GinnyroseAn answer that would be given about natural disasters and aid groups is that there are groups who go to these places who are not affiliated with religious groups. red cross i.e. Doctors without borders. Then you have Mormons as well. Many athiests will give links to certain thinks that they know of to show their humanity reaching out to others. That kind of thing has to go deeper than just reaching out to your fellow man otherwise it because humanism.When it comes to God it goes beyond just reaching out, anybody can reach out to a group of people needing help. To the other posters, What I probably need to do is read some of the OT and get an understanding of what things happened the way they do. It is too easy to point the finger at groups or God and accuse Him of vile acts. The Adversary does this so well and if we are not careful we begin doing it and not realizing it. I see atheism and agnosticism as a new frontier, so to speak of America because even those who left the church have become these. I was on the borderline as well. Only for me, I got to the point that I knew God had to be there because of the past in my life and I held on to that fact and that kept a chain on me when I decided to walk back into the darkness of my soul as a result of my eyes being on other 'christians'. Does this make sense?
_________________John
John,May I suggest you go to Ravi Zacharias website at www.rzim.org. On it he has lots of audios you can listen to that may help you with the questions you have. He appeals to the intellectual and reasons with them about God and how He is worthy...
I see atheism and agnosticism as a new frontier, so to speak of America because even those who left the church have become these
_________________Sandra Miller
Deadn, Keep strong and keep cool. I have talked with many atheist and agnostics and surprisingly a great deal of them were at one point and time abused or degraded by someone who they viewed as religious. I met quite a few who were Catholic and it seemed to be a pattern. One of the tactics of an atheist or agnostic is to attack you so you in turn will attack back whether it be sarcasm, name calling, or arrogance. As soon as they get you to do this your testimony in their eyes is shot and you no longer are a threat but are now just another hypocrite. When I go into a debate or discussion with either one, one of my main objectives is to not get into a theological debate but to try and figure out where religion burned them in the past and minister to that hurt. Say someone was seriously rejected by the church for the way they appeared, I will generally apologize for the actions of those that judged them and tell them about Christ Jesus and His Love. I say again but strong and keep your cool those are the keys to ministering Christ to that group of people. I would say a great deal of them aren't actually atheist or agnostic but in realty just angry at the church or even God if they have lived a hard life. Ministering to those wounds are what's important. I hope this helps you.
_________________Matthew Guldner
I always look to limit 'arguments' to discussions. Arguments begin shouting matches. A discussion is a conversation and trying to answer each others questions. The moment a disagreement happens and it begins to escalate is when an argument happens. For a christian this is a dangerous place because you go from a realm of sharing the gospel and proving or showing God is there to one that can cross into the human line of thinking and taking matters into our own hands. This puts a christian on his heels and instead of allowing the Spirit to lead you are allowing your soul to lead and it begins a dog chasing its tail journey to nowhere fast. With my discussions I notice more athiests and agnostics coming forward than anyone else. Hence, there has to be an answer given somehow.
Deadn,I keep thinking about your question...I got to thinking about one thing - who committed the first murder? It was Cain. Murder, killing started with man...if you were to inform the agnostic about this, he will likely then blame God for making man knowing He will do such. But in so saying He would be admitting to the existence of God and his foreknowledge...but would he admit it? This is what Ravi Zacharias says:Is it possible that somewhere in the deepest recesses of the human heart, we are really not battling intellectual ideas as much we fighting for the right for our own sexual proclivities and our passionate indulgences? I suspect Ravi may be right....what say?