Skip to main content

CS Response to "Letter to a Young Skeptic of Color"

In Letter to a Young Skeptic of Color, Sikivu Hutchinson in seeking to evangelize those of color to the side of atheism commits several errors:

1. She confuses the presence of continuing injustices to suggest God must either not exist or not care.

Job deals with this issue in depth in Job 24 and points out that while God sets his own times for judgment, and while God may even let the wicked rest in a feeling of security, they have no assurance of life, & God's eyes are upon them!

Point: We must not confuse God's timing with God's ability and intentions of bringing about justice/judgment!

2. She fails to recognize that that turning from God and embracing athiesm is not going to change the oppression and injustice, it will only be to surrender the foundation for true justice as well as the one who brings true and abiding comfort in the midst of evil and injustice.

3. Sikivu suggests God "justifies" the ritualistic killing of unarmed people, etc. This is false and nothing but a strawman.

4. Sikivu makes an emotional appeal asking "if the Lord will be your shepherd" as he was for those who have been killed; but one should ask the question - which is better: to have a Redeemer and eternal judge who will bring justice and give life, or to be in the grave as a result of injustice having trusted in oneself?

5. She insinuates that doubts raised by unrighteousness even in the church and among some clergy point to the truth of atheism and denial of religion's claims. To do so is to fail to distinguish between the sins of some and the truth of another.


Seems the atheists now are picking up on the practices of the Muslims and others in reaching out to and preying upon the impoverished and oppressed. Unlike Christians who have and continue to reach to similar groups (with Christ, who is wisdom and truth), the atheists will lead them from bondage to greater bondage.

Comments

  1. You've made some really good points. Stay strong brother. God Bless. See you there!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Eckhart Tolle - Christian Response

Unbelievable! ...The extent man not founded upon Christ will go and follow in their quest and pursuit of self and attempts to explain away reality and sin. Here's Oprah's spiritual sage... Response: 1. He resurrects errors of the past which deny reality by seeking to replace it with forms. 2. By reducing the past to forms (or photo albums) he not only denies the reality of the past but the extent of it's connectedness and relationship to the present. This error he also translates in regard to the future. 3. He establishes a false premise that one can separate the reality of the present ("now") from reality itself, which he vests in onesself (though he inconsistently goes on to suggest that life is found in abandoning oneself) 4. He has no grounds or basis for assuming reality is found in self (and apart from everything else, or only what one want's to allow) 5. By denying the truth of God, he falsely asserts that the future is no longer problematic...

Why “Sky Daddy” Fails: Debunking a Lazy Insult Against God

Why “Sky Daddy” Fails: Debunking a Lazy Insult Against God Tags: #christianity #apologetics #faith #logic #theology There’s a term some atheists like to throw around—“sky daddy.” You’ve probably seen it in comment sections or memes, tossed like a grenade meant to shut down the conversation. It's not meant to spark discussion; it’s meant to ridicule. But here’s the thing: It’s not an argument. It’s a caricature. And like most caricatures, it reveals more about the one mocking than the one being mocked. 1. It’s Based on a Straw Man No serious Christian believes God is some bearded man living in the clouds. That’s a cartoon version. The actual Christian claim is far richer, deeper, and more philosophically grounded. Scripture describes God as: Eternal (Psalm 90:2) Spirit, not material (John 4:24) The sustainer of all things (Colossians...

Global Blasphemy Laws

One of the interesting things about discussions surrounding blasphemy laws (whether by the UN or others)is they cannot be conducted without coming back to the central question: What is Truth? Seems this was the question in Jesus' day, it's the question which comes us today, and it's a question which cannot be avoided. ... suppose God intended it to be this way?

Search This Blog