Should Christian claims be confronted in conversation?

[cloudyday2]

Let's say two friends a Christian and an atheist are talking in real life, and the Christian makes a casual comment revealing belief in the historicity of Noah's Flood and an assumption that the atheist shares this belief. However, the atheist obviously doesn't share this belief.

Should the atheist ignore the comment or confront the comment in some way?

I am often faced with that question, but normally I try to politely nod and say nothing. Noah's Flood is only an example, but there are many Christian beliefs of that nature. I'm not a confrontational person, so I prefer to say nothing.

I wonder if Christians would prefer to have their assumptions confronted rather than being politely ignored? I don't care if people believe in Noah's Flood and similar things, and I know that Christianity helps many people emotionally and morally and socially.

I also have people who believe weird conspiracy theories that I handle similarly. I nod politely and hope they change the subject. Maybe it is patronizing for me to say nothing?

 

[Hammster]

I don’t see why not.

 

[awitch]

I think context is important.
Generally, I'm not going to debate religious beliefs that I don't share in casual conversation.

In a religious discussion, or if the other person is confrontational, then it's far more likely that I would.

 

[DebbieJ]

An atheist actually taught me critical thinking. Although, we fought like cats and dogs hurling insults, I actually learned something from this confrontation and used this to my advantage. I saw my flaws in how I argued and learned to change it overtime.

 

[Albion]

Let's say two friends a Christian and an atheist are talking in real life, and the Christian makes a casual comment revealing belief in the historicity of Noah's Flood and an assumption that the atheist shares this belief. However, the atheist obviously doesn't share this belief.

Should the atheist ignore the comment or confront the comment in some way?

I am often faced with that question, but normally I try to politely nod and say nothing. Noah's Flood is only an example, but there are many Christian beliefs of that nature. I'm not a confrontational person, so I prefer to say nothing.

I wonder if Christians would prefer to have their assumptions confronted rather than being politely ignored?

First, I cannot imagine that too many Christians would prefer to have such a comment challenged.

We already know that the typical atheist does not believe the story about Noah and the Flood, and I don't think that the Christian in your example has hopes of changing minds just because he gives voice to his own thinking.

So I let such comments pass without a challenge, and I think my reasoning would be the same if I were to put myself into the position of either the Christian in your question or the atheist.

If one party were in the habit of lecturing the other one all the time, it might be different. You said that you were only asking about a "casual" comment, however.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Maybe it is patronizing for me to say nothing?

I have done both extremes of arguing against something and letting it slide by. This is the ultimate "your mileage will vary" situation. For some people that you see all the time probably good to discuss it, but when you want to have that peaceful holiday dinner or get to together ignoring it is also good, especially when people are very set in their ways, not willing to explore ideas, defensive etc. For some people you are not ever going to see eye to eye, but because of them being relatives, coworkers etc. its not like you can ignore or severe your contact with them, so you just got to get by. And that I think is fine. Personally on the subject of politics i find I often have to do that.


But to reiterate for folks you do spend time with, I think it worth it. Conflict can be a very positive thing, at least if handed the right way with some tact etc.

 

[Broken Fence]

I would think any person would speak honestly and openly about what they believe to be the truth.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

I was going to edit in one comment, but will make it a separate one. I've seen some atheists like Penn Gilette and others complain about no longer being invited to their Christian friends Christmas parties and so on. And well I can really see why based on the behavior of some atheists on boards etc. where they can basically act like spoilers etc. Anyway this sort of thing should really be noted; because, I think many atheists, skeptics etc. are not aware of how negative they come across (Like their only enjoyment in life comes from undermining peoples Faith etc.)

 

[Albion]

I've seen some atheists like Penn Gilette and others complain about no longer being invited to their Christian friends Christmas parties and so on.

We'd have to know how those atheists behaved at their friends' parties. Penn Gillette is a comedian and very blunt. He's a lot of fun, really, but at a Christmas party, I have no idea if he reigns any of that in.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

We'd have to know how those atheists behaved at their friends' parties. Penn Gillette is a comedian and very blunt. He's a lot of fun, really, but at a Christmas party, I have no idea if he reigns any of that in.

Yes that was the sort of thing I was trying to get at. Relationships are a two way street, and I don't think that people like him have a lot of self awareness, until at least they have succeeded in isolating themselves from their childhood friends and family and suddenly want to bring it up.

 

[eleos1954]

Let's say two friends a Christian and an atheist are talking in real life, and the Christian makes a casual comment revealing belief in the historicity of Noah's Flood and an assumption that the atheist shares this belief. However, the atheist obviously doesn't share this belief.

Should the atheist ignore the comment or confront the comment in some way?

I am often faced with that question, but normally I try to politely nod and say nothing. Noah's Flood is only an example, but there are many Christian beliefs of that nature. I'm not a confrontational person, so I prefer to say nothing.

I wonder if Christians would prefer to have their assumptions confronted rather than being politely ignored? I don't care if people believe in Noah's Flood and similar things, and I know that Christianity helps many people emotionally and morally and socially.

I also have people who believe weird conspiracy theories that I handle similarly. I nod politely and hope they change the subject. Maybe it is patronizing for me to say nothing?

It has been my experience that most (not all) atheist's love to argue. I'm willing to have conversation with anyone about anything ... as long as people don't get smart alecky and/or belittle people about their beliefs. People need to just agree to disagree and not make a big deal about their differences. It's not what is being discussed .... it's the how (attitude) it is discussed that matters. Same goes within the christian realm in regard to interpretation differences.

 

[cloudyday2]

It has been my experience that most (not all) atheist's love to argue.

For internet conversations, I agree with your characterization, but it's been my experience that in real life conversations most atheists don't like to argue.

What has been your experience with real life conversations? Are the atheists eager to debate religion in real life?

 

[Albion]

My experience has been "no." Atheists who are my friends and acquaintances rarely want to make that a topic of conversation. However, I rarely make religion a topic when I'm in their presence.

 

[Robban]

Let's say two friends a Christian and an atheist are talking in real life, and the Christian makes a casual comment revealing belief in the historicity of Noah's Flood and an assumption that the atheist shares this belief. However, the atheist obviously doesn't share this belief.

Should the atheist ignore the comment or confront the comment in some way?

I am often faced with that question, but normally I try to politely nod and say nothing. Noah's Flood is only an example, but there are many Christian beliefs of that nature. I'm not a confrontational person, so I prefer to say nothing.

I wonder if Christians would prefer to have their assumptions confronted rather than being politely ignored? I don't care if people believe in Noah's Flood and similar things, and I know that Christianity helps many people emotionally and morally and socially.

I also have people who believe weird conspiracy theories that I handle similarly. I nod politely and hope they change the subject. Maybe it is patronizing for me to say nothing?

The past few days I was thinking something similar,

it started with the two being alone on a desert island.

Then it went further to the two being adrift on a raft.

It came about by reading so many threads here on CF
where one says something and another demands proof, evidence, source, link etc.

Was thinking what it would be like adrift on a raft with such a person.

Reckon sooner or later one would end up as shark food,

haha.

 

[cloudyday2]

One reason that I personally would prefer not to debate religion in real life conversations is that I am not confident of my abilities to defend my ideas.

For example, how would I explain why I don't believe in Noah's Flood? I'm not a geologist or planetary scientist. I'm merely an ordinary person who chooses to believe the majority of experts who say that a global flood didn't happen. My only argument would be "why don't you listen to all the experts?", and their response might be "because I believe the Bible is the word of God and the Bible says it happened".

 

[eleos1954]

For internet conversations, I agree with your characterization, but it's been my experience that in real life conversations most atheists don't like to argue.

What has been your experience with real life conversations? Are the atheists eager to debate religion in real life?

I have a few friends that are atheists ... they know I am christian ... atheists (most if not all) believe in evolution ... me and my friends enjoy the outdoors and the beauty of nature ... when the opportunity arises .... I just bring out the "design aspect" of nature ... such intricate and marvelous design and leave it at that .... some times they will ask me about my beliefs ... and I try to keep it simple, logical and short .... also the Grand Canyon is a great example of "flawed" interpretation of the layers ... science says many layers over millions/billions of years ... however if so .... there is NO evidence of erosion in those layers ... and that just can not be if indeed each layer was formed over numerous years the elements would have caused erosion within the layers.

I usually don't quote scripture to them .... because if one is not open to creation ... they certainly won't be open to a divine being ... so no sense in preaching.

There are many scientists (Einstein was one) who believe in creation and put forth many sound scientific reasons ... but most atheists as soon as they determine the scientist is christian ... then they really don't bother to listen to what they put forth.

Atheists debate evolution verses creation .... both are theories .... but many atheists say we have all this "evidence" ... no .... theories (theory upon theory) ... that's why it is called "The THEORY of evolution". Yet they argue that as well. ;o) The end game is .... IT IS THEORY!

 

[awitch]

Atheists debate evolution verses creation .... both are theories .... but many atheists say we have all this "evidence" ... no .... theories (theory upon theory) ... that's why it is called "The THEORY of evolution". Yet they argue that as well. ;o) The end game is .... IT IS THEORY!

Like, right now, I'd love to address this, but this thread isn't the place.

(But if you'd like to actually have a little understanding of what evolution says and what a scientific theory is, send me an IM).

 

[jacks]

For internet conversations, I agree with your characterization, but it's been my experience that in real life conversations most atheists don't like to argue.

What has been your experience with real life conversations? Are the atheists eager to debate religion in real life?

I think that living by the rule "When in doubt say nothing." is the wisest choice. Usually, it really doesn't matter so risking an unnecessary confrontation or saying something you will regret later, just isn't worth it.

 

[FireDragon76]

If the assumption is that it is shared history and objective, then I would correct or qualify what the other person was saying. But otherwise, it's not necessarily to debate religious beliefs in casual conversations.

 

[FireDragon76]

I was going to edit in one comment, but will make it a separate one. I've seen some atheists like Penn Gilette and others complain about no longer being invited to their Christian friends Christmas parties and so on. And well I can really see why based on the behavior of some atheists on boards etc. where they can basically act like spoilers etc. Anyway this sort of thing should really be noted; because, I think many atheists, skeptics etc. are not aware of how negative they come across (Like their only enjoyment in life comes from undermining peoples Faith etc.)

I am baffled by people that are irreligious that want to celebrate things like Christmas parties. Especially because I make it a point to not celebrate them, precisely because of their religious undertones.