categories

Friday, May 13, 2016

Atheism: Defining Words, and Truth vs Science



There is going to be a theme of Christianity vs Atheism in the coming posts and videos, and this writing came about while I was preparing an Intro to my newest YouTube video, which will be posted, probably tomorrow. Every now and then I will offer a rebuke to an Atheist on Twitter or YouTube. I don't spend a whole lot of time on them though. I speak the word of God, the truth, and if they have ears to hear, and Christ chooses to draw them, well. If not, I won't lose any sleep over it. And I care little about winning an argument. I have better things to do. But I am commanded to speak the truth and preach the gospel, so thus I do.

I take this approach because the problem with the Atheist has little, if anything to do with him not receiving satisfactory answers to his objections. He loves his sin, and wants to be his own god. That is the true reason for his rejection of God and Christ. So to spend my valuable time that I could be doing better things, which glorify God, on arguing with someone (and trying to prove the Bible true to someone) who has his ears closed, is foolish, to say the least.

Science vs. Religion

I will attempt to touch on this in more detail in the future, hopefully in a video some time; but Christians really need to stop trying to prove that Christianity is "scientific". In one sense it is; because no scriptural truth is outside the realm of actual, real truth. Yet, when you define "science" the way an Atheist does, Christianity is very unscientific, or at least should be.

The scientific community is a group of God-haters who interpret everything in the universe by an anti-Christ worldview. The interpretation they ascribe to verifiable facts is then called "science". It contradicts the Bible, sure. But that is because of the games they play with definitions. The Bible does not contradict truth, it contradicts science. But science today contradicts science of yesteryear. Was the science of past years not really science? Those scientists of the past certainly believed they held the truth, as they condemned the holy scriptures. And yet, as the years go by, and we discover more, and have newer interpretations, which contradict current science, will that make today's science, not really science?

Dictionary Definitions Do Not Equate to Truth

"Look it up in the dictionary", the Atheist scoffs, when he sits and claims that Atheism is not a religion. But as I like to point out, every definition in the dictionary is based on the worldview of the person defining the word. So if a Christ-hater is defining marriage, as with today's dictionary, it says this:

Marriage
noun
(broadly) any of the diverse forms of interpersonal union established in various parts of the world to form a familial bond that is recognized legally, religiously, or socially, granting the participating partners mutual conjugal rights and responsibilities and including, for example, opposite-sex marriage, same-sex marriage, plural marriage, and arranged marriage:

Anthropologists say that some type of marriage has been found in every known human society since ancient times.

Yet if a Biblical Christian is defining marriage, such as Noah Webster in his 1828 dictionary, we show quite a different definition of the same word:

Marriage
MAR'RIAGE, noun [Latin mas, maris.] The act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life. marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity, till death shall separate them. marriage was instituted by God himself for the purpose of preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes, for promoting domestic felicity, and for securing the maintenance and education of children.

Marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled. Hebrews 13:4

One definition makes it clear that marriage is defined in terms of a man and a woman, and that the terms of marriage are for life, and that it is an institution which God created. It also defines it as being sacred, in that, if we have a dishonorable marriage, God will judge us. This is the Christian definition.

The Humanist, or Atheistic definition defines marriage in terms of which, it does not need to be between a man and woman. It does not include any moral obligations either. And it is something instituted by man, rather than God. Quite a huge change in the definition of what is the same word, in not even 200 years.

So for an Atheist to say, "Look at the dictionary" as if this were some kind of authority for truth, this is utterly ridiculous. I might actually not chalk this up to dishonesty as much as stupidity in some cases. It is probably a combination of both. But I think it is more of the way that Atheists have trained their entire beings to be dishonest, in order to avoid being accountable to their Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Truth vs Science

Coming back around to the original thought: Christians need to refrain from trying to prove the Bible is "scientific". Why? Because in thus doing, they are admitting to the Atheists that science is God, rather than Christ being God. Society has been trained to believe that whatever the Scientists tell us is true, must be true. To the Christian defending that the Bible is accurate with Science, he admits that Science is the ultimate arbitrator of truth; he tries hard to prove that the Bible is in step with the true God: Science. It really should be the other way around, and it used to be.

When the Bible states something is true, it is true regardless of what some man thinks is true, based on his faulty human faculties. So if a Scientist is researching and his findings (or what he perceives) contradicts the word of God, he ought to conclude that his reasoning, his interpretation, etc. are in error, not the word of God.

This is notwithstanding the fact that the scientific community is dishonest and untrustworthy. When a study is conducted and the scientists performing the study tell us their findings, how do we know of 100 % certainty they are telling us the full truth? We don't. (See Kent Hovind's 'Lies in the Textbooks'
which exposes many things evolutionists have taught through the years that have been proven to be manipulative lies.) We have to trust them. To say that "science proves it" is to put an unquestionable faith in the word of the scientists. Yet, Atheists ridicule Christians for trusting the Word of God. The total irony, right?

Consider this article on Dr. Mercola's website regarding studies about Drug Safety. Doctor Mercola exposes how scientific studies are manipulated to promote the lies that Drug companies want us to believe. Any honest person seeing these kind of facts knows that the scientific community is entirely untrustworthy. They honor profit and the glory of man rather than truth.

The Atheist will usually respond to this by calling us a "conspiracy theorist" or whatever. So a group of scientists and/or government agencies are incapable of conspiring together for evil? They certainly want us to believe that the German government under Adolph Hitler conspired to murder 6 million Jews.

The Bible is very clear that conspiracies happen (Psalm 2) and history proves this out as well. The Biblical Christian knows full well, like the founders of America did, that man is utterly depraved without Christ. The only way a scientist could be fully trustworthy is if he is submitted to the Lord Jesus Christ in his life.

Top all that with this question: What reason does an Atheist Scientist have to tell the truth? If he can gain more money, more power, higher honor, or simply promote his own agenda, by telling falsehoods, twisting the truth, telling partial truths, etc., why wouldn't he? He believes he is accountable to no one, and that man is the ultimate authority. He believes that the highest being is man, and the only accountability he will ever face is via man. And if he is convinced he will never become accountable in this life for his dishonesty, what incentive does he have to be truthful? He has none. And his wicked heart (as we all have without Christ) will always lead him toward sin and death, and to do and say what gives him the most pleasure, happiness, and things that he wants.

It all comes down to a matter of who we are presupposing holds the keys of the truth. The Atheist and the Christian of today's America believe that man's opinion, interpretation, and reasoning should be trusted, and should be presupposed as being true. The true Christian presupposes the Word of God is the truth. Both camps are presupposing someone is true. One presupposes man is always true, and the other, God. Thus back to the original sin in the garden. It all comes down to who is God. Is the LORD God, or is man god? As for me and my house, we choose the LORD.

Swiss Kinist