Originally posted by knightmeisterIt's more like telling a group of already healthy eaters about the evils of greaseburgers, and then some of them succumb to curiosity and try McDonald's.
Someone can accept of reject Christ without being evangelised. Whether they are evangelised or not makes no difference , ultimately it will be their own spiritual relationship with christ that cuts the mustard.
Think of it like healthy dieting. If someone spreads the word about healthy eating then that's good and it will make a massive difference t ...[text shortened]... ir own right is not a good reason to question the wisdom of spreading the word on good eating.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhich may or may not be true , but you cannot deflect from the fact you have not put forward an argument to support your position. Examine the statement below and you will see in front of you a statement not an argument. You have not said why it would lower their chances.
You wouldn't know an argument if it hit you in the face with a Bible.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Then what's the point of evangelism? If what you say is true, then presenting somebody with the choice to accept or reject Christ can only lower their chances of being saved."
--------DrScrib-----------------------------------------------
You see I might not know an argument if it hit me in the face with a Bible , but since you have not "hit me in the face" with so much as a bookmark then it's hard to ascertain.
Originally posted by knightmeisterI really don't think that answers my question.
Anyway, I could see why an off-putting upbringing could help shape a certain attitude toward theists, but could you explain how that is supposed to fully support an absence of theistic belief? ----------------------------Lemon-----------------------------
I'm surprised you ask. Human beings are very good at forming belief systems based on bad/good e ...[text shortened]...
Getr someone early enough and you can convince them of anything (or turn them off anything)
I would just like to know how much you think evidentiary considerations play a role in explicit atheism, on average (my labeling it "explicit" is only to denote that the person has been introduced to theistic notions and models; that's all I mean by "explicit"; I just want to separate it from cases of atheism in which the person, for example, has never even entertained or been introduced to theistic notions).
Originally posted by LemonJelloI think evidential considerations play a big role. People are entitled to ask what evidence there is. I'm not saying that there are no genuine atheists and I also don't think that it's clear cut. Someone like Dawkins for example seems to have a strong rational foundation for his atheism and it's a well thought through position. However , I still detect an emotional element to it and he seems to go too far and be a bit too angry about theism sometimes , tarring everyone with the same brush. He had religious parents did he not?
I really don't think that answers my question.
I would just like to know how much you think evidentiary considerations play a role in explicit atheism, on average (my labeling it "explicit" is only to denote that the person has been introduced to theistic notions and models; that's all I mean by "explicit"; I just want to separate it from cases of athe ...[text shortened]... e person, for example, has never even entertained or been introduced to theistic notions).
I also don't see how atheism can form with no exposure to theism at all since by definition it is a reaction against theism.
Originally posted by knightmeisterAnd what about Muslims? Surely you admit that they are deluded? You don't think that they are mostly correct and that there is simply some things they are not yet aware of?
My feeling is that Atheists seem to treat the whole issue as if they have cornered the market on objectivity and rationality. They have not. I do not consider you deluded or irrational. My view is that there's just things that you are not aware of yet in your life. I object to being labelled "deluded" as a Theist although I can understand how it might look if you don't believe.
And where do you think their beliefs come from? The devil? Parental indoctrination? A desire to believe? Cultural pressure? God?
The points I am making here concern not all Atheists but just some of them. Your points hopefully do not encompass all Theists either.
A significant proportion of them as your idea is based on a perception that there is an over-representation of anti-theist atheists in this forum. Of course you chose to ignore other statistics such as education levels, chess playing ability and the fact that we bother to even be in this forum.
BTW- I think the way you were treated was outrageous and has everything to do with "religion" and nothing to do with Christian spirituality.
It has to do with the fact that humans have a natural tendency to stick with their 'own' and discriminate against anyone who seems different. I fully admit that the discrimination I have experienced for being Christian is far less than the discrimination most Christians experience from members of other denominations and other religions.
I have also been lucky that I have experienced more positive discrimination than negative when it comes to race.
Originally posted by knightmeisterAtheism is the natural state of a human being (as I am sure you are fully aware). Actively announcing and promoting atheism, obviously requires exposure to theism.
I also don't see how atheism can form with no exposure to theism at all since by definition it is a reaction against theism.
You yourself are atheist for every God except the Christian one, yet you don't attribute that atheism to some terrible childhood experience.
Lets look at all the anti-Muslim people in the US. They clearly don't like Muslims and the two main reasons for that would be the threat of terrorism, and a dislike of people who are different. But to take your mind reading idea and claim that all anti Muslims are non-Muslim because they must have been brought up as Muslims and experienced a reaction to it is simply nonsensical.
Originally posted by twhitehead"But to take your mind reading idea and claim that all anti Muslims are non-Muslim because they must have been brought up as Muslims and experienced a reaction to it is simply nonsensical."-------------------------------------whitey-------------------------------------------
Atheism is the natural state of a human being (as I am sure you are fully aware). Actively announcing and promoting atheism, obviously requires exposure to theism.
You yourself are atheist for every God except the Christian one, yet you don't attribute that atheism to some terrible childhood experience.
Lets look at all the anti-Muslim people in the US. y must have been brought up as Muslims and experienced a reaction to it is simply nonsensical.
I have never claimed what you are implying. I have always said that my idea does not apply right across the board to all Atheists , only that there seems to be an over representation of Atheists who have had bad experiences at the hands of a religious upbringing.
Are you sure it is not you who are mind reading? I am not seeking to de-bunk Atheism as purely a reaction against religious parents . I'm just saying it can be a significant factor with some.
Originally posted by twhiteheadAnd what about Muslims? Surely you admit that they are deluded? You don't think that they are mostly correct and that there is simply some things they are not yet aware of? ------------------------------------------------------whitey-------------------------------------------
And what about Muslims? Surely you admit that they are deluded? You don't think that they are mostly correct and that there is simply some things they are not yet aware of?
And where do you think their beliefs come from? The devil? Parental indoctrination? A desire to believe? Cultural pressure? God?
[b]The points I am making here concern not all Athe ...[text shortened]... y that I have experienced more positive discrimination than negative when it comes to race.
I DO think they are mostly correct actually. Islam and Judaism are very similar and Judaism forms the ebdrock of Christianity. My view is that Islam only has 75% of the jigsaw puzzle and the other 25% is very important and they are not aware of it. I think the very thing you think I don't think. LOL
People that believe in God can be very intelligent. I just happen to believe that those that have come to a logical conclusion of no need for a God to exist for things to be the way they are...well, we're simply more intelligent in THAT regard. For many people, the world and it's mysteries and phenomena or too hard to grasp...so God explains it. We're too intelligent to believe that we are nothing when we die. It's kind of pathetic, actually, that we're the only animal that we can think of that is so self-centered as to believe that all other animals are below us and that we will live forever. C'mon...let's be serious.
But anyway, I could talk about this all day long...so I won't. I was a Catholic, a "Christian" (protestant), a "non-denominational Christian" (same junk), Agnostic, and now Atheist. I am happy to have arrived here and have no regrets. I'm clear minded. I'm free from that stuff...and I arrived at it after allowing my questions to muster and gaining more and more education. I'm sorry buddy, but I would say the average atheist is probably statistically smarter than the average believer. No offense.
Here's my question: Although the burden of proof is on believers (and I could totally back up that argument), let's say I had to prove the bible is false or that God isn't real. Let's say I build a time machine that can catch images of the past but not manipulate it. Let's say we go back to Jonah's time and the huge fish or whale never comes by...Jonah is never swallowed. Let's say we also see that the red sea wasn't parted. We also see that Noah didn't build the ark. Let's say one or two characters in the bible didn't even exist or died way before the bible says they did anything. Let's say we also see Jesus but no miracles. We could go on, but you get it. So, having seen all this proof, would you still believe in God or in the Bible?
If you answer "yes"...you're deluded. The difference between a deluded christian and a more rational christian or a deluded christian and most atheists is this: Given actual proof...actual evidence, I and all of my atheist friends would believe...it wouldn't be belief, in fact. We'd KNOW God existed...given proof. The deluded Christian can have all of the Bible's inconsistencies and flaws pointed out, all the evidence for evolution rammed down his throat, and take part in that time machine experiment and yet...that deluded christian would still believe.
The God delusion indeed.
P.S. the inconsistencies and proof of evolution already exist...but I'll work on that time machine for you 🙂
Originally posted by kastIf ! If and only if, you can provide the time machine to proove that whatever did not happen, then can you say that there are deluded Christians. But you cannot. So there are NO DELUDED CHRISTIANS.
People that believe in God can be very intelligent. I just happen to believe that those that have come to a logical conclusion of no need for a God to exist for things to be the way they are...well, we're simply more intelligent in THAT regard. For many people, the world and it's mysteries and phenomena or too hard to grasp...so God explains it. We're too in ...[text shortened]... already exist...but I'll work on that time machine for you 🙂
So whats the point of your post. Just to say IF this and IF that and IF the other ?
It seems your response is aimed angrily at the "ifs"...so here's a simpler version:
BECAUSE most christians believe the bible is accurate and a historical account of facts and not fiction
BECAUSE most christians are OK with all of the crazy stories and inconsistencies of the bible and of the bible's account of a personal, intervening God
BECAUSE most christians think everyone else is going to hell
BECAUSE most christians REBUKE evolution and sometimes natural selection all together
BECAUSE some (few? many?...some for sure) believe dinosaurs and humans ran around at the same time...some time within the last 10,000 years the Earth has existed...
MOST CHRISTIANS ARE DELUDED.
One little if....please...just one if, ok?
IF any of the above statements could be said of "all" christians, then ALL christians are deluded.
Thank you. I feel better having cleared that up.
Actually, I'd also like to finish at that. Not that I "won" or "lost" or anything. I just run into this conversation so much as an atheist that I think as far as redhotpawn is concerned, I'm gonna try to remain peaceful and try not to piss people off.
Have a nice day.
Originally posted by kastIF any of the above statements could be said of "all" christians, then ALL christians are deluded.----------kast--------------------
It seems your response is aimed angrily at the "ifs"...so here's a simpler version:
BECAUSE most christians believe the bible is accurate and a historical account of facts and not fiction
BECAUSE most christians are OK with all of the crazy stories and inconsistencies of the bible and of the bible's account of a personal, intervening God
BECAUSE most chris ...[text shortened]... I'm gonna try to remain peaceful and try not to piss people off.
Have a nice day.
Good job only some of them are then eh?
Originally posted by knightmeisterSo what about all the things they believe that you believe are false? How could 'deluded' not be an appropriate word for those beliefs?
And what about Muslims? Surely you admit that they are deluded? You don't think that they are mostly correct and that there is simply some things they are not yet aware of? ------------------------------------------------------whitey-------------------------------------------
I DO think they are mostly correct actually. Islam and Judaism are very si ...[text shortened]... ry important and they are not aware of it. I think the very thing you think I don't think. LOL
Originally posted by knightmeisterAnd you missed my point.
I have never claimed what you are implying. I have always said that my idea does not apply right across the board to all Atheists , only that there seems to be an over representation of Atheists who have had bad experiences at the hands of a religious upbringing.
In the US there seems to be an over representation of a-Muslims who have had bad experiences at the hands of terrorists.
You are then taking that as evidence that their lack of faith in Islaam is a direct result of their bad experiences.
Where I come from most people are theists and as a result all atheists would have a bad experience at the hands of a religious upbringing. Some would even have some good experiences too. Your desire to use those facts to explain why we are atheist looks more like it is based on your failure to accept that there are reasonable logical reasons for being atheist than it is on common sense.
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere's not as much difference between Islam and Christ as you might think but the main difference is regarding forgiveness and sin. However, I do not think that just because someone has a different belief that is wrong that therefore they are deluded.
So what about all the things they believe that you believe are false? How could 'deluded' not be an appropriate word for those beliefs?
I am a socialist , if a man says he is ardent capitalist I may disagree with his philosophy but to me he is not deluded he's just wrong. However , if a capitalist tells me that CO2 has been released into the atmosphere by commie aliens who want to bring down the US by means of global warming then "deluded" would be a more appropriate word.
Do you think everyone who does not share your beliefs "deluded"?