Speaking to theists

[ssmutters]

I would like to put this question forth to everyone here. Most of my family is very religious and none in my friend circle is an atheist. Now, when you are talking to a bunch of believers and something brings up the argument of existence of God, how do you go about convincing the other person about atheism? I would be happy if, at the least, the arguments are effective in making other person to question his/her beliefs.

But, most of the time, even when my argument is lucid and filled with rationality, it only offends the other person. At first, i thought it was my style, but seeing some threads and posts here I realize this happens a lot to other people as well. The more rational the argument, the more offense the other person takes. I don't want to offend. A heated debate only makes a believer more headstrong and at the most, it is only entertainment value or is just spicy. After all, in any argument, a person does not like to lose. One thing to be said about religion is - it reaches everyone at all intellectual levels.

So, how do you go about it? Has anyone here had success in personally converting someone to atheism? I would appreciate your response very much.

- ss

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

I would like to put this question forth to everyone here. Most of my family is very religious and none in my friend circle is an atheist. Now, when you are talking to a bunch of believers and something brings up the argument of existence of God, how do you go about convincing the other person about atheism? I would be happy if, at the least, the arguments are effective in making other person to question his/her beliefs.

But, most of the time, even when my argument is lucid and filled with rationality, it only offends the other person. At first, i thought it was my style, but seeing some threads and posts here I realize this happens a lot to other people as well. The more rational the argument, the more offense the other person takes. I don't want to offend. A heated debate only makes a believer more headstrong and at the most, it is only entertainment value or is just spicy. After all, in any argument, a person does not like to lose. One thing to be said about religion is - it reaches everyone at all intellectual levels.

So, how do you go about it? Has anyone here had success in personally converting someone to atheism? I would appreciate your response very much.

- ss

Offense from the other person is certainly expected because you're attacking their entire worldview with pesky details like facts and logic. Don't let that deter you.
Mostly, just avoid being confrontational because that will be off-putting. They'll just ignore your arguements if they feel you're being agressive with your views. Many Christians have a persecution complex regarding their religion, so just be calm, rational, logical, and consistent. Don't be afraid to challenge them but don't be confrontational.

I recommend any videos on youtube regarding the atheist experience and user Aronra to see how this thing goes. You can also look up Richard Dawkin's debate with a creationist named Wendy Wright for an example (though Dawkins seems to be kind of sheepish, but he's very intelligent and excellent at making his points even when he's debating an intellectually daft person.)

Here's an excellent example (of many) of Aronra's work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY

[Edward the Theist]

You have to understand the mindsets. I assume you're talking about Christians, so you have to realize that they are going to believe what they believe in spite of what they see. Some of them would rather die than disbelieve, though admittedly such knights are becoming more rare.

And then there's the problem of Jesus. Atheists like Bill Maher like to pretend Jesus never existed, but that's a pretty new view. Everyone has always assumed given the various gospels out there from antiquity and the impact on the world, and the face value of the four gospels of the New Testament, that Jesus probably existed. And the stuff Jesus says, if a person will just read it for themselves, is so anarchist, so inflamatory, so elitist, so uncompromising, so violent, and so courageous, and so monarchical (in the sense of being above the law and even justice for that matter) that it remains highly attractive to those who still care about "character."

And Jesus assumes the existence of God. Even more powerfully, he doesn't devote one word to trying to "prove" his "Father's" existence to anyone.

So, you have that to contend with.

Then there is always the possibility that atheism just doesn't work either. Most Christians no longer believe God is a man in the sky. They really think of God more as a spiritual entity responsible for the creation of the world and intimately involved with all of His creation. So, when you say God doesn't exist, you hit a definition problem. Of course the man with a white beared sitting on a throne doesn't exist--all Christians know that, and they know that's symbolic language. So, they see atheists who beat up on "idiot Christianity" as kind of idiots themselves.

When it comes to disproving a "Creator," you're in for an uphill battle, because you really don't know. No one does. No one knows how the universe started, and if it didn't start, how it came to exist at all (without infinite regress). No one has a clue how gravity works or why energy comes in little quantums. All atheism can do is speculate that it might be something other than a conscious supernatural creator, but they have nothing to put in place of it, and that can never convince a believer.

[ABierman1986]

I have always found that when discussing religion with religious people it is a fool's errand to try and make them change their minds. As has been stated above they are set in their ways, they have deep seated beliefs that I don't think anyone from the outside can remove. I find that if I approach the discussion as a questioner trying to reconcile my concerns with that of the bible. If I present my arguments as discussions I have with myself as bars to my acceptance or belief in God then I have much more success. Of course this is absolutely true; if someone could truly convince me logically that my problems with religion and God are false then I would be willing to re-examine the case, but so far it hasn't come close to happening. What I've found effective about this is it forces the person I'm talking to think about the issues, and be critical of their books as they must be to answer the true questions the bible really presents. It's non-confrontational, and many religious people I've talked to are thrilled for the chance to proselytize to me when in reality the discussion invariable goes silent after a few minutes. This is the most I think we can do, inspire people to think critically of their beliefs.

---

BTW @Edward the theist; the discussion of how gravity works and why energy comes in quantums may not be fully understood, but it is certainly much farther along than saying we don't have a clue. Atheists don't argue to put something in place of a creator, the purpose is to believe what is observable and rational and not to give in at difficulties in understanding and ascribe the solution to a supernatural entity. To convince a believer one only needs to convince them to finally use a critical and skeptical mind on their beliefs, this will at the least lead to agnosticism if not atheism. It's convincing them to do this that is the hard part.

[Edward the Theist]

BTW @Edward the theist; the discussion of how gravity works and why energy comes in quantums may not be fully understood, but it is certainly much farther along than saying we don't have a clue. Atheists don't argue to put something in place of a creator, the purpose is to believe what is observable and rational and not to give in at difficulties in understanding and ascribe the solution to a supernatural entity. To convince a believer one only needs to convince them to finally use a critical and skeptical mind on their beliefs, this will at the least lead to agnosticism if not atheism. It's convincing them to do this that is the hard part.

Well, good luck with that. You still have to compete with Jesus Christ.

[ABierman1986]

BTW @Edward the theist; the discussion of how gravity works and why energy comes in quantums may not be fully understood, but it is certainly much farther along than saying we don't have a clue. Atheists don't argue to put something in place of a creator, the purpose is to believe what is observable and rational and not to give in at difficulties in understanding and ascribe the solution to a supernatural entity. To convince a believer one only needs to convince them to finally use a critical and skeptical mind on their beliefs, this will at the least lead to agnosticism if not atheism. It's convincing them to do this that is the hard part.

Well, good luck with that. You still have to compete with Jesus Christ.

I don't think compete is quite the right phrasing, as you say, you can't compete with the belief of a savior, all you can ever do is try to engage in critical discussion and hope it turns inward.

[Zen Badger]

Just remember to talk slooowly and only use little words, polysyllabic language only confuses them

[Edward the Theist]

I don't think compete is quite the right phrasing, as you say, you can't compete with the belief of a savior, all you can ever do is try to engage in critical discussion and hope it turns inward.

The more you critically analyze what Jesus said and examine how he lived his life (all of it, not just what you learned in Sunday school), the harder he is to defeat. I'm not preaching Jesus to you, I'm saying that if you want to turn people away from Christianity, that's who you have to compete with, and there's a reason Christianity has survived for 2000 years and still has the same effect today as it did back then.

Oh, I'm sure you believe atheism is enlightenment, and I know a lot of people in this forum think we theists are idiots who just don't understand atheism, but when you have someone like Jesus Christ talking about God...well, just imagine sitting down with him--a love so great it can take in all evil--and trying to convince him there is no God. If you can convince him, you can convince me.

[ABierman1986]

I don't think compete is quite the right phrasing, as you say, you can't compete with the belief of a savior, all you can ever do is try to engage in critical discussion and hope it turns inward.

The more you critically analyze what Jesus said and examine how he lived his life (all of it, not just what you learned in Sunday school), the harder he is to defeat. I'm not preaching Jesus to you, I'm saying that if you want to turn people away from Christianity, that's who you have to compete with, and there's a reason Christianity has survived for 2000 years and still has the same effect today as it did back then.

Oh, I'm sure you believe atheism is enlightenment, and I know a lot of people in this forum think we theists are idiots who just don't understand atheism, but when you have someone like Jesus Christ talking about God...well, just imagine sitting down with him and trying to convince him there is no God: a love so great it can take in all evil. Yeah, boy, I'm ready to become an atheist.

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.

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.

When I say think critically about belief, I don't mean to pick and choose sections to critically analyze but look at the underlying consistency of the material as a whole.

I also want to fully acknowledge that if Jesus Christ came to me from Heaven, sat down to discuss God with me, and thereby proved God's existence and divinity without a doubt, I would happily convert to religion and proselytize all day long.

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.

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.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Oh, I'm sure you believe atheism is enlightenment,

Well no,I don't actually. Some atheists are also enlightened,as indeed as are some theists. Most are not,being only ordinary people who happen to be unable to believe in god(s) I'm one of them.

and I know a lot of people in this forum think we theists are idiots who just don't understand atheism,

I'm sure you do,but I'm not one of them .I believe a lot of theists do not understand what atheism is and is not. Some of those people are also idiots. EG an IQ of about 70,like Forrest Gump. Most are not,they are merely willfully ignorant and closed minded,which I consider far worse than clinical stupidity. So far you seem to fit into that category..