All Activity

Emotional insecurity or immaturity perhaps.

This thread actually STARTED as a self-pplicing "when is it rude for an atheist to bring up atheism when we're having doctrinal discussions?" At least that was the intent. And I think we reached a consensus that there are very limited circumstances in which it is polite and on topic. For example, if we're talking about whether the Trinity is Biblically accurate, it might be best to back off. Maybe point to a couple of contradictory verses and say you don't see a way to resolve them without doing damage to one or the other. But for the most part "Jesus Christ is not God because there is no God he was at most a troublemaking itinerant preacher with a massive ego" is not a viewpoint that is either welcome or polite. However, if we're talking about the historical development of the Trinity doctrine, your Christianity or atheism is largely irrelevant. Facts is facts. Sometimes revealing yourself as an atheist [or reminding people] is a constructive way of demonstrating a lack of bias. Do Christians need to tithe? Studied that one back and forth. And I can honestly say I have no dog in the fight. No, Christians do not need to tithe. That is the Biblical answer. And it is as close to ironclad as you're going to get. The Biblical God doesn't expect a tithe from Christians, never asks for one. He DOES, however, expect generous giving, commensurate with your faith, your understanding, your love, your outward devotion to speaking the Word, and your commitment. If that says 10 percent to you, give it. If it says 8, fine. Maybe it says 25. OK. But it's on you. There's no floor, and the ceiling is only 100 percent because math. All of which is to say, for the wondering atheist, is READ THE ROOM. More later.

I was going to start a new thread when I checked and found this one of Raf's which is along the line of what I had been thinking. If I'm getting off topic though of the original reason for this thread, just let me know. Seth Andrews has a YouTube channel called The Thinking Atheist where he usually takes calls. I listened to one recently where he talks for quite a while about finally having had enough of family members trying to get him to change his beliefs back to being a Christian. After years of telling them he's done discussing this with them, he recently received an article about there being fewer atheists because evolution is being proven to be wrong. He was in a fighting mood for the first part of that video - quite interesting what he had to say. Anyway, Andrews has had his share of aggressive Christians calling in or making comments on his videos. I myself have no family members who still believe in God, so this has not been an issue for me since I deconverted. But, I'm interested in what insight others might have as to why some Christians become frustrated, angry or uncivil with atheists. And since this is not a one-way street, I'd like to hear the reverse side as well - why atheists might become frustrated, angry or uncivil with Christians. (I heard John Loftus admit that he has become more jaded over the years when responding to apologists.)

Right, but he welcomed all comments. Taoists and Buddhists are atheists. Beleef is not part of these traditions as I understand them.

Ah yes, the Disclaimer. An atheist is someone who does not believe in God or gods. That's it. You can be atheist and still believe in ghosts, spirits, astrology, crystals, reincarnation, past life regression, witchcraft, chiropractic, bitcoin and the comedic genius of Rob Schneider. You just can't believe in gods. Now, context is critical, because most of the time atheists will have chucked it all out: There is no baby. It's all bathwater. But you can't guarantee that. The only thing you know about any atheist is that he or she does not believe in gods. That said, oldiesman's question was aimed at me and therefore properly worded for my sake. But if anyone else were to read it, the response might be different.

Atheists are not precluded from an experience or conscious awareness of the transcendent, the mystical, the “spiritual.” Nor are they precluded from “a walk endowed with power from on high.” I use these terms and phrases for convenience, in spite of their insufficiency.

This thread is now unlocked and the original post and one reply have been restored. You all are welcome to continue provided comments stay within the rules for GSC.

Reposting the "Questioning Faith" forum rules, which apparently require a reminder. Emphases added.

You bring a depth of insight and conviction in your posts about atheism Raf. You wrote, "The MUCH more fair thing to do is recognize that regardless of faith, an ALS diagnosis is more often than not a death sentence with an execution date within two to five years." But that’s when a Christian will likely want to hold onto their faith tighter than ever working hard to build it to the level of Abraham's in Romans 4, “Who against hope believed in hope…And being not weak in faith…He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith...And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.” The fact that, unlike Abraham, God makes no promise of healing in the bible is just a moot point. Some will hold onto their faith if they think there's even a slightest chance that God will answer their prayer. Either way, when no deliverance comes, the idea may surface that it's because there is no god but then along come all the “possible” reasons why prayers weren't answered (websites actually give 5, 6, 7, 10 and even up to 20 of them). IMO, It's like . It's better (healthier) just to not play this guessing game anymore.

I submit that part of what you're missing with this excellent, respectful question actually seeking an honest response without a hint of being judgmental or dismissive is that the process is not an immediate or instantaneous one. Personal experience of the miraculous. Honestly, I think we call things miracles when they're not. We call our intuition Revelation when it's not. Most of the "personal experiences with the miraculous" I had easily and neatly fall into the category of "you know, coincidence explains that just as easily as divine intervention." A few fall into the "you know the other person involved was lying, right?" Some of it was "you made that up" and "there is a mountain of evidence contradicting that claim and zero evidence supporting it." What was left, for me, are stories OTHER people told. And I honestly respect their integrity. But I don't believe there was anything supernatural at work. No matter how cold it was (who has ears to hear). I remember thinking at ROA 89 that LCM had bugged the RV we had rented for the week, because there he was on stage every night addressing something we were discussing in private hours earlier. He must have bugged us! And, admittedly, he easily could have. BUT: isn't the more likely explanation that hundreds of people, maybe even thousands, at ROA 1989 were all talking about and thinking about the same controversy that had just decimated the ministry? Did he really need to bug a bunch of nobodies from New York (and Texas) to find out what our complaints and arguments were? A few months back, Mike posted a thread trying to explain the "paucity" of miracles. It was a stunning admission right there in the title of the thread. Folks had to argue whether the evidence really supported a "paucity" of miracles. I just sat there thinking, "finally, someone admits it." ... On a semi-related front, if ANYONE on GSC has cause to think I am biased against his religious beliefs, it's got to be Mike. The utter contempt I had for him as a human being cannot be overstated. I often joke that half of GSC's rules were developed to combat the ways I talked to and about Mike. My personal favorite is we can no longer distort the person's screen name for comedic effect. That's because I used to call him "Smikeol," like he was Gollum from Lord of the Rings protecting his precious PFAL. Ah, the good old days. One thing I have noticed about Mike though: he follows the GSC rules. He may annoy [some of] us [more than others], but he knows the difference between arguing his position and arguing against people. I respect that. And my comments on his thread would have absolutely derailed the conversation you all were having in Doctrinal (which is to say, "of course there's a paucity of miracles; there's no God to perform them!') So I had to start a parallel thread here in the atheist subforum OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE CHRISTIANS WHO HAD EVERY RIGHT TO DISCUSS THEIR FAITH WITHOUT MY INTERFERENCE. And I bring it up now because Oldiesman, your question was the best example I've seen in a long time of conducting a respectful inquiry despite holding a [presumably] polar opposite point of view from the people of whom you are inquiring. So thank you for that.

Stephen Hawking had ALS for 55 years. Augie Nieto had it for 18. The average life expectancy after diagnosis is two to 5 years. My sister lived four years and 11 months after diagnosis. So Hawking, the atheist, outlives the majority of Christians praying for a miracle by a factor of anywhere between three and 11, if we're being charitable. I know, that's a MEAN thing to say. And no one wants to hear it. But it also unfairly singles out one person's experience and tries to make an example of it. The MUCH more fair thing to do is recognize that regardless of faith, an ALS diagnosis is more often than not a death sentence with an execution date within two to five years. It doesn't care what you believe or how much "faith" you put in science. It's there to kill you, period. But what about the exceptions? They're exceptions. Statistics tells you to expect them. My sister's ALS was not God's fault. Stephen Hawking's ALS was not God's way of giving a prominent atheist as much time as divinely possible to change his mind and see the light. How do I know this? Because I literally just made that up! This idea of clinging to the possible as likely just because it hasn't been ruled out is not an honest approach to the facts. I suspect the reason some Christians think atheists are angry at God is that they recognize, if they were in our shoes, that they would be angry at Him (too, from their perspective). And I could see where that would make sense. Dozens of GSers prayed for my sister and contributed to ALS research on her behalf (THANK YOU ALL AGAIN FOR THAT). Did God just not give a flip? Too busy keeping the evangelical atheist scientist alive to give a sick nobody one or two more years of a quality life before she watches herself deteriorate painfully with the knowledge that eventually she will basically drown in her own saliva? Hell, I would be mad at Him too! But it's not his fault for the same reason it's not Allah's fault it's not Zeus' fault it's not Odin's fault it's not Horus' fault it's not Joe Pesci's fault. None of those guys exist. Well, maybe the last guy, but I'm half convinced he's a fictional character being played publicly by an amazing actor. My son has autism because he was born with a brain that misfires in the area of communication. Happens to a lot of people. Happened to my kid. Would have happened if I never believed in God. Would have happened if I were the right reverend so-and-so. It does.not.care.about.my.religious.beliefs. That's kind of the sad part about realizing you're atheist. You can't pray for people anymore, and let me tell you, that hurts. Because we WANT to do SOMETHING. "I'll pray for you." It sounds like something. And to the person praying, it is. But as it's written in James, if I'm hungry, and you say "I'll pray for you," um. Thanks, but you haven't flipping fed me. I think that's in James. I give a lot more as an atheist. Not to churches, but to real causes. Like clean water. Medical research. Feeding programs. Journalism associations. First Amendment defenders. I could pray for them, but that would not pay a single bill. I foster kids. I could pray for them, but that wouldn't rescue them from an abusive home, comfort them when they're having nightmares. Feed them. Play with them. Teach them. Clothe them. Take them to their first baseball game or swimming pool. People need to do that.

Thank you for your post oldiesman. It can happen when someone begins to have questions about God (and consequently his word as well), for whatever reason, decides to look for logical answers both within and outside of the bible and eventually discover those answers give enough reasons for them to permanently change their view that a God exists. I know I've said that my "decision" to no longer believe in God happened one particular evening, but I had been seriously questioning for a while before that night over a couple of issues. I think the fact that I did go back to the bible afterwards to see again what it had to say was a sign of my wanting to confirm that decision. And with time, the confirmation came and continues to come as I learn more.

Chockfull had written, "I had a relative die of MS. Just saw his widow. He was supposedly healed of MS by someone praying years ago. Did that happen? Or did it just go into remission for 20 years? I don’t know." ~~~~~~~ That's the thing oldiesman, why are there these questions? Why can someone not know for sure if God was responsible for Chockfull's relative having 20 years without the symptoms of MS? A Christian might answer, "I know by faith that it was the result of prayer," and this would give enormous comfort to the Christian. When the MS returned and there's medical proof that the person died because of the MS, then the questions return as well - why did it return? If there were prayers said, why were they not answered this time? The faithful Christian will most likely think of a reason that again brings some comfort. An atheist doesn't go through all that. It's simply, we're so relieved the symptoms went into remission. Sadly, the MS returned which is not an uncommon thing to happen. Which scenario is preferable is a personal decision.

Kim Cattrall Star Trek 6 Iman George

Rutger Hauer? George

This all is well said and well taken. The (let's say) hundreds of bible claims and stories, bring a once-believer in miracles to come to the place of not believing ANYTHING spiritual? Not to mention that personal experiences of the miraculous? It doesn't work with that VPW "mathematical exactness and scientific precision" but they do happen don't they? All of that should be thrown in the trash can like it was all a silly accident? All comments welcome, thx.

Or else it was the plan all along? If so, logically then "he who planned it all along" must be keeping track of everything. In contrast from the non-spiritual side of things, it all happened by happenstance?

Exactly.

Providence, Rhode Island???

Great post Raf about a lot of things. This abridged copy of it is to say thanks a lot for your support (see underlined parts). The video clip above was part of another one called My Top 7 Favorite Hitchslaps. I thought that name was very apropos for what he does in this one. He's so good at not mincing words. I love it. Thanks for sharing it. Your Jonah adaptation was precious. Unfortunate though that your main character drank the Koolaid. You wrote, "As unbelievers, we are not criticizing God in this story, because we are not asked to identify with him." I couldn't get your point at first because even as an unbeliever, I'm thinking h*ll yes, God deserves to be criticized big time. Then I'm pretty sure I got it - it was up to Abraham to tell God what He could do with his insane command. That would make him someone in this story worthy of emulating.

This thread is just over a month old and I wasn’t sure how to navigate the topic when I started it. Even though I have a bit of a better idea now, there are still foggy patches where I don’t know where I’m heading. Sometimes, I’m all over the map going in too many directions. I know there have been some glitches, but I really appreciate what posters have shared. Along with discussing other ideas, discussing scriptures has given me the chance to - see how I think differently about them now - consider how letting go of bible passages make life better, freer - ask questions - find more grounds to support my decision to be an atheist - learn from how different people view them - amend my POV as I gain new insight from others - even notice that I can get angry or judgmental at times. All good stuff so thanks to everyone.

I almost forgot! (It was a long post.) Your treatment of Jonah is gold.

“…according to the book Born Again to Serve by the American Christian Press, Pillai and Wierwille worked through every orientalism in the Bible from Genesis through Revelation over a six-week period in 1953.” —K.C. Pillai’s Wiki page Six weeks? Worked through every orientalism in… the… Bible!?!? EVERY? In six weeks? Yep. The ”work” checks out.

There you go reading what's written and letting the book speak for itself. So arrogant. :) So my adaptation of Jonah gets nothing?

Ouch, bad scene man, bad scene. Wanted Dead or Alive The Hitcher Blind Fury