Philosopher Karl Popper talks about having an attitude of reasonableness in a debate. The attitude of reasonableness suggests that two combatants come to the table on either side of a debate knowing that they are right, willing to convince the other person they are right, but accepting that the other person has a viable view and that they may have to adopt the opponent's viewpoint. My position is that believers have an attitude of reasonableness. Atheists do not. In fact atheists cannot be reasonable for reasons I intend to explain.
Atheism is not isolated from a belief in God; it is part of a belief in God. Believers sometimes doubt the existence of God. Our doctrine accepts and makes allowance for our disbelief. Even Jesus, God's son, while dying on the cross, lost God. Believers come to the debate understanding the atheist view. Atheists cannot for a moment concede that God might exist because the moment that they do, they become believers. All faith journeys are an exploration of God and it doesn't matter if you believe in God 90 per cent or 10 per cent of the time.
Therefore, an atheist must bring an airtight, closed mind to the debate. There can be no wavering. Yet the moment a believer concedes some point about atheism, the atheist sees a gap and wedges home point after point. Atheists have it easy in this debate. First, they cannot admit the other side has a viable point. Second, it is easier to attack something and defend nothing than it is to defend something and attack nothing.
God is attacked for being improvable, for allowing evil to exist and for being inattentive to the needs of His people. Believers acknowledge these things and have no defense other than, “We're not meant to understand His will.” Lame! At this juncture the atheist shouts like the announcer of a European football match, “Gooooooooooooooooo-al!”
Atheists, because they don't have to listen to the counterdebate, are right. They know believers have no viable proof for the existence of God. In the wake of the same ol' boring God litany, the absolutist atheist voice is one that rings loud, long and clear. Next the media runs with a leading atheist theory because slamming God creates controversy and in the secular world controversy sells … something that should make us dubious! Arguments for God are as old as time and they sell nothing—except a few million Bibles each year!
My greatest proof lies in Jesus. Some deny his existence. Others call him myth. Roman records and Jewish historian Josephus say otherwise. My bend towards atheism stops when I consider Christ. C.S. Lewis said Jesus was either insane, a liar, or who he said he was. Christ himself said that he couldn't be one of Satan's crew, for a house divided could not stand. Therefore seeing as he wasn't tried for insanity, and he spoke the truth, I pick Son of God as my answer. Therefore, God must exist.
Lastly, and this might not be a very good reason to attack atheism or to defend belief, but I simply like the kind of people who, despite the impracticality of belief, still opt to believe. A journey of faith in God and His son the Christ enriches life, whether that belief is justified or provable. I believe we are spiritual creatures and when we ignore believing in something divine and bigger than ourselves, we simply miss out on something quite wonderful. Many things in the world aren't explainable and that fact alone is good enough for the believer to say God exists. I like the “out there” element of faith. It's all a believer requires and it drives the logical atheist wild!
