(May 26, 2011 at 2:33 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: After going into a debate with a Theist, I found an article entitled, "How Not to Convert An Atheist." After reading the article, I decided to take the points that the author (Ebonmuse) put in the article, and I decided to tweak them significantly for a forum-specific list, and decided on creating an article that could, after some tweaking by forumers, work as a supplement to Darwinian's "Important Information For Theists."

• There is No Single Atheist Ideology.
  Despite all the things you may have read, all atheism entails can be summed up in the sentence: "There is no reason to believe a higher power exists." That's all atheism is, and that's just about the only common ground you will find with atheists, on this forum, or, for that matter, anywhere else. And, for that matter, you may believe several stereotypes about atheists, things like that they're angry at God or just his followers, or are just simply bitter. Many of these stereotypes can be found in this TVTropes article, which goes into detail as to why these stereotypes are just not true. If you assume anything more than the italicized statement above about atheists, you run the risk of creating a strawman that any atheist who doesn't fit into your views can easily knock down. If you actually expect said atheist to convert, you will have failed miserably, as you would show you have no understanding for what they do and don't believe. And if we're going to do that, one might as well lump Christianity and Islam as one belief system. If you really want to know the finer points of one particular atheist's beliefs, just ask.
  
  
• Nobody Speaks for every atheist.
  For many varieties of theism, there's some sort of sacred text that explains, at a basic level, what they believe in (Something like the Bible, the Quran, the Book of Mormon, or even Dianetics). In addition, there may be some governing body that decides how the wisdom of that sacred text should be lived out today in everyday life (like the Roman Catholic church), or even a figurehead who explains to his followers just how he thinks we should live, based on his religion's precepts (think The Pope or the Dalai Lama.) Despite the impressions you may have gotten from people like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, or even, if you're old enough, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, Atheists do not have any of those things. Yes, there are definitely atheist organizations, but none of them speak for all atheists. As mentioned before, atheism is a single belief that many people came to in several different ways. Thus, it should make sense that many different atheists have many differing beliefs. Just to take one facet, many atheists have differing political views: Ayn Rand became famous for becoming a strong advocate for Capitalism; Karl Marx essentially became known for, if not defining modern Communism, then giving them a convenient banner to rally under; Karl Rove was one of the masterminds behind the administration of George W. Bush, including the War in Iraq; John Lennon was a singer who wanted everybody to imagine a world where people had no reason to kill other people or to hoard possessions. All were atheists, and that was just about the only similarity their personal ideologies had, just like there are many differences in a more cohesive religion like Christianity.
  THAT SAID: reading books by atheists is still valuable in understanding atheism, but that still has its limits, as there's a very good chance that any given atheist you debate is going to disagree with any given atheist author on at least one point.
  
  
• Odds are, most of us already get at least the gist of your beliefs
  Let me express this in an axiomatic term: the more adherents are in your religion, the more likely that any given atheist is pretty knowledgeable in your religion. In addition, the more adherents your religion has, the more likely it is that there is somebody here who used to be a member of your religion. If you are a member of one of the world's major religions, most of us already know the gist of what you believe, and so, if you feel the need to write a sermon for us, you will be wasting your time. In practice, this warning goes triple for Christians, as, considering that this is an English-speaking forum, and that Christianity has tended to dominate English-speaking countries, for the majority of forumers, Christianity is the religion that they are most familiar with. In addition, do not assume that the only reason that atheists are atheists is because they haven't heard about their religion. This is flat out wrong, for reasons mentioned before. If you are looking for converts, condescension is one of the worst ways to do it.
  THAT SAID: If an atheist says something that shows their ignorance of your religion, then it's okay to enlighten them.
  
  
• Don't ignore sincere questions.
  As in any sort of discussion, if a person asks a question, there's a very good chance that they actually want an answer. If you evade or ignore them, their opinion of you and your beliefs will very likely drop, because they will likely think that you cannot defend your faith, but there is a fairly good chance that nobody can.
  THAT SAID: If you're overwhelmed by a sheer number of questions or if you cannot answer a given question, then there's a good idea for what you should do: just say so.
  
  
• Be ready to back up any assertions you may make
  If you post an argument for the existence of God, please bear in mind that there's a good chance that some atheist already has an argument against it. In addition, some theists in the past have been known to make sweeping statements that would definitely demand being backed up, statements like "the entire universe has only been around for 6 millenia," or "After a priest performs a ritual, wine and crackers become literal flesh and blood," or "There is a Hell, and you're going to go there if you're not a part of my religion." However, if an atheist says something like "wait, what about all the evidence for the universe being a lot older?", or "since they still look and taste like wine and crackers, how does that work?", or "where's the evidence for this place and how would the existence of a place of eternal torment square with the existence of a benevolent, all-poweful being?," and you don't back up your statements, do not expect atheists to convert. In addition, if you say that your belief systems should be obvious to anybody who has neither a huge ego problem or he has an evil spirit controlling him, then you will have alienated everybody who reads your post.
  
  
• Do not threaten, or use personal insults on forumers.
  This should, once again, be a blindingly obvious point, and a bare minimum for any sort of rational discussion, but, alas, there's still some theists who, when their favorite arguments and assertions have been exhausted, like to insult individual atheists. Condescending to other people makes no friends, and it just makes you (and, by extention, your position) look worse. Of course, issuing threats makes you look even worse. For the record, for many people, warning people that they'll go to Hell does constitute a threat, albeit not a very effective one. The warning that an atheist is going to Hell is almost certainly doomed to failure, as, at a very basic level, atheists tend to not believe in Heaven or Hell, so, therefore, one's saying an atheist is destined for Hell is no more convincing than saying that he would throw that atheist into the Total Perspective Vortex. In addition, threats in general are not effective in convincing another of an argument.
  
  
• Don't try to speculate on the causes of our Atheism.
  Some theists believe that the only reasons that people become atheists are that their childhoods were abusive, that there's been a big tragedy in their lives, or that the churchmen in their lives were bad. As a result, this particular type of theist has a tendency to try and play Freud with people they don't know from Adam (and vice versa). Simply put, there's a lot of reasons people become atheists, and there's certainly people who stopped believing for those reasons given above, but then again, there's many other reasons that people stopped believing. In fact, ex-SNL Castmember Julia Sweeney traced the origins of her non-belief directly to her reading the Bible for the first time. If, however, you are curious about the reason any atheist stopped believing in God, then just ask.
  
  
• When you make a mistake, admit it.
  Roman philosopher Seneca once said, "Errare humanum est. Perseverare diabolicum." Simply put, it means that to err is human, but to repeat error is diabolical. If a theist makes an honest mistake, there's a pretty good chance that this in and of itself will be forgiven on the condition that, if corrected, the mistake is admitted and corrected. If, however, they keep repeating that claim even after being corrected, it makes them look dishonest, and why should anybody believe somebody who is being blatantly dishonest?
  One example: In one lecture, creationist Kent Hovind was once found claiming that the Australopithecus specimen called Lucy was discovered with its leg bones several miles away from the head. A scientist heard him, and noted that the leg bones were of a different individual from "Lucy." Years later, he was found on tape repeating the claim.
  
  
• Be wary of Quotes.
  For some theists, just quoting their own particular favourite passages of scripture is the best way they think of to get their message across. Unfortunately, this effort is problematic for several reasons, namely that because Atheists are not likely to put any particular weight to scripture, a long string of quotes from the Bible or the Quran is just about as convincing as an equally large string of quotes from Hemingway or Shakespeare. Simply put, it would just be a waste of time and possibly bandwidth. This also goes for including several quotes from scientists as proof of God's existence, especially if the debate is about evolution and the scientist quoted is either not a biologist, died before the publication of Darwin's Origin of Species, or both. Quotes in and of themselves prove nothing.
  THAT SAID: There's a good way and a bad way to use an appeal to authority, as shown in this link. Using a respected authority to claim justified belief in something is different from using a respected authority to claim absolute knowledge of something.
  

So, for any additional points, and possible corrections, please reply and I'll see what I can do.