This retweet really serves to show how little some Atheists (who claim the intellectual high ground no doubt) understand about Christian theology. The doctrine of the Trinity posits that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all eternally existent and eternally God. God the Son took on a human nature at the incarnation, it’s not that the Son began to exist. The response from @lilmsgs exposes the ignorance of that which he rejects. He seems to think that the Son didn’t exist until the incarnation of Jesus. Hmm.
https://twitter.com/lilmsgs/status/379725884837478401
Then as expected, someone jumps in to take the Richard Dawkins “don’t argue when you can ridicule instead” approach to debate. I understand that it was probably embarrassing saying something so theologically ignorant so publicly.
The second, however, comes from someone who ought to know better.
The Christian view is that Earth is not our final destination, for anyone. Believers have nothing to worry about, really. Paul assures us that to be gone from this life is to be with the Lord. No matter the trials we endure here it is but a moment compared to eternity in the presence of God in heaven. This is in addition to the fact that moral good and evil on an atheistic world view makes no sense. The only ones who should be worried about what God may do, aren’t: the unbeliever. Alas, they are busy eating, drinking, and being merry.
Ordinarily, it’s not a big deal if someone isn’t totally familiar with the ins and outs of a religion’s theological intricacies, but I find Atheists who make their atheism known on the internet love to brag about how it is their intellect which won’t allow their trust in the Bible or Christ. As we can see, this isn’t always the case.
Sifting Reality 
Doesn’t this represent the same vacuum of knowledge you have regarding Hinduism, Taoism, or any number of specific native/tribal religions? You dismiss all of those outright without having at least a Master’s degree in any specific field of study. Any number of sciences or scientific findings are dismissed in the same way by christian conservatives, carbon14 dating for example. Yet there is no sound, objectively legitimate basis made for this dismissal.
Admittedly this 1 atheist has a poor grasp of what he is referring. Others though, do not. Do they need to be pastors or preachers in order to dismiss christianity or specific tenets of the faith? Or maybe have degree’s from university to make more sound arguments?
There seems to be a double standard at play here. On the one hand christians dismiss all other religions across the board without any investigation, and knowing nothing or next to nothing about said religions, yet when the same is done to their brand they call it unfair etc.
Do you need to get a degree in volcanism to know that volcanoes don’t produce pink rabbits from the ash that falls to Earth?
Have you read my post Why I’m Not A…?
If theologians have to believe that which they study, then, sure, atheists are bad theologians. However, one man’s great theologian is another’s crank. Many denominations don’t accept the Trinity, to them, anyone who explains away the first tweet as you did lousy at theology. It seems a discipline in which merit is based on biases and accommodation.
the problem is not that the tweeter rejected the trinity, he didnt realize that on a trinitarian view Jesus existed eternally as God the Son and only gained a material human nature at the incarnation.
I’m just saying that the tweeter referenced one valid assessment of the bible, that the plural pronouns are a hold-over of pagan polytheism, just not specifically your view of the bible. The study of religion either most consider all religions or there will be separate theology for every viewpoint. So the tweeter is either equally guilty as you in being a bad theologian or an equally good theologian with a focus of a different viewpoint.
But at the time genesis was written the israelite monotheism had been firmly established. Moses’ and the israelite generations before him were monotheists. He may have been writing about a time when people worshipped other gods, but thats not in dispute since genesis says God told Abraham to abandon that line of thinking.
My point is that moses did not include the ‘us’ ‘our’ language as a hold over from polytheism because he and his audience were already firmly worshipping YHWH.