The following is my response to “Former Atheists Speak. 44 Quotes” by James Bishop of Historical Jesus Studies, and reblogged by the Concierge Librarian [52] and Pickering Post [53], wherein he quoted 27 “former atheists” [1] in an attempt to provide credibility to Christianity
So, without further adieu let us have a closer look at Bishop’s 44 quotes.
RESPONSE
The Claims of Warner Wallace
Bishop’s first “former atheist” is Prof. Dr. Warner Wallace, “a cold-case homicide detective, assistant professor of apologetics at Biola University, Christian case maker and author” [1], who allegedly “was once a vocal atheist” [1].
“In the end, I came to the conclusion that THE GOSPELS WERE RELIABLE EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS THAT DELIVERED ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT JESUS, INCLUDING HIS CRUCIFIXION AND RESURRECTION. But that created a problem for me. IF JESUS REALLY WAS WHO HE SAID HE WAS, then Jesus was God Himself. If JESUS TRULY DID WHAT THE GOSPEL EYEWITNESSES RECORDED, then Jesus is still God Himself. As someone who used to reject anything supernatural, I had to make a decision about my naturalistic presuppositions.” [1|2]
Well, I would love to see Dr. Wallace’s evidence, that “the gospels were reliable eyewitness accounts that delivered accurate information about Jesus, including His crucifixion and resurrection” [1|2], since according to my own research into the historicity of Jesus [as a former pastor and current atheist], there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE [5], that “Jesus really was who he said he was” [1|2], or “truly did what the Gospel eyewitnesses recorded” [1|2].
The mere fact that he is a would-be “former atheist” [1], and cold-case detective does not simply make it so.
Furthermore, it would seem like Dr. Wallace’s conclusions are primarily drawn from “eye-witness accounts” [3], which any psychologist would tell him is extremely unreliable. [4]
“If skeptics were willing TO GIVE THE GOSPELS THE SAME ‘BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT’ THEY ARE WILLING TO GIVE OTHER ANCIENT DOCUMENTS, THE GOSPELS WOULD EASILY PASS THE TEST OF AUTHORSHIP.” [1]
No I think skeptics should NOT give ANY ‘benefit of the doubt’ to ANY ancient documents, ASSUMING them to be authentic and true, especially not those claiming divine inspiration.
Or, would Dr Wallace give the Quran and Book of Mormon the same ‘benefit of the doubt’? No? I did not think so.
The Claims of Frank Tipler
Bishop’s second “former atheist” is Frank Tipler [7], “a mathematical physicist and cosmologist, holding a joint appointment in the Departments of Mathematics and Physics at Tulane University.” [1]
“When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that THE CENTRAL CLAIMS OF JUDEO-CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY ARE IN FACT TRUE, THAT THESE CLAIMS ARE STRAIGHTFORWARD DEDUCTIONS OF THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AS WE NOW UNDERSTAND THEM. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics.” [1|6]
I would love to know exactly what “inexorable logic” [1|6] and “straightforward deductions” [1|6] of “mathematical physics” [1|6] Dr. Tipler is referring to, since even those who agree with his Omega Point Cosmology “is highly critical of Tipler’s theological conclusions” [7] Among them Prof. Dr. David Deutsch, a British Physicist at the University of Oxford. [7]
It would seem like Tipler’s “inexorable logic” [1|6] and “straightforward deductions” [1|6] are not so inexorable, logical, and straightforward, as he and Bishop would have us belief.
The Claims of Alister McGrath
Bishop’s third “former atheist” is Alister McGrath, a “theologian, scientist, and a priest.” [1]
“ATHEISM, I BEGAN TO REALIZE, RESTED ON A LESS-THAN-SATISFACTORY EVIDENTIAL BASIS. The arguments that had once seemed bold, decisive, and conclusive increasingly turned out to be circular, tentative, and uncertain.” [1|8]
And here McGrath exposes his ignorance of Atheism, since as I have explained in “Science Cannot Explain It, Therefore Goddidit”, Atheism does NOT rest on science [“an evidential basis”] to begin with.
“We are not atheists because we have all the answers. We are atheists because we consider the concept of a ‘god’ as flawed and counter-intuitive; the ‘holy books’ as erroneous, unreliable, and often self-contradictory; and organized religion as essentially corrupt… That is why any attempt at refuting scientific theories are pointless, since doing so will in no way undermine Atheism. Discrediting science, does not auto-magically accredit god. I have yet to meet anyone, who became an atheist, because of science. Virtually every atheist I ever met lost their faith after studying the Bible, the Quran, or the Book of Mormon.” [9]
The second quote from McGrath reads:
“CHRISTIANITY OFFERS A WORLDVIEW THAT LEADS TO THE GENERATION OF MORAL VALUES AND IDEALS that are able to give moral meaning and dignity to our existence.” [1|10]
So let me try and understand this correctly. McGrath is trying to tell us that the Bible’s “moral values and ideals” give “moral meaning and dignity” to our existence.
Bullshit! The Bible condones everything from slavery (Lev. 25v44-46; Ex. 21v2-11, v20-21; Eph. 6v5) to infanticide (Ex. 12v29; 1 Sam. 15v3; Ps. 135v8, 136v10, 137v8-9) and murder (Lev. 20v9; Judg. 11v30-40; Deut. 21v18-21; Ex. 12v29; 2 Kgs. 2v23-24) – as long as, of course, it is done in the name of God.
Tell that to the youngest daughter of Jephthah, who was burned as a sacrifice to God at His request. (Judges 11v30-40)
Even if McGrath’s statement was true, do we simply adopt any belief system solely because it teaches some form of morality?! No? I did not think so.
The Claims of Lee Strobel
Bishop’s fourth “former atheist” is Lee Strobel, once “a self-described militant atheist who worked at the Chicago Tribune. He is now a widely known Christian author, journalist, apologist and pastor, as well as author of the book Case For Christ.” [1]
“It was THE EVIDENCE FROM SCIENCE AND HISTORY that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” [1|11]
What “evidence from science and history” [1|11] would that be? I have searched long and hard to find ANY evidence from science and history [5]. But I guess we will just have to take Mr Strobel’s word for it?!
“To be honest, I didn’t want to believe that CHRISTIANITY COULD RADICALLY TRANSFORM SOMEONE’S CHARACTER AND VALUES. It was much easier to raise doubts and manufacture outrageous objections than to consider the possibility that God actually could trigger a revolutionary turn-around in such a depraved and degenerate life.” [1|11]
What?! Christianity radically transform someone’s character and values?! Not according to the latest statistics. But then again, you will probably pull that “get-out-of-jail-free card”, claiming that “they weren’t really Christians”. How convenient.
“… THE SCIENTIFIC DATA POINT POWERFULLY TOWARD THE EXISTENCE OF A CREATOR and that THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION ESTABLISHES CONVINCINGLY THAT JESUS IS DIVINE.” [1|12]
What “scientific data point powerfully toward the existence of a Creator” [1|12]?
What “historical evidence for the resurrection establishes convincingly that Jesus is divine” [1|12]? I could not find any. [5]
The Claims of Rick Oliver
Bishop’s fifth “former atheist” is Dr. Rick Oliver of Confound The Wise, with a “Ph.D. in Biology from the University of California, Irvine. He is a member of the American Federation of Herpetoculturalists, the California Science Teachers Association, and the New York Academy of Science.” [1]
“I remember how frustrated I became when, as a young atheist, I examined specimens under the microscope. I would often walk away and try to convince myself THAT I WAS NOT SEEING EXAMPLES OF EXTRAORDINARY DESIGN, BUT MERELY THE PRODUCT OF SOME RANDOM, UNEXPLAINED MUTATIONS.” [1|14]
Oh my word, Dr. Oliver still on the pseudoscientific Intelligent Design bandwagon?! [13]
The Claims of Sir William Ramsay
Bishop’s sixth “former atheist” is Sir William Ramsay (1851-1939), “a Scottish archaeologist and New Testament scholar. By his death in 1939 he had become the foremost authority of his day on the history of Asia Minor and a leading scholar in the study of the New Testament.” [1]
“CHRISTIANITY DID NOT ORIGINATE IN A LIE; and we can and ought to demonstrate this as well as believe it.” [1|15]
No, it actually did. [5]
“Further study . . . showed that THE BOOK (ACTS) COULD BEAR THE MOST MINUTE SCRUTINY AS AN AUTHORITY FOR THE FACTS OF THE AEGEAN WORLD, AND THAT IT WAS WRITTEN WITH SUCH JUDGMENT, SKILL, ART AND PERCEPTION OF TRUTH AS TO BE A MODEL OF HISTORICAL STATEMENT.” [1|15]
FALSE. The historical accuracy of various passages from the book of acts are disputed. [16|17]
The Claims of C.S. Lewis
Bishop’s seventh “former atheist” is Prof. Dr. C.S. Lewis (1898-1963), “one of the most widely read Christian apologetic authors today. He is the mind behind the Narnia entertainment series, and some of his most popular Christian writings read widely today are Mere Christianity and The Screwtape Letters.” [1]
“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.” [1|21]
Now what kind of argument is that? Atheism is too simple therefore God?! This is not “mere Christianity”, it’s “mere idiocy”.
“Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” [1|22]
What? We can only trust the way our brain thinks IF it was created by an intelligent creator? What nonsense.
This quote itself should serve as ample proof, that there was absolutely no intelligence involved in designing Lewis’ brain for the purpose of thinking.
His feebleness of mind is further demonstrated in his denial of both, the Inerrancy of Scripture and the Divinity of Christ, when in references to Matthew Chapter 23 Verse 36, Matthew Chapter 24 Verse 34, Mark Chapter 13 Verse 30 and Luke Chapter 21 Verse 32, he concludes:
“The apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘This generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And He was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else. This is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” [18|19|20]
Not because he denies the Inerrancy of Scripture or the Divinity of Christ, but because he does so on the basis of a literal interpretation of a figurative passage.
Lewis was not only a shitty “former atheist”, but also a shitty theologian.
Now as an atheist I really couldn’t give a wooden nickel, but one would think that a Christian like Bishop would?!
Lewis continues:
“A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. GOD IS, IF I MAY SAY IT, VERY UNSCRUPULOUS.” [1|23]
Agreed. So is his ministers. In the words of George Eglington Dix, “It is no accident that the symbol of a bishop is a crook, and the sign of an archbishop is a double-cross.” [24]
The Claims of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Bishop’s eight “former atheist” is Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), “a Russian writer, and winner of the 1970 Nobel Prize in literature. He was pivotal in revealing what life was like in the days of the atheistic communist Soviet Union. He is the mind behind his powerful book Voice from the Gulag.” [1]
“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.’ Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.'” [1|25]
As if all atheists are communists. But I tell you what: we will “own” communism, just as soon as you “own” the crusades, slavery, racism, and sexism – all in the name of God.
The Claims of Antony Flew
Bishop’s ninth “former atheist” is Antony Flew (1923-2010), who “was a world leading atheist philosopher who belonged to the analytic and evidentialist schools of thought. He was known as a strong advocate of atheism, arguing that one should presuppose atheism until empirical evidence of a God surfaces. He also criticised the idea of life after death, the free will defence to the problem of evil, and the meaningfulness of the concept of God. In 2003 he was one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto. In 2004 he stated an allegiance to deism, more specifically a belief in the Aristotelian God. He stated that in keeping his lifelong commitment to go where the evidence leads, he now believed in the existence of a god.” [1]
“It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA RESEARCH HAVE PROVIDED MATERIALS FOR A NEW AND ENORMOUSLY POWERFUL ARGUMENT TO DESIGN.” [1|26]
Yes, Dr. Flew also fell for the pseudoscientific Intelligent Design nonsense. [13]
“I now believe there is a god … I NOW THINK IT [THE EVIDENCE] DOES POINT TO A CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE ALMOST ENTIRELY BECAUSE OF THE DNA INVESTIGATIONS. What I think the DNA material has done is that IT HAS SHOWN, BY THE ALMOST UNBELIEVABLE COMPLEXITY OF THE ARRANGEMENTS WHICH ARE NEEDED TO PRODUCE LIFE, THAT INTELLIGENCE MUST HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN GETTING THESE EXTRAORDINARILY DIVERSE ELEMENTS TO WORK TOGETHER.” [1|26]
Dr. Flew’s belief in Intelligent Design is “almost entirely” [1|26] [by his own admission] based on “DNA investigations” [1|26], pointing to “a creative Intelligence” [1|26], which “must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements to work together” [1|26], to account for “the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life” [1|26].
But, according to Prof. Dr. James A. Shapiro, Professor of Microbiology at the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the University of Chicago, the latest research into the nature of cells “puts all of our thinking about biological processes into a very different context than the ones under which the 19th century and 20th century evolutionists operated.” [27] Dr. Shapiro explains:
“This relates directly to my own work, and was first demonstrated by a woman named Barbara McClintock … is that hereditary innovation is not accidental, it’s not random, it is actually an active function of cells, and that cells generate their own hereditary innovation. And they do this in a large number of different ways…. and since genetic change or hereditary innovation is an active cellular process, like all active cellular processes, it is subject to control. It is not accidental… We need to change our thinking about what a genome is. The conventional view is that the genome is a read-only memory, which undergoes accidental changes as it is duplicated and passed on to new cells. That’s the basic conventional wisdom. WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY IS, THAT CELLS CAN CHANGE THEIR DNA, FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSES, AND THAT THE GENOME IS ACTUALLY A READ-WRITE MEMORY SYSTEM. AND THAT FORCES US TO THINK OF EVOLUTION IN A DIFFERENT WAY…. The DNA record tells us that major steps in genome evolution have involved rapid genome-wide changes …. These possibilities were readily ignored by Darwin and his followers, [who] was very insistent on the accumulation of small changes over long periods of time. Even his friend, Thomas Huxley, said that THE GRADUALISM IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE THEORY, it was the Natural Selection, and he should give up on that…. the DNA record tells us exactly what kinds of changes can occur…. WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE BOTH FROM GENOME SEQUENCE ANALYSIS AND FROM MOLECULAR GENETIC ANALYSIS OF CELLS CHANGING THEIR DNA IN REAL-TIME, WE KNOW OF MOLECULAR PROCESSES THAT ALLOW US TO THINK OF COMPLEX EVOLUTIONARY EVENTS, AND IN PARTICULAR THE RAPID EVOLUTION OF CIRCUITS WITHIN THE GENOME AND WITHIN THE CELL AND MULTI-COMPONENT ADAPTATIONS. This is the point that the Intelligent Design people have been chipping away at, saying Darwinism doesn’t explain this. I think the critique is right, but I don’t agree with the solution. I don’t think we need to invoke the supernatural. In any way, in science you never invoke the supernatural. You always look for the naturalistic explanation. And if we just look at the history of science, we see that things which seemed to be supernatural … are perfectly natural things.” [27]
In other words, Molecular Biology can now account for “the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life” [1|26], without the need for “a creative Intelligence” [1|26].
Yet, Dr Flew continues:
“… WE HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE WE NEED IN OUR IMMEDIATE EXPERIENCE and that only a deliberate refusal to ‘look’ is responsible for atheism of any variety.” [1|26]
No, you ASSUMED that you had “all the evidence [you] need in [your] immediate experience” [1|26], but it turns out you didn’t.
But I will cut you some slack, since you were 81 after all, when you came to these new “insights”.
The Claims of Francis Collins
Bishop’s tenth “former atheist” is Dr. Francis Collins (1950-), “a geneticist noted for his discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project, he is also the director of the National Institutes of Health. Collins has written a number of books on science, medicine, and spirituality, including the New York Times bestseller, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.” [1]
“I believe God did intend, in giving us intelligence, to give us the opportunity to investigate and appreciate the wonders of His creation. He is not threatened by our scientific adventures.” [1|28]
“The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. He can be worshipped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate and beautiful – and it cannot be at war with itself. Only we imperfect humans can start such battles. And only we can end them.” [1|29]
I guess if you ASSUME he exists, all of the above would be true.
The Claims of Peter Hitchens
Bishop’s eleventh “former atheist” is Peter Hitchens (1951-), younger brother of Christoper Hitchens (1949-2011), and “a widely know English journalist and author. He has published six books, including The Abolition of Britain, The Rage Against God and The War We Never Fought. He also writes for Britain’s The Mail on Sunday newspaper and is a former foreign correspondent in Moscow and Washington. In his book The Rage Against God: How Atheism Led Me to Faith he tells us of his conversion from militant atheist to Christian theism.” [1]
“I thought this gesture [burning his Bible] was a way of showing that I had finally rejected all the things that I had been brought up to believe, and I went on to behave for the next 20 years of my life exactly as if I didn’t believe in him [God], and that’s how I discovered in the end that what I had rejected was right.” [1|30]
So you discovered the Bible was right, because you rejected and burned it? The logic is ‘strong’ with this one.
“The current intellectual assault on God in Europe and North America is in fact a specific attack on Christianity – the faith that stubbornly persists in the morality, laws, and government of the major Western countries…. The God they fight is the Christian God, because he is their own God…. God is the leftists’ chief rival. Christian belief, by subjecting all men to divine authority and by asserting in the words ‘My kingdom is not of this world’ that the ideal society does not exist in this life, is the most coherent and potent obstacle to secular utopianism…. the Bible angers and frustrates those who believe that the pursuit of a perfect society justifies the quest for absolute power.” [1|30]
No, the “current intellectual assault” is against idiocy. And the reason why “the Bible angers and frustrates” us, is because it is neither inspired, nor inerrant [31], yet demands the allegiance of millions.
“… when it comes to the millions of small and tedious good deeds that are needed for a society to function with charity, honesty, and kindness, A SHORTAGE OF BELIEVING CHRISTIANS WILL LEAD TO THAT SOCIETY’S DECAY.” [1|30]
Always ready to take the credit for all that is good in society … as if Christians are the only ones performing “millions of small and tedious good deeds that are needed for a society to function with charity, honesty, and kindness” [1|30] What nonsense!
Not only do we have numerous other religions engaged in Social Upliftment, Poverty Alleviation, and Educational Initiatives, but also a wide variety of non-religious ones, like the Foundation Beyond Belief, the Richard Dawkins Foundation, Sparkle Kids, The Jobs Fund, the United Nations (UN), the Atheists, Agnostics, Skeptics, Freethinkers, Secular Humanists and the Non-Religious (AASFSHNR) at Kiva.org, and a variety of government institutions, none of which require a pledge of allegiance to any imaginary friend.
A shortage of believing Christians will, however, lead to the decay of superstition, indoctrination, and rampant anti-intellectualism.
The Claims of Richard Morgan
Bishop’s twelth “former atheist” is Richard Morgan, “once a Mormon who converted to atheism, became a Christian after participating in debates and online discussions, especially discussions at Richard Dawkins’ official site.” [1]
“SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY DO NOT HAVE THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING. If you are willing to listen with an open mind and an open heart and just say ‘perhaps I do not possess all the truth,’ that is an act of humility and I know that God never rejects or ignores acts of humility.” [1|32]
Correct. BUT, the truth is that Science and Philosophy never claimed to “have the answer to everything” [1|32] – at least not yet.
As I have already explained in “Science Cannot Explain It, Therefore Goddidit” [9]:
“We are not atheists because we have all the answers. We are atheists because we consider the concept of a ‘god’ as flawed and counter-intuitive; the ‘holy books’ as erroneous, unreliable, and often self-contradictory; and organized religion as essentially corrupt… That is why any attempt at refuting scientific theories are pointless, since doing so will in no way undermine Atheism. Discrediting science, does not auto-magically accredit god. I have yet to meet anyone, who became an atheist, because of science. Virtually every atheist I ever met lost their faith after studying the Bible, the Quran, or the Book of Mormon.” [9]
The only ones who do think they have the answer to everything is, of course, Christians – and that because they have a book.
If you are willing to listen with an open mind and an open heart and just say ‘perhaps I do not possess all the truth’ [5|31], that is an act of humility and I know that we atheists never rejects or ignores acts of humility.
The Claims of Philip Vander Elst
Bishop’s thirteenth “former atheist” is Philip Vander Elst, “a freelance writer and lecturer who has spent nearly 30 years in politics and journalism, and now works with Areopagus Ministries.” [1]
“So, confronted by all these facts and arguments – philosophical, scientific, and historical – I surrendered my sword of unbelief to God, and asked Jesus to forgive my sins and come into my life during the hot, dry summer of 1976. In the years that have followed, I have never regretted that decision, despite many ups and downs and trials of my faith.” [1|33]
Philosophical, scientific and historical facts in favor of Christianity? This I’ve got to see.
The Claims of A.S.A. Jones
Bishop’s fourteenth “former atheist” is A.S.A. Jones, “a devout atheist for over 20 years before finally managing to see the biblical truths that had managed to elude him for so long.” [1]
“MY ATHEISTIC PHILOSOPHY HAD ALLOWED ME TO LOSE MY COMPASSION FOR OTHERS. I NO LONGER HAD THE ABILITY TO LOVE ANYONE, NOT EVEN MYSELF. I had become apathetic to life itself. For years, I had been dead, but because I continued to walk and talk, I didn’t know it. But now, I was born again and the spirit that was in me, which had allowed me to understand spiritual things, connected with the glorious and perfect higher consciousness of Jesus Christ.” [1|34]
If your atheistic philosophy allowed you to lose your compassion for others, I doubt you had much of an atheistic philosophy or compassion to begin with.
My atheistic philosophy only made me more compassionate and loving to others and myself, including those who do not think like me, like what I like, believe what I believe, live like I live, and look like I do.
Psychologically speaking, any sense of purpose, religious or otherwise, that brings meaning to your life will thwart Apathy [35] and Depression.
Yours just happened to be Christianity.
The Claims of Craig S. Keener
Bishop’s fifteenth “former atheist” is Prof. Dr. Craig Keener, “a leading scholar, and professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary. Craig received his Ph.D. in New Testament Studies and Christian Origins from Duke University.” [1]
“I thought that atheism was ‘smart.’ When my grandmother argued for a first cause, I replied by postulating an infinite regression of causes (my arrogance left me unaware that my response violated modern physics!) Yet unknown to me, my father’s mother, sister, and the sister’s family were praying for our family. When I was 13, reading Plato raised for me the question of life after death, but Plato’s answers did not seem adequate. I began to realize that only an infinite Being could guarantee the hope of eternal life. Yet if such a Being existed, there seemed no reason why that Being would care about me, even if that Being were perfectly loving enough to give life to some. I was incurably selfish and undeserving of a loving Being’s attention; it seemed to me that if I pretended to love, it was only for the self-serving purpose of getting that Being’s attention. Yet shortly before I turned 15, I began to secretly cry out, ‘God, if You are there – please show me.'” [1|36]
It would seem like Dr. Keener is under the impression, that “postulating an infinite regression” [1|36] is the only possible response to the First Cause Kalām Cosmological Argument.
Unfortunately for Dr. Keener, however, there are a number of naturalistic theories in response to the First Cause Kalām Cosmological Argument, that does NOT ‘violate modern physics’. [37]
It would seem, however, from Dr Keener’s own testimony, that it was in fact “the question of life after death” [1|36] that drove his ascent to Christianity, rather than science and/or philosophy.
The Claims of Jennifer Fulwiler
Bishop’s sixteenth “former atheist” is Jennifer Fulwiler, who “turned Catholic, is a columnist for Envoy magazine, a regular guest on the Relevant Radio and EWTN Radio networks, and a contributor to the books The Church and New Media and Atheist to Catholic: 11 Stories of Conversion.” [1]
“One thing I could never get on the same page with my fellow atheists about was the idea of meaning. The other atheists I knew seemed to feel like life was full of purpose despite the fact that we’re all nothing more than chemical reactions. I could never get there. In fact, I THOUGHT THAT WHOLE LINE OF THINKING WAS UNSCIENTIFIC, AND MORE THAN A LITTLE INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST. If everything that we call heroism and glory, and all the significance of all great human achievements, can be reduced to some neurons firing in the human brain, then it’s all destined to be extinguished at death.” [1|38]
According to Jennifer, atheists are “unscientific and more than a little intellectually dishonest” [1|38], when we feel like life is full of purpose, despite the fact that we are all “nothing more than chemical reactions” [1|38] – which by the way is not what any atheist I ever met believes.
In other words, the only ‘honest purpose’ with any scientific meaning must be a Christian one?! So much for her “intellectual honesty”.
It would seem like “Jennifer Fulwiler is Still an Idiot” [39]
The Claims of Sarah Salviander
Bishop’s seventeenth “former atheist” is Sarah Salviander, “a research scientist in astronomy and astrophysics at the University of Texas.” [1]
“In fact, it seems that every question we have about the universe is answerable. There’s no reason it has to be this way, and it made me think of Einstein’s observation that the most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it’s comprehensible. I started to sense an underlying order to the universe. Without knowing it, I was awakening to what Psalm 19 tells us so clearly, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.'” [1|40]
According to Sarah’s logic, “every question we have about the universe is answerable” [1|40], therefore Christianity is true, because it teaches that “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.” [1|40]
Well then, by that same token, Islam must also be true, because it teaches that the “heavens and the earth, and all beings therein, declare His glory:” (Surat Al-‘Isrā’ 17v44), and “Whatever is in the heavens and on earth,- let it declare the Praises and Glory of Allah” (Surat Al-Ĥadīd 57v1).
The Claims of Darrin Rasberry
Bishop’s eighteenth “former atheist” is Darrin Rasberry, who “used to write for John Loftus’ blog site Debunking Christianity. He is now a Christian, as well as a math teacher at Ellsworth Community College.” [1]
“Some time last week, I realized that I could no longer call myself a skeptic. After fifteen years away from Christianity, most of which was spent as an atheist with an active, busy intent on destroying the faith, I returned to a church (with a real intention of going for worship) last Sunday. Although I know I may struggle with doubt for the rest of my life, my life as an atheist is over.” [1|41]
What a former atheist jumped ship? Guess we must follow suit. NOT!
The Claims of Michael Bird
Bishop’s nineteenth “former atheist” is Prof. Dr. Michael Bird, “a leading New Testament historian and theologian. He also lectures at Ridley Melbourne, and his teaching areas are on Synoptic Gospels, Paul’s Letters, Systematic Theology.” [1]
“Many years later, however, I read the New Testament for myself. The Jesus I encountered was far different from the deluded radical, even mythical character described to me. THIS JESUS – THE JESUS OF HISTORY – WAS REAL. He touched upon things that cut close to my heart, especially as I pondered the meaning of human existence. I was struck by the early church’s testimony to Jesus: In Christ’s death God has vanquished evil, and by his resurrection he has brought life and hope to all.” [1|42]
OK, I’ll take your word for it. NOT! [5]
“My faith and studies have led me to believe otherwise. First-century Jews and early Christians clearly demarcated God from all other reality, thus leading them to hold to a very strict monotheism. That said, Jesus was not seen as a Greek god like Zeus who trotted about earth or a human being who morphed into an angel at death. Rather, the first Christians redefined the concept of ‘one God’ around the person and work of Jesus Christ. Not to mention the New Testament writers, especially Luke and Paul, consistently identify Jesus with the God of Israel.” [1|42]
And proving the Bible from the Bible, is like proving the existence of hobbits from The Lord of The Rings.
The Claims of Ravi Zacharias
Bishop’s twentieth “former atheist” is Ravi Zacharias, “a world leading evangelist. He has authored numerous books, including the Gold Medallion Book Award winner Can Man Live Without God? in the category ‘theology and doctrine’ and bestsellers Light in the Shadow of Jihad, and The Grand Weaver.” [1]
“I very seldom like to mention the turning point of my own life, for it is a very private matter and sometimes still hurts to think of it, to say nothing of the embarrassment it must bring my family. But I cannot resist thinking of that most poignant moment of my past. I was seventeen years old when, with neither great intensity or great anguish, I came to the recognition that life had very little meaning. The more I pondered its harsh implication the closer I drew to a decision. That decision was to choose the way of suicide.” [1|43]
“I found myself after that attempt lying in a hospital bed, having expelled all the poison that I had taken but unsure if I would recover. There on that bed, with a dehydrated body, the Scriptures were read to me. The flooding of my heart with the news that Jesus Christ could come into my life and that I could know God personally defies the depths to which the truth overwhelmed me. In that moment with a simple prayer of trust, the change from a desperate heart to one that found the fullness of meaning became a reality for me. God reached down to a teenager in a hospital bed in the city of New Delhi, a mega-city of teeming millions. Imagine! God cared enough to hear my cry. How incredible, that He has a personal interest in the struggles of our lives. I cannot express it better than to say that His self-sufficiency and greatness do not deny us the wonderful joy of being affirmed in our individuality and of knowing that we are of unique value to Him. That was the point of the parable Jesus told about the shepherd who left the ninety-nine sheep in the fold and went looking for the one.” [1|43]
I understand where Zacharias is coming from, since I also converted to Christianity at the age of sixteen, following two failed suicide attempts, because it seemed that “life had very little meaning” [1|43].
At that time Christianity provided me with ‘a sense of meaning and purpose’ that carried me for many years to come.
BUT, the problem with meaning and purpose, is that people often find ‘real’ meaning and purpose in just about anything and everything. I placed the word ‘real’ in quotation marks, because to them it is very real.
Ufologists find their meaning and purpose in studying aliens and unidentified flying objects. “48% of serial killers kill for enjoyment” [44], finding their meaning and purpose in serial homicide.
It goes without saying, that finding meaning and purpose in something, says absolutely nothing of the source.
The Claims of Nick Watts
Bishop’s twenty-first “former atheist” is Nick Watts, “the Music Minister at Bacon Heights Baptist Church in Lubbock. He tried to disprove God’s existence after his son committed suicide.” [1]
“I tried to disprove the existence of God, immediately after finding my 19-year-old son dead in his bedroom from suicide.” [1|45]
Sorry to hear that. As a parent myself, I can just imagine what that must feel like.
“But atheism failed me. The words of the best, most intelligent atheists rang hollow. Their rebuttals and refutations against the existence of God were, in my opinion, incomplete, short-sighted, and at times, ludicrous. While the atheists scream loudly trying to speak for their evidence, THE THEISTS, IN MY OPINION, SIMPLY STEP BACK AND ALLOW THE EVIDENCE TO SPEAK FOR ITSELF. For the arguments of theists were akin to the familiar statement: ‘You don’t need to defend a lion; you simply open the cage and allow him to defend himself.'” [1|45]
Evidence? What evidence? There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for either, the Inerrancy of Scripture [31], or the historicity of Jesus [5].
But if you really want to believe that your son is burning in hell – for committing suicide – be my guest.
The Claims of Jordan Monge
Bishop’s twenty-second “former atheist” is the beautiful Jordan Monge, “a contributor to the magazine Fare Forward, and has also written for Christianity Today. She is also an avid writer and blogger.” [1]
“I tried to face down AN OVERWHELMING BODY OF EVIDENCE, as well as the living God.” [1|46]
Well, seeing that you have such “an overwhelming body of evidence” [1|46], please show me just one.
“At the same time, I had begun to read through the Bible and was confronted by my sin. I was painfully arrogant and prone to fits of rage. I was unforgiving and unwaveringly selfish. I passed sexual boundaries that I’d promised I wouldn’t. The fact that I had failed to adhere to my own ethical standards filled me with deep regret. Yet I could do nothing to right these wrongs. The Cross no longer looked merely like a symbol of love, but like the answer to an incurable need. When I read the Crucifixion scene in the Book of John for the first time, I wept.” [1|46]
Well, you are of course free to judge and condemn yourself, if you so wish. I can only hope that one day you will realize, that the Bible is not inerrant and authoritative. [31]
The Claims of Edward Feser
Bishop’s twenty-third “former atheist” is Prof. Dr. Edward Feser (1968-), “professor of philosophy at Pasadena City College, and author of the book The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism. He is also particularly critical of atheists like Richard Dawkins.” [1]
“Secular theorists often assume they know what a religious argument is like: they present it as a crude prescription from God, backed up with threat of hellfire, derived from general or particular revelation, and they contrast it with the elegant complexity of a philosophical argument by Rawls (say) or Dworkin. With this image in mind, they think it obvious that religious argument should be excluded from public life…. But those who have bothered to make themselves familiar with existing religious-based arguments in modern political theory know that this is mostly a travesty.” [1|47]
I think Dr. Feser is jumping the gun. Before you can assume any prescription from God, you first have to determine whether actually God exists, and thereafter whether his or her mode of communication is reliable. Now unless Dr Feser can conclusively proof the inerrancy of Scripture, he has no basis to stand on. [31]
The Claims of John Clayton
Bishop’s twenty-fourth “former atheist” is John Clayton, who “was very anti-Christian, and after reading the Bible four times over he planned to write a book called All the Stupidity of the Bible. After failing to find scientific contradictions in the Bible he gave up this project.” [1]
“I had a lot to overcome. I could not talk without swearing. You could not go to the preacher’s house and say pass the @$#%& potatoes. I had to learn a new way of talking, a new way of living, a new set of values, and a new morality, because I had lived in opposition to God. I asked God’s help in these things and I found I was able to overcome things I had never been able to overcome before. I have a whole new set of problems — a whole new set of things that I have to work on — but the problems I have today are nothing like the problems I had in the past. IF ANYONE HAD TOLD ME TWENTY YEARS AGO THAT I WOULD BE OPENLY USING MY LIMITED ABILITIES TO PUBLICLY CONVICT DISBELIEVERS OF GOD’S REALITY, I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THEY WERE INSANE. Nonetheless, God has blessed my feeble efforts in spectacular ways — totally beyond anything I could have ever done.” [1|48]
It is extremely easy to convict people of just about anything. I refer you to An Honest Liar (2014).
The Claims of Darren Gedye
Bishop’s twenty-fifth “former atheist” is Darren Gedye, who “grew up in as an atheist in non-Christian home with a father who was an atheist and a mother who was a lukewarm Christian.” [1]
“I realized that a lot of what I had been told about Christians when I was growing up was not true.” [1|49]
“Becoming a Christian didn’t solve my problems, but it helped me to understand them and it opened the way for God to start healing me from my past.” [1|49]
Yes, becoming a Christian will not automagically solve your problems.
The Claims of Giovanni Panini
Bishop’s twenty-sixth “former atheist” is Giovanni Panini, who “was militantly atheist before his conversion. He once attempted to create scandal by speculating that Jesus and John the Apostle had a homosexual relationship.” [1]
“Humans: become atheists each and all! God will nevertheless welcome you with all his heart!” [1|50]
Not much to answer here but gibberish.
The Claims of Dana Oleskiewicz
Bishop’s twenty-seventh “former atheist” is Dana Oleskiewicz, who “is self-employed in the environmental field, with an emphasis on water protection. She received a B.S. in Biology with a minor in Secondary Education and an M.S. in Aquatic Ecology, both from Kent State University. Her area of specialization is in nonprofit organizational development, collaborative decision-making, environmental education, and lake ecosystems.” [1]
“I was again confronted with the science/faith dichotomy when recently given the gift of Jesus. This time, the Holy Spirit would not let me reject my salvation, but what awful anguish I experienced as I assumed I had to reject my beloved science instead. I WAS THRILLED TO LEARN THAT I COULD BELIEVE IN BOTH! AS I INVESTIGATE MY NEW-FOUND FAITH ALONGSIDE MY SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, THE LORD CONTINUES TO REVEAL TO ME THAT SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS AND THE USE OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD ARE VERY GOOD, just as his Word is also good.” [1|51]
The mere fact, that science may agree with a number of components of any given religion, does not make that religion true.
Various verses from Islam also agrees with science. Are you now going to adopt Islam? I did not think so.
CONCLUSION
Maybe Bishop should take some time out from selective quote-mining, and see if he still believes all this shit, after hearing a few ‘Former Pastors Speak’.
I can highly recommend Dan Barker (1947-), and Drew Bekius (1979-), among more than 700 other former religious leaders at The Clergy Project.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. James Bishop. Former Atheists Speak. 44 Quotes (Historical Jesus Studies; 7 July 2015)
2. Warner Wallace. Jesus Is Evidence that God Exists (Cold-Case Christianity; 27 March 2015) ✔
3. VIDEO: Jim Warner Wallace: An Atheist Challenges the Bible (YouTube; 26 March 2014) ✔
4. Eyewitness testimony (Wikipedia; 7 July 2015) ✔
5. EJ Hill. Jesus of Nazareth, 7/2 BC – 30/33 AD (Hillside; 7 July 2015) ✔
6. Frank Tipler. The Physics Of Immortality ✔
7. Frank J. Tipler (Wikipedia; 7 July 2015) ✔
8. Alister McGrath. Breaking the Science-Atheism Bond (Beliefnet; August 2009) ✔
9. EJ Hill. Science Cannot Explain It, Therefore Goddidit (Hillside; 7 July 2015) ✔
10. Alister McGrath. Alister McGrath Quotes (Christian Quotes; 7 July 2015) ✔
11. Lee Strobel. Case For Christ: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity ✔
12. Lee Strobel. Finding the Real Jesus: A Guide for Curious Christians and Skeptical Seekers ✔
13. EJ Hill. Intelligent Design [Debunked] (Hillside; 8 July 2015) ✔
14. Rick Oliver. Designed to Kill in a Fallen World (Answers In Genesis; 27 May 2009) ✔
15. Sir William Ramsay. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament ✔
16. Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles (Wikipedia; 9 July 2015) ✔
17. Paul N. Tobin. The Historical Reliability of Acts (The Rejection of Pascal’s Wager; 2000) ✔
18. EJ Hill. Prof. Dr. C.S. Lewis, 1898-1963 (Hillside; 9 July 2015) ✔
19. David B. Curtis. This Generation, Mark 13:28-30 (Berean Bible Church; 1 July 2007) ✔
20. C.S. Lewis. The Essential: “The World’s Last Night” (1960) p. 385 ✔
21. C.S. Lewis. Mere Christianity ✔
22. C.S. Lewis. The Case for Christianity ✔
23. C.S. Lewis. Surprised by Joy ✔
24. George Eglington Dix. Letter to The Times (London; 1977) ✔
25. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Voice from the Gulag ✔
26. Antony Flew. There is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind ✔
27. VIDEO: Proof of Intelligent Design in DNA? (YouTube; 13 March 2012) ✔
28. Francis Collins. Interview: ‘God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures (Beliefnet; August 2006) ✔
29. Francis Collins. The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief ✔
30. Peter Hitchens. The Rage Against God: How Atheism Led Me to Faith ✔
31. EJ Hill. The Reality and Ramifications of Scribal Errors (Hillside; 9 July 2015) ✔
32. Eryn Sun. Former atheist turned Christian through Dawkin’s website continues strong faith in God (Christian Today; 25 March 2011) ✔
33. Philip Vander Elst. From Atheism to Christianity: a Personal Journey (BeThinking; 2011) ✔
34. A.S.A. Jones. Testimony of A Former Atheist, A.S.A. Jones (Jesus Revolution) ✔
35. Apathy (Wikipedia; 10 July 2015) ✔
36. James Bishop. Professor of New Testament, Craig Keener, Explains His Journey from Atheism to Christianity (Historical Jesus Studies; 12 June 2015) ✔
37. EJ Hill. The First Cause Kalām Cosmological Argument (Hillside; 11 July 2015) ✔
38. Jennifer Fulwiler. Why I’m Catholic (Why I’m Catholic) ✔
39. Mike Gillis. Guess What? Jennifer Fulwiler is Still an Idiot (Ask An Atheist; 28 July 2011) ✔
40. Sarah Salviander. My Testimony (SixDay Science; 11 May 2015) ✔
41. Darrin Thomas Rasberry. The Journey Of An Old Atheist Convert (Journey To Orthodoxy; 25 January 2014) ✔
42. Wintery Knight. Professor explains how his study of the historical Jesus made him leave atheism (15 April 2014) ✔
43. Ravi Zacharias. The Cries of the Heart ✔
44. Steve Viglione. 9 Grim Facts About Serial Killers You Wish You Never Knew (Life Analytics; 19 December 2013) ✔
45. Nick Watts. Atheism failed me. The Testimony of Nick Watts (Historical Jesus Studies; 3 February 2015) ✔
46. Jordan Monge. The Atheist’s Dilemma (Christianity Today; 4 April 2013) ✔
47. Edward Feser. The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism ✔
48. John N. Clayton. Why I Left Atheism (Does God Exist? 1971, 1989, 2000, 2006) ✔
49. Darren “Daz” Gedye. Testimony of an Ex-Atheist (Darkness To Light; 1996) ✔
50. Giovanni Panini. Inspirational quotes, words, sayings ✔
51. James Bishop. Scientist Dana Oleskiewicz Comes to Jesus After 30 Years (Historical Jesus Studies; 17 June 2015) ✔
52. Former atheists speak. 44 Quotes (Concierge Librarian; 6 July 2015) ✔
53. Former atheists speak. 44 Quotes (Pickering Post; 7 July 2015) ✔
REVISIONS
07-11.07.2015
The post My Response to “Former Atheists Speak. 44 Quotes” by James Bishop appeared first on Hillside.