The magic trick 

Atheists, and those who follow Atheistic dogmas, set up a magic trick with just a little deceptive patter.  They start using assumptive language that presupposes that Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism (three lies) are the basis for knowing anything.  They then assumptively state that anything that contradicts Naturalism, Materialism, or Uniformitarianism (three lies) will require extraordinary proof.  They are taking three lies for which they have no proof and making them the basis of all knowledge instead of taking God’s Word and making It the basis of all knowledge.

Ridicule certainly works on 8-year-old children, and it works very well on adults as well.  Atheists, and those who follow Atheistic dogmas, use ridicule against any claim of God’s power, love, caring, and leading.  Keep in mind that all of these people have the unhindered ability to repent, experience a change of mind, and seek God with all their minds.  All of them would find God and experience His comfort, His leading, His power, and His revelation if they were to turn toward Him in their minds.  And, they all know that God exists and they know what can be known about Him.  How do we know that?  Divine revelation.  God tells us, through Romans 1, that they know.  God speaks to us through Scripture, so we know that they know.  And they know that they know, which is why they are so careful to avoid allowing the discussion to show that Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism are three irrational claims.  When they try to defend these claims, they must go to irrational arguments from ignorance, universal negatives, and circular reasoning. (some caveats about hearing God's Voice)

The reality is that any claim that would be against Scripture would require extraordinary proof.   Claims against Scripture have historically been flimflam and magic tricks.  And, we know, by revelation, that the Scripture cannot be broken.  They will point out what appears to be a contradiction, but looking into it reveals that it is not a contradiction.  They will point out something that some scientists claims and show that it is in conflict with Scripture or that it requires that we interpret Scripture in a weird way, but looking into it a bit further reveals that the scientists have come to a conclusion that is not supported by the facts.  It was the way that the facts were presented that made the Creation appear to be in conflict with the Bible.  This is true of interpretations of the fossil record and many of the geological observations that get wrongly interpreted as having some other means of formation when they would be better explained by The Biblical Global Flood.  This is true of the false dilemma of distant starlight.  This is true of stories about molecules-to-man evolution, which is mostly taught as if it were fact while all the evidence fits very nicely into the historical account of God creating all the living things and all the living things reproducing after their own kinds.  This is also true of big-bang stories about the beginning of the Universe when the evidence points strongly toward the historical account of God creating everything in the beginning.

If someone wants to claim that something in the Bible is false, they must to much more than present a competing story.  They must show that that story is absolutely true and that the Bible is absolutely false.  They cannot present a story (not a very good one at that) and then claim that their story, their lie, shows that the Bible is false.

We know that the Scripture is God’s Word, without error.  How do we know?  God has revealed that to us.  Naturalists will ridicule when you tell them that God speaks to you, that He shows you things that you just know by revelation from Him.  They are using circular reasoning very deceptively.  They are assuming Naturalism (God does nothing and doesn’t lead) and then using that assumption to claim that Naturalism is the only logical position to hold.  If we assume that God cannot reveal, then it is illogical to say that God does reveal.  However, they never state that they are assuming Naturalism.  They use assumptive language with Naturalism as a presupposition.  They are using circular reasoning, and their presupposition of Naturalism is based on a universal negative, which is always irrational unless it is based on divine revelation—the very thing they are trying to deny.  And, typically, they will then say that they have never observed anything but what is natural, therefore, the supernatural does not exist.  First, it is highly doubtful that they never saw the Hand of God move, but we can’t prove that, can we?  It is the untestable lie.  However, this argument that they are bringing, “I don’t know about it so it doesn’t exist,” is an argument from ignorance, and arguments from ignorance are irrational.

The Revelation that comes from God is the Rock.  When we obey that Revelation, that leading, we are building on the Rock.  When we build in this way, we are building on the Revelation, the Truth, and the building material that we are using is the Truth, Jesus Christ.  Anything that contradicts the Truth is a lie.  Following a lie rather than Truth is sin.  That is what sin is.  Adultery is sin because God never leads us into adultery.  Stealing in sin because God never leads us to steal.  Being envious is sin because God never leads us into envy.  God leads.  When we don’t follow, this is sin and will lead to calamity.

The Atheists, and those who believe Atheistic dogmas, claim that all they need to do is to prove that science could explain everything we needed to know without reference to God.  If science is equivalent to story-telling this might have been true, except that we now know that scientific-sounding-story-telling cannot explain everything without violating several basic laws of science.

The reality is that the Atheists, and those who believe Atheistic dogmas, actually need to do a lot more than to prove that science could explain everything we needed to know without reference to God.  They need to show proof that their stories have actually taken place, which they have not been able to do.  They must show proof that God does not exist, which they have not been able to do.  They have to show proof, using something besides circular reasoning, arguments from ignorance, universal negatives, and other irrational arguments, that followers of Christ are not actually hearing His Voice and being filled with His Spirit and having Him do His works through them.

When Atheists, and those who follow Atheistic dogmas, set up a magic trick with deceptive patter, you must re-frame the discussion.  Note their presuppositions (usually some mix of Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism), and state the fact that these are lies.  Do not allow that discussion to go forward with these assumptions as a basis for the discussion.  We don’t build on lies but on Truth. 

Naturalism is that assumption that God does nothing, but we know that God speaks, God delivers, and God answers prayer.  God holds everything throughout the Universe together every moment, and He is so consistent in doing this that we can do science.  Under Naturalism, there is no way that we could know anything because there would be no one to give and enforce the scientific laws.

Materialism is the assumption that God doesn’t exist, but we know that God exists in the same way we know that our friends exist.  We communicate with God and He with us.  To one who is willingly ignorant, I can no more prove that my friend exists than I can prove that God exists.  In both cases, they would have to meet either my friend or God.  In both cases, they could make irrational arguments against the existence of either my friend or my God.  If I show a birth certificate of my friend, that is just a piece of paper.  It might be forged.  And the arguments could go on and on.  When someone doesn’t want God to exist, that person will stop at nothing to keep themselves from allowing God to speak to them.

Uniformitarianism is the assumption that God didn’t create everything and that God never brought The Great Worldwide Flood.  It works so hard against the scientific evidence.  Increasingly, this presupposition of Uniformitarianism requires the addition of many invisible, untestable, unobservable entities such as dark matter and dark energy.  Science classes often just assume that these invisible, untestable, unobservable entities just exist and never challenge them.  These then become presuppositions to “prove” the big bang story and a very old Universe.  The very old Universe and the big bang story is used to “prove” that God didn’t create and that God didn’t bring The Great Worldwide Flood, so the logic has gone in a circle which is irrational. 

Interestingly, the scientific facts very nicely fit God’s creation and The Great Worldwide Flood just as it is written in the Bible without modifying what the Bible says or violating the text of Scripture.  There is no evidence that God doesn’t lead His people, but there is plenty of evidence that He does.  Miracles are not that uncommon, though our faith is still very weak.  We are learning how to hear His Voice and how to stand in His Presence.  As we do this, He will speak to us and His Faith comes by Hearing His Voice.  This give access to His Grace and His Grace does His Works through us.  As we allow His Love to flow through us in this way, we are changed in our very nature.  We die to self and He is more fully formed in us.  Our minds are transfigured into His Holiness and we are redeemed from slavery to the fallen human nature and to the slavery that kept us under the control of evil principalities and powers in the spiritual realm.