Why do you think there are people out there trying to convert you to atheism?

[Chris72]

1) You were in the military, which in fact does turn many away from religion.

Unsubstantiated and untrue. I dont know of anyone turned away from religion by the military. I wasnt turned away from religion by the military, I was made aware of the dangers inherent in religion.

You saw something scary in military leaders - who are highly trained killing machines. Now I'm not saying there's no connection to religion there, but please look at this statement for what it is!

I'm looking at it and stand by it. Read comments by such high ranking officers as Lt Gen William G. Boykin, Lt Col Ralph Kauzlarich, Gen Carl Stiner, (I could go on) if you want some examples.

And I'm not saying to compare them to their closest chaplains either, because we do have some issues there. I'm just saying maybe - just maybe - these aren't your best representatives of Biblical Christianity.

There are no good examples of biblical christianity. Different people interpret it in their own ways and no one has any business saying that others are wrong. Why would your interpretation mean more than theirs?

2) Ev and global warming. Red herring. These are NOT issues within Christianity!

these are absolutely issues with christianity, as with all religions. This whole "intelligent design" movement is just another attempt to squeeze creationism into the science classroom where it doe not belong. Have you heard or listened to any of the debates on these subjects? What do you think the anti-evolution and anti-global warming stances are based upon? Surely you dont think they represent the scientific viewpoint?

3) No benefits. IOW, argument from ignorance. YOU have received no benefits, so you're going to tell me I haven't received any? d00d, medical science left me for dead 30 years ago. Explain that if you don't mind.

You either weren't actually left for dead by medical science, or you were misdiagnosed, or your body's natural recuperative ability restored you to health. Without knowing your specific situation, I cant tell you what happened. Maybe you could at least tell me the diagnosis was that they felt was terminal?

CONCLUSION: you're apparently out of the military now, (congratulations, hope you are whole, I'm a little hesitant to say ty for your service but if you went in with good intentions it's in order) maybe you should consider it's time to stop being militant?

My military service isnt diminished by the fact I dont subscribe to ancient cultural superstitions about imaginary beings in the sky. As far as the "stop being militant" comment, when I see leading presidential candidates talking about how the scientific establishment is wrong on evolution or global warming because "galileo was outvoted for a spell", when I see planes flying into skyscrapers, when I hear about the death and destruction in Iraq, I think now is the time more and ever to call out these cultural superstitions for what they are. It is the 21st century and time for us to move beyond this.

 

[ziggy29]

My military service isnt diminished by the fact I dont subscribe to ancient cultural superstitions about imaginary beings in the sky. As far as the "stop being militant" comment, when I see leading presidential candidates talking about how the scientific establishment is wrong on evolution or global warming because "galileo was outvoted for a spell", when I see planes flying into skyscrapers, when I hear about the death and destruction in Iraq, I think now is the time more and ever to call out these cultural superstitions for what they are. It is the 21st century and time for us to move beyond this.

This illustrates exactly the point the OP makes, I think. Many people complain about the "Religious Right" (sometimes justifiably so, IMO) and how they refuse to live and let live, try to force others to live by their beliefs.

I don't see how militant atheism is any different, and rhetoric like yours is an example. Live and let live is a two way street. I always find it sadly ironic that many people who complain about others telling you how to live are trying to do the same thing themselves, just in the opposite direction.

I think using words like "imaginary" and "superstition" are intentionally inflammatory and is intended to upset people. Doesn't sound like a good moral foundation to me, with OR without religion.

 

[lesliedellow]

This illustrates exactly the point the OP makes, I think. Many people complain about the "Religious Right" (sometimes justifiably so, IMO) and how they refuse to live and let live, try to force others to live by their beliefs.

I don't see how militant atheism is any different, and rhetoric like yours is an example. Live and let live is a two way street. I always find it sadly ironic that many people who complain about others telling you how to live are trying to do the same thing themselves, just in the opposite direction.

I think using words like "imaginary" and "superstition" are intentionally inflammatory and is intended to upset people. Doesn't sound like a good moral foundation to me, with OR without religion.

I agree. Militant atheists exactly mirror their Christian opposite numbers.

 

[AlexBP]

Uh, no. What on earth would make one "suspect" such a thing aside from wishful thinking?

Basic logic. When a person feels comfortable and confident in their dismissal of something, they have no need to continually bash that thing and the people who follow it. I do not believe in astrology and I'm quite sure that there's nothing real going on behind astrologers. However, there is no need for me to go to message boards and insult astrologers, nor to read and write books attacking astrologers, nor to have astrologers censored or imprisoned or killed. However, when I look around I see atheists writing endless blog posts and books attacking Christians, invading Christian message boards to tell us how we're the cause of all the world's problems, and--in other countries--having Christians persecuted, censored, and killed. Such behavior makes no sense if the atheists felt confident that their beliefs were in the right. It makes sense only if they are nervous about the prospect that their beliefs are wrong.

 

[AlexBP]

I can tell you from my perspective why I argue against religion.

First because, to paraphrase Voltaire, those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Religion is at the heart of the majority of conflict you see in the world, and always has been. I see planes flying into skyscrapers blah blah blah

So tell us this. How many major terrorist attacks have you prevented with your posts on this message board? How many major scientific discoveries have occurred because of your posts on this message board?

 

[lesliedellow]

I can tell you from my perspective why I argue against religion.

First because, to paraphrase Voltaire, those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Religion is at the heart of the majority of conflict you see in the world, and always has been.

Oh yeah, you mean like:

The two wars in Iraq
The Vietnam War
The Falklands War
The Korean War
The Second World War
The First World War
The Boer War

All caused by religion of course.

Now, if you would care to return to planet earth, could you name me a major war in the last 300 years which has had Christianity as any part of the cause?

 

[ziggy29]

Religion is at the heart of the majority of conflict you see in the world, and always has been.

Personally I think most of the wars in the future will be over control of natural resources, but that obviously remains to be seen.

I guess what gets me about your statement is the idea something needs to be completely abolished because some people misuse it. Heck, by that logic we could cars because some people misuse them by driving drunk.

 

[GrayAngel]

If they don't exist then no, they are not benefits. No more than giving someone a fake winning lottery ticket.

Even if the afterlife does not exist, then the very promise of an afterlife is still enough to enrich our lives. It makes funerals much more bearable, it gives us something to look forward to, and it also makes us feel as if what we do in our lives have eternal significance.

Unlike the person with a fake winning lottery ticket, they won't even ever know they were mistaken. Just like everyone else, they'll die and just stop existing, never having the chance to be disappointed.

Knowing that this is your only life and that your time is always limited absolutely makes life more meaningful. It makes you treasure every day and every moment with your loved ones that much more because you know they won't always be there, that all could be lost tomorrow.

Believing your life is some kind of strange temporary prelude to an eternal blissful afterlife, doesnt make your time here better. It just means that your time that you're alive is meaningless compared to what you feel awaits you afterwards. What's 70 or 80 years compared to eternity?

Imagine if you were shopping and you found a battery guaranteed to never lose it's life. Wouldn't you pay a higher price for it than you would a battery that might last a couple of months?

Having a shorter life doesn't make it richer. Otherwise, we'd be telling children with cancer that they're the lucky ones.

Neither this life or the next are cheapened by its everlasting value. In this life, every second counts, because it is on earth were our eternal destinies are determined. I've never met a single person who enjoys their life more than the missionary who does charity work across the globe, spreading the gospel of Jesus. And there are few people more miserable than the elderly who know their days are numbered.

Reality isnt about what "sounds" better, it's about what really is. Creating an imaginary scenario in your head to make yourself feel better isnt reality.

What you are doing is similar to someone convincing themselves they have the winning ticket to tomorrow's jackpot. If you delude yourself enough, you can convince yourself it's true. Especially if you surround yourself with people who feel the same, and you convince yourself as a group that you are all going to win tomorrow.

The difference is, tomorrow comes, you dont win the lottery, you move on with your life and hopefully have learned your lesson. In your case, no one ever finds out because the belief is that this all happens after you die. And since no one comes back to tell you yes or no, the delusion persists.

You acknowledge that those of us who believe in the afterlife can never find out we're wrong, but you still think your life is better? Please, enlighten me. How is your life so much richer now that you're "disillusioned." What are the benefits of atheism?

I think your belief system makes you treasure life less, as I have explained above. I didnt say my life is better than yours. I have a good life, family and career, but since I know nothing of you I cant really make a comparison.

I still haven't seen any evidence to prove that the life of an atheist is better than the life of a Christian. The only difference, assuming you're right, is you have nothing to look forward to. When your family and friends die, you know you'll never see them again. And nothing you can do will make any lasting difference, because we'll all be gone soon.

Even Buddhism is better than atheism. At least they believe they'll be reincarnated to live again. But what do you have?

 

[GadFly]

I realise the title may be a little ambiguous, so I'll clarify. There are people out there trying to convert Christians to atheism. Some have even produced great reams of work like Dear Believer in Christ. Why do you think people do that sort of thing?

The fact is that every person born is given the light of God at birth according to John, chapter one. God, being the most self evident truth in the universe, reveals himself to every man that is born. In order for man to lose eternal life, he must be misled by Satan, just like he was misled by that old Snake in the Garden. That seems to be the job of atheists and all of Satan's related philosophies. God has only one philosophy of life.

 

[GadFly]

Thats the billion dollar question. Its the part that most agitates me about atheism. I wish I could just be friends with an atheist without them pressuring me into beliving that believing in God is the wrong thing to do. Can't we just get in the pool and play marco polo?

With all due respect sister, do you think it is a good idea to have fellowship with Satan?

2Cor:6:14: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

 

[GadFly]

Atheism seems to have developed an evangelical streak in the last decade or so, but if their intention is to convert anybody, they do a singularly bad job of it. Time and again you hear the same old saws about Jesus was based upon Mithras, or the Bible was edited at Nicea, and what have you.

If there is one thing the new atheists all have in common, it seems to be the belief that science is omnicompetent to solve all life's problems. They have effectively made science into a religion.

Not only that brother but atheism has sneaked into the philosophical argument to have already captured the majority of minds on the campuses of major colleges and universities in both Europe and the USA. Atheism does this under the guise of liberalism, which uses phenomenology philosophy to explain what is real. God, by the atheist's liberalism philosophy has almost succeeded in taking God out of society as well as science. They do this by distorting the ontological argument for God. Modern day protestant ministers do not seem to have a clue as to what ontology is.

I generally post on the Wesleyan Parish. The folk over there, for the most part, the UMC and other ministers there IMHO, have little understanding of God as being their science and explanation of reality. If readers here have no conception of God as the ontological being in the universe, we invite you to the WP to join that discussion there. Just look up the most recent posts of the Gadfly. This knowledge of God will make you a stronger Christian.

 

[GadFly]

In 1963, when I first encountered self-proclaimed atheists who tried to convert me to the worship of science as the answer to all our questions, I realized that atheists weren't really atheists. Instead, they were idolaters. They were worshipping something more modern than Ba'al and Molech, but they were still worshipping it as their god.

Since that time I've encountered other so-called atheists. Some have stated that God does not exist because their humanist philosophy doesn't allow for him to exist. Some have said that he doesn't exist because they don't want to admit that there is good and evil in the world, but merely a programming dictated by our genetic makeup and environment that causes everything we say and do to be totally beyond our control (I heard a professor of philosophy promote this one in his lecures in 1964). And then there are those who don't want a divine being to exist because that would put their own lifestyles in jeopardy. The reasons are endless, but the purpose is always the same. They would rather worship whatever idol they have chosen for themselves than worship God.

We are all 'hardwired' to worship. It's not a matter of 'if' but only a matter of 'what' we will worship. Those who claim that there is no God haven't stopped worshipping; they've merely exchanged the worship of God for the worship of whatever idol they have chosen to replace him.[/QUOTE

The philosophical explanation for what these scientists do is found in the slick way they take half of reality, that being ontology, out of the equation of reality. God is self evidently the main factor and creator of science and the scientific method but atheist/liberals claim cosmology and experience creates ontology. The correct equation of metaphysics or reality is:
Ontology + Cosmology = Reality.

 

[GadFly]

I can tell you from my perspective why I argue against religion.

First because, to paraphrase Voltaire, those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Religion is at the heart of the majority of conflict you see in the world, and always has been. I see planes flying into skyscrapers because people believe it is what invisible beings want them to do. I see wars launched against sovereign states such as Iraq killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people, all because a president trusts his religious advisors and what he thinks a god is telling him he should do (Bush: God told me to invade Iraq - Americas, World - The Independent and Bush Gog and Magog | Andrew Brown | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk). I see mass atrocities committed over and over again all in the name of converting one group into believing in the cultural superstitions of another. And it is inevitable. When one group's irrational belief in imaginary beings conflicts with another's irrational belief in imaginary beings, conflict is inevitable. The only reason you may find "peace" in your particular religion is because you are surrounded by those with similar beliefs.

I saw such irrationality and the dangers it presents firsthand as a military officer. The level of christian fundamentalism among military leaders is scary, to say the least.

You are certainly blind if your contention is that atheist have no initiated terror, wars, and great suffering on mankind. That seems to be what you are saying. I would guess that you not only hold to the philosophy of atheism but you are most likely a phenomenological liberal. Before I finish reading this thread, I will be surprised if you are politically motivated by your curse remarks.

Second, I am tired of the progress of science being held up again and again and again by religious nonsense. The science of evolution and of global warming (including the contribution to this by mankind) is about as controversial among scientists as non-flat-earth theory or the-sun-isnt-a-guy-in-a-golden-chariot theory. Yet, even today you have a push to take them out of the classroom. Teaching biology without evolution is like teaching computer science but not acknowledging that electricity exists. It's asinine. Even in the republican debate last night, you had a republican front runner blowing off the scientific consensus on such issues with the comment "well even Galileo got outvoted for a spell"! Galileo was "outvoted" by the CHURCH you moron, not fellow scientists!

And yet, this is the kind of ignorance that we want to pass on to our children. And this kind of ignorance that threatens our children's future on this planet the longer we ignore global warming. The only way to combat it is to speak up and call out religious beliefs for what they are: cultural superstitions.

Did you enjoy calling Christians asinine and morons? What a joke. Without ontology, there is no science or meaning to science. A stick or stone has never contributed to man's understanding. Since you are so smart, there is no need for me to explain how moronic your statement just was. Your reason number two is very unlearned. Evolution does not explain creation. Only ontology explains creation unless you think something comes from nothing. The equation of reality includes existence first, then cosmology. It has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It has only to do with true science and ontology. Ontology + Cosmology = Reality.

This is an incredibly ignorant comment. There are no "benefits" with christianity or any other religion. Just an imaginary bill of goods. And there is nothing "meaningless" about life unless you make it so. I live every day on the planet as if it were my last. I treasure every moment I have because I am not banking on some eternal afterlife that I have no reason to suspect exists. If your only "meaning" in life is in currying favor with an invisible overlord in the sky, then THAT is a meaningless life.

On this thread, the Christians are not the ones playing the role of fools, morons, or the ignorant. Until atheist can cite a reasonable premise for everything that is, a premise for science, logic and reasoning, until they can give a reason and purpose for science beyond the end of their nose, and show why anybody could be interested in their nothingness, atheist will have to play the fool's role in philosophy and science.

 

[ziggy29]

With all due respect sister, do you think it is a good idea to have fellowship with Satan?

Christ engaged in fellowship with prostitutes and tax collectors. If the idea is to hopefully bring them into exploring the riches of Christ and making them want to hear more, it seems to me this is exactly what Jesus did. It was the Pharisees who screamed that this was wrong.

Was it a good idea for Jesus to associate with them?

 

[GadFly]

No atheists and/or scientists claims that science is omnicompetent to solve all of life's problems. That is ridiculous. Who do you know has made such a claim?

And do you not believe the bible was edited at Nicea? Is it your thought that the bible, as you see it today has been static and complete since 33 AD?

Christian logically believe God has all the sociological and scientific answers. It is a matter or perception and perspective. Atheists do not realize that they have already lost the ontological argument for existence. They also think that creation is finished. Christians know that God is still creating man to finally be in God's image. Through ontology, reasoning, and logical inferences, God continues to improve those that will follow Him into a more perfect union. Jesus Christ said he was the end of creation. When God is finished creating man, man will no longer have all these flaws of character you atheist point towards as being an argument against God. You can not interrupt an artist in the middle of his painting, sculpture, and composing and say he has failed, which you do.

 

[GadFly]

Unsubstantiated and untrue. I dont know of anyone turned away from religion by the military. I wasnt turned away from religion by the military, I was made aware of the dangers inherent in religion.

I'm looking at it and stand by it. Read comments by such high ranking officers as Lt Gen William G. Boykin, Lt Col Ralph Kauzlarich, Gen Carl Stiner, (I could go on) if you want some examples.

There are no good examples of biblical christianity. Different people interpret it in their own ways and no one has any business saying that others are wrong. Why would your interpretation mean more than theirs?

these are absolutely issues with christianity, as with all religions. This whole "intelligent design" movement is just another attempt to squeeze creationism into the science classroom where it doe not belong. Have you heard or listened to any of the debates on these subjects? What do you think the anti-evolution and anti-global warming stances are based upon? Surely you dont think they represent the scientific viewpoint?

You either weren't actually left for dead by medical science, or you were misdiagnosed, or your body's natural recuperative ability restored you to health. Without knowing your specific situation, I cant tell you what happened. Maybe you could at least tell me the diagnosis was that they felt was terminal?

My military service isnt diminished by the fact I dont subscribe to ancient cultural superstitions about imaginary beings in the sky. As far as the "stop being militant" comment, when I see leading presidential candidates talking about how the scientific establishment is wrong on evolution or global warming because "galileo was outvoted for a spell", when I see planes flying into skyscrapers, when I hear about the death and destruction in Iraq, I think now is the time more and ever to call out these cultural superstitions for what they are. It is the 21st century and time for us to move beyond this.

Just from briefly scanning what you write, your argument misses what Christianity claims. For one, I have never heard a Christ say he bases his religion on beings flying in the sky. For the most part Christians base their religion on real premises for reasoning and logic, which is called ontology.

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have an ontological premise, which means they are not capable of real science or reasoning. This means their conclusions will always be full of errors. Reality is not something atheist can understand, since they deny ontology exist. How can they, then, do any science whatever? Atheist can not only successfully explain creation, they can not explain the the scientific method without explaining it without using ontology, which they say does not exist./B] And, they call Christians to be fools?

 

[GadFly]

Oh yeah, you mean like:

The two wars in Iraq
The Vietnam War
The Falklands War
The Korean War
The Second World War
The First World War
The Boer War

All caused by religion of course.

Now, if you would care to return to planet earth, could you name me a major war in the last 300 years which has had Christianity as any part of the cause?

Religion is not Ontology, not Christ, God was not responsible for any of the wars you point towards. Also, how about all the atheistic wars created by Hitler, the USSR, and Red China, plus all the other communist evils throughout the world? Since you base your philosophy on score keeping, do all other evils also count? Christians who are Christians base their religion on the reasoning and wisdom that comes from God, the Ontological being in the universe.

 

[GadFly]

Christ engaged in fellowship with prostitutes and tax collectors. If the idea is to hopefully bring them into exploring the riches of Christ and making them want to hear more, it seems to me this is exactly what Jesus did. It was the Pharisees who screamed that this was wrong.

Was it a good idea for Jesus to associate with them?

Christ instructed them in the ways of God. He turned them into suitable candidates for fellowship. That is how we Christians like to operate. We want sinners to take on the philosophy of Jesus Christ to create a lifestyle thereby.

 

[ziggy29]

Christ instructed them in the ways of God. He turned them into suitable candidates for fellowship. That is how we Christians like to operate. We want sinners to take on the philosophy of Jesus Christ to create a lifestyle thereby.

I agree. We want them to hear the Word of God and we hope they will listen and take heed. But do we criticize Christians for continuing to engage in those who don't believe, hoping that maybe those unbelievers will eventually hear the Good News of the Gospel of Christ? I think that's what the Pharisees would have us do, not what Jesus would have us do.

Sure, it would be neat and tidy if they immediately decided to seek Jesus when we first mention the Good News, but does it really work that way? Would Jesus really want us to abandon association with people who didn't immediately seek the way of God when we talk about it? I don't think so.

 

[GadFly]

I agree. We want them to hear the Word of God and we hope they will listen and take heed. But do we criticize Christians for continuing to engage in those who don't believe, hoping that maybe those unbelievers will eventually hear the Good News of the Gospel of Christ? I think that's what the Pharisees would have us do, not what Jesus would have us do.

Sure, it would be neat and tidy if they immediately decided to seek Jesus when we first mention the Good News, but does it really work that way? Would Jesus really want us to abandon association with people who didn't immediately seek the way of God when we talk about it? I don't think so.

Engage them always. If they believe, fellowship with them. If they reject the truth, dust off your feet and move on. Be always led by the Holy Spirit in telling the good news but never cast your pearls before swine. How is that?