Speaking to theists

[ssmutters]

Thanks for all the responses, keep them coming. Special thanks to ABierman1986 and TheDarkestofTheAngels. I especially liked ABierman1986's last post. Edward the Theist, you started of nicely with 'understanding a Christian's mindset', however, after that it felt like I am being fed a theistic doctrination about the existence of God and Jesus. It's not my point to question the existence of Jesus. he might have existed, and there might be clinching proof one day of his existence (maybe it's there already) but even in that case, Jesus was a man and not a supernatural being or God.

Zen Badger, I feel some of us atheists are not the brightest bulbs here as padraic pointed out. I am a common person myself, and not a scientist or a great a intellectual or a philosopher. (I have to admit I enjoyed your comment in the context of some arguments I hear from people when they try to make me believe).

My problem is not converting all the theists I meet. I would be happy to live my own life as long as I am not bothered and a stranger cannot bother me with his beliefs. It's my closest circle that bothers me. At best, they get on my nerves and at worst, they use 'emotional blackmail' to make me conform to thoughts I don't believe in. They used to be nice people who were only a little religious, but the problem started with the swarm of televangelists, faith healers, and self-help people like Robin Sharma. The power of suggestion is great indeed.

I became an atheist (6 in atheist scale) after reading 'The God Delusion'. I never really believed in any religion/theistic God anyway, however I did believe in some kind of a majestic entity that is responsible for the laws of universe before I became an atheist (or maybe it was just a desire to believe and I overcame the desire when I read Richard Dawkins pointing the difference between the reality of God and the desire to believe in God). However, it was a problem even to mention the title of Richard Dawkins' 'The God Delusion' to any of my friends. Most were offended by the word "Delusion". Yet, I think of all the Dawkins' books, this is the one that's simple enough to be understood by people at all levels. I tried 'Letter to a Christian Nation', but even though my friends and my mother read it, enjoyed it, they only said: 'it was an interesting read - but why does he write these things? Surely all these are only argument sake. Don't you believe in all these things, because it's a stunt to make money and he (Harris) must secretly be a Christian'. I am glad that Sam Harris didn't hear this, though I think he must be used to hearing comments like this. However, after hearing this from them, I am frightened to even start saying 'Christopher Hitchens'.

I am going to take a look at the you tube videos now. Who knows, videos might be more effective. I am amazed how Richard Dawkins always comes across as courteous and patient, even when he has to repeatedly face illogical arguments. Thanks especially for the Wendy Wright video and I am going to try my luck with the video and the other related videos.

[DiRNiS]

For myself, the few times the issue of religion came across when talking to theist friends or family members, I found that even suggesting anything contrary to their beliefs they started looking mildly offended and went on a defensive stance, sometimes even accusing me of blasphemy. You know how the religious mind works. Their beliefs have been ingrained into their minds from a very young age and suggesting that their beliefs may be wrong or attacking their faith is a big deal for them. The more close minded they are, the most offended and defensive they become. Some of us were also ingrained with religious beliefs but managed to break away from them with a little research and applying common sense and reason.

Something that usually came up when I discuss literature, books by Dawkins, Hitchens and other works on the matter with a theist friend he would go on the defensive and ask this absurd question: "Why should I believe what those people have to say instead of believing in what the Bible says? What's the difference?". I just can't bother answering because of how hard it is to win any argument with a stubborn theist.

[Minimalist]

sometimes even accusing me of blasphemy.

My answer to that one is "Good. I like blasphemy. What else have you got?"


Any "friends" you lose that way were not worth keeping.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

I just can't bother answering because of how hard it is to win any argument with a stubborn theist.

Indeed, the same goes for with anyone with dogmatic beliefs.Nor do I confuse winning an argument with being right necessarily.

So far,I've only ever run across ONE theist on forums worth bothering with;he's here.I'll leave it to you to find him.

I rarely argue with believers,although I will happily ridicule some of the more irritating, such as those who are wont to loudly exclaim "PRAISE THE LORD" at the drop of a hat.People who get in my face socially may get "I'm really not interested in your personal superstitions" and I walk away.

I find common expletives useful for shock value. EG Your YHWH is a nasty,petty,petulant,jealous, vindictive,cruel,sadistic cunt. If believed in him, I'd be fucking terrified of him.

[Edward the Theist]

Well, in order to critically analyze what Jesus said there are several initial assumptions you think I am willing to concede. The first is that Jesus existed in the first place. Every symbol associated with the Christ legend has basis in older religions and older foundations still in ancient astrology. The secular writers who wrote of Christ did not appear until decades after his supposed crucifixion and they included numerous other supposed messiahs in their writings as well. There is no external record written in the time that Jesus the man supposedly walked the earth that supports his existence. So I reject this assumption as axiomatically true.

Okay, that's fair enough. Let's say there never was an historical figure. I never met him, so certainly I can't prove it. All I have is the Jesus talked about in the Gospels. And that's the only Jesus Christ I'm talking about. That is the "idea" you have to compete with, because that idea presuposes God. The idea exists; you have to agree with that. It almost doesn't matter if the man existed or not. What does matter is that someone wrote the Gospel of John, and that Gospel changes people and empowers them.

It's kind of like in the movie "Doubt." I never met the real Sister who exposed the priest who was a pedophile. I only know the Meryl Streep version of her. But what difference does that make? The idea of her changes how I think and feel about things in a positive and powerful way.

Where's the power in atheism? Why would I give up God and Jesus Christ only to replace them with nothing? For freedom? Sure, I'm free of the ground when I jump off a cliff, too.

All I'm saying is that if you want to convince religious people of atheism, you have to show them how it is more powerful than what they have. Just being true won't cut it. To quote Pilate: "What is truth?"

(By the way, in the Gospel of Nicodemus, Jesus answers Pilate's question very poignantly.)

This leads to the second assumption, that what is written down is what Jesus said. The gospel of Jesus does not appear in the bible, nor does any original writing by Jesus himself appear anywhere. The gospels which record Jesus' life were written by men, and several of the gospels were handpicked to be included in the bible long after Christ's supposed death. To say that what has been recorded is the actual verse that Jesus spoke is a huge assumption that is logically inconsistent, as is a thousand person game of telephone.

Fair enough.

Atheism isn't about enlightenment, or about theists being idiots. Religion obviously has deep, deep roots within the core of humanity for one reason or another. Being a theist may in the end prove to be the right answer, I think it is a mistake to say God is false, end of story. The core of atheist thinking however is to be as harsh as possible about our beliefs, to put them through trial by fire and see if they stand up. So far religion has not passed this test, if you think we are wrong in our logic or assumptions then please discuss how so.

Well, I'm certainly not trying to defend religion, and I think what you have said in the paragraph above could go a long way to making believers think. I think it's a good first step.

I am hesitant of any idea that does not bring, and warrant, questions, and it is clear why we will be wrong more often than right. What an atheist believes as true should only be that which can bear the brunt of the marvelous capacity for human intelligence.

I agree.

(See, it's working already!)hock:

[cdog]

I feel your pain. Almost all of my family is religious though most of them just avoid the topic of religion. But of course some of them seem to think it's their personal directive from god to try and convince me that I'm wrong. I find it very frustrating because their tactics oscillate between attacking my views or points (for example I say "what if I believe in the Hindu gods? according to your logic that's totally reasonable" so he says "stop being stupid, you don't believe that") to getting all offended. I think you can either take it seriously, and I do believe it's possible as an athiest to have a serious discussion about religion with a religious person, or just find the humour in it.
Like when my cousin, brother and I got in to an argument with his dad. We're all athiests and he's on-and-off again (apparently hardcore on-again) christian. My cousin kept bringing up Star Trek "well in this one episode of star trek it was like the greek gods were really these aliens..." "oh ya that reminds me of this other episode of star trek when..." his dad would just freak out and not even let him finish talking it was hilarious. It didn't help that I kept bringing up seven headed space monkeys or the flying spaghetti monster.
I guess the key is, if somebody believes, you probably aren't going to change their minds in a day, same as if somebody talks to you or me about jesus, muhammed or whatever, I'm not going to change my mind.

[AnunZi]

What does matter is that someone wrote the Gospel of John, and that Gospel changes people and empowers them.

Empowers them how exactly? Could you explain what you mean by this? Preferably without referring to more religious dogma.

Where's the power in atheism? Why would I give up God and Jesus Christ only to replace them with nothing? For freedom? Sure, I'm free of the ground when I jump off a cliff, too.

I find this statement very intriguing, this is a glimpse into your minds workings I think.
The power in atheism? Why would you give up lies and deceit to replace them with truth and logic you mean?
Freedom you say? Yes, you are free to jump off a cliff. As are we all. However I think you have missed the point.
The freedom of atheism for me is not being told what to think. I want to believe in ToE, I will. I want to believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old, I will. I will not be told what to think by a book written by shepherds 2000 years ago.

You really don’t have ANY understanding of what atheism is do you?

[Edward the Theist]

You really don’t have ANY understanding of what atheism is do you?

I'm so sick of hearing that. I've been debating atheism vs. theism for...ever I think. I've probably read more atheists manifestos than most in here. All you're saying when you say that is, "No matter what you say or think or speculate, or prove, it won't work because I'm going to keep changing my definition of atheism every time you get close to scoring a point."

I'll tell you what I think an atheist is, honestly.

I think most atheists don't believe in Christianity. They don't like the power it has in society, and they don't like the ignorance of bible-believers who choose to "believe" rather than to "know" anything. They really don't give two hoots about Islam or Judaism, because they basically think those types are too far away and irrelevant to our culture to worry about. Buddhists they don't even think about, because basically, Western Buddhism is a more of a philosophy anyway and it's pretty atheistic when it's just a philosophy.

The old atheists basically wanted sexual freedom from the Church. The young atheists basically want to be counter-cultural and defiant. Again, it all goes back to resenting an unenlightened bunch of idiots having social power.

Atheists don't believe in god, but most atheists do not go anywhere near the implications of that. Most atheists only think about not believing in religious gods, they don't ponder what a world of chaos and natural selection really means. Some do, but most don't. Most atheists are very hypocritical: they hate the church but abide by all the precepts of its moral code. They think the same moral code would exist in an atheist world.

Most atheists pretend to be smarter than they are. They don't study math or science, but they like technology. They like evolution, and ignore its shortcomings. They simply refuse to talk about the universe before the big bang. That's it. No questions asked about the universe before Plank's constant. They do not talk about atheist politics, they don't talk about atheist workplaces, because in those situations, they are hoping people will not look upon other people as purposeless matter radiating quirky useless consciousness. They hope for every one to be endowed by their Creator with certain unailienable rights.

Basically, that atheist wants to be smarter, and more rebellious. They don't believe in God, but they don't really bother to think about any concept of God other than the Christian God.

Most atheists are not any more immoral than anyone else, but they aren't any better either. They get through their day without having to worry about the meaning of their life, and they feel a bit more superior than most because they know that most of the people around them are theists of the Christian sort. That's how they keep their self-esteem up. The geek-chic glasses just seem to help with that.

By all mean, correct me if I'm wrong.

[AnunZi]

I'm so sick of hearing that.

I'm not surprised.

By all means, correct me if I'm wrong.

Atheism = Not believing in god/gods. That’s it.

Your post above seems to me as if its just one huge generalisation. Based on what I don’t know, as none of it applies to me or any atheist I know.

[Tiberius]

By all mean, correct me if I'm wrong.

Gladly.

I think most atheists don't believe in Christianity. They don't like the power it has in society, and they don't like the ignorance of bible-believers who choose to "believe" rather than to "know" anything. They really don't give two hoots about Islam or Judaism, because they basically think those types are too far away and irrelevant to our culture to worry about. Buddhists they don't even think about, because basically, Western Buddhism is a more of a philosophy anyway and it's pretty atheistic when it's just a philosophy.

Correction; *all* atheists don't believe in Christianity. One of the key tenets of Christianity is the existence of God. Atheists don't believe in gods. Atheists therefore cannot be Christians.

As an atheist, I do actually give two hoots about Islam, mainly because it is on the rise and with it comes a rise of intellectual dishonesty and ignorance. I don't like many of the secular responses to it either though.

The old atheists basically wanted sexual freedom from the Church. The young atheists basically want to be counter-cultural and defiant. Again, it all goes back to resenting an unenlightened bunch of idiots having social power.

Atheists don't believe in god, but most atheists do not go anywhere near the implications of that. Most atheists only think about not believing in religious gods, they don't ponder what a world of chaos and natural selection really means. Some do, but most don't. Most atheists are very hypocritical: they hate the church but abide by all the precepts of its moral code. They think the same moral code would exist in an atheist world.

I agree, most atheists don't go anywhere near the implications of God not existing, mainly because it doesn't bother them. When you don't believe in something, you tend to not let it bother you.

You do realize that the so-called "moral code" of the church existed for years prior to the church right? Plus, I daresay that moral codes based on equality and secularism are far better than anything the church can come up with. The church has discriminated against blacks, women, and gays to name a few. Gay people can't even get married in most countries because of the "church moral code". Does that sound right to you?

Most atheists pretend to be smarter than they are. They don't study math or science, but they like technology. They like evolution, and ignore its shortcomings. They simply refuse to talk about the universe before the big bang. That's it. No questions asked about the universe before Plank's constant. They do not talk about atheist politics, they don't talk about atheist workplaces, because in those situations, they are hoping people will not look upon other people as purposeless matter radiating quirky useless consciousness. They hope for every one to be endowed by their Creator with certain unailienable rights.

Well I study both math and science. I certainly don't pretend to be smart...

As for evolution, perhaps you had better explain some of its shortcomings. I certainly have never heard of any that stand up to scrutiny.

Talking about "before the Big Bang" is a bit ludicrous, seeing as current theories suggest that time started at the moment of the Big Bang, and so "before" such an event doesn't make sense logically. That is why we don't talk about it; as far as science is concerned, there was no "before".

Atheist politics...atheist workplaces? Erm...what?

Basically, that atheist wants to be smarter, and more rebellious. They don't believe in God, but they don't really bother to think about any concept of God other than the Christian God.

Well I want to be more smarter than I already am, sure. I don't want to be more rebellious though; I think I'm fine the way I am in that department. I've also studied various religions, and various philosophical musings concerning gods, not just the Christian god.

Most atheists are not any more immoral than anyone else, but they aren't any better either. They get through their day without having to worry about the meaning of their life, and they feel a bit more superior than most because they know that most of the people around them are theists of the Christian sort. That's how they keep their self-esteem up. The geek-chic glasses just seem to help with that.

Ah, but I do worry about the meaning of my life. I want to make my life worth something; I want to help people, start a family, explore, realize dreams, etc. I keep my self-esteem up because I know people like me, care about me, and I can return that feeling to them. It has nothing to do with geek-chic glasses.

So to conclude, by the responses you have already made, and by this "summation", I don't think you have a leg to stand on when you say you understand atheism. You paint us all with the same brush, and even when you break down to specifics, it all depends on the kind of person they are, not what they may believe about God.