For about 15 minutes yesterday, I had one of those "pull your hair out moments." Since Evangelism Team is not a large organization, it's not often that I receive calls whereby people want to argue about the "proof" of the Bible or the validity of "God." That typically happens on the streets, but never over the phone. I'll leave that up to James White.
Yesterday, as stated above, was different. This gentleman from New York called. When I answered the phone, he said, "I was wondering why you use the 10 Commandments when talking to people?"
Once that question was asked, I responded (and rightly so), "Why are you asking this? In other what is your motive for calling?"
Immediately, his true colors came forth. He began to rant and rave about how the Christian God is just like all the other gods, and how we, as Christians, cannot prove God exists, nor can we prove the validity of the Bible.
His comments, and by the way he was quite angry, were typical. I told him what I tell most others. "It's obvious you have not taken the time to look these things up." After I made this comment, he insisted that I "prove" to Him God exists.
That didn't get too far because he would not allow me to say much. When he would speak, I would interject occasionally. When I would speak, on the hand, he would not allow me to complete a thought. Well actually, my first thought he allowed me to complete, but after that, I could not say much.
With the opportunities I did have to say something, however, I conveyed to him several things.
1. He logic and rationale were inconsistent.
--He claimed that because I did not have the original manuscripts, I cannot trust the Bible. I showed him, in brief, the ways in which we know we can trust certain manuscript data. He rejected that notion. So, I told him that he's just rejected all of scholarship that had absolutely nothing to do with the Bible.
2. The historicity of Jesus was valid.
--He claimed that because no writings were written at the time of Jesus, my argument is not valid. I refuted that, yet again, with secular, or in most cases scholarly data on how we validate something in antiquity. He rejected that notion as well, and thus, rejected all scholarly application. And remember, the scholarship I am referring to has nothing to do with the Bible. You learn this information at university (e.g. Graduate training or Post-Graduate training).
3. He borrows from the Christian worldview.
--I told him that his life is based around the God (the only God) of Christianity. I demonstrated this, somewhat, and he rejected this notion stating that there is no proof for God and therefore this cannot be true. From there, I attempted to describe to him a basic philosophical argument with an "if/then clause," and he would not let me finish this portion of the conversation. He said, "See, you have to say, 'if God exists...' I tried to explain to him I was merely using a philosophical argument to illustrate a point and he would not receive that either. By rejecting this, he's just rejected all of philosophy. How many scholars are able to use 'if/then clauses' to illustrate a point? This is freshman year college information.
4. His anger and frustration prove my point.
--I told him that his anger and frustration prove my point that, if nothing else, God exists. I explained to him that I don't get frustrated over disproving the Easter bunny or Santa Clause. Why is he so frustrated with disproving God? I explained to him that I don't waste my time with such silly notions; if you're so sure God does not exist, why are you so angry and determined to prove He does not exist. To this, he had no answer.
5. He was at war with God.
--I left him with his state before God. I told him that his sin has blinded him and that he needed eyes to see. He said that my notion of sin does not exist, and as a matter of fact, "sin does not exist."
Eventually, I had to get off the phone because I had plans. This was a "hair pulling" situation because the man would not argue rationally. It was clear that he had not done his homework, rather he probably does all his research on the internet looking for ways to disprove God. This method would not be accepted in any peer review journals (Christian or not). So, why should we accept this level of argumentation. Truly, it was pathetic!
Quite honestly, I have not had one of these conversations in some time, much less have this conversation over the phone. He must have received one of our gospel tracts and took it upon himself to call and assert himself. Maybe this conversation was to prepare me for what is to come. After all, I am going to an outreach event today and Monday. Please keep that in your prayers.
Lastly, during the conversation I believed I heard him talking to a young girl (probably his daughter). My heart hurts for that young lady that she would have a father who would raise her in such ignorance. May God cause him to believe, and if not, may the Holy Spirit open that young girl's eyes so that she may know the Risen Lord.