Grab the popcorn and call your friends–ABC’s Nightline is staging a smackdown confrontation with eternal consequences. It’s a debate between Christians and atheists. In the atheists’ corner we have Brian Sapient and Kelly (last name withheld) of the Rational Response Squad, an atheist group best known for their Blasphemy Challenge. In the Christians’ corner we have Growing Pains star Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort of Way of the Master.
Anybody sense a coming train wreck? Check this out:
Comfort–who claims he can prove the existence of God, scientifically, without mentioning faith or the Bible–stated, “The network originally offered me only four minutes to present my case. After speaking with Kirk and conferring with the atheists, they settled on 13 minutes. I’m ecstatic. I can prove the existence of God in that amount of time.
Comfort also told Nightline, “We cannot only prove that God exists, but we can prove that the atheist doesn’t.”
Wow. The single question humanity has wrestled with since the dawn of time–does God exist?–will be answered by a former sitcom star and a preacher with no theological training in a mere 13 minutes. Let’s just hope they leave the banana out of it.
It’s true what they say–Christians are the reason most people don’t become Christians. The pride and arrogance of Comfort is what really amazes me. He only needs 13 minutes to prove God once and for all. Nevermind that if faith can be scientifically proven then it’s not really faith.
The church marketing lesson here is that pride and arrogance don’t go over well. There’s a level of humility needed when you’re sharing your faith. Few of us have Christianity all figured out, and pretending we do doesn’t get you very far. Especially in today’s world of relativism the trumpeting bravado of ‘I know it all’ simply sounds like ‘nanny nanny boo-boo.’ I think it’s in relationship that we can best share the messy, confounding truth of Jesus Christ, not in a confrontational, ‘I’m right and you’re going to hell,’ kind of debate.
But I don’t know everything either. There are certainly different methods and different approachs, whether or not I like them. I pray God can use Comfort and Cameron and that they don’t make Christians everywhere look stupid (that should always be our prayer, that our own actions don’t hurt the cause of Christ).
Perhaps the lesson is that we should be aware of how we’re coming across (an essential component of marketing) and be sure that’s not going to hinder our audience from hearing our message. Some audiences might be receptive to the confident proclamation of Comfort. Other audiences would be turned off and might prefer a more relational, journey-based approach. Perhaps the bottomline is that we can’t expect one method to convince everyone.
Jenn
May 4, 2007
Oh dear…
DittoBox
May 4, 2007
Soren Kierkegaard, a 19th century Christian philosopher, poet and writer had this to say about what the church had become then (and what I feel it is right now):
“It is explained that Christianity is a “doctrine”, and then it is declared that “this doctrine has transformed the face of the world.” O we fools, or we sly rascals! No, never has any doctrine—served by that which weighs it down and makes it finite, by status people and salaried officials—transformed the face of the world, which is just as impossible as getting a kite to ascend by means of what draws it down, the weight. Never has any doctrine, served in that way, ever been able to arouse a scrap of persecution—and this is certainly unavoidable if there is going to be any question of transforming the world—such people will certainly guard it and themselves against that. No, but Christianity—and this is the crucial point that makes this doctrine something other than a doctrine—was served by witnesses to the truth, who, instead of having profit and every profit from this doctrine, sacrificed and sacrificed everything for this doctrine, witnesses to the truth, who did not, and together with a family, live off the doctrine but lived and died for the doctrine. Because of that Christianity became power, power, became the power that was able to transform the world. It was served in that way for some three hundred years; in that way Christianity became the power in the world.”
Kierkegaard very much liked the idea of a relational church made of *people* who imitated Christ, no matter what the cost. The imitation of Christ in terms of morality is pretty good in the church…in terms of so-called “conservative values,” and personal responsibility and such, the visible sins. However the more so-called liberal things like forgiveness, love, acceptance, social justice, taking care of the poor, the widowed, the hungry and homeless and loving the sinners (because we’re all sinners right?) among other things that Christ championed is woefully inadequate within “the church.” And that, above almost anything else today, makes the church a hypocritical lot. Marketing is great but you can’t polish a turd.
(don’t get me wrong, both “types” of sin are equally bad, they’re just that: “sin”…both attempt to rob authority from God or Christ in some way)
Just look at Newt Gingrich, calls himself a conservative Christian yet he’s off screwing his House intern behind wife #2’s back (he also had an affair with wife #1, whom he divorced in part because she had cancer and that’d look bad while trying to run for office), all the while he’s trying to impeach Clinton for the very same thing. (granted it was because he purjered himself but we all know the motives). Its that kind of crap that Christ didn’t stand by and look over. He delivered 8 woes to the Pharisees and Scribes, who look just like the modern American church. Matthew Henry said it best, in his commentary on Matthew 23:
“We find not Christ, in all his preaching, so severe upon any sort of people as upon these scribes and Pharisees; for the truth is, nothing is more directly opposite to the spirit of the gospel than the temper and practice of that generation of men, who were made up of pride, worldliness, and tyranny, under a cloak and pretense of religion; yet these were the idols and darlings of the people, who thought, if but two men went to heaven, one would be a Pharisee.”
Christ came to open the Kingdom of Heaven to all, and yet men stand at its gates not to keep them open but to shut them in men’s faces. They do this consciously or unconciously, by declaring a love and admiration for Christ but not by imitating him and his actions. This makes their effectiveness luke-warm, and the fault of the rejection of them and then ultimately Christ is their’s.
Another good read is Isaiah 58. Christians have the tendency to blame all of society’s problems on society. Sure it’s the truth, but most Christians having not truly been “those bad sinner people” find it all too easy to sit in judgment of sin and sinner without ever lifting a finger to help. We sit in church Sunday and expect people to flock to us…but if that’s all we do, is sit in church and sit in judgment, then people won’t come. The church’s monopoly on government in the west is coming to slow death. That’s our call to show the world Christ not by societal or legal pressures but by love and grace. You know…like Jesus did.
After all if sinners need grace the most…why don’t we show it to them, by first acknowledging our own desperate need for it on the individual and collective levels and then offering it to them not as some indignant righteous act but simply by being friends.
(sorry for all that…)
DittoBox
May 4, 2007
Oh, yeah, my point:
We Christians, as a whole and as individuals need to stop being so arrogant in the face of sinners, because by assuming the judgment seat of Christ we make the same mistake the sinner makes: by assuming the authority of God, to make our own decisions based on our own flesh. Sin is not “doing bad” sin is usurping His authority. That’s why Christ said that when we judge, we judge ourselves, the measure we use against them is used against us. Arrogance is form of judgment, because it’s acting superior when we really aren’t.
You are not righteous, you cannot become righteous. You can only be made righteous. And that’s a huge difference that the Pharisees didn’t get, and that we as Christians tend not to get either. Or, at least from my experience anyway.
YMMV
Alex Fear
May 5, 2007
Considering the terrible publicity that the religious right and guys like this create in the media in US, one wonders if Jesus foresaw it all when he whispered “don’t tell anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest”.
jimmy@relevantchristian
May 5, 2007
Hmmm….
I’m afraid that knowing how the media can be…they will do their best to make Comfort and Cameron look like idiots.
I will be very suprised if the media doesn’t spin this in favor of the “other” team.
Peace!
Jimmy@relevantchristian.com
jimmy@relevantchristian
May 5, 2007
Hmmm….
I’m afraid that knowing how the media can be…they will do their best to make Comfort and Cameron look like idiots.
I will be very suprised if the media doesn’t spin this in favor of the “other” team.
Peace!
Jimmy@relevantchristian.com
jimmy@relevantchristian
May 5, 2007
Sorry for the double post…computer freaked out.
JL
May 5, 2007
These guys are our brothers in Christ. We shouldn’t be mocking them. We should be praying for them to give a strong arguement and witness to whoever sees this. It amazes me how we fire into our own ranks sometimes as Christians. Fire at the enemy instead.
mike hosey
May 5, 2007
This Nightline event is an apologetic endeavor. Just remember that apologetics is not about convincing the atheist that there is a Christian God. You likely won’t be able to do that. In fact, all the evidence in the world would not convince a real atheist. They would just explain the evidence through another lense. As an apologist, you are convincing an audience that you as a theist in general, and a Christian theist in particular, are capable of providing a reasoned arguement and explanation of your belief. This is a highly effective marketing tool geared toward the individual whom God has already touched, but hasn’t come up with his or her own reasoning just yet. It shows the world, that theists are smart, too.
Lets pray that this sitcom actor, and this preacher can pull that off. Let’s not beat them up until we see how they handle this.
DittoBox
May 5, 2007
“These guys are our brothers in Christ. We shouldn’t be mocking them. We should be praying for them to give a strong arguement and witness to whoever sees this. It amazes me how we fire into our own ranks sometimes as Christians. Fire at the enemy instead.” -JL
That’s our entire problem. We sit here and call anyone we don’t like “enemies.” Why are they our “enemy?” They’re human! They’re just like you and me! They’re sinners, and so are we. Why do we act like we’re in some way better than them?
I was an atheist once and the main reason I left the church was that brand of sheer arrogance. Atheists were far less a danger to my belief than nominal Christianity. If “our own” are doing far, far more damage to our cause than the atheists, then we should be firing into our own ranks. (or more to the point we should be reprooving them, not firing on them…and we should be loving the atheists not firing on them)
We’re in this boat together, and that attitude does exactly nothing to market ourselves. Atheists are looking for God just as much as anyone else. Why do we work so hard to push them away?
PJ
May 6, 2007
I’d be really interested in seeing how many in the US really fall into the atheist category. Current trends would seem that number is extremely low at this point.
Perhaps our time is better spent doing acts that convey the truth of the Gospel than trying to “prove” God to those who are already staunchly against His existence. The whole endeavor feels awfully modernistic at that. We called to faith and not proof.
miracle
May 6, 2007
Interesting, they must’ve ripped off me and my atheist friend’s blogs. We have a weekly conversation reflecting on life and our different faith perspective. From watching Way Of The Master, I feel my blog is more informative and useful than this show will be. Sadly though, I’m sure I’ll be watching it..
If you’d like to check out the conversation between an atheist and I… Altnoise.net
miracle
May 6, 2007
looking at the conversation in the comments I would like to add a few things.
I agree with dittobox in the “enemy” language. It puts us into a metaphor where we are murdering those outside of our faith. We end up fighting against them. If we want to use a battle metaphor then they are captives, hostages, MIA, ones who have gotten lost. They are not the enemies we are fighting against, but our brothers and sisters we are fighting for. Therefore, for their rescue we do need to critique our methods and tactics. A poorly developed, old and/or dumb strategy will just lose more of our family members.
Also, I do not think the network marketing crew will have a hard time making these guys look like fools. I’ve seen their own show and they do a good job of it themselves.
Truth Seeker
May 7, 2007
It is not arrogancy to stand up for the truth…it is rather arrogant of us actually to think that the truth does not matter and that we should back down when the time comes.
I applaud those that stand up against the enemy and his evil ones and will speak truth. I applaud them wholeheartedly. The ‘enemy’ is Satan and his hord, as well as those who purposely go against God and mock Him. That is the enemy and our weapon is to stand for truth.
Blessings,
Kevin D. Hendricks
May 7, 2007
JL, I hear you. But I’m certainly conflicted That’s why my post goes both ways. I want to whole-heartedly support them–but did you see the banana video? Seriously. I can’t support that. That kind of logic doesn’t help our cause.
Matt
May 7, 2007
I don’t think the media will have to do anything extra to make Kirk and Ray look bad. This whole “Way of the Master” movement is Biblically sketchy to me. I just get a weird feeling about it. I don’t know much about Ray, but from all the articles I’ve read about him, he is not the kind of person we need speaking on behalf of Christians. He seems to have the same effect on people as Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson. Where did they come from and what are they a reverend of? What church did they pastor? How did they get to be such enfluential people? It’s a little shady for me.
Brad
May 7, 2007
I get a little concerned when anybody assumes they can speak for my faith. Especially if they think they wrap it up in an argument-proof argument in 13 minutes on network TV. The Way of the Master seems to be Way Off-Base. There is nothing of Jesus’ love for people in its formulaic, simplistic and smug approach.
Note to church marketing types: “The Enemy” is Christianese. As with all Christianese, it’s to be used with caution. Or avoided entirely! Take this discussion as an object lesson.
My final thought, if God is proved by a banana, isn’t He disproved by an apple, an orange, a potato or a coconut? Or does it mean that we are only ever supposed to eat bananas as the only holy, God-ordained food?
WayneDawg
May 7, 2007
Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are two of the most dedicated people that I have seen in a long, long time that are working hard in the area of evangelism.
The approach that they take (Like Jesus did) in using the Law to prepare the heart before Grace is given, is something that the modern day church and modern day evangelism has basically forgotten.
Comfort and Cameron and well versed when it comes to defending our faith and debating atheists. Todd Friel, who does the Way of the Master radio program, is also one of the best apologist around today.
I agree with Jimmy who said that we should not be mocking our brothers in the faith. These guy’s are out there on the frontline and we should be supporting them with our prayers.
Check these guy’s out sometime. They are not a pair of bozo’s who are embarrasing Christians, they are very passionate born-again believers who are defending what you and I believe!
WayneDawg
May 7, 2007
By the way Brad –
The ’13 minutes’ on network TV is not the whole debate. The debate will be an hour long debate. Nightline is the one responsible for the editing into the 13 minute segment.
The entire debate will probably be made available at the Way of the Master radio website.
Kevin – If you think the Way of the Master is Biblically sketchy, you might want to check out how Jesus witnessed.
The whole ‘method’, if we have to use that word, is based solely on the Master Himself.
It’s that simple (and Biblical)
DittoBox
May 7, 2007
“The ‘enemy’ is Satan and his hord, as well as those who purposely go against God and mock Him. That is the enemy and our weapon is to stand for truth.” -Truth Seeker
I’m offended. Deeply. As I said I once was an atheist, and as you so tactlessly put I was in “the hord of Satan.” I got news for you, unless you were born sinless and think you’re on par with Christ you too were in the “hord of Satan.” Grace is the only thing which saves you and have nothing to boast in but the Lord. That grace is the only thing that keeps from being in league with Satan, thus you have no authority to distinguish another’s sin unless you are called to do so against a brother.
Christ came to save, to save and not to condemn. How much less your authority is if even Christ reserved judgement until the final day.
Their life and actions are not complete, they may one day be saved. For us to push them further is sin.
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees! Hypocrites! For you stand at the gate of Heaven and shut it in men’s faces, and nor do you enter yourself.” -Matthew 23
If you think for one moment you will get away with pushing the sinner further away from heaven by being the exact opposite of grace you’ve got another thing coming. Christ dies *while we were still sinners*. Don’t *ever* forget that.
If grace saw you through, grace can see them through. Fighting them pushes them away.
Kevin D. Hendricks
May 7, 2007
WayneDawg, the author for each comment is listed below the comment, not above. So you got the names wrong in your comment above–I didn’t say the Way of the Master was biblically sketchy. But I think we can figure out what you’re saying anyway.
And I agree with you, Comfort and Cameron are very dedicated. But did you watch the banana video? Seriously? After watching that I can’t help but think of the word ‘bozo’, no matter how much I want to support my fellow brothers in Christ. ;-)
Truth Seeker
May 7, 2007
Ditto Box,
Get over yourself! Just so ya know, I was once in that “hord” too! I was an atheist myself too, but I once I came to Christ I realized that I was on the wong side.
I could care less if your offended, doesn’t bother me none. What bothers me though is the lack of believers that are willing to stand up and fight for truth. That is what is wrong with Christianity today. We have a bunch of limp-wristed weak Christians who pander to the objections of those who openly mock and reject God. I highly doubt that Paul, or any apostle for that matter, would back down to atheists or anyone else who openly mocks God. They would stand for truth and not be swayed.
I was a sinner in that “hord” and it took someone standing up to me in love to show me the truth. They did it in love but they didn’t pander to me as well. In fact most people I know who are either atheist or non Christians say that they respect Christians who stand for what they believe instead of weak minded Christians who bend with every whim.
Ditto Box, I am a believer saved by grace from the “hord”. I stand by my beliefs. Get over it!
Blessings,
WayneDawg
May 8, 2007
Sorry Kevin.
I think the Banana think was more fun than being serious. Anyway, Comfort is a very intelligent man with a huge sense of humor. I think the Law before grace approach is dead on.
A.W. Pink, Spurgeon, Calvin, Wesley, etc. all used the Law before preaching Grace.
I use the Law before grace because it only makes sense to do so. A sinner has to know what he is being saved from before he can come to the place of acknowledging that he has sinned before a Holy and Righteous God and will need Someone to save him on the day of judgment.
JL
May 8, 2007
miracle and dittobox,
When I said, “It amazes me how we fire into our own ranks sometimes as Christians. Fire at the enemy instead”, I was alluding to Ephesians 6 and prayer. We don’t war with flesh and blood, with atheists or unbelievers. We fight for them in prayer to “escape the snare of the devil who has taken them captive to do his will.” My friends this is the Bible, like it or not. I thought since this is a site mostly frequented by Believers that you all would understand what I was saying. We were all slaves to sin and Satan before coming to Christ whether we like to admit it or not.
Read Ephesians 2: “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.” This is reality.
As for Ray and Kirk doing a diservice to the “cause”, I agree that the bananna incident was goofy, but it is an isolated video that people have used to mock them when the bulk of their work is good and right. If you listen to Ray Comfort you will come to know him as a person with a good sense of humor, ie) the tongue and cheek video. Nevertheless, we should not join with others in scoffing and mocking. I believe that even if you feel you’re right, God hates that kind of attitude.
WayneDawg
May 8, 2007
Here is some info from the debate from the Livingwaters press release…..
Just a quick note to let you know that the debate went wonderfully.
When I say “wonderfully,” I have to qualify it. It was like an open air with an unreasonable and loud heckler. The “heckler” in this case wasn’t just the two atheists we were there to debate, but the fifty atheists in the audience. As per ABC’s stipulations, the audience was composed half-and-half — fifty Christians and fifty atheists. The Christians were very quiet and polite — the atheists weren’t. It was very apparant who was who in the audience. It seemed that no matter what we said, it was completely ignored by Brian and Kelly (the atheists) and then followed up with their anger, mockery, and insults. But as with a good open air, the heckler is simply a platform to speak to the crowd who is listening. In this case there is a crowd of millions who will hear clear, concise evidence for the existance of God. How incredible. So I am delighted, because of what we were able to say.
Below is the press release and the information you need to watch the debate Wednesday. Thanks for your prayers.
God bless,
Ray Comfort
http://www.wayofthemaster.com/abc_debate.shtml
Brandon
May 8, 2007
Why do we spend so much time trying to prove something to people that don’t want to believe and will accept nothing less than concrete proof, which even then, they would find a way to dismiss? We’re missing the point. They don’t want to accept Christ. It has nothing to do with proof or lack of proof.
Besides, from what I have read in the Bible, God proves himself, and according to the Bible, is more than capable of doing so. I think we should leave the “proving” to Him and we should focus on loving people and being a good influence in our world.
mike hosey
May 8, 2007
Brandon –
The answer to your question about why we engage atheists is in my comment above about how the audience perceives the debate/discussion. We’re not trying to convince the hardboiled atheist. You’re right, the won’t be convinced. We’re trying to persuade those already touched by God, or at least those open to being touched by him.
WayneDawg
May 9, 2007
Brandon –
Mike is spot on. Kirk and Ray have both admitted that the debate is not for the atheists; it’s for the millions of people who will tune in to watch it.
I’ve listened to the atheists who they will be debating and, nothing short of the work of God, will ever change their mind about there being no God.
Kirk and Ray do present the Gospel at the end of the debate (Whether or not that is left in the edited version tonight we will have to see)for the masses who will be watching.
Debates are almost alawys for folks in the audience who are watching for curiositys sake.
Just like open air preaching; when a crowd starts to gather because there is a heckler beating down the preacher, people stop to hear what’s being said.
When some people tune in to hear the debate it may be the only time they are ever exposed to the Gospel!!
brandon
May 9, 2007
Mike & WayneDawg:
I understand what you guys are saying, but if these guys don’t deliver on what they claim, and I mean really deliver, what good is it?
To make such a bold claim and not be able to deliver (thats what early reviews are saying) only hurts the cause. True it may be the only time some people hear the message of Christ, but if people are tuning in for “proof” and it doesn’t happen, I doubt they are going to be that interested in pursuing it further.
mike hosey
May 9, 2007
Brandon –
You are right. I could not agree with you more. We should never try to oversell anything. It is always bad. It is also the bane of marketing and advertising. These fields possess an inherent risk of devaluation of product. The temptation is often to sell the product not on its merits but on its sexiness, or how its going to benefit the buyer in the immediacy of his or her situation. The field rarely promotes product cost.
But churches, even those not prone to any kind of professional marketing, make this mistake of oversell all the time. The perception often sold by the church is that salvation solves all of one’s earthly problems. I’ve heard sermons from a variety of major denominations and churches which sell that very perception.
I have come to believe that churches knowingly sell this perception all the time. This is wrong, and at the level of particular individuals it is often counter productive.
Still, it would be foolish for me to say that those sermons do not often contain truth. It would be foolish of me to assume that some “unbelieving” people who were touched by God before they heard the sermon, were not better equipped in their search for truth after the sermon.
As a Christian, it is my duty to hear that truth, critique the oversell, and present then present the gospel, and where possible present solid reasoning.
Until I have seen Comfort and Cameron’s performance, I can’t do any of that.
All I’m saying is that we shouldn’t critique them until we’ve seen what they’ve done. Once we have seen what they’ve done, we should support their arguments and performance were we can, then lovingly and truthfully critique it where necessary.
Hopefully, they’ll show that Christians and theists are smart people too.
Thanks Brandon for your input.
justin aka j rocka
May 9, 2007
i liked growing pains.
Michael Patrick Leahy
May 9, 2007
As the author of Letter to an Atheist, I rate the debate a draw. I agree with you that Kirk and Ray made a fundamental error when they attacked the Darwinian theory of evolution as being the alternative to belief in God.
It is not.
Darwin did give atheists an excuse to proclaim their atheism, but his theory, though flawed, is accepted by all mainstream scientists today.
For my full commentary on the debate, go to
http://www.michaelpatrickleahy.com/nightline.html
greg
May 10, 2007
Why did they have to go and get these guys to do this debate? I mean, is Kirk Cameron the best we can do in a Christian vs. Atheist debate? No offense to Kirk, but he’s pretty far down the list on who I would have liked to have seen involved with this. Too bad Lee Strobel couldn’t have been on growing pains.
Kevin D. Hendricks
May 11, 2007
Now that the debate’s over I blogged about it on my personal blog. Interesting to watch, but kind of painful for both sides.
jordan fowlere
May 13, 2007
Yes, why wouldn’t nightline pick more heavy hitters? Because they wouldn’t do it. This was like a Contender match unlike the PPV matches of Crossan vs. William Layne Craig debate (a formal debate) and Craig vs. Spong (on the historical resurrection.)
I would love to see Os Guiness versus Bertrand Russell, but then Bertrand, if he is right, is worm food…if he was wrong…ooops!
Ann
May 13, 2007
I don’t understand debating atheists. The Bible tells us to witness for the Lord, and if they still choose to reject God, to wipe the dust from our feet, and move on….of course that is parapharasing, but the gist is that we cannot, even as believers, make someone believe who isn’t willing to believe in God. But, we can continue to pray for the lost.
My problem with debates is that it is one man’s belief over another, and debates often become heated and ugly. Just watch a political debate. How many times have you been swayed from your candidates beliefs in a debate… never would be my guess. So, what did the debate really accomplish except to strengthen your belief in your candidate. So it is with the atheist/christian debates, my best guess is that no one came over to either side from the other. I doubt that fence riders were convince one way or the other either.
It is my opinion that we as Christians should be in prayer, and witness as God leads us, and leave out the debating whether or not we can prove God exists.
I received an e-mail not long ago that gave me pause to reflect on the saying “out of the mouths of babes.”
One Nation, “Under God”.
One day a 6 year old girl was sitting in a classroom. The teacher was going to explain
evolution to the children. The teacher asked a little boy: Tommy do you see the tree outside?
TOMMY: Yes.
TEACHER: Tommy, do you see the grass outside?
TOMMY: Yes.
TEACHER: Go outside and look up and see if you can see the sky.
TOMMY: Okay. (He returned a few minutes later) Yes, I saw the sky.
TEACHER: Did you see God up there?
TOMMY: No.
TEACHER: That’s my point. We can’t see God because he isn’t there. Possibly he just doesn’t exist.
A little girl spoke up and wanted to ask the boy some questions.
The teacher agreed and the little girl asked the boy: Tommy, do you see the tree outside?
TOMMY: Yes.
LITTLE GIRL: Tommy do you see the grass outside?
TOMMY: Yessssss!
LITTLE GIRL: Did you see the sky?
TOMMY: Yessssss!
LITTLE GIRL: Tommy, do you see the
teacher?
TOMMY: Yes
LITTLE GIRL: Do you see her brain?
TOMMY: No
LITTLE GIRL: Then according to what we were taught today in school, she possibly
may not even have one!
FOR WE WALK BY FAITH, NOT BY SIGHT”
II CORINTHIANS 5:7
Maybe we should make sure our children know the truth and not worry about the atheist/christian debates so much. Our children are our future leaders and it will be most important that we still have one nation under God.
mike hosey
May 14, 2007
Ann –
Your anectdote regarding the teacher and the children demonstrates the importance of debate. What you provided is, in fact, an informal debate. That debate showed that there were two reasonable ways of looking at the same set of facts.
In the creation/evolution debate the fact is that both camps ultimately resort to faith — faith in a completely naturalistic view of the world, or faith in a first cause power.
In the case of evolution, we got here either one of two ways. We were created, or we evolved. There is NO in between. If you say that God created us through evolution, you are still saying God created us. Debates, when done well, drive this point home.
Brad
May 15, 2007
I’m going to eat my words — a little bit. I’ve heard more about Way of the Master from people who have participated much closer than I have, and the training appears to be solid and useful.
I’m still concerned that its approach is one-inch deep, and for sure that is what is demonstrated by the marketing, which is I guess my chief beef.
But I can’t knock anything too hard which has a positive impact for the kingdom. And one thing mentioned is that WOTM training stretches people to participate well outside of their comfort zones, which is a critical plus.
Paul
May 16, 2007
I’m with what Kevin implied, about both sides being hurt by the debate…. I actually had to stop watching it because it seemed like a waste of my time. I was completely unimpressed with arguments from both sides… seemed as if they were arguing over their opinions rather than giving sound explanations and facts to support their claims.
I will say this though, in the portion of the show I watched, it seemed that Kirk and Ray handled themselves with a little more class than the atheists… with the exception of the “missing link” illustrations, which just made them look like idiots. (even though they were trying to be funny or tongue-in-cheek.)
@jordan fowlere – loved your bertrand russell comment. good stuff.
Benjamin
July 21, 2007
Sad how Christianity has dwindled down to a popularity contest. I’ve read this whole discussion thread and literally have a dozen things I’d like to write, however, I’d end up offending everyone, including myself…
So I’ll try to keep my comments brief…
For those who would prefer to take a jab at Ray and Kirk, based upon their credentials, or apparent lack thereof… Consider your own efforts for the sake of the Kingdom…
For those who think the banana illustration is insulting to the Body of Christ – consider how insulting Evolution is to Real Scientists – that’s the point Ray was trying to make… The proof of God’s Intelligent Design is so easy to see, it’s as simple as examining the intricate design of an ordinary banana…
It seems to me that Comfort is just following God’s lead, using foolish things to confound the wise…
As for arrogance, you demonstrate your own hypocrisy when you call them arrogant for simply stating what is clearly written in God’s Word…
The biggest mistakes in the Bible are the interpretations man puts into the text… The term is eisegesis (sic?) and when someone (in this case it was the “Rational” Response Squad) wants to step forward and present a false claim against the Word of God – our mandate, commissioned by God Himself in His Word, is to stand up and point out where the presentation is flawed…
Ray and Kirk were no more arrogant than Christ Himself when He stood in front of the Pharisees and called them children of their father, the devil…
Am I comparing Comfort and Cameron to Christ? Only in that they present the Truth of God’s Word – not in that they are without fault, they’ll be the first to tell you themselves that there’s nothing special about who they are… They are simply living according to Christ’s command to preach the Gospel to every creature…
If that means getting up in front of the world, on National TV in front of non-believers and professed believers alike, and being thought of as “fools for Christ” then I would suggest to you that they are in good company…
However, my question for you still remains… What have YOU done for the sake of the Kingdom? Are you, as Jude pleaded with his readers, “snatching them from the flames of God’s judgment, hating even the garment stained by their flesh…”?
I write all of this without judgment, without condemnation…
Our war is not with one another… Let us judge with righteous judgment, not arrogance… Let us win them with the very Word that won us… Not with a flashy catch-phrase, or a kitchy banner ad…
So much for being brief…
setrr
September 2, 2007
Isn’t this supposed to be:
LITTLE GIRL: Tommy, do you see the
teacher?
TOMMY: Yes
LITTLE GIRL: Do you see his brain?
TOMMY: No
LITTLE GIRL: Then according to what we were taught today in school, he possibly
may not even have one!