Poor old chicken little. He thought the sky was falling in. And unfortunately so did some of the students at uni today as the Australian University Atheists (AUA) began a postering campaign on campus. However, I'm as excited as an [insert simile]. Being a health science campus of predominantly 'nice' people our biggest concern is another AUA; Australian University Apathy. And there's nothing like a little public tension between atheists and Christians to get people talking. Hopefully this will include the students friends noticing the posters and talking to them about God and Jesus.Although the posters are mildly passive aggressive I have decided to post some Christian replies in identical font and size beside them. Touché. But I need your help.
Here are the slogans;
1. INFINITE BEING IS AN OXYMORON2. WE'RE A NON-PROPHET ORGANISATION3. BLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME4. IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE THEN WHO CREATED GOD?5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU
Got a witty reply which answers the question? I'd love your help now. My aim is not necessarily to convert the (probably sole) atheist who placed the posters, but rather to answer the objections in the hope it will get students talking.
Oh yes, and I will be printing them as soon as possible for maximum impact.
ReplyDeleteMy first thoughts are in response to "INFINITE BEING";
IF THE UNIVERSE IS INFINITE, THEN WHY NOT GOD?
which is better than the first thought that popped into my head "an oxymoron is when you cross an ox with a moron"
Brad has just commented to me on fb for #1;
ReplyDeleteA FINITE BEING ONLY HAS FINITE THOUGHTS
Melody says on fb;
ReplyDeleteIF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
nat said something on the lines of "if he is God, he doesn't need to be created" (she had something more succinct...)
sorry i don't know how to comment on your blog........
IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
ReplyDeleteDefinitely not the athiests...
4. IF GOD CREATED ATHEISTS THEN...
ReplyDeleteBLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME
ReplyDeleteVictimless Crime is an oxymoron
2. CHRISTIANITY: THE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION THAT LOVES
ReplyDeleteNO PROPHET = NO PROFIT
"Atheism is a dead end" may work with 1. and 2.
ReplyDelete1. An oxymoron is an atheist with a blowtorch.
ReplyDelete2. We're a multi-prophet disorganisation.
3. Blasphemy is not even a crime, thanks to political freedoms won by Christians.
4. If an infinite universe will produce intelligent life, why will it not produce an infinite God?
5. Great, lets get together for a beer and be friends
"We're a non-prophet organization"
ReplyDelete(Follow us to your loss)
I like Kevin's.
ReplyDeleteI would also rewrite my number 4. It's too long.
If an infinite universe, over infinite time will produce intelligent life, then why not an infinite God?
Still too long. But getting closer to the idea. Their problem with infinity is flawed and paradoxical.
ReplyDelete'Why be politically corect when you can be right'...
ReplyDeleteMight work for a few don't think it's the best one to use though
What about 'Define infinity without reference to time'?
ReplyDeleteIF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
ReplyDeleteIf the universe needs no creator then the Creator needs no creator.
Brilliant Gordo.
ReplyDelete5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU
ReplyDeleteNo God. No hope. No life.
No wonder.
INFINITE BEING IS AN OXYMORON
ReplyDeleteTell the oxymoron to read his Bible.
3. BLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME
ReplyDelete...until Jesus makes you serve your time.
Okay so currently, here are my favourites. Gordo has come to the fore and just squeezed out a number of other suggestions at the last minute:
ReplyDelete1. INFINITE BEING IS AN OXYMORON
Tell the oxymoron to read his Bible
2. WE'RE A NON-PROPHET ORGANISATION
We're a non-prophet organisation (Follow us to your loss)
3. BLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME
... until Jesus makes you serve your time
4. IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
If the universe needs no creator then the Creator needs no creator
5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU
No God. No hope. No life. No wonder.
Final decision coming tomorrow morning
I still think five could perhaps be improved upon.
ReplyDeleteHow about something along the lines of
ReplyDelete"The Athiest is an Oxymoron"
Seeing that God created Man and what not.
YA DIG?
2. WE'RE A NON-PROPHET ORGANISATION
ReplyDeleteRead the Bible for prophet.
I like Nathans.
ReplyDeleteOne I thought of, but someone else has basically said, was 'A GOD WHO NEEDED TO BE CREATED IS NO GOD AT ALL'
Also, maybe something like NO PROPHET=NO PROFIT.
5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU
ReplyDeleteCareful! We just believe God is just.
5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU
ReplyDeleteBut does God believe in one less you?
I like most of those one's Gordon said, but I think you need a different #2..
ReplyDeleteYou don't Believe in God but he believes in you.
ReplyDelete5. WE JUST BELIEVE IN ONE LESS GOD THAN YOU..Which explains why we have no hope.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ben,
ReplyDeleteYeah I think I agree. I had also suggested earlier "No prophet = no profit" and you've tipped me back that way.
But I think it can still be better. What about a combination
"No prophet mean no profit (ignore us to your loss)"
1...And for semantics I'll throw away eternal joy. I'm stubborn like that.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I dunno Izaac. Maybe a different tack?
ReplyDelete2. WE'RE A NON-PROPHET ORGANISATION We stand for nothing.
Hmmm, yeah Ben. More thought needed. Maybe Gordo's "Read the BIble for prophet."
ReplyDeleteOr else it will occur to me at 3am.
#5. Long, but I see the parenthetical in a smaller font:
ReplyDeleteTELL US MORE ABOUT THE GOD YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN (WE PROBABLY DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT ONE EITHER)
#4: IF SOMEONE HAD TO CREATE HIM, WE'D WORSHIP THEM INSTEAD.
ReplyDelete#3: TRY TELLING THAT TO THE VICTIM (HE'LL LISTEN)
ReplyDelete#2: OK, WE'LL GIVE YOU THAT ONE
ReplyDelete#1: I DO NOT THINK THAT WORD MEANS WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS
ReplyDelete2. We’re a prophet and lost organization
ReplyDelete3. Offenders can sometimes be victims
2. Then who told you there's no God?
ReplyDelete3. It always seems that way when you don't know the victim.
ReplyDelete5. Are you sure? Who runs your life, really?
ReplyDeleteor some variation on this theme, such as:
5. Are you sure? Is there anything you couldn't live without?
5. Wow. You've got a lot of faith.
ReplyDeleteIn commenting on 3, I reckon it'd be a gracious move to concede that it's a very clever and funny poster. You could put something in the smallprint about it.
ReplyDeleteThanks for all your suggestions. And keep them coming as according to Rob, whose campus was postered yesterday
ReplyDelete" There’s a small atheist group sticking up posters on campuses around Sydney (I think that’s all they do!). It was cumbo yesterday and UWS Penrith today; according to their website ‘Macquarie and Newcastle soon. Still to come is UNSW, Bankstown UWS and eventually interstate’ "
So my little forum here (even though I decided to go with many of Gordo's suggestions) may provide helpful slogans that other campuses use to respond.
Thanks to those especially with multiple suggestions. RodeoClown (the Lurker) and Kutz came in with some good suggestions but too late for us. Nathan also had some good ideas that just needed to be punchier. Others may find these helpful.
Now that I have closed anonymous comments again (they were only open for about 18 hours for poster suggestions) some people are unable to post suggestions. If you know my email or are friendson FB, just drop me a line and I will post them for you.
ReplyDeleteRob says;
ReplyDeleteWe just believe in one less God than you’ >
‘We just believe in one God, but it's not you’
‘Infinite being is an oxymoron’ >
‘Infinite beings love even morons’
My blowtorch line was pretty punchy.
ReplyDeleteIt was. But in my mind it just crossed the line of personal attack which I thought was not quite as potent as Gordo's "Tell the oxymoron to read his Bible." Plus, Gordo's suggestion had the positive of the challenge to read the Bible.
ReplyDeleteI thought your best was the blasphemy isn't even a crime (thanks to political freedoms won by Christian)s. And had started to do up the poster for it when Gordo came in late with the rhyme entry.
The blasphemy one was definitely your best, Nath. I'm generally not a fan of Gordo's ones, because they come across as massively derogatory.
ReplyDeleteOn second readings, all of my own sound pretty negative too. :(
hmmm....
This isn't a serious suggestion, I just find it amusing...
ReplyDelete5. We only believe in one! Statistically, that makes you an outlier.
Essentially what is happening is that people are "listening in" on a conversation. So what you want is to conduct it in such a way as you come off as witty, engaging and yet humble. I think primarily most things (unfortunately, on second reading even my own contributions) aren't quite up to scratch on one or more of those counts.
ReplyDeleteThus the continuing problem of witty, engaging, yet humble while still helping people to frame their discussion is reference to God, Jesus and the Bible, all in preferably eight words or less.
ReplyDeleteI think we must keep remembering we are responding rather than initiating this. I think the expectation of the original posters was that (as someone posted here) they would silence Christians as if they had never thought of these things. That we are responding in many people's minds is automatically aggressive and effects their reading of the replies. They say attack is the best form of defense, but we have chosen in most instances to respond in a relatively passive way.
The one exception is the oxymoron one, but come on. It's funny, isn't it? Lighten up. We must remember the text-form of slogan postering must be taken into account. I wouldn't use the line in a debate in person.
I would suggest that in order for the conversation to be effective it should be witty first, engaging second and humble last - there is an inherent arrogance in telling people that they're wrong and you're right.
ReplyDeleteWe're to speak the truth with love. You can be loving, witty, and engaging without appearing to be humble - and humility is expressed not with the words you choose but the way you live. Wishing to enter discourse and ultimately win people to the Lordship of Christ is inherently humble.
The posters aren't being put up to impress but to generate discussion. I think the parameter of humility is slightly unhelpful in this case.
"I think the parameter of humility is slightly unhelpful in this case."
ReplyDeleteI don't agree because the point is actually about winning people, not arguments. Secondly, humility IS expressed with words as it's simply a part of the way you choose to live your life.
"there is an inherent arrogance in telling people that they're wrong and you're right."
Yes, but is that what we're actually doing in this 'conversation'? Instinctively, I wouldn't have thought that the best angle to be taking on it, but perhaps I'm less familiar with public print media. Certainly in a conversation I wouldn't be taking that stance. Presenting arguments and contradicting someone are different. Some of the posters so far have been only contradiction, without shedding any extra light on the issue that was raised. That's where the wit ought to come in.
The fact that my wit isn't up to it has been demonstrated already in my own suggestions, so I'm not saying it's easy!
Humility is notoriously difficult to express in print. Especially in a case where it's almost intrinsically impossible - ie when you're telling somebody they're wrong.
ReplyDeleteI think we've got a functional definition of humility that is different to the Biblical definition of humility - which is to consider others better than yourself in a sacrificial way.
I don't think humility means kowtowing to anybody who expresses a difference of opinion. I don't know that humility goes hand in hand with apologetics except in a "there but for the grace of God go I" manner of understanding where the other person is coming from. That's humbling. Sacrificing a well made point for fear of seeming less than humble by making it would seem to be falling short of our evangelistic imperative.
As an evangelistic model I'd much rather be witty, engaging and right - than witty, engaging and humble.
ReplyDeleteI think you can be right and humble at the same time. But I don't think you can be witty (essentially requiring you to pour scorn) and humble simultaneously.
"I think we've got a functional definition of humility that is different to the Biblical definition of humility..."
ReplyDeleteAfter adding the vertical dimension to humility (Ie, fearing God rather than man) I completely agree with your definition, and think it's the one I'm utilising.
I just think that you CAN be witty and humble a the same time. Philip Jensen's 'gracious' request in Synod for the opposition to be given more time to make their case for women's eldership from Scripture is case in point.
Hey - the posters have come to Sydney uni main campus, and some of us are brainstorming... thanks for your helpful comments.
ReplyDeleteI have a couple late entries for future reference:
"We just believe in one less God than you"" -> "the Atheist god is in the mirror"
or in your wallet?
"If God created the universe, who created God?" -> "if nothing created the universe, how is it here?"
Also, Nathan, I would look to the example and teaching of Jesus and Paul, Peter etc, to see humility and grace as fundamental to the way in which the message (of God's grace) is presented. This comes up for Paul especially in 1 Cortinthians 1-3, where paul talks about fast-talkers and the foolishness of the gospel. Paul would rather be foolish than arrogant. Brother, even though I don't know you, I think this is an attitude you need to repent of.
God bless in your work for the Lord.
Hey just thought I'd add that over at Main Sydney Uni Campus, the AUA just put up posters and we're thinking of some comebacks also. This has been really helpful!
ReplyDelete- Anna (EU Engo)
Hi Anna,
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you are the Anna who knows Fiona who knows me, but she has emailed asking for my versions of the posters. If not and you need me to design any for you with your logo then please let me know.
God bless.
I'm a Christian at USyd and saw the posters also... I don't know about the idea of 'comebacks'. The whole tone they're using is unattractive, something it's kind of impossible to take up in the nature of what we want to present. I think the better of evils is to let it slide, not give attention to it except in one-on-one conversation.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a random reader, I would put the atheist ones in the category of all the other senseless propaganda, and if I agreed with it I'm sure there would be other ways in which Christians could show me another side of Jesus, in another context, which he would bring up. But I would find a Christian response lame and pettily defensive. Some of these responses are witty but kind of don't address the logic of the first statements, which for many people are real logical issues that they genuinely grapple with.
However I did like the Princess Bride quote, and wouldn't be averse to seeing that printed in response :)
But in conversation, I guess a good question is- finite /and/ self-existent? Doe sthat make sense? It's not so much a question of 'who started the world'->'who started God'->etc., with everything needing a starting point; I think our world, even time itself (which needs to rest on a starting point to have come to now), constantly declares its dependence and embeddedness.
ReplyDeleteI think the more you look into the nature of the finite world, the fact that things exist, the more it points to the mystery of one who is both infinite and specific :)
Now try fitting that on a poster with 8 words or less and still preferably points to Jesus...
ReplyDelete@ Bear
ReplyDeleteEven though I know you didn't like the poster comebacks concept, it's all about what our aim was: to get more of those conversations going like the one you suggested.
With no response people are confirmed in their unbelief, confirmed in their suspicion that Christians have never thought through these issues and are suppressing the truth in order to have the thing they call 'faith' (as they would define faith as a leap in the dark).
The Bible does speak of atheism in Psalm 14:1. Which to me suggests arguing is pointless - as they are suppressing the truth to validate an immoral lifestyle. So do I think anyone could be converted through these posters? With God, anything is possible, but it is unlikely in my mind. Could someone be converted by speaking with their friends who sit down and explain the Bible message about Jesus to them? Yes, and I hope it has.