Fellow atheists, especially the ones who used to be believers, which approach works best?
The liberal sensitivities of those like myself, or the tell-it-like-it-is directness of those like Desiree?
Either way, Christians explain their viewpoints to me all the time and of course all I can do is make up my own mind. Basically, your defense to hypocrisy isn't a good one.
As one christian poster in R&S wrote, "I don't take advice from a person who does not know God."
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
You can only hope they become unlost down the line.
do you want them to try and get you to convert to their religion? i doubt it, so why would you do the hypocritical thing and do it to them?
Actually I was first a skeptical christian in my teens due to peer pressure from christian friends who had, of course, been brainwashed by their parents. It took a couple of years of my persistent and logical questioning before my "friends" labeled me the devil and we went our separate ways. So I cannot say I ever was really your typical intellectually dishonest christian as most are. I went through an Atheist phaze before, going though a few years of life and getting closer to death, I realized life was a lot more brighter if yah allow just a dash of hope to shine through...and that was when I figured I was agnostic..I hope there is an afterlife where I will be with my family, friends, past pets.
But don't worry, I will not condemn you to an eternity of pain and suffering for not believing the same things I do, or for denying my "truth" that life is better with a dash of hope tossed in.
I have been having this argument with every kind of christian for the last 10 years...in that time I have not "converted" a single one of them...many times I have influenced younger minds who were asking all the questions and being told to sit down, shut up, and to accept flapping lips as proof of truth by the christians in their lives...I answered all their questions and provoked them into thinking for themselves and to keep asking questions until arriving at an acceptable answer (acceptable to an open minded, sane person).
Intellectual dishonesty is one of the prices christians pay for placing their faith in a book...no matter how you phrase the tough questions they will find ways to dance around actually giving you an answer.
I have tried both forms of deliberations you spoke of, tried it the respectful way, tried it the disrespectful way...tried to mix a little of both. The problem is that there are, obviously, different kinds of christians. Just like in politics there are basically 3 kinds of christian...far right - moderate - far left...each type should be treated differently and could be treated differently, if all three types could be dealt with in separate groups.
Unfortunately they all seem to perch themselves in the same places and at the same times...so you cannot mock and ridicule the extreme beliefs of the Fundies without also offending the moderates and the lefties, even if you truly only meant for the Fundies to be offended.
If you take the nice tone and try to be respectful for the moderates, the fundies will attack you even harder in the attempt to provoke you into acting like they do, like a hate filled demon. If you take the direct approach then you risk offending the moderates and lefties who are your best chance if you are looking for civil discourse. I suggest you pick one and stick with it...or do like me, do unto each individual christian as they do unto you...treat me with respect, I treat you with respect, mock my beliefs, I mock yours.
While we are attempting to bring these people around to our point of view...they are doing the same. The difference is that they truly do feel as though they will avoid an eternity of pain and suffering if they do not follow the books orders to go out and convert. And since most of them are sincere, though deluded, in their beliefs they all also truly think god will give them brownie points in heaven for conversions.
Their incentive to stick to their guns is much greater than ours.. it does not matter if they recognize their own intellectual dishonesty, their everlasting soul is more important to them than being seen as a fool in the eyes of people they could truly care less about...unless they see opportunity for conversion, they will make you their best friend for a time...it typically takes a month for them to pass their righteous judgement upon you, deciding if you are worth the effort or if you are unconvertable and a waste of their time...in that case, they become as cold as fish to you, proving their intentions were selfish in nature and the friendship always was a scam.
Ten years of dealing with intellectual dishonesty has me firmly placed in the "give NONE of them any respect" category as there are NO christians who respect my right (or yours) to have my own beliefs and to live a life free from insane people telling me to live my life as they do...or else!
Directness worked better on me.
In trying to bring religous people to your point of view, you are doing exactly what they do when they try to shove their beliefs down our throat. They try to save us and we try to save them... is that it? In my opinion, people need to be left alone with their spiritual convictions (or lack of them). It's like trying to force a horse to drink... when it gets thirsy enough... it will look for water :-)
The difference between atheist and religious people is atheist knows what he is talking about, religious people only talk about what they heard their preacher, pastor or whom ever say and many times they don't understand it. They are sheep.
To each his own and leave me alone!
For example, if you were to point out that the Biblical God advocated genocide for foreigners, the believer simply recognizes that God's ways are sometimes unfathomable to mortal minds, so what's your problem? But if you point out that the idea of God "answering" prayer in a "yes", "no" or "later" manner is indistingushable from random chance, the believer can't provide an explanation, so he is more likely to see your POV. Similarly, pointing out the historical conundrums over predestination and free will due to the inherent incompatibilities of "omniscience" an "omnipotence" is more likely to provoke understanding than quibbling over which genealogy of Jesus is the correct one. Make it your "problem", not their "stupidity", and you are more likely to get a compassionate ear.
Just remember, in Christian eyes, you don't have a 'point' other than 'SATAN'!
#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |