Stephen, the atheist, and the dew drop

The debates are endless. The results are predictable. The efforts are fruitless. Or are they? You have seen them, possibly by way of being  a spectator, or  by engaging yourself with those of polar opposite views in regard to God/no God, and the circular arguments that are as old as time.

The atheist (not all) cloaks himself/herself (assumed) in his alleged superior oratory, chastising the believer in God as if he/she has a mental defect, all the while painting himself as a god. The atheist will never admit to worshiping other things or even himself, and he is just as happy wallowing in his own intellectual pursuits, as long as these endeavors lead from God.

The atheist rummages through history to support a belief in the deification of man, referring to things and places he has never seen, but fails to use the same logic when the believer uses the same history in regard to Jesus of Nazareth.

The atheist puts full credence  in the Romans, the Greeks, and cites the writings of Flavius Josephus as fact, but disregards the writings of his contemporaries, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, calling them fables.

The believer has been given a heart that has been fused with a love that is other-worldly. (whether he uses that heart, now that’s a another discussion) The atheist can make no such claim.

Witness the stoning of Stephen who was praying for them who were ending his life. Where oh where could a man acquire such a gracious and forgiving heart unless it was other-worldly, yea, rather, heavenly?

The atheist will mock this example, saying it never happened, was an idea written by a fool, or simply the rant of a lunatic. Sadly, what the atheist misses here is the truth that Stephen was sold out for One greater, and One by whom death was given eloquence.

No amount of learning will satisfy the thirst for an atheist’s pursuit of truth apart from God. as there will always be another reference to cite, another book to read, another debate to engage, with each just another detour driving further from the truth.

When Saul of Tarsus was brought from darkness to light, and as he became Paul the apostle, he was given an intellect the likes of which this world has never seen. He was brilliant as a scholar, but his mind, heart, and soul were now sanctified! His treatise of the book of Romans has long been used by law professors in its presentation of argumentation. Quite an admission to be so utilized by unbelievers and sceptics of ‘higher education.’

So here he is, standing before a group of ‘thinkers,’ the intellectually elite of the day, the superstitious, the seekers of truth, you know the type, they demand answers while they argue day in and day out, never getting to the root of a matter. Paul offers the root.

He states that God ‘does not need anything,’ and he gives ‘breath’ to all men. (Say Mr. Atheist, it appears your next breath is on loan to you from God; breathe wisely) He then states something quite marvellous: ‘God made of one blood ALL nations to dwell on the earth, and set the times, and the boundaries of their habitation.’  Interesting, one blood.

Paul tells all, and this is equally true to the atheist, that God is not far from us, that is, if the heart is right. Outstanding. Paul then says that ‘in Him we live, move, and have our being.’

The atheist will mock this fact that ‘in Him we live and move,’ yet where can the atheist go to find a place that is distinctly his? Hmmmm? Where can the atheist go and say: ‘This is my place?’  Where can the atheist go where the dewdrop doesn’t sing the song of the Creator?

Even the Lebanese poet Gibran said as much when he suggested studying the dewdrop as a way to the Creator. He was right.

To an honest seeker of truth, there is nothing on earth that does not point to design, a Creator, and a Lord above all.  Consider the spider web or the stars above.

Stephen loved and prayed for they who pelted him with rocks, and is an example of how a believer offers hope to his foes. What pray tell, can a person who is an atheist offer (of equal value) in return?

You may have missed it above, but the idea of a ‘sanctified mind,’ should really not be overlooked in a person’s life; this free, undeserved, and crystal clear point of view, that is nothing short of other-worldly,  you know, kind of like Stephen and the dew drop.

2

Advertisements

About ColorStorm

Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture.
Gallery | This entry was posted in Unbelief (ahem: atheism) and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Stephen, the atheist, and the dew drop

  1. Ana says:

    spot on, nothing more needs to be said!

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I have simply decided to not engage with hardcore atheists anymore. All I can do for them is prayer, and all they can do for me is verbally abuse me and the God I love.

    They claim I am mentally disabled and unhappy, but have they seen my face? Have they seen the bounce in my step on a sunny day when the warmth of God’s creation called the sun shines down on me? Have they seen my pleasant interactions with friends and family and even strangers, which I rarely used to do before? Have they seen how I’ve grown from a bitter young lady to a cheerful and content child of God?

    No, they have not seen it. Until they see it, they probably will never believe it, even if I argue until all the words drain from my body. I’m led to believe that even if I took a bullet for them, they still would not believe in the loving Christ that lives in me.

    And that is the truth of the matter.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Colorstorm says:

      Well Ada,

      I’m with you. ‘The debates are endless, and the results predictable.’ Part of what was left out was what you addressed here: the draining of spiritual energy-

      Truly, the ‘natural man can not perceive the spiritual,’ so arguing on a lower level leaves the others at a disadvantage, and ‘we the people’ frustrated.

      That said, seeds are planted, some watered, and you never know, God can do wonders with mere clay vessels.

      I probably wouldn’t ignore atheists completely, but I certainly would not want to go on forever with ‘endless debate.’

      The time and effort you put into your posts combating atheism is remarkable; your range of knowledge and perspective, coupled with your loving heart is inspirational, at least to me.

      Your last thoughts are ‘off the charts awesome.’ Thank you for sending that to me!!!


      “I’m led to believe that even if I took a bullet for them, they still would not believe in the loving Christ that lives in me.

      And that is the truth of the matter.” (Ada) 😉


      >3

      Liked by 2 people

      • Well, true. I won’t just immediately ignore an atheist that tries to debate with me. But more often than not the debate usually ends in name-calling, ridiculing my faith, and countless claims with unsourced “facts.” They also tend to ignore the “uncomfortable” arguments I make, like how if God doesn’t exist then there’s ultimately no meaning for human life, and if morality is solely grounded in biology then that means we can make up morality as we go along, so therefore one day eugenics (only allowing humans who are “fit” to breed) could be considered moral “for the advancement of our species.”

        So basically, what I mean to say is engaging in endless debate rarely leads anywhere, so after a few back-and-forth comments I’ll just make my peace and pray. Which I think you seem to agree with. 🙂

        If someone is really looking for God, they’ll find Him, even in the face of all the lies the devil can muster. Our job is only to help those willing along that path, and pray that when we preach the Word of God to anyone, seeds will be planted and watered.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. This is a thought-provoking post, Colorstorm. I apologize in advance if it is lengthy.

    As an atheist, I am disappointed that you paint with such a broad brush; atheism like Christianity may have many who wear the label, but they are not uniform in their beliefs. Saying “the atheist” is akin to saying “the Christian.” Why stone with words those who wish to have a dialogue?

    In your post, you refer to Stephen who is stoned for his beliefs. He loved those who killed him, something that stemmed from his faith. I am an atheist, but I see in that story no lunatic, madman, or wretch. Rather, I see a tragic end to a human being’s life, ended because he believed differently. There is a lesson here, and one does not need to believe in any deity for it to be known.

    Additionally you say that honest seekers of truth find design in nature rather than simply nature (if you shall excuse the paraphrase). I will say this: honest seekers of truth only search for the truth. There is no promise that it shall be found. This isn’t to downplay your faith, or the experiences you have had to reach your conclusions. Rather, it is only to point out that searchers come from different backgrounds and walks of life.

    Finally, you ask what atheists offer instead of the hope of salvation. It is true: there is no promise of an afterlife, eternal justice, or a reason for troubling things to happen to people. Atheism is simply no belief in any deities. What it offers, it offers only by implication. There is plenty of energy devoted to the implication that there is no God to uplift the human spirit to eternity. But, hidden away from all the loud voices on both sides of the discussion on faith, there is the implication that we as human beings are not broken creatures worthy only of eternal damnation. As human beings we are capable of whatever we build for ourselves if we try. And as human beings, there is no deity holding us back from holding a hand out in friendship.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Colorstorm says:

      Good reply SB and thank you- no worries about length-

      I did speak as you observed, to a general readership. There are exceptions and you obviously are one. No stoning here though. Perhaps you are drawing nigh to the kingdom of heaven…

      You made this observation:

      ‘Finally, you ask what atheists offer instead of the hope of salvation’

      But Sirius, I didn’t mention salvation at all nor was it implied. I’m not slighting you in the least, just a simple correction, which is important, and here’s why:

      The context was Stephen being stoned to death, while at the same time he asked God to FORGIVE his tormentors. He was seeking God’s favor upon his killers. This is the Hope that I was referring to, and I then asked for something that an atheist could offer of this magnitude. Stephen asked God for the welfare of his brethren..

      He also asked God to ‘not lay this sin at their charge.’ What a heart! To forgive under such circumstances is much more than just a man being killed for a differing opinion SB. Men are killed everyday, but who blesses this way?

      Always appreciate the interplay.

      (btw, you may not be aware, but I’ve written in other places how it is possible for the atheist (broad brush 😉 to live a life with finer morals than a christian. This should make you smile.

      Like

    • Colorstorm says:

      SB-
      You are not the garden variety atheist. You appeared to have had a stint in christianity, if I read you correctly in other places.

      In which case, you may have to find another word for your position as ‘atheist’. Doesn’t seem right. 😉 .

      Liked by 1 person

      • Colorstorm,

        I think that’s the highest compliment a Christian can pay someone like me. And the answer is yes, I learned as much and did as much as I could to keep my own faith. I won’t go into the details here (I’ve posted them on my own blog in bits and pieces), but suffice it to say that I didn’t forget what I’d learned either.

        My current beliefs are best expressed by the word “atheist.” That others do not wear it well is something that is currently outside my control. However, I do have hope if we can have amicable discussion. Perhaps there should be a new term, though. If I could choose, I’d pick “person” or “human being.” And I’d welcome all who wear it well, such as yourself.

        Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          I appreciate your wanting to make less of a distinction Sirius about the word ‘atheist’ and the word ‘christian,’ but is seems there is no harm nor foul in wanting to draw a clear line.

          Remember the word: ‘The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch?’ and if I have this correct, it was a slur as it were, it was not a badge of honor by they doing the name calling. And again: ‘If any man suffer as a Christian….’

          Makes for a much easier discussion if a frame of reference is established. Strange though, I see you as more a prodigal than an atheist, kind of like the cow who thinks he is a sheep. He’s just visiting another’s field.

          We just have to change your ‘baa’ to a ‘mooo.’ 😉 Reading your other stuff, I believe one day this will occur, or reoccur, and you will be welcomed to sheepdom.

          Like

  4. There’s so much insight in this and the right tone. You haven’t missed the mark. God bless you!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Colorstorm says:

      Tkx M-

      I do think there is plenty of evidence in nature, in people of faith, and in the human conscience of all men to point to a perfect Creator.

      Heck, we cannot even have the discussion about a Redeemer unless we admit there is a God.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yes, you’re right, there is evidence all around us that it is God’s world.
        Psalm 19
        19 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
        2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
        3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
        Romans 1
        19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
        20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. That was really good and well written, too.

    I once got really aggravated with atheists and threw a bit of a fit. There was one in particular that just irritated me. In the process of praying and venting my frustration, God left me sputtering by informing me that the guy actually leads more people to Christ then many Christians do. Oh ouch, and so true!

    My own faith was strengthened by atheists, continues to be strengthened (and tested) by atheists. I’ve read posts by former atheists who actually fled the relentless nihilism of atheism and became Christians instead. So, alas, I try to remember that everybody serves a purpose in God’s kingdom and that there is usually more going on there then I can ever hope to become aware of 😉

    Liked by 1 person

    • Colorstorm says:

      Yes, isn’t it true that God makes the wrath of man to praise Him? As long as you and I are not doing the wrathing. 😉

      Heck, if an ass could speak, our great God could use anybody as u suggest.

      And its worth remembering (you said as much some time ago) that at any given time, we could be talking to the next Finney, Moody, Edwards, or even a Paul like character, not even to mention the fact that WE once were children of disobedience………….

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Tiribulus says:

    Colorstorm says: “You may have missed it above, but the idea of a ‘sanctified mind,’ should really not be overlooked in a person’s life; this free, undeserved, and crystal clear point of view, that is nothing short of other-worldly, you know, kind of like Stephen and the dew drop.”
    Amen!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Colorstorm says:

      Welcome neighbor.

      A mind set apart, yep, that’s a good thing.

      One man plus God is a majority 😉

      Like

      • Tiribulus says:

        That is quite true, but my new friends very vehemently disagree.

        Like

        • I believe that the Bible is from the Creator, who is our Redeemer, and that He inspired those who wrote it, and He preserved their words in history. It is completely trustworthy, infinitely more trustworthy than the words and writings of the scholars who tear it down, and whose so called scholarship changes all the time. Such people refuse to accept the fact that there is a simplicity about truth. It is impossible for them to acknowledge the truth unless God does this for them. Their acts of vandalism against God’s Word show their cruelty toward those who believe. For such scholars what Jesus said is true:
          Matthew 18:6
          6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
          May God grant them repentance and faith!

          Liked by 1 person

        • Tribulus, I didn’t mean to address you or anyone in particular. Sorry! God bless you!

          Liked by 2 people

        • Colorstorm says:

          It’s ok Maria-

          We understand. Say hi to Tirib-
          Also, Tirib, visit Maria, she has a nice work at Pilgrim’s.

          But all your points are valid because they are true M.

          Tkx for chiming in.

          ‘For ever o Lord thy word is settled…………….’.

          Liked by 1 person

  7. Colorstorm says:

    Arch

    Let’s take just one of your assertions ok.

    John wrote; :This is the disciple which testifies,of these things (his gospel account) and wrote these things,and we know that his testimony is true.’

    In addition, the testimony which you speak of, was confirmed by Peter, who while with John and James, also wrote
    :We beheld His majesty…’

    so not quite sure arch where u get the idea there was

    1, no gospel writer as a witness (clearly John)
    2. no verifiable witness……John wrote:

    WE beheld His glory…’

    This is plenty of evidence alone. Your ‘court suggestion’ is worth noting, for there were in fact 500 witnesses, according to 1 Cor. 15-

    (ARCH-btw-this post was written on the second of Nov)

    Like

    • Colorstorm says:

      Nope, no arguing here, Arch- not sure why u would think that–
      Seems to be no evidence in any correspondence to you anyway.

      John the apostle wrote three epistles, the gospel, as well.as Revelation, so yes, he was a pretty reliable witness.( He wrote: ‘our hands have handled……………’ speaking of the Lord) The gospel account alone speaks of things only he could know. The inclusion of the royal ‘We’ has long been used as a literary skill.

      Yes, Paul did meet the Lord , several times in fact. But back to the five hundred: pretty strong evidence in any courtroom.

      And the impact that Stephen had on Saul, later Paul, was huge, as he stood idly by watching a man being stoned to death.

      Like

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        I’m putting it away for the night, but I’ll admit I was more than a little curious as to what you meant by, “science falsely called – possibly you could enlighten me, tomorrow.

        Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          Yes, heres my two cents Arch-

          Paul was charging his friend and brother:

          ‘O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

          Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.’

          Seems this was no new thing, for there will always be people with itching ears. Any science which leaves God out of his creation,always comes up short.

          Timothy was told to be aware, and make others aware, of the subtle inroads and damage done by ‘fair speeches.’ The intellect without guidance is a dangerous thing.

          To dissect the universe apart from a Creator? Really? What man has enough courage to challenge and deny that which is well beyond his grasp?

          The petrie dish does many things, and many an intelligent man has found ‘new’ things, but for goodness sakes, we all use materials that were here already.

          Until a man can go into the lab and make a tree from nothing, he should be a little slow to boast of his ‘no God’ theory.

          And for what its worth, this includes all sciences. The ‘profane and vain babblings’ thrive on blogs,you can’t deny.

          Just look at any thread, any make an honest assessment. .
          😉

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          …many an intelligent man has found ‘new’ things, but for goodness sakes, we all use materials that were here already” – While that’s certainly true, we have no evidence that would support their origins as being supernatural.

          Like

      • Colorstorm says:

        Arch-

        ‘We know his testimony is true.’ Fair concern as to WHY?

        John said HE wrote these things…..vs 24 last chapter; the ‘we’ is the Spirit of God and he.

        Appears to be a gracious way of not drawing attention to himself. Makes sense.This style of writing is common, and more endearing when dealing with spiritual matters. If you look in my writings, you will find traces of ‘we.’

        500 witnesses. Who is one mans testimony if 500 show up to testify?

        In the book of Acts, (a continuation of the gospel written by Luke, Paul met the Lord. He met Him again while in Arabia, and when he was ‘caught up.’ No real disputation there

        For what its worth, Paul was the most important apostle.

        The book of Romans is proof enough he met the Lord of Glory.

        Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          the ‘we’ is the Spirit of God and he” – I believe that’s an assumption, nowhere do I see it stated.

          Who is one mans testimony if 500 show up to testify?” 1:500 – IF they show up. Are you expecting them soon?

          Like

  8. Colorstorm says:

    Arch-

    I did include a caveat at the top of the page, (not ALL atheists, etc) so you must be in a different class 😉

    One thing: The possibility existed that Paul may have embellished here and there?

    Well then, if I were you, and so you can come to a clear determination once and for all, I would make it my life’s work to find out.

    And at the end of your findings, you will have been enriched greatly, seen the hand of a divine God, and you will see a person with a mind and heart the likes of which this world has never seen in Paul the apostle.

    Mr Weems is no Paul.

    Like

    • Colorstorm says:

      arch-

      First, I would like to point out to you that you DO care, ‘one way or another,’ lest you be foolish to waste your time here.

      Paul was God’s man for the time with a very distinct purpose. Anybody who disagrees, be it pope, priest, king, queen, elder, president, shah, janitor, can take it up with God.

      I have seen that trend, and it is laughable. Secondly, your link had a virus threat, so I removed it; have no clue what it was.

      Like

      • Colorstorm says:

        Well arch-

        you saw it, you tried it again, and I couldn’t open it-

        I went into settings and couldn’t see where that would be to ‘fix,’ anyway, what was it??

        Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          It was in reference to your comment dismissing ten years of research by noted biblical scholars at the Westar Instute and the findings of the Acts Seminar. It was an image of a sign outside a church that read, “If your faith is big enough, facts d’nt count!” I’ve run into that way of thinking often among Christians.

          Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          I’ve seen that recently. Can’t remember where.
          I do agree with that premise though Arch-

          But the idea of repudiating the canon of scripture goes back to our previous discussion: ‘Avoid profane babblings,’ and in the context of an epistle, it is usually refers to spiritual things.

          The very first chapter of Acts should settle any argument as to its veracity, ‘infallible proofs’ kind of things.

          The attacks on scripture are incessant, nothing new under the sun.

          I may add too arch, you may not know this: No amount of learning can impart spiritual gift to he who God saw fit to withhold.’ In other words Phd’s mean very little to God in the area of spiritual thought, they are usually a hindrance.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          It’s certainly true that the Bible is full of admonitions against learning too much, dating all the way back to 950 BCE and the story of the Tree of Knowledge.

          Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          Correction to a common oversight if I may.

          It is the tree of knowledge of good and evil.’ Huge difference. And I am not discounting knowledge, I was drawing a distinction between learned knowledge, and divine knowledge, ie, a prophets message, or the knowledge of say Peter in Acts 2; totally unprepared, but willing and able.

          Read it and see what I mean, after all, they were just unlearned and ignorant fishermen…………

          Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          I’m afraid u are correct Arch about the christians being lazy readers.

          I’m just puzzled why you feel the need to cast doubt on every issue with the scriptures. It’s either all true, or none of it is true.

          There is a witness to the conscience which points to the former.

          Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          A little housekeeping friend. Man was formed from dust, woman was made from bone; ie, Adams rib.

          This distinction alone is a huge reason why the sexes are so different. Yes, I hold to this just as a global flood.

          A rainbow in Alaska, Turkey, Canada, South America is a wink from the Creator that He will keep His promises; you see, His word is good.

          If God can easily inspire His word, He could surely preserve it, which He has. It is self proving with NO contradictions-

          Liked by 1 person

        • Colorstorm says:

          The dogmatism and certainty with which I speak and carry my points offends you.

          Afraid of examining? I beg your pardon. My conclusions have been reached by a lifetime of learning, and the word of God answers all. It is perfect in every way.

          Find a flaw in it, in the words themselves, not by using opinions of men who deny its contents.

          Remember ‘profane and vain babblings??’ The Genesis account has been tested and stands. There are no errors.

          I do not apologize for recognizing a Creator who has faithfully preserved His word. My learning ends at the feet of the Creator. Whose feet accept your worship?

          Liked by 2 people

        • Tiribulus says:

          Colorstorm says: “[God’s Word] is self proving “
          Yes it is. From my favorite 360 year old: CONFESSION
          ” The authority of the holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or Church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the Author thereof; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.”
          Amen!!! The Holy Scripture is the judge of all and is judged by no man.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Colorstorm says:

          Well Tirib,

          You said amen, and I’ll just say ‘yes.’
          So now we have a yea and amen…………

          tkx

          (people mistakenly think that we add to its truth, meanwhile, the truth cannot be added to. We simply testify)

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          The very first chapter of Acts should settle any argument as to its veracity, ‘infallible proofs’ kind of things.
          I’ve read the first chapter of Acts, and the rest as well, and saw no such ‘infallible proofs,’ in fact, I saw nothing to indicate that the book couldn’t have been written in 115 CE, as the experts involved with the Acts Seminar concluded.

          Like

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        I rather take that to mean, “If I lie in order to add to god’s glory, where’s the harm in that?” – basically Rev. Weems’ “end-justifies-the-means” philosophy.

        Like

        • Colorstorm says:

          No Arch, Paul was not advocating lying for the ‘greater good.’

          He just explained that ‘all men are liars,’ and he included himself in that long train of misfits. The ‘lie’ was his life in opposition to God, while he thought he was doing God a favour.

          This ‘lie’ abounded to God’s glory, for the grace of God can reach the most hardened.

          Like

  9. Tiribulus says:

    Maria says: “Tribulus, I didn’t mean to address you or anyone in particular. Sorry! God bless you!”
    Oh no Maam. No offense. I was speaking of the folks at the site where I met Colorstorm.
    archaeopteryx1 too. He would be one of my new friends who disagrees.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Pingback: ANSWERING FOLLY: WHO IS A FOOL? — PART 2 | Citizen Tom

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s