What Atheists wish Christians knew about them

[xxoo]

On the other hand, you'll never know how many people you drive farther away from Christianity. If I had been raised in a Christian community that took the Bible less literally, I might never have run so far from it.

[M30USA]

On the other hand, you'll never know how many people you drive farther away from Christianity. If I had been raised in a Christian community that took the Bible less literally, I might never have run so far from it.

 

Exactly. Jesus said the same thing. He came to be a "sword". He would draw those in who are prepared to receive his word--while driving away those who are of the world and want no part of it. The Word of God is like a wedge. It forced the heart to become softer OR more hardened.

 

I'd rather you reject (currently) the true Word than accept a lie and false version of the Word like is done in so many churches just to get people in.

Edited May 14, 2013 by M30USA

[xxoo]

Exactly. Jesus said the same thing. He came to be a "sword". He would draw those in who are prepared to receive his word--while driving away those who are of the world and want no part of it. The Word of God is like a wedge. It forced the heart to become softer OR more hardened.

 

I'd rather you reject (currently) the true Word than accept a lie and false version of the Word like is done in so many churches just to get people in.

 

Nothing I haven't heard before. My roots are your home.

 

It's like a language of my youth. I used to witness, myself.

[M30USA]

Nothing I haven't heard before. My roots are your home.

 

It's like a language of my youth. I used to witness, myself.

 

What would you witness to people?

[Eve]

TFW,

 

I know it looks as of I'm "not making any headway", but here's my opinion on that:

 

Oftentimes we don't see the result of seeds planted for years, even decades. And by the time (hopefully) many of these people wind up accepting Christ, they won't even remember me--assuming I was even the deliverer of the message. So I've learned to never judge the job I'm doing by how much headway I appear to be making.

 

I believe it's better, ironically, to NOT be "relevant" to people. As Paul Washer says, the world doesn't need more "relevant Christians". Jesus' kingdom is not of this world and the world is passing away (1 John 2:15-17). It's better to just present the Gospel and Scripture to people boldly and without fear of how counter-cultural it is. Then, down the line, if the person ever does consider it, I can almost GUARANTEE you it will be because of the bold teachers who presented it without watering down that they wind up believing--and not because of relevant, worldly teaching. If people want a way out of the worlds system, why give them more of the same crap? (And I think each of these posters deserve more than a few posts back and forth-- at least until they firmly understand what is being presented to them, even if they currently want no part of it.)

 

I think because of your aspergers you are willing to defy social norms. It is interesting to observe as I have not previously met anyone with aspergers who could actually be spiritual, never mind Christian.

 

I seriously thought this was not possible due to how your brain is wired.

 

Take care,

Eve x

[serial muse]

haha that's a good one!

 

No sorry my posts are a bit scattered right now (haha i'm in like 3 time zones in a week). I quoted you and I liked what you said about planting seeds. I do think that many atheist vs. Christian debates get quit heated and instead of both sides learning more about each other, most walk away more entrenched about what they did not like about the other group's side.

 

Not just for you but for all (me!) that get into debating with atheists. It can be frustrating b/c you give all of these examples and arguments and they don't make much difference. Don't get discouraged. When you feel frustrated keep two things in mind: 1) In the on-line environment you're fighting with one arm and one leg behind your back. Our lives are the greatest testimony for Christ. So I guess what I'm saying is don't let it frustrate you because all you can give over a board like this is text, logic, and reason...but witnessing a life of a man or woman following Christ (that does it right) is a much more powerful seed we can plant with a few lines of text typed by a bunch of anonymous blips on the Web. So this is also for the internet warriors that proselytize their belief or non-belief. Preaching online is not that effective unless the audience is motivated to learn. When you attach a claim to your name (for Christians we claim Christ) that makes a statement. People are watching...and I think atheists will agree its the hypocrites of Christianity that are a primary deterrent from respecting our faith. 2) If you are doing that correctly and are still not making any headway, pray and seek the Lord about his opinion about the track you are on. He may be saying that door is closed. It can be hard to accept that instruction from God, but it is needed at times. But the corollary of that set up is that when we debate we have to keep Christ in mind and before each new post ask ourselves am "I" typing this (I, the spiritual man that walks in the fruits of the spirit) or is my ego typing this (Let me not take time to see what they said, but instead hurry up and come up with a rebuttal.......sccceeeeccchhhh breaks Ego is now in charge of the debate. Now the debate comes about I have to defend Jesus and my ego is the barometer for assessing that. When ego gets involved walls go up, anger ensues, and frustration builds...then we get in trouble

Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town and in his own home.” And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith

 

This illustrates the amazing ability of Jesus to keep his ego under lock and key. Here he is in is on home town (where reputation matters most) and they rejected his claim to be the Messiah. He did not debate with him, he only went to those with faith and focused there.Because of their unbelief he did not do many works there.

 

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them,

 

I think you are missing the point of the OP here, and honestly you and M30USA are actually veering off-topic with this sort of thing.

 

You are mistaken in thinking that the hypocrisy of certain Christians is the reason that atheists reject religion. Certainly it may be the reason for a lack of respect for those particular Christians. But it doesn't follow that living a more idealized "Christian" life will compel those who simply don't believe in a supreme being to start believing in one. It just means that those people will be less likely to find you annoying for the relentless proselytizing, which is basically the same thing as a lack of respect on your part.

 

But I do find it funny, M30USA, that you call yourself a biblical literalist, because despite your extensive scholarship along your own particular favorite lines of inquiry, there really is no such thing. As any unprejudiced scholar (with no axes to grind and nothing particular to prove, such as that he's right) of the subject knows, the varying texts even in the biblical canon contradict themselves, and of course there are numerous "apocrypha" that have been considered and sometimes rejected (depending on who's asking and what century it is) for candidacy in the canon that would further muddy the waters, plus there are numerous translations of the canon that call into question actual meaning of key passages often used in biblical arguments - and in the end, what you are left with is, indeed, interpretation.

 

Which basically means that you're choosing what to believe. Now, I personally have no problem with that, and I am not aggressive about challenging others' beliefs, but I do have a problem with the hypocrisy inherent in saying that atheists define morals as though they were individual gods (actually a contradiction in terms) and then turning around and doing the precise same thing yourself, only you call it divine inspiration. Some are favored (you, obviously) and some, hey presto, aren't (those who disagree with you).

 

To an atheist, M30USA, that suggests that you consider yourself God -- you are asserting, and have done many times in this and other threads, that you are one of the few who know the real truth, and you repeatedly assess this by an incredibly convenient metric: whether or not they agree with you.

 

Call it divine inspiration, but understand that to an atheist it is a contradiction to assume that you are the one who has been inspired, but that those pastors in those churches you decry are false leaders -- you are assuming that they aren't divinely inspired, and that is nothing more nor less than ego. You will never get an atheist to agree that you know something that others aren't privy to, simply because you say you know it. That is utter nonsense, to an atheist, not because she believes she is a god, but because she thinks you aren't one.

 

And yet by the same token, you will keep arguing that point, over and over and over again on these threads and in these boards and in your life because well, why not, what you believe isn't really disprovable, and actually the vast majority of atheists aren't interested in taking you apart - they just want to be left alone. The problem is when you won't do that, as in this thread.

 

So have at it, because you will anyway, but be aware that it doesn't look much like you're revealing anything other than your own massive ego and inability to see past your need to be right. If that's not hypocritical than I sure don't know what is.

[TheFinalWord]

TFW,

 

I know it looks as of I'm "not making any headway", but here's my opinion on that:

 

Oftentimes we don't see the result of seeds planted for years, even decades. And by the time (hopefully) many of these people wind up accepting Christ, they won't even remember me--assuming I was even the deliverer of the message. So I've learned to never judge the job I'm doing by how much headway I appear to be making.

 

I believe it's better, ironically, to NOT be "relevant" to people. As Paul Washer says, the world doesn't need more "relevant Christians". Jesus' kingdom is not of this world and the world is passing away (1 John 2:15-17). It's better to just present the Gospel and Scripture to people boldly and without fear of how counter-cultural it is. Then, down the line, if the person ever does consider it, I can almost GUARANTEE you it will be because of the bold teachers who presented it without watering down that they wind up believing--and not because of relevant, worldly teaching. If people want a way out of the worlds system, why give them more of the same crap? (And I think each of these posters deserve more than a few posts back and forth-- at least until they firmly understand what is being presented to them, even if they currently want no part of it.)

 

Sure I can see what you're saying. I agree to an extent. The gospel is good news and I have not seen that posted at all in this thread?

 

But I think that a heart has to be receptive to seeds. If you can tell people's hearts are hard, than the seeds do not sink into the soil (rocky ground).

 

For myself, what Christians told me in the past made no difference when I received salvation. It was God who opened my heart, and then I was receptive. What opened my heart to that was that I did not have to be perfect with a perfect understanding of the bible to receive salvation. God took me just the way I was. It was the experience of God's love that was life changing, not theology, philosophy, etc.

[TheFinalWord]

I think you are missing the point of the OP here, and honestly you and M30USA are actually veering off-topic with this sort of thing.

 

You are mistaken in thinking that the hypocrisy of certain Christians is the reason that atheists reject religion. Certainly it may be the reason for a lack of respect for those particular Christians. But it doesn't follow that living a more idealized "Christian" life will compel those who simply don't believe in a supreme being to start believing in one. It just means that those people will be less likely to find you annoying for the relentless proselytizing, which is basically the same thing as a lack of respect on your part.

/QUOTE]

 

I think it is a bit off topic, but it is dealing with how Christians interact with atheists which seems to be at least somewhat related to this thread haha but perhaps you are right it is a bit off topic, but that seems to happen after page 1 of nearly every one of these types of threads here.

 

Yes, you are right I don't think its the reason anyone rejects God. As a former atheist, it was my personal choice to reject Christ. But it helped when I saw the hypocrisy of other Christians to justify my position.

[BetheButterfly]

What I liked about this video and the purpose behind starting this thread was to get beyond the stereotypes

 

It's a great idea. However, some Atheists think badly of Christians and some Christians think badly of Atheists. However, it was a great try!

 

I liked how the pastor and Carter were able to come together and respectfully acknowledge a difference in their beliefs.

Me too

 

At the end of the video the pastor says how appreciative he is that Carter did not try to ridicule his beliefs or try to convert him, to which Carter simply replied that there was no need to. I loved that.

Yeah that is very admirable.

Just because we hold different beliefs does not mean that we should draw a line in the ground and hurl insults at each other, or that we should concentrate only on the bad in others while ignoring the good.

100% agreed!!!

 

This thread wasn't supposed to be about arguing about different beliefs, it's about respecting our differences.

That is a beautiful purpose for this thread. Thanks and much appreciated.

 

I'd love to see a list of what Christians wish Atheists knew about them, address some of the stereotypes. Lets open it up to all beliefs.

That's a great idea! I can't do that right now though. Blessings (or warm positive thoughts!)

[stillafool]

Could you explain how someone can hate something that he thinks does not exist?

 

 

This is what I don't understand. Have you ever noticed that Atheists want to constantly talk about God but they do not believe in him? When most people don't believe in something they no longer question it but move on and forget about it. They don't start threads or continue to find ways to disprove it they just move on. I think Athieists do believe in God otherwise why do they keep talking about him.

[soccerrprp]

This is what I don't understand. Have you ever noticed that Atheists want to constantly talk about God but they do not believe in him? When most people don't believe in something they no longer question it but move on and forget about it. They don't start threads or continue to find ways to disprove it they just move on. I think Athieists do believe in God otherwise why do they keep talking about him.

 

Good point. As an agnostic (or deist, still trying to figure this out), I suspect that there is a combination of disdain for the religious institution and mockery of a God that is inconsistent in any and all behavior (unless you go back to the bible to convince yourself otherwise).

 

I would think that atheists are trying to rub your nose in the concept of the existence of god by forcing believers to come to grips with a wide variety of observed and intangible concepts, behaviors (lack thereof), premises that simply do not add up to reveal the existence of a deity at all. And it's easier to do that by having the believer question someone that he/she is convinced must exist.

 

So, you believe there is a god? Then why does he do A or B or C? Why isn't he A or B or C? For the believer, he will need to address these questions and failure to adequately do so, then begins the questioning of the existence of said being. There's no logic in arguing against the existence of a god w/o attacking what the believer says he believes exists. So, as a non-believer, I attack "him" or "her". Something identifiable and the center of debate.

 

Besides that, Christians cannot prove the existence of God either.

[umirano]

Fear. Often fear of something not understood translates to "hate"

 

You're dodging the question, not answering it. How can someone fear something he doesn't think of as an actual entity?

[umirano]

This is what I don't understand. Have you ever noticed that Atheists want to constantly talk about God but they do not believe in him?

I hope you don't think that's an actual argument. You are, I assume, not believing atheism holds any water. Yet you talk about it. That doesn't make you a (closet) atheist.

 

When most people don't believe in something they no longer question it but move on and forget about it.

Hardly. There are many reasons to talk about a concept, or mention it in a discussion, even if you do not believe in it. If people really acted like you seem to think is consistent, then we would never ever discuss controversial subjects. Which kind of turns everything on the head... Not sure what you really tried to prove here...

 

They don't start threads or continue to find ways to disprove it they just move on.

That would be stupid, someone might miss a chance to base his world view on actual experience and not on crazy stories.

 

I think Athieists do believe in God otherwise why do they keep talking about him.

Do you realize you just violated Carter's point (the third I believe)? If I were a person close to you I think you'd annoy me a great deal by thinking you know what I really believe. Now I'm in the comfortable situation of being thousands of miles away and not knowing you. This gives me the calmness to understand that you probably just try to put yourself at ease by saying "Oh, they might still believe in God, yeeh, I'm right in believing in him!"

[umirano]

They don't start threads or continue to find ways to disprove it they just move on.

 

I haven't seen anyone disproving god. Show me, I'm curious.

 

I think you confuse doubting, questioning the usefulness and accuracy of such a proposal with the refusal of the existence of one or more gods.

[umirano]

For people who have lost their sarcasm radar

I guess you're talking about me

 

Pie (a sweet member who has been on this forum apparently since 2009) is using a form of writing that is actually appreciated in many circles. Sarcasm is a form of satire.

Yeah, turns out though that pie wasn't all that sarcastic, from what I read in pie's posts as the thread chugs along.

 

"sat·ire [sat-ahyuhr] Show IPA noun 1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc."

Satire | Define Satire at Dictionary.com

Thanks. I'd humbly remark that you can only use irony if you actually don't mean what you say. Pie's later posts and likes let me doubt at least how ironic his first post really is. I agree though that my language at times is a bit rougher than what most people still appreciate.

 

I also regret that my apology to pie2 was removed. And I repeat it here. Pie2, I am sorry for having offended you (or others).

 

Not all writers place winky smiley faces or an exposed tongue smiley face at the end of their sarcastic "work of literary art", but Pie did. That helps literary people like myself to understand the fact that sattire/sarcasm is being used.

Well, some people make excessive use of smileys precisely because what they think of as satiric isn't always identifiable as such to others. Or because they safely want to play the grey area...

[soccerrprp]

Okay...so if I were to tell you that we know everything about God, you say that's condescending and arrogant. But if I tell you that we DONT know everything about God and that his revelation is gradual, you say that's wishy-washy, etc. in doing so you have created a impossible expectation where no matter what anyone says, and no matter how God operates, you refuse to be satisfied.

 

NO NO NO. The burden is not on you. The question isn't whether you exist. The question is whether god exists. Your explanations will ALWAYS be inadequate b/c you CANNOT demonstrate the existence of a deity. Only the deity can.

 

I, personally, have NO expectation of you to satisfy any of my questions b/c you are incapable of doing so. Like I said earlier, still waiting for HIM/HER to make it easy for us to believe that HE/SHE exists. As omnipotent as believers claim he is, he has a tremendously poor track record of revelation as far as I see it.

Edited May 15, 2013 by soccerrprp

[soccerrprp]

Fear. Often fear of something not understood translates to "hate"

 

Interesting. So, how do you explain the unquestionable HATE that believers have long exhibited, demonstrated towards their fellow man since the beginning of Christendom? So, do you fear your god? As traditional Christians are taught to do? So would that explain why christians have been guilty of some of the most atrocious, dehumanizing crimes in humanity? Because they feared AND did not understand.

 

How do you explain the HATE that exists among christians even today?

[Robert Z]

This is what I don't understand. Have you ever noticed that Atheists want to constantly talk about God but they do not believe in him? When most people don't believe in something they no longer question it but move on and forget about it. They don't start threads or continue to find ways to disprove it they just move on. I think Athieists do believe in God otherwise why do they keep talking about him.

 

For me it becomes an issue when it affects things like science curriculum, personal freedom, the right of choice, the right to privacy, and on, and on, and on.

 

More and more people are sick and tired of religion screwing up reality for the non believers. If people would keep their faith in church and live by it, instead of expecting everyone else to live by it, you wouldn't see nearly so much vile and contempt for religion.

[soccerrprp]

For me it becomes an issue when it affects things like science curriculum, personal freedom, the right of choice, the right to privacy, and on, and on, and on.

 

More and more people are sick and tired of religion screwing up reality for the non believers. If people would keep their faith in church and live by it, instead of expecting everyone else to live by it, you wouldn't see nearly so much vile and contempt for religion.

 

I have a slightly different opinion and not so antagonistic.

 

I love this stuff. Neither the non-believer nor the believer can adequately make their case. But the burden of proof is really on the believer, isn't it? Unfortunately for them, we have nothing to go on but from their behavior and practice and that has been a very POOR example indeed to gauge whether a god exists or not.

 

...live by it? I know very few, if any believer who has not conveniently tainted his faith with the worldly desires, machinations and motivations that provide them with equal parts of hedonistic pleasure and dismissive disregard for human charity.

 

Unfortunately, even among the believers there is no consensus to what is acceptable or unacceptable within their belief system.

Edited May 15, 2013 by soccerrprp

[Robert Z]

I have a slightly different opinion and not so antagonistic.

 

I love this stuff. Neither the non-believer nor the believer can adequately make their case. But the burden of proof is really on the believer, isn't it?

 

And that is irrelevant because unless God shows up in a flaming chariot, it is a matter faith - and I can have faith in invisible scary skeletons under my bed if I wish. So one can't point to faith and say it means anything to anyone other than the believer. There is no use or need for debate. The burden of proof is on the believer and there is no proof. End of discussion. Trying to prove a belief only further disqualifies the position and shows the logic to be hopelessly flawed, which doesn't inspire faith in non believers.

 

Unfortunately for them, we have nothing to go on but from their behavior and practice and that has been a very POOR example indeed to gauge whether a god exists or not

 

Again, it is irrelevant. No example of good behavior is proof of anything. And we can point to as many atrocities as anything good, that comes from religion.

 

...live by it? I know very few, if any believer who has not conveniently tainted his faith with the world desires, machinations and motivations that provide them with equal parts of hedonistic pleasure and dismissive disregard for human charity.

 

Unfortunately, even among the believers there is no consensus to what is acceptable or unacceptable within their belief system.

 

Except to interfere with the lives of others based on their faith.

[Roadkill007]

Although I was raised in a Catholic setting, I've never believed in God (or really any deity I suppose). That said, I've never considered myself to be an atheist, because to me, what I'm saying if I'm saying that I'm an atheist is that I KNOW there is no God, and I've always felt that there's a huge difference between knowledge and belief. Thus, while I may never have believed in God (or a god or gods or w/e... basically a being of a higher order/plane), I've always considered myself an agnostic, as I never felt anyone could possibly "know" that there could be or not be God (or a god or gods or w/e... basically a being of a higher order/plane).

 

 

 

#1. We have morals too.

 

This is one that's incredibly annoying that constantly comes up when people find out I don't have a faith. It's as if they expect faithless people to all be serial murderers and rapists, because hell, what's stopping us?

Just because we're not answerable to a higher power doesn't mean we don't want to have a positive impact on this world while we're still here.

 

 

#2. You don't know us better than ourselves.

 

Thankfully I don't get this one as often. Maybe because technically agnosticism doesn't outright reject the possibility of a higher being and a spiritual world. It does sound like it would piss me off, though (the reaction ofc)

 

 

#5. We don't all disbelieve because something bad happened to us.

 

Nothing bad has happened to me that made me reject my Catholic upbringing, and thankfully, no1 has ever suggested this after finding out my lack of faith. That's a pretty patronizing assumption

 

 

#11. Not all of us are anti-theists

 

These "anti-theist" that he talks about that many religious people are wary of do exist, yes. However, religions have their own version of this as well... There's nothing wrong with just talking about different beliefs and such, but it's a pain when you are dealing with someone who is simply trying to push their point down your throat without really listening to what you're saying. For example (not an example of religious fanatics, but of people who shove their beliefs down your throat), while most vegans/vegetarians I've known are quite nice and don't go out of their way to push their beliefs on others, there are some that I've met who were pretty fanatically obsessed with converting everyone they come in contact with, and do so with very little concern for real discussion or counter arguments. Similarly, I've met atheists and theists who do the same thing, and I think we can all say that such experiences aren't pleasant. It IS rather rude though, to assume that all faithless people will act like that, though.

Edited May 16, 2013 by Roadkill007

[soccerrprp]

And that is irrelevant because unless God shows up in a flaming chariot, it is a matter faith - and I can have faith in invisible scary skeletons under my bed if I wish. So one can't point to faith and say it means anything to anyone other than the believer. There is no use or need for debate. The burden of proof is on the believer and there is no proof. End of discussion. Trying to prove a belief only further disqualifies the position and shows the logic to be hopelessly flawed, which doesn't inspire faith in non believers.

 

 

 

Again, it is irrelevant. No example of good behavior is proof of anything. And we can point to as many atrocities as anything good, that comes from religion.

 

 

 

Except to interfere with the lives of others based on their faith.

 

Then why even have a discussion on whether there's a god or not at all. FUTILE.

[Roadkill007]

Jatheism doesn't make a judgment upon knowledge. Theism refers to belief, and therefore, atheism means simply to be "without belief." I'm an atheist, but I don't claim there is no god, just that I do not believe in one. I don't identify as an agnostic because I know what my beliefs are, and I know I'm not on the fence on it.

 

For me, my atheism stems from the fact that no theological claims have convinced me there is or could be a god. I don't have knowledge that there isn't one, but I don't need that. I need knowledge that there IS one in order to believe.

 

I guess I always find it confusing when people say they don't believe in any deity, but that they aren't an atheist. Because that's what atheism is. Then again, people are free to label themselves whatever way they see fit.

 

 

 

Well, I had something to contrast myself to, as I've known quite a few atheists throughout my life, and that's the one point I'd often find in contention. They say lack of proof, I say proof would be impossible within our scopes. So yea, while I might be broadly an atheist, I consider myself specifically a philosophical agnostic.

[Feelin Frisky]

Calling your self an atheist is like defining yourself as a non-bread truck driver in a world full of mostly poor bread truck drivers. Why even go there is if's truly irrelevant? High everyone I don't drive a bread truck. I got beef with driving bread trucks. I don't think highly of anyone who drives bread trucks. Fck you and the bread-truck you rode in on? It's a natural progression. So unless one is a crusading anti-theist it make no sense to say, that God thing? Count me out. sometimes the whole world can be wrong and only seemingly you right, but it never serves to get caught up in defining ourselves by what you're not.

[man_in_the_box]

It's just that there's many more theists than atheists that atheists experience a lot of misunderstanding and condesendence towards them. If it would be reversed than very likely were would be discussing why atheists don't "get" theists int his thread. That's just how humans are - everything different gets put in a little window for convenience....

 

On the internet though I've often mingled in various communities with large percentages of non-theists. Most of them are indstinguishable based on their religious convinctions and fine people but because of the excess there's always a few rotten apples that felt the need to insult or harass me solely for me believing in a deity of some sorts (ofcourse when the subject was being discussed. This also has happened in real life.