To the many believers who attempt to be 'militant' in their approach to spread your 'gospel,' I have a few questions:
1) You know 'gospel' means 'good news,' right? Who wants good news delivered with insults or loud voices? If someone converted as a result of your intimidation factors, empty threats, or impossible dares, would that even count as 'faith' within your religious views anyway?
2) What are you hoping to accomplish? With an aggressive style of verbal combat, you only force people to build up a wall and stop communicating effectively. Attacking someone will naturally create an opposition and defensive mentality. Is that your goal?
Just as I've challenged my fellow atheists to be political and civil in their approach, I am challenging believers to do the same. My time with preachers like Dr. Bruce Prescott, Bill Burk, and Dr. Barry Creamer, are classic examples of how to further our knowledge and debate without hate.
At our core, all people share the same ultimate goal--to be happy. When you start to ruin that for others that disagree with your worldview, you're not being very a convincing example of how they would like to live, so you're actually being detrimental to your cause.
Just keep that in mind moving forward. Happy debating...
10 comments:
i've had so many people knocking at my door recently trying to have "a conversation" about religion that it got me to thinking about this topic again.
it led me to a google search that led me to your site. i happened upon your 10 for Atheism post and read through the whole thing plus comments. great read.
i became an atheist during my Confirmation. raised Catholic b/c of my mother w/ a Jewish father, religion was a frequent topic of conversation w/ my friends. so at the age of 14 i began my newfound belief. it was fun to debate my friends, and became even more fun during college Religion class (unfortunately, my professor barely passed me w/ a 'D').
it's been great to see more and more people accept atheism over the years. it is alarming, as i can tell by reading the aforementioned post, that most people still cling to the theistic belief system. it should not be surprising, however. consider:
1. most of the country considers marijuana dangerous, while legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco are substantially more dangerous.
2. most of the country still believes in the creationism. most even believe in the Genesis version.
3. most people in America are NASCAR fans (just kidding, kind of).
4. people need something to believe in, beyond this world. this is something atheism cannot offer.
5. most people are not free thinkers. this is not specific to religion, it is universal about most people. very few people i know think to question anything that they "know".
the collective mindset of a people is difficult to change. it takes time. the vast majority will be slow, or simply won't, change because they won't pay attention to what's happening around them. and that's fine.
i, like you, think it's a shame that people won't be able to enjoy the freedom to LIVE that atheism affords us. having said that, i won't be knocking on anyone's door to let them know that.
It's interesting that you came to the realization of atheism during your Catholic confirmation! Maybe you just accidentally paid attention instead of just going through the motions like most. I just wrote a book titled "Baptized Atheist" about something very similar in the Baptist world.
In that book, I take on the topics such as 'group psychology' that you speak of, and really get in to why people think they need religion. There are several evolutionary biological reasons religion is so successful. One day we'll outgrow it.
Here's my book: http://www.amazon.com/Baptized-Atheist-David-Smalley/dp/1578840082/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1287185907&sr=8-1
i had been paying attention for a while, but it all came to a head while watching the bishop run through his shpeel (sp?) and bop individual kids on the noggin!
it made me realize the silliness of the entire process, the entire catholic religion, the idea of a ressurected jesus, and finally god himself.
not that all happened during that day. the initial spark was created during my confirmation, the rest came over the following weeks and months. i had to go to the library (remember those) and dig through the CARD CATALOG for books on atheism. i mostly skimmed, looking for ideas that i could easily comprehend and that matched my previous assumptions. i really needed some validation at the time. no one i knew was an atheist, and it was very reassuring to know that many great thinkers are atheists.
keep up your efforts David. it's a lot easier for a young and curious mind to explore atheism today. your site, and i'm sure others, are a great resource for the reassurance that was difficult for me to come by when i was young.
Thank you Matt. I don't debate to convert believers. I debate to bring awareness and encourage closet atheists to come out. I appreciate that.
you both post about 'religion' as an explanation for your atheism. One can have experienced lots of religion and church and still have never met Jesus. you reject that which you do not know.
Religion was man's invention- Jesus rejected it, too.
Laurie, you make two interesting and provocative assertions, but you don't tell us what you mean.
What does it mean to "meet Jesus" in the first place. What does it mean to "meet" him outside the religious realm? Why do you say that Jesus rejected religion? You imply that you have "met Jesus". How exactly did that happen for you?
David and Matt both experienced what many if not most children in this country experience: early, more or less intense indoctrination by their parents and other trusted elders in the beliefs and dogmas of a particular religious sect.
The milder levels of intensity of this indoctrination involve kind-hearted sharing of beliefs that the parents and elders treasure, teaching by example, by actually displaying in their lives the virtues they teach their children.
The violent levels involve blatant brainwashing, exploiting fear of punishment, demanding unhesitating assent of faith in whatever dogmas parents and elders promulgate, insisting on unquestioning obedience to what they call "God's Commandments".
Both Matt and David posted about their real-life early religious involvement. They did not imply that 'religion' (why the scare-quotes?) explains their Atheism. I went through an equivalent early experience. Of course I had to realize that religious elders possess none of the authority they claim, but even more, I experienced greater and greater well-justified confidence in natural explanations for everything that happens in the world.
Matt wasn't entirely accurate. David silently corrected him. Most people only "think" they need something to believe in beyond this world. Our finite presence to its self-revealing vastness is infinitely valuable on its own. This is the nature of Matt's and Davids Atheism - and mine.
Everyone:
David's book is excellent. You can trust his facts and his conclusions. He is wise for such a young man. He would rather not say a word than utter a deliberate falsehood. Who will benefit the most from reading it? As he says above: those readers who recognize their own inchoate thoughts expressed and focused by his words. Some will find their whole personal outlook changed by the end of the book and be free for the first time from fears and imaginary worries that held them bound for so long. It's good reading for everyone. I enjoyed it immensely.
One more thing, Laurie:
You say that Matt and David (and I, I presume) "reject that which you don't know." What do you mean by that? True, we reject patently false claims about the nature and significance of Jesus. If there is a "true Jesus" that we don't know about, I don't see how we (or anyone else in our ignorant shoes) can "reject" him. The only true thing we can say about what we don't know is that there's an awful lot of it. Then we try to remedy that as far as possible whenever those things actually enter our lives. Again, it would be helpful to know how the Jesus we don't know about entered your life for you to "meet" him in the first place.
Everyone:
Did I mention that David writes with respect for others? I should have. It's another thing that makes his book such a great read!
First, "meet Jesus"- isn't a literal, we went up introduced ourselves and shook hands. It means your heart has been changed so you can accept Christianity(even though you've never seen anything to prove it). It isn't something that can be easily explained but it is why "true Christians" are Christians. By true Christians I mean the ones that didn't do it just because your parents did.
Lets face it most Christians are ignorant but not in the way you are seeing them. I get mad at most Christians because they read the parts in the bible they want to know, and skip over the hard parts. Sadly most Christians are NOT good examples of Christianity. Most Christians just inherit the title, they don't read or pray or really do anything(in relating to Christianity) outside of Sunday morning church. They skip over the love people, and go straight to people that sin and don't ask for forgiveness, ask Jesus into their heart.... are going to Hell. So they figure if they yell at them they can scare anyone not Christian into doing what they want them to do(because supposedly its faster). But in reality Christians are supposed to show the love of Christ, and pray that God will open up, anyone not Christian's heart so that they can accept Jesus. But again love gets pushed to the back burner in most Christians minds.
Really to understand the REAL Christianity, the one that actually follows the bible(the one source we have), you have to throw out anything you have seen other Christians do and read the bible(and talk to "real" Christians).
Lindsey
@Lindsey
Please define the characteristics of a REAL christian. I would like to know what one is.
@Lindsey
Please define the characteristics of a REAL christian. I would like to know what one is.
Post a Comment