I believe you just defined the essence of “faith”.

The question is, why does he place so much value on a decision that is no more rational than the alternative? Why the high stakes? And how is it that being less hidden somehow limits our choice? When Jesus came, God was certainly more visible, but the choice to follow him or not did not simply evaporate.

Brett, sounds like the humanism you follow, so very closely parallels the walk of a Christian. However, your daily struggle to create meaning in your own existence will be a tough task to figure out on your own. That realization has been the turning point for so many who have given their life to Christ….the emptiness of going it alone, and on their own merits.

It is not us that prick the hearts of others. Maybe we are not trying to convince others but ourselves. Dr. Wray once told me that the reason Jesus was able to go to the cross was because he knew who he was. It may be that when we have to convince others that they are wrong, it is because we do not believe we are right.

I personally disagree with you about the “equally rational” concept because of some threads of logic I would call the “whys”, but I won’t argue about it. Jesus, when asked what proof he would give to evidence his identity, just didn’t respond like he could have. Why not? I guess he wanted the message to be enough….unforced relationship.

I would agree that belief in God and unbelief are both rational positions. The point I was trying to make earlier is that not only are they both rational, but they are both more or less equally rational (IMHO). In other words, an aethist is no less rational than a Christian and visa-versa. Given that the God we as Christians believe in is concerned about us knowing him and relationship together, this is an especially disturbing situation. Why not make belief in him a bit more rational, if it is so important to him? I have a hard time believing that God could punish people for choosing an equally rational choice.

For me, as a humanist, I celebrate our species’ ability to overcome, to liberate, to show compassion, to enjoy the pursuit of knowledge about the universe, etc. I might talk about finding meaning in those things- in music, art, knowledge, relationships, service, etc. Many Christian sermons on behaving morally focus on doing things not just because it’s “the right thing to do” but because it will make your life more satisfying in this world. So I would try to show Johnny through discussion or through action that a life centered on community, relationship, service, and other long-lasting pursuits is more satisfying and meaningful than the pure pursuit of instant self-gratification or consumerism. There is a definite push-and-pull between these two desires within Christianity as well.

I might also explain ways in which some Christians have answered the questions he’s raised (usually stemming from liberal theology) if I thought that that was more likely to lead Johnny to making a positive difference in the world.

I think your question about what keeps an atheist going day to day partly indicates the falsehood of a statement made (usually without really thinking it out) by some Christians: “Atheism is the easy way out,” or “they’re just doing that because they get to do whatever they want.” While this sort of hedonistic view may be accurate for some (you’d generally know if you ask them their reasons), for me at least it is not an “easy” path. The search for truth and knowledge about the world in which we live and the struggle to create and appreciate meaning in one’s own existence is a daily challenge- but it one that I embrace because it is the only way I know to live honestly. That’s what I would talk to Johnny about.

“His evidences in nature will always appear to be proof to the believer and ridiculous to the atheist. I think he wants me to choose, without proofs, without evidences and arguments.”

“My argument for the existence of God is voiced to the extent I am changed by him to treat others with love and respect and compassion, no matter what they have done or not done. No matter whether I am talking to an atheist or a brother.”

There is an obvious contradiction here. If I understand you right, you are saying “leave rationality out of belief, because God wants the choice to ‘unencumbered’.” And then you say your best argument for God’s existence is your changed life. But someone looking at your changed life and seeing that as evidence for God’s existence, would now be applying reason to a problem you claim reason should be left out of.

The authority of the Bible is a topic on which volumes have been written. The best thing to do is read a number of these and educate yourself (if you haven’t already) on the complexity of the issue. Having everyone “come clean” and state what they believe is a pointless exercise and waste of blogspace. Obviously there are Christains that have a different view of the Bible than you do, and before criticizing their beliefs, I think it would be worthwhile to get a better feel for the landscape. Just to relate that topic to some current events, the last Pope made a number of statements in the 90′s about how believing in darwinian evolution is not incompatible with believing in the Bible. While I’m not sure that the Catholic church has an official postion on evolution, I think he was probably speaking for most Catholics when making those pronouncements. And they, of course, make up the majority of Christians.

Related to your atheist argument #3 in your post, I once attended a presentation by Huston Smith, renowned expert on world religions, and he had a great quote. Someone asked him whether, in his opinion, religion was overall a positive or negative force in the world. His answer? “Positive, but just barely…just barely.”