When Debating an Atheist...don't give up Christianity to try and prove the God of Christianity

The debating of nonbelievers on issues concerning biblical Christianity has become fashionable today. FOXNEWS and CNN feature evangelical leaders regularly on their respective news shows to discuss family and values and political malady for the social ills facing our country. Douglous Wilson recently engaged Christopher Hitchens through Christianity Today's online mag on the theme of "Is Christianity Good for the World?." And most recently the now infamous and somewhat controversial debate on ABCNEWS featuring Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort of The Way of the Master vs. two atheists Brian Sapient and "Kelly" of the Rational Response Squad.

It is clear, that faith is no longer on the sidelines--but is central in the mainstream media daily meta concerning the social, political, economic, educucational, spiritual and moral condition of our nation.

But how should we as believers in the Lord engage nonbelievers in the public square? What does the Scriptures teach us about our methodology in this area? How should we conduct ourselves among those who do not name the name of Christ? And what can we learn from some of the apologetic blunders we have seen of late?

Part one of this series will be more a list of what we should and should not do in the debating of atheists when given the chance on the national platform.

Part two will address in detail Paul's example on Mars Hill found in Acts 17:16ff.

And part three will try to equip you with some key Scriptures and points of engagement to stay focused upon when dialoguing with those who deny the existence of God.

Before beginning, I would highly recommend you carefully read SBJT Forum (The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology) thoughtful article featuring: D. A. Carson, Kirk Wellum, Todd L. Miles, Terry Mortenson, and C. Everett Berry on the subject “In the Beginning…” - discussions over science and origins.

Part One:
1. Contend for the once for delivered to the saints, faith (Jude 3). Do not allow yourself to be diverted to lesser means to try and scientifically "prove God's existence" absent of the faith and the Word of God. God does not set out in Scripture to prove His existence; He simply declares that He is... "In the beginning God..."

2. Prov. 26:4-5 "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes."

3. The purpose of apologetics, as Calvin says, “is not to convert the sinner, but to stop the mouths of the obstreperous…”

4. Don’t assume the unbeliever is neutral in his ability in evaluating "the evidence"; he does so according to his own lustful desires to assert his own world-view of how the world should be in support of his own sinful activity (Roms. 1:18-23; Titus 1:15-16).

5. Through biblical principles, show the unbeliever how his own assertions contradict his own world-view.

6. Don’t give heed or credence to the propensity of an atheists world-view that they have some sort of philosophical autonomy in respect to God, His creation, His Law, His existence, or His self-revelation through the created order.

7. Paul never used this kind of approach or argumentation in Acts 17:16ff while preaching to the Epicurean leadership on Mars Hill (Acts 17:16ff).

8. Declare the gospel of sola fide of Jesus Christ the Lord; don’t make an offer for the gospel (Roms. 3:21-26; Titus 3:4-7).

9. Demonstrate that the atheist assumes certain things about their "reality" that lacks sufficient "philosophical cash value." (see Dr. Greg Bahnsen's Great Debate against Gordon Steign on "The Existence of God").

10. That Romans 1:20 is not an apologetic for scientifically proving the existence of God. It is, however, the reason why God’s wrath abides on all people for suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. IOW, the “no man is without excuse” is speaking to judgment of the great sin of idolatry – which violates the first two commandments.

11. Notice also that Paul does not state here (Roms. 1:18-23) that this knowledge of God is “the result of careful deduction and reasoning so that the text can be used as sophisticated rational argumentation as an apologetic for God’s existence” (T. Schreiner, Romans Commentary, p. 86). Disbelief in what God has revealed concerning Himself leads one to rebellion against God and person and to commit the sin of idolatry. “Self-deification lies at the heart of human rebellion; ‘claiming to be wise they became fools’” (R. Mounce – Romans Commentary, p. 79).

12. “The Scriptures contain no formal or syllogistic argument for Divine existence. As you know, the opening sentence of the Bible already presupposes this by saying, “In the beginning, God...” The only form of atheism combated in the Bible is practical atheism (the fool has said in his heart there is no God – Psalm 14:1). The reason why the Scriptures make no provision against speculative atheism by syllogistic reasoning is that syllogistic reasoning starts from a premise that is more obvious and certain than the conclusion drawn from it; and they do not concede that any premise necessary to be laid down in order to draw the conclusion that there is a Supreme Being is more intuitively certain than the conclusion itself” (Dogmatic Theology, W.T. Shedd, p. 185).

13. Presuppositional apologetics from the Reformed worldview is the most efficient and effective way to engage atheists on their claims. Evidentiary apologetics allows for the unbiblical assertions for the neutrality of the sinner in regards to faith considerations, moral restraints, and ultimately does not prove the existence of the One Triune God of the Bible. At best it can only show a benign attitude for any god that man may design after his own liking.

14. "We do not prove the existence of the God of Christianity by first giving up Christianity. ...to employ this type of apologetic method is irreverent, dishonoring to Christ and is downright sinful." (Pastor Dustin Segers)