Atheists who become Christians

[Mister Agenda]

Isn't it hugely arrogant to presume that there can be no good reason to convert to Christianity. That's what I get from skimming this thread. I guess the op is a wind up.

It's not a presumption, it's an observation. Every time we hear about an atheist converting to a theistic religion, we're curious. Was it something that would be convincing to a reasonably skeptical person? Was it a great argument we've never heard, evidence we weren't aware of, or even a personal experience that we can't access but which we can see how it could be convincing if it happened to us? If they have a good reason to think Christianity is true, we want to know what it is. But it's always similar to the conversion stories non-atheists share. We hope for something from a converted skeptic that would convince a skeptic.

We aren't looking for good reasons to convert to Christianity. There can be good reasons to convert to Christianity: to save a marriage, to get elected to public office, to access a good support network, to bandage your emotional wounds, etc.

We're looking for good reasons to think Christianity is really true. And that's something that formerly atheist Christian converts never seem to have when asked what convinced them that Christianity is true.

What are the rational steps? Is it a rationally held position?

It can be, in some sense, rational to hold an irrational position if there are advantages in doing so and your value structure doesn't prioritize truth over those advantages.

Does your own biographical experience prove that rationality only allows one path for everyone? How do you know?

My own biographical experience, coupled with ordinary logic, proves that two contradictory things can't both be true. That doesn't mean that someone can't be both wrong and rational. Rationality isn't a recipe for infallibility. We all only have the tools we have. It's perfectly rational to believe the earth is flat and the sun is a hot fire in the sky that rises in the East and sets in the West if you're unaware of the evidence and reasoning for the opposite position. If you're a tribesman in a remote area who has never been to school, it would be unfair to characterize you as irrational because you have this false belief, because it's based on the evidence you have available (to casual observation, the sun seems to rise in the East and set in the West and the earth seems to be a large disk when viewed from a high place).

But if theists have rational reasons to think their varous religions are true that would hold up to reasonable scrutiny, they're being awfully cagey about them. Some of the reasons they do share seem to be like reasons for believing the earth is flat, reasonable to accept once upon a time when we knew much less, but unsupportable in light of modern knowledge. Most of the other reasons are 'fluffy', and seem to amount mostly to believing because they want to and softening their claims so they at least don't contradict directly observed reality.

---

The reason people usually give is, "Personal experiences which probably wouldn't mean much to you."

Not so convincing, and certainly not rational.

I'm not so sure about 'not rational'.

Like the scientist played by Jodie Foster in Contact, who has an experience that is utterly real to her but that she can't back up with independent physical evidence. I'm not so sure she's being irrational in believing her experience wasn't just hallucination. It would be irrational for her to think other people should take her experience at face value, but she doesn't make that mistake. She accepts that she can't prove her position, doesn't spend the rest of her life trying to convince people, but she remains internally certain that what happened to her was alien contact. Of course, if the same thing had happened to her 'out of the blue' as she was walking down the street, she would probably have concluded that it really WAS hallucination.

It might also be the case that a person could have a religious experience that by its brain-changing nature, they have no choice but to believe it. I'm not sure it would be irrational to believe something you can't not believe. More like a-rational, rationality or irrationality wouldn't enter into it.

---

Drich, I missed the part in your post about beating up Christians. Why did you do that? That was a pretty horrible thing to do. You shouldn't need religion to teach you the hurting people is wrong. Those people you beat up didn't deserve it just because they disagreed with you.

What was going on in your life that made you beat and bully people?

I think (hope) he meant figuratively, like teasing.