What do Christians think of Atheists?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes. I think people who claim to be atheist are just misclassifying themselves. They have really never thought it through.

In my experience, atheists thought through their beliefs and disbeliefs a lot more then your average theist.

It's also not surprising to me in that context, that several survey's show that, in general, atheists seem to be more informed on various religions then the followers of those religions.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How would you know, what other people have thought through?

Isn't it obvious?
Whenever someone disagrees with his beliefs, that someone "didn't think things through".

Because, obviously, it is utterly impossible to "think things through" properly and then come to a different conclusion..

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

They haven't thought through that which is unthinkable.

How do you think about the unthinkable?
Seems like a contradiction in terms.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How does one know anything? I believe that is exactly problem with atheism.

Atheism isn't about knowing anything.
It is about disbelieving a very specific something.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, we didn't clear that up (but if you want to, we could do that); the article says, between the lines, that the (supposed or not) belief in Satan is good for our judging other things, our judging of other people. Again, read the last paragraph, especially the very last sentence.

No...it doesn't say that anywhere in the last paragraph...nor in the last sentence. It doesn't say that on the lines, next to them, or between them.

The reason I know this isn't just because I read it...but because you can't point to any part of the entire article that even mildly suggests that belief in Satan has any positive benefits whatsoever. To the contrary...the entire article is how such beliefs distort judgement and cause people to act poorly.

Since that's what the article is about...one can only surmise that the "subtext" or the message "between the lines" is that we'd all be better off if no one believed in Satan at all.

 

[Nithavela]

I personally believe that God doesn't follow inflexible rules but that he judges each atheist individually and takes all relevant factors into full consideration before rendering judgment.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[Larniavc]

Satan indeed. Many psychologists would tell you that the belief in existence of Satan is good for you.

No they would say the opposite. A beleif in a benevolent god IS good for you.

But a belief in Satan or demons stalking the land is bad for you.

Which makes sense, if you think about it.

 

[Larniavc]

google a bit.

Aw well done, champ!

Finally. And as I promised I shall never mention again how you used Gargamel, Frankenstein and Mr Hyde as examples of atheist scientists you had heard of in many of your previous threads.

 

[just a believing guy]

Since that's what the article is about...one can only surmise that the "subtext" or the message "between the lines" is that we'd all be better off if no one believed in Satan at all.

Mind you, you yourself have agreed that it might be possible that the writer says that it is possible that Satan is real. So, how would it be possible to be better off if no one believed in Satan at all, if Satan actually existed?

 

[just a believing guy]

No they would say the opposite. A beleif in a benevolent god IS good for you.

But a belief in Satan or demons stalking the land is bad for you.

Which makes sense, if you think about it.

Your evolutionary friends would disagree a bit, I suppose. It was the caution before the Bad that made humans champions of the Earth, wasn't it?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Mind you, you yourself have agreed that it might be possible that the writer says that it is possible that Satan is real.

Might be...it's not made clear. The writer's personal beliefs aren't a part of the article.

So, how would it be possible to be better off if no one believed in Satan at all, if Satan actually existed?

Did you read the article? Because it answers that question in detail.

No one can prove that Satan does or doesn't exist. They can prove that the belief in Satan negatively distorts your view of people...in several bad ways.

 

[just a believing guy]

Might be...it's not made clear. The writer's personal beliefs aren't a part of the article.



Did you read the article? Because it answers that question in detail.

No one can prove that Satan does or doesn't exist. They can prove that the belief in Satan negatively distorts your view of people...in several bad ways.

So we cannot but call it a draw. It would be naive to think that the writer isn't a scientist.

 

[Larniavc]

Extrapolating means reading betwen the lines.

That is not what extrapolate means.

 

[just a believing guy]

That is not what extrapolate means.

Not in a strickt sense.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So we cannot but call it a draw. It would be naive to think that the writer isn't a scientist.

???

Call what a draw? Your claim was specifically that...

Belief in Satan is a good thing...many psychologists think so.

Not only did you fail to prove that belief in Satan is a good thing, but you also failed to prove that many psychologists think so.

You're 0 for 2 on this.

 

[just a believing guy]

???

Call what a draw? Your claim was specifically that...

Belief in Satan is a good thing...many psychologists think so.

Not only did you fail to prove that belief in Satan is a good thing, but you also failed to prove that many psychologists think so.

You're 0 for 2 on this.

0 for 2

The article ends with the writer's statement that Satan exists. The very last sentence. All the studies mentioned notwithstanding.

So, how can you be better off by believing that something doesn't exist, when it's clearly stated in the source you are using that such an entity exists? You just close your eyes and pretend it doesn't exist in the very very credible source you are using?!

 

[Ana the Ist]

That is not what extrapolate means.

Larn, help me out here...

"Just" made this claim...

"Belief in Satan is a good thing, many psychologists think so."

This is the article he used to support that claim.

The Psychological Power of Satan

Am I crazy? Does anything in there support that claim?

 

[Ana the Ist]

0 for 2

The article ends with the writer's statement that Satan exists. The very last sentence. All the studies mentioned notwithstanding.

No...no it doesn't.

So, how can you be better off by believing that something doesn't exist, when it's clearly stated in the source you are using that such an entity exists? You just close your eyes and pretend it doesn't exist in the very very credible source you are using?!

Read the article.

 

[timewerx]

That's what I was asking about when I asked, "do you think that's an accurate way to understand reality?"

No, of course not. I'm only telling one way we can convince unbelievers by a stronger demonstration of our faith.

An accurate way to understand reality is that you still need to see reality from a perspective governed by sound reasoning, logic, and an unbiased perspective.....even unbiased by religion and the desire for self-preservation. A scientific approach with an open mind than blind faith.

 

[Larniavc]

Larn, help me out here...

"Just" made this claim...

"Belief in Satan is a good thing, many psychologists think so."

This is the article he used to support that claim.

The Psychological Power of Satan

Am I crazy? Does anything in there support that claim?

Nothing in the article remotely supports JABG's claim.

In fact it says the opposite.