Two Cabins

[jacknife]

I was thinking that even if I were an atheist, and I had the choice of trusting a person with some beliefs about right and wrong which were rooted in the Creator of the universe (even if untrue), and trusting a person I knew nothing about, except that he may or may not have such firm beliefs, I'd trust the one who believed in a Creator.

isnt that in itself stereotyping one? hmm perhaps never having been an athiest (have you?) has somewhat skewred your preception of one. while not a choice every athiest has put quite a bit of thought into their morals i assure you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well yeah, but that was apart from the OP. Those were my answers to the question, not assumptions built into it. Anyone's free to disagree with my answer, but I honestly didn't expect to get called names for asking the question.

Not assumptions built into it???!!

Who do you think you're kidding?!?!

Why else are we pretending we're carrying a sack of gold???! Have I just finished collecting from my stable of leprechaun hookers?!?!

The whole reason the gold is in the story is we want someone to pretend they have something "tempting" to steal. You're asking the reader to pretend he has something valuable to protect and then asking them if they trust it more with an atheist or christian!

There's a giant assumption built into the question...it's the assumption that you can't trust an atheist with your sack of gold (or whatever you hold valuable).

It's blatantly offensive.

 

[Chesterton]

Here are the stereotypes of Christians you claimed were unwarranted:

Pay special attention to 3, 4 and 5. Have a look over the thread. Have you folks undermined or perpetuated these steretypes? If you need help, I'm sure there a posters that would be happy to direct you to some particular posts.

Technically, I didn't claim they were all completely unwarranted. I answered the question "what stereotypes do you think atheists hold about Christians" or something like that. We don't have to go farther than our friend who says "Science can take a hike" to extrapolate that there's at least an anti-science fringe out there.

Apart from that, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[Chesterton]

isnt that in itself stereotyping one? hmm perhaps never having been an athiest (have you?) has somewhat skewred your preception of one. while not a choice every athiest has put quite a bit of thought into their morals i assure you.

It's not a stereotype to say the atheist may or may not have as solid a belief in right and wrong as the Christian. You're not claiming all atheists are paragons of virtue, are you?

(I was agnostic most of my life, never really took the plunge of the grand negative assertion of atheism. It seemed a step too far.)

 

[Chesterton]

The whole reason the gold is in the story is we want someone to pretend they have something "tempting" to steal. You're asking the reader to pretend he has something valuable to protect and then asking them if they trust it more with an atheist or christian!

Yes that's exactly what I asked.

There's a giant assumption built into the question...it's the assumption that you can't trust an atheist with your sack of gold (or whatever you hold valuable).

And that's exactly how you've responded.

Why else are we pretending we're carrying a sack of gold???! Have I just finished collecting from my stable of leprechaun hookers?!?!

There you have it. Only the insatiable perversity of an atheist would know there was a niche market for leprechaun hookers.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I was thinking that even if I were an atheist ... I'd trust the one who believed in a Creator.

Yes, but that's only because you have an underdeveloped ability to put yourself in someone else's shoes, due to your Christian privilege.

 

[JGG]

Technically, I didn't claim they were all completely unwarranted. I answered the question "what stereotypes do you think atheists hold about Christians" or something like that. We don't have to go farther than our friend who says "Science can take a hike" to extrapolate that there's at least an anti-science fringe out there.

Apart from that, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

So, are you saying that generally Christians are:

Ignorant of their own beliefs?

Anti-science?

Only moral Christians because of fear?

Bigots?

and/or

Under the belief that they are morally superior?

 

[JGG]

Double post

 

[durangodawood]

OK, lets change the terms a little bit:

You are also informed that the atheist and the Christian in each cabin also happen to be participants in this thread.

Now what.....?

 

[Chesterton]

Yes, but that's only because you have an underdeveloped ability to put yourself in someone else's shoes, due to your Christian privilege.

I think my ability is just fine. Why would you say that? And what is Christian privilege? I've never heard of it.

 

[Chesterton]

So, are you saying that generally Christians are:

Ignorant of their own beliefs?

Anti-science?

Only moral Christians because of fear?

Bigots?

and/or

Under the belief that they are morally superior?

I just answered the guy's question. He didn't ask for stereotypes we think are false, or true, or partially true. He just asked what stereotypes Christians think atheists might have.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes that's exactly what I asked.



And that's exactly how you've responded.



There you have it. Only the insatiable perversity of an atheist would know there was a niche market for leprechaun hookers.

If you hadn't noticed, I never actually answered the OP. I had considered it, then I decided upon a much tamer approach.

If there's no assumptions built into the OP, if you weren't directly playing into the "dangerous amoral atheist" stereotype, then why add the sack of gold at all? Why not just have the person walking through the woods and need a place to stay for the night?

We both know why, it's as inherent in the OP as it is in your own responses. You want people to confirm (and thereby justify) your own shallow, ignorant, baseless, naive, and offensive biases.

I honestly thought the whole thread was just an attempt at trolling to begin with. It wasn't until you and Tree both started replying that I realized you were serious.

 

[Chesterton]

OK, lets change the terms a little bit:

You are also informed that the atheist and the Christian in each cabin also happen to be participants in this thread.

Now what.....?

Then the traveler is safe in either cabin because everyone wants to be seen in the eyes of other people as living up to the basic moral code we all share.

 

[durangodawood]

Then the traveler is safe in either cabin because everyone wants to be seen in the eyes of other people as living up to the basic moral code we all share.

Who said anything about seeing the outcome?

Its a random local atheist vs a random local Christian, outcome unknown!

Who's it going to be???

 

[Chesterton]

If you hadn't noticed, I never actually answered the OP. I had considered it, then I decided upon a much tamer approach.

If there's no assumptions built into the OP, if you weren't directly playing into the "dangerous amoral atheist" stereotype, then why add the sack of gold at all? Why not just have the person walking through the woods and need a place to stay for the night?

We both know why, it's as inherent in the OP as it is in your own responses. You want people to confirm (and thereby justify) your own shallow, ignorant, baseless, naive, and offensive biases.

I honestly thought the whole thread was just an attempt at trolling to begin with. It wasn't until you and Tree both started replying that I realized you were serious.

I had to check, but you're the guy that called me a "cornhole". That's your tamer approach?

No, he had to have gold because the scenario's about trusting a stranger you know (almost) nothing about. There needed to be something to lose, that's all.

 

[Chesterton]

Who said anything about seeing the outcome?

Its a random local atheist vs a random local Christian, outcome unknown!

Who's it going to be???

IP addresses aren't hard to come by, especially in the case of a crime.

ETA: Oh I see. I'm assuming the traveler's in the thread too.

 

[LostMarbels]

This is inspired by Tree Of Life's "Persuasiveness of the Christian Community" thread. I didn't want to hijack that one.

It's a hypothetical scenario I think I read in a book a long time ago - you're traveling to a town, but you're having to walk a long way through the woods to get there. It's snowing, temperature's below freezing, and you have to stop for the night. A man you came across earlier told you there are two cabins up ahead with warm fire and food. You asked him about who lived in them, and he replied that he didn't know either of the occupants, except it was known that one man was an atheist (cabin A), and the other man was a Christian (cabin B). That's all you know. Another thing, you're carrying a bag with your life savings in gold coins, so if you're going to sleep you'd like to be able to trust the person who's offering you hospitality not to murder you and/or steal your money. Which cabin would you go to?

I find this offensive in its very connotation... Is a 'known' Christian somehow safer and more trustworthy than an Atheist? :o

Well praise Jesus for that judgement....

What does it matter if you lost your life's savings, or your life anyways? There are soooo many things I find wrong in this. Coming from a man that sleeps in homeless camps, invites drug addicts, drunks, and even the 'horrid Atheists' into his home, I find this completely against what I accept as 'Christian'. My faith is in Christ. There is not one thing any of them can do to me against the will of my God. They cannot touch me without my God's permission. Maybe they need your money, and God needs you to be their blessing. Maybe you need to sit with them, suffer with them, show them compassion, and be God's love in their life. "BE" God's light.... don't just preach it.

I'm going to cabin "A". Chances are he might have a cold beer to go with the chow, and he won't berate me for stepping outside to smoke a cigg.

 

[madaz]

Which cabin would you go to?

There isn't enough information to make an informed decision.... so I would choose the atheist cabin.

Simply because I feel that we would have more in common when it comes to conversation.

 

[jacknife]

You're not claiming all atheists are paragons of virtue, are you?

no i am saying it is impossible to know the mind of another, the fact you are claiming to be able to do just that is unsettling.

 

[JGG]

I just answered the guy's question. He didn't ask for stereotypes we think are false, or true, or partially true. He just asked what stereotypes Christians think atheists might have.

I see.

But later in the thread you said:

Seems like most of them (atheists) agree with most of the stereotypes. Was hoping they'd be a bit more generous, but oh well. It's a very tiny sample of people from both sites though.

Why the disappointment that atheists agree with stereotypes that you yourself have unapologetically contributed to? If you don't know which are true or false why are you expecting atheists to be generous? Maybe they're just agreeing with accurate observations.