How Do You Feel About Atheists?

[razeontherock]

On one hand it might be interesting, but on the other hand I bet it's not anything I hadn't wrestled with by the time I was 12. In any event, "Exploring 'Christianity" is really not the place for it ... but in our outreach section here under CWR you might be able to get away with it, especially if you tack it into a thread that deals with the issues already ...

But I'll tell you in advance, you really need to think through the whole concept of evil all over again! The book of Job addresses that, right in the first chapter ...

 

[Blue Man]

On one hand it might be interesting, but on the other hand I bet it's not anything I hadn't wrestled with by the time I was 12. In any event, "Exploring 'Christianity" is really not the place for it ... but in our outreach section here under CWR you might be able to get away with it, especially if you tack it into a thread that deals with the issues already ...

But I'll tell you in advance, you really need to think through the whole concept of evil all over again! The book of Job addresses that, right in the first chapter ...

Thanks. It would be nice to fire test my ideals against people who seem to have a better understanding of their religion and are at least civil. Perhaps tomorrow.

 

[A_maize]

So how do you feel about atheists?

Welcome to the forums, I guess I'm sort of the opposite of you, and agnostic/soft atheist turned Christians.

To answer your question, I like atheists the vast majority of the time. Until arguments get all heated up and everyone starts to get angry and annoyed. Despite differences in thought, I don't know an atheist who isn't for equal treatment of all, protecting the environment, animal, anti-sexist, anti-racist, against war, and a whole lot of other good things.

This forum seems to have been around awhile, and many posters on both sides brand new folks with fire. But I'm sure coming from a political forum, you are well versed in those kind of things.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"So how do you feel about atheists?"

Can't say that I "FEEL" anything about 'em one way or the other. They're not "Christians", of course (by definition) - but then MOST people that I interface with over the course of the days and weeks probably aren't either. The vast majority of Humanity isn't.

I also know that "Intellectual discussion" while interesting to some degree ISN'T going to cause an "Atheist" (or an "Agnostic", a "Pagan", or a Republican) to BECOME "Christian". So "Atheists" are just "normal people" like anybody else. I don't have any reason NOT to talk to them about Bluegrass Music, the weather, how their car runs, or about the Lord.

I might persuade him to "try out this or that church", but in the final analysis, it isn't likely to be significant in a spiritual sense.

The "Non-Christian", regardless of what "intellectual paradigm" he ascribes to, CAN'T SEE the "Kingdom of God" and can't be aware even of its presence. it's ONLY visible for those who've been "born again" (to use Jesus' words) Spiritually.

Paul's method of dealing with the "normal people" of his day is quite simple -

1 Cor 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

HE told 'em of Jesus, and relied on the HOLY SPIRIT to convict/convince 'em of their SIN and need for repentance.

I don't know that I can IMPROVE on that technique.

 

[dyanis]

First, allow me to introduce myself. I am an atheist < staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit > .

Hi. Welcome to CF.

So how do you feel about atheists?

Like any group of diverse people, it's difficult to paint them all with one brush. In general, I've liked the atheists I've interacted with and met. Most of them seemed to be intelligent, respectful people.

Of course, there are kind atheists, and there are antagonistic atheists. For the record, I have met kind Christians and antagonistic Christians, too. I don't care for people who like to pick fights or belittle others, no matter what worldview to which they subscribe.

I certainly do not hate atheists as a group, and any Christian who genuinely hates atheists is in serious error according to the Bible. I think that both sides tend to get a little hot under the collar at times. As a member of a political forum, I am sure that you have seen plenty of that.

I have friends with a range of beliefs, from hardcore conservative Christian to free-form paganism to hardcore atheism. I respect them all as people, and they respect me. Personally, I am not a confrontational sort. I try to model my life after Micah 6:8 - act justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with my God.

 

[heron]

Some of my best friends are atheists. You are a forum member; you know how forum people talk. One loud person can misrepresent a whole group. People are very abrasive online.

Honestly, I have friends who are agnostic, Wiccan, Muslim, Buddhist... I don't think about them according to their religion. I talk with them as human beings, who they are, how they relate in their world.

The athiests I have met, have spent a lot of time thinking about religion. Which makes me think they are a little more agnostic than they would want to admit. If someone goes to the trouble of research and analysis, then it seems there is a tidbit of curiosity still remaining. But that doesn't matter really. I am not looking for titles. Titles never completely define, so they misdefine.

Christians, according to scripture, set their lives to serve God-- bring healing and restoration and life to others. There are times when they boldly challenge conventions, but for the sake of preventing others' oppression.

 

[Bro_Sam]

I became Christian because I was born into a Christian family.

And that makes somebody a Christian...how, exactly?

I was talking to a young girl one day and she said the same thing: "my parents were Christians, so that makes me a Christian, too."

I asked her, "What do your parents do for a living?" To which she replied, "They're both doctors."

I asked her how she liked being a doctor and she looked at me like I had three heads. "No, I'm not a doctor", she explained, "my mom and dad are doctors".

"Right", I said. "But you said that the fact that they're Christians makes you a Christian so then by your logic, the fact that they're doctors must make you a doctor".

She got it. I hope you do, too.

You're not a Christian based on what somebody else is or does. You're a Christian because you become born again and choose to follow Christ.

Nobody can do that for you and nobody can inherit Christianity from their parents.

Then as time went on I heard a lot of good arguments against religion, so I became agnostic, and I finally took a philosophy class which had a great deal of discussion on the concept of god, and I converted to atheism.

So then, if you now don't believe that God exists, how can you say that you were a Christian? By your own admission, at best, all you can say is that you were pretending to follow somebody you believe doesn't exist.

I think psychiatrists have a name for that.

 

[Blue Man]

And that makes somebody a Christian...how, exactly?

I was talking to a young girl one day and she said the same thing: "my parents were Christians, so that makes me a Christian, too."

I asked her, "What do your parents do for a living?" To which she replied, "They're both doctors."

I asked her how she liked being a doctor and she looked at me like I had three heads. "No, I'm not a doctor", she explained, "my mom and dad are doctors".

"Right", I said. "But you said that the fact that they're Christians makes you a Christian so then by your logic, the fact that they're doctors must make you a doctor".

She got it. I hope you do, too.

You're not a Christian based on what somebody else is or does. You're a Christian because you become born again and choose to follow Christ.

Nobody can do that for you and nobody can inherit Christianity from their parents.

I doubt anybody here discovered Christianity on their own. The apostles didn't even do that. Every single Christian is persuaded by somebody, and I've met people who think they came to it on their own, but that's bull. You at very least heard about it from someone, you at very least read a book by someone who was Christian. Same difference.

So then, if you now don't believe that God exists, how can you say that you were a Christian? By your own admission, at best, all you can say is that you were pretending to follow somebody you believe doesn't exist.

I think psychiatrists have a name for that.

No. I was full blown Christian. Sorry if that bothers you. I simply learned more as I went and stopped believing.

 

[Bro_Sam]

I doubt anybody here discovered Christianity on their own.

I'm not talking about discovering Christianity. I'm talking about actually becoming a Christian.

You at very least heard about it from someone, you at very least read a book by someone who was Christian. Same difference.

No, it isn't the same difference at all because merely hearing about it or reading a book didn't make me a Christian.

No. I was full blown Christian. Sorry if that bothers you.

It doesn't bother me. I just think it's silly that you clam you were a Christian but then show that you don't know what Christianity teaches.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

I dislike the militant ones who make it their mission in life, however, to talk smack about my God.

Otherwise, I can get along just fine with them. Believe me, there are some good arguments for why God is not real. (But He is! lol)

I agree

 

[Blue Man]

I'm not talking about discovering Christianity. I'm talking about actually becoming a Christian.



No, it isn't the same difference at all because merely hearing about it or reading a book didn't make me a Christian.

Lol I'm sure no one "becomes" Christian without discovering it.

You have to "accept Jesus into your heart as your savior" to become Christian, right? Well again, I seriously doubt anyone has ever done that without first having someone tell them they should.

It doesn't bother me. I just think it's silly that you clam you were a Christian but then show that you don't know what Christianity teaches.

Well then I'm glad I make you laugh.

 

[Bro_Sam]

You have to "accept Jesus into your heart as your savior" to become Christian, right?

Nope. You won't find anything like that in scripture. In fact, the Bible says just the opposite: that it is Jesus who accepts or rejects us.

Really, if you're going to tell us how you used to be a Christian, then I'd think you'd at least know that much.

 

[bsd31]

Nope. You won't find anything like that in scripture. In fact, the Bible says just the opposite: that it is Jesus who accepts or rejects us.

Really, if you're going to tell us how you used to be a Christian, then I'd think you'd at least know that much.

I'm not at all surprised that people who used to be Christian believe they make a "decision for Christ" and "accept" the Lord. Many people, particularly those who were born into Christian homes, have no idea what the scriptures really say. They often don't bother to study it out for themselves and instead rely on family and friends to tell them.

 

[Bro_Sam]

I'm not at all surprised that people who used to be Christian believe they make a "decision for Christ" and "accept" the Lord. Many people, particularly those who were born into Christian homes, have no idea what the scriptures really say. They often don't bother to study it out for themselves and instead rely on family and friends to tell them.

Yeah, it seems like the whole "with every head bowed and every eye closed, if you'll just repeat this prayer, you're good to go" has been drummed into people's heads to the point that they have no clue how someone is saved.

 

[Harfelugan]

Lol I'm sure no one "becomes" Christian without discovering it.

You have to "accept Jesus into your heart as your savior" to become Christian, right? Well again, I seriously doubt anyone has ever done that without first having someone tell them they should.

Romans in the discussion of heathen who have become a law unto themselves refutes your claim. As well as the specific prayer in a specific name, and the acceptance of Jesus into your heart. What your speaking of and some of what those responding to you have interlaced with an acceptable practice is merely another form of mental assent. Mans means, and sometimes the Church's as well, of proclaiming God's will over a person before God has preformed that will.



How do I feel about Athiests? Usually intimidated. Though I meet them on the street and at work every day the subject of ideologies usually only comes up in very personal conversation. No one likes to cast their pearls of ideology before swine,(them or us). Outside of the web I've met only a few fundamental athiest that feel a need to save me into their ideology from my own. I see them, at least those who feel the need to come out of the closet so to say, are typical of any religious person and should at least confess as much. To me any ideolical stance is religion in it's basest form. Once it goes from philosophy to practice the religion line has been crossed. So you could say that I think an athiest worldview should be as equally feared in the public forum as a faith based religious worldview.
This is the point where the stated qoute you presented as Athiesm is an ideolgy of acceptable human agression and hatred originated. An Athiest can adhere to a higher moral existance than a person of faith yet the potiential to fall to the lowest moral existance is equally as possible. Yet within Christianity the theolgy behind the worldview can condemn those of us who sink to a low morality and hold them accountable without civil law. Not true within Athiesm there is no platform on which one could proclaim one view of morality over another without legislating it by civil law. This criticism of Atheism fails to recognize those of higher moral opinion within Athiesm, which is sad, but speaks directly to the foundations upon which atiesm stands. In Christianity you cant blame the Father for the acts of His Children, despite how often it's been tried. In Athiesm the actions of it's children, good and bad are both consistant with the source.

 

[lucaspa]

Here are some quotes that lead me to believe that Christians secretly hate atheists:

Generalize much? What the quotes show is that some Christians secretly hate atheists. I can show you quotes where some atheists not-so-secretly hate theists.

You're surprised that 2 large groups of people contain some people that hate members of the other group? C'mon, this is something humans do. You get some Democrats that hate Republicans, and vice versa. Some Americans that hate the French, and vice versa. Some Yankee fans that hate Mets fans, and vice versa. Why do you expect theists and atheists to be different?

 

[lucaspa]

You have to "accept Jesus into your heart as your savior" to become Christian, right? Well again, I seriously doubt anyone has ever done that without first having someone tell them they should.

Saul of Tarsus? CS Lewis? Mary Magdalene?

 

[lucaspa]

I see them, at least those who feel the need to come out of the closet so to say, are typical of any religious person and should at least confess as much.

That would be my criticism of some atheists: they do not admit that atheism is a faith. Many atheists do. Some -- those that Shermer calls "militant atheists" -- do not.

So you could say that I think an athiest worldview should be as equally feared in the public forum as a faith based religious worldview.

Public forum or sponsored by the government? I don't see a problem with "public forum". I do see a problem in possible violation of the Establishment Clause.

Yet within Christianity the theolgy behind the worldview can condemn those of us who sink to a low morality and hold them accountable without civil law. Not true within Athiesm there is no platform on which one could proclaim one view of morality over another without legislating it by civil law.

I would dispute this. Is something good because God commands it or does God command it because it is good? The first is the ultimate in relativistic morals. The second has absolute morals and those morals are independent of God. So yes, there is a platform on which you can proclaim one view of morality over another.

Legislation does not establish what is moral. We all know of laws that are not/were not moral. Instead legislation attempts to have society abide by those morals.

 

[lucaspa]

Why do you feel we're arrogant?

Atheists often consider theists to be dumb to believe in God. Some atheists, OTOH, congratulate themselves on being "smart" enough to see that religion is false.

I've always thought one of the problems atheists have is that it's impossible to make an argument for atheism without making an argument against theism.

Atheism is based on the denial of evidence. There really is no evidence "for" atheism. That makes atheism a very weak position, intellectually. The arrogance may be a defence mechanism to cover up the weakness.

 

[Harfelugan]

I would dispute this. Is something good because God commands it or does God command it because it is good? The first is the ultimate in relativistic morals. The second has absolute morals and those morals are independent of God. So yes, there is a platform on which you can proclaim one view of morality over another.

Legislation does not establish what is moral. We all know of laws that are not/were not moral. Instead legislation attempts to have society abide by those morals.

A claim can be made from either. My assertion is that the relativism angle enters only if God is mutable in nature, changing. Of which He goes to great lenghts to affirm that He is immutable. I'm thinking this is essential, tied to creedal orthodoxy.

I recently defended cival law as a means of cultural stability with an athiest in the Christian Apologetics Forum here. She was determined that Christians were legislating morality and was offended by it. Yet Her own worldview, if ever in majority, will have such as its only means of maintaining order.