are condemned anyway because whether they like it or not God's existence is shown to them by the things that are around them.  Closing one's eyes and refusing to see doesn't make the whole situation go away.

Romans 1 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

I live in a very earthquake prone country.  If an atheist was trapped under a pile of rubble of a collapsed building and a fire was beginning to move in their direction I'm almost certain they would be saying "Dear God please save me, please save me, please don't let me burn to death, please get me out of here".

Whenever I talk to non-believers about the things in this world that could never have come about unless God created them then the non-believers always want to end the conversation and run away.  I became a Christian because of the things I saw around me and knew therefore that God who was unknown but known to me at that time must exist and I also knew I stood as guilty and condemned for wrong things I had done in my life.  You can imagine my surprise when I read scripture for the very first time like that quoted above.

As Chris pointed out.  You can try and tell people, but if they won't listen all one can do is let them go their own way.

Here's a sneak preview of the "atheists" in the future.

Revelation 6 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; 13 and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17 for the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

It looks like their "atheism" won't last very long when rocks start falling from the sky. "Dear God please save me, please save me, please don't let me burn to death be crushed under a big rock falling out of the sky, please get me out of here".

[A]

Thanks for all the replies. They've been more helpful than anyone else I know could help me on this matter.

I think I get the point now, though I still have one main point unanswered for me.
Are the laws of logic inescapable? Is it possible for someone to cast off the laws of logic? Or are they an inescapable part of existence?
I've honestly heard an atheist(I don't know what he is now) in person claim the existence of "infinite paradox". But again is the fact that he had to use logic, otherwise he would not be able to claim "paradox" of that sense. Though, I am still confused on the heart of the matter.

The Transcendental Argument for God's existence works this way:
The Laws of Logic exist - > The Christian God exists - > Since the Christian God exists and there can only be one non-contradictory truth, all other religions are false(including atheism, and all other religions one can think of)

But that argument alone requires the laws of logic to be an inescapable part of existence. Unless I truly can prove that is true, I doubt I will be able to close this issue once and for all. So, can anyone help?

[Jeanne]

I think you answered your own question there. You can't use the laws of logic to disprove the laws of logic. The heart of the matter is simply that atheists don't WANT to believe in God because they don't want to be held accountable for their sin. It's as simple as that.

A better way to approach this would be to ask the atheist if he believes evil exists and if he says yes, then ask on what basis does he believe that. How does he determine what is good and what is evil and why does he believe certain things are wrong to do? (The Bible says that the law is written on men's hearts, so they KNOW when something is wrong, or they wouldn't try to hide it; they just choose to ignore it.)

1 Timothy 4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

I believe Chris wrote about all this in his article; if it's not there, then listen to some of the podcasts he did when debating atheists. They're down at the bottom of the audio page, below all the weekly teachings.