Hypothetical Debate From Both Sides Ideas For Youth Lesson

[joshp]

Hopefully this is the right place to put this.

I'm teaching a new topic at my church for my youth (mostly high school/college freshman). They're all pretty well versed in the bible but I am trying to get them out of their bubble and present them with the questions and topics that smart atheist/agnostics (like you all) will point out to them that may will have no answer for. If other smart christians could then propose answers (I will join in too), I think it would be a great discussion. I was going to use Quora, but this seems much better suited.

I'm going to be playing the atheist and ask them different questions, and challenge their answers. I'll be starting out with one of the two points below. Probably the second one, but if anyone wants to answer the first, go for it.

Topic 1
I'm going to be pointing out how ludicrous it is to believe some man existed 2,000+ years ago, who was crucified (for sake of time constraints, I'll just assume that he did in fact die), and magically was raised from the dead a few days later. I'll ask them if, besides just pure faith, they can point out any reason I should believe in such a story.

Topic 2
I will point out the fact that the only reason that they are Christians, is because their parents are. I will point out that if their parents had been Islamic, they would be following that religion, and so on. Why then, is their religion right and all others wrong?

If anyone would like to propose new questions that they think would be good to ask, please feel free to do so.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 10 by Tcg]

Find an atheist, or even better yet, a small number of atheists who would be willing to join your class for a few sessions.

I'd be willing to do this. Would have to be through Skype of course, so just set up a laptop, and I'd be willing to discuss things.

Apologetics rarely lead to faith and are usually tacked on after the fact.

Exactly. Arguments like Modal Ontological, or Kalam, at best "prove" (in quotes because they actually don't) a deistic god and do not lead anywhere to the theistic God of the Bible. Indeed, if I was to accept Modal Ontological as being valid and sound, it would by necessity disqualify Bible God, since I can imagine a god greater than him.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 5:

I think there may be a better way. A longer harder way, but a better way.

Teaching Christians how to overcome common questions/objections is useful to an extent. But what happens when someone asks a question for which they haven't been taught the answer? It's a little like teaching students to prepare for a test by memorizing the answers to past exam questions.

Some answers can't be taught, being all dependent on one's faith and all. Where it is, can't none show a God exists, only don't it beat all, so many folks declare they know the mind of a God they can't show exists to even have 'im one of him one of 'em.

In my humble opinion, young Christians would be far better equipped if taught the basics of logic and how history is done.

And how it is, just 'cause it is it got it writ down, that don't mean it's logical, or historical. Or factual.

The more advanced ones should consider at least learning the basics of Greek. With these tools they have what they need to not only answer virtually any question asked of them, but answer their questions as well.

The ability to answer a question has little bearing on if that answer's it a correct'n or not.


"How y'all doin' Joey?"

"I got me a frog in my pocket!"

That don't tell near how proud I was I did. Or that he jumped in there all by hisself.


This kinda gets at my deal there with Christian / theist claims regarding a god that can't be shown to exist - "I can't show he exists, but boy howdy, ain't it something else how God believes in him the exact same stuff it is I do!"


"Show me that frog Joey".

"Well about that, that frog thinks he's there!"

[joshp]

Just an update...

We had a huge snowstorm (at least for Georgia) so church had been canceled. Then with holidays, I had to obviously go over Jesus being born. Sorry for not replying sooner.

I'm going to be going through this thread for my lesson today.

We're going to come up with what we think would be a good topic for us all to study. When I say "good", I mean challenging.

We will come up with a format for how we can do this most effectively, taking into consideration what everyone here has said (including possibly Skype as a final part ).

I'll update you all know how it goes.

Thank you all for giving sincere ideas/questions on these topics.

[Divine Insight]

Topic 1
I'm going to be pointing out how ludicrous it is to believe some man existed 2,000+ years ago, who was crucified (for sake of time constraints, I'll just assume that he did in fact die), and magically was raised from the dead a few days later. I'll ask them if, besides just pure faith, they can point out any reason I should believe in such a story.

The problem I have with the above topic from a Christian theological perspective is that Christians should be taught that this is indeed a faith-based religion. The very idea that they should be able to make compelling arguments for why anyone should believe this story beyond reasons of faith, is actually a very poor way to teach this theology.

There are no compelling reasons to believe this story other than faith. And honest Christians should be honest with themselves on that fact.

If a Christian wants to believe in Jesus on faith, they should do just that. Pretending that they have compelling evidence to believe that it's true without any need for faith is to basically destroy the whole point of the religion.

If they feel that they have to believe it because it's obviously true, then there is no place for faith.

So this is actually a dishonest place for Christians to be. The first thing they should do is openly confess to themselves that it is a faith-based religion. Putting in their minds that the religion should be believed based on evidence is actually a bad theological idea.

IMHO

[Mithrae]

So this is actually a dishonest place for Christians to be. The first thing they should do is openly confess to themselves that it is a faith-based religion. Putting in their minds that the religion should be believed based on evidence is actually a bad theological idea.

IMHO

That, or your extremely humble accusations of dishonesty, pretense, ignorance and hypocrisy are based on an erroneous assumption of what 'faith' is. Just sayin'

There clearly should be more acknowledgement of uncertainty and unknowns in Christianity as traditionally practiced, but conflating that with (or against) 'faith' seems to be erroneous. And in fairness, that's a point which many Christians need to learn also. As I see it false certainty - especially in an ecclesiastical hierarchy or in the solid book they hold in their hands - is almost exactly the opposite of biblical faith, a desperate clinging to something our minds can understand rather than trusting in a God who we can't.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 1 by joshp]

If anyone would like to propose new questions that they think would be good to ask, please feel free to do so.

Okay, I'll ask them this. What is truth? What do they consider truth to be?
For the record, I consider truth to be "That which corresponds with reality".
Thus, the statement "Hilary Clinton won the 2016 Presidential election" is not true, whereas "Donald Trump won the 2016 Presidential election" is, and we are able to figure out which statement is true by observing reality.

A follow up question would be "How do we, as humans, learn truth, what is true?"

[Divine Insight]

So this is actually a dishonest place for Christians to be. The first thing they should do is openly confess to themselves that it is a faith-based religion. Putting in their minds that the religion should be believed based on evidence is actually a bad theological idea.

IMHO

That, or your extremely humble accusations of dishonesty, pretense, ignorance and hypocrisy are based on an erroneous assumption of what 'faith' is. Just sayin'

There clearly should be more acknowledgement of uncertainty and unknowns in Christianity as traditionally practiced, but conflating that with (or against) 'faith' seems to be erroneous. And in fairness, that's a point which many Christians need to learn also. As I see it false certainty - especially in an ecclesiastical hierarchy or in the solid book they hold in their hands - is almost exactly the opposite of biblical faith, a desperate clinging to something our minds can understand rather than trusting in a God who we can't.

My point is that once a person is convinced that they have no choice but to believe the religion is real then the only meaning of "faith" at that point becomes a concept of being "saved" from otherwise certain damnation.

That would then not be placing faith in a religion, but rather placing faith in being saved from what one believes would otherwise be certain damnation, which may potentially include eternal torture.

So that's not the same as placing faith in the religion.

That would be placing faith in being 'saved from damnation' because the person has already been convinced that the religion must be true.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 1 by joshp]

I think it's great that you're open-minded enough to approach this subject with your Christian students. I'm assuming you're a youth pastor or a Bible teacher since you use the reference "my students." I'm wondering if your pastor feels the same way.

I think you can play the atheist role and ask the questions but as someone pointed out it would be better to get a real atheist to ask the questions and respond to questions. Otherwise, you're stuck in your Christian worldview should questions and discussions arise, which they inevitably will. If you really want to understand the atheist perspective I suggest you find several of the many debates between atheists/theists on youtube.

Just know that atheists don't have an "Atheist Bible" that we all use and live by. We're as diverse and divided as Christians are. I don't consider myself an atheist because I have no way of knowing if there is a superior being that exists somewhere. I don't think there is but there's always a chance. I do, however, consider myself an atheist when it comes to the "God" of the Bible.

Finally, don't be surprised if you meet with some opposition to your endeavor. Especially if you belong to an evangelical church. I don't know of any who would welcome any mentioning of atheistic views.

Good luck.

[Mithrae]

There clearly should be more acknowledgement of uncertainty and unknowns in Christianity as traditionally practiced, but conflating that with (or against) 'faith' seems to be erroneous. And in fairness, that's a point which many Christians need to learn also. As I see it false certainty - especially in an ecclesiastical hierarchy or in the solid book they hold in their hands - is almost exactly the opposite of biblical faith, a desperate clinging to something our minds can understand rather than trusting in a God who we can't.

My point is that once a person is convinced that they have no choice but to believe the religion is real then the only meaning of "faith" at that point becomes a concept of being "saved" from otherwise certain damnation.

That would then not be placing faith in a religion, but rather placing faith in being saved from what one believes would otherwise be certain damnation, which may potentially include eternal torture.

So that's not the same as placing faith in the religion.

That would be placing faith in being 'saved from damnation' because the person has already been convinced that the religion must be true.

Again, to my understand that has nothing to do with what biblical faith is. A child having faith in her father to catch her when she jumps has obvious and absolute proof that he exists; husbands and wives being faithful to each other are not somehow diminished because they know that they're not figments of each others' imagination. I'm pretty sure the bible never once says that anyone should be "placing faith in the religion," but in Jesus and God. You're imagining that faith is about belief, whereas the bible - most notably and obviously in the big chapter on faith, Hebrews 11 - suggests that it is more about trust, commitment and the actions based on it.