Humanists commonly comment on Christian websites and social media pages. Many of them are there to simply “troll,” while a few others like to debate. I’ve debated humanists on Christian pages, and have had worthwhile dialogue with them. Now, when I go on a humanist Facebook page to engage in discussion and debate, the tables are turned, though I’m not there to simply troll them. In Part 4 of what I dubbed the Bird Evolution Debate, one particular humanist/atheist, DG, accused me of trolling and asked me to leave atheists alone.
Also, humanist LB continued the debate regarding bird evolution, as discussed so far in Parts 1, 2, and 3 of the Bird Evolution Debate.
Humanist JM jumped in with a mocking “no true scotsman” logical fallacy by trying to imply that creationists cannot be real scientists. Since his comment carried no actual substance, I felt no need to respond.
See below for Part 4 of the Bird Evolution Debate. Names are abbreviated for privacy and brevity.
"Creation scientists" 😆😅😂
Kevin, an uncertainty over a detail, and a willingness to re-examine that detail does not dismiss an entire field of enquiry.
Even if it turned out that birds weren't directly 'descended' from dinosaurs, it wouldn't in any way dismiss the reality of evolutionary processes.
@Kevin Why do you people troll this group? I don't look up christian groups so I can troll them. There is enough bad blood right now....Atheist groups simply like to share their notions and feelings among themselves. To us, evolution is the theory that best explains the natural world at this time. If you want to believe in divine creation or intelligent design, go for it. Just leave us alone. You're just being self righteous and it makes you feel superior or holy to try to set us awful atheists straight.
LB, how is your statement anything more than a faith commitment to a worldview rather than a defense of the claimed “…reality of evolutionary processes”? As I asked earlier in the thread, can you provide an observable example of an organism adding brand new genetic information and functionality such as an originally blind organism evolving eyesight, or an originally flightless organism evolving the ability to fly?
DG, I think it’s a safe assumption that the Friendly Atheist and many of his supporters are not here to just “share their notions and feelings among themselves.” Considering the fact that the Christian worldview is mocked in nearly every post, it’s apparent that many of the atheists on this page have an agenda to persuade others of their worldview. That’s fine that you personally do not troll Christian groups, but I’ve witnessed many atheists do just that. I don’t have any problem with that, as long as they are respectful, and I’ve engaged with those atheists on Christian pages as well. Also, I’m secure enough in my biblical faith that I am willing to go outside of my comfort zone and respectfully engage with people who disagree with me. Why should I not respectfully engage in robust debate/dialogue with those who disagree with me? And no, I’m not self-righteous…I’m a sinner just like you, deserving of God’s eternal wrath…however, God in His mercy saved me and gave me a new heart and spirit about 8 years ago when I put my trust and faith in the person and work of God the Son. Jesus died on the cross for my sins, and rose from the dead, confirming a future resurrection to eternal life for those who put their trust and faith in Him. I’m saved by grace, and by the righteousness of Christ, and not by any righteousness of my own.
DG’s comment gave me a springboard to share the Gospel. If I did not have any compassion for humanists/atheists, then sure, I would leave them alone and not ever challenge their worldview. I would leave them alone and not care one bit that they fall under God’s judgment and suffer in hell for eternity. Yet, since I know God and His Word, how could I be silent about both the reality of hell and the fact that God paved a way of salvation through the person and work of His Son, Jesus?
The conversation that I had with JC in Part 3 of the debate continues in Part 5, where he says “I don’t understand how you see the unquestionable and undeniable existence of God.” I will share that portion of the debate in my next blog post.