Usually I just coast through life, letting some Christians around me have their beliefs, being silent through their grace, not shooting down all of their dogma as they spew it out, so that I can live my evil little life in peace. But last night, after reading through thread I had posted on this fine, enlightened, forum, my brother-in-law decided that it was time to start arguing his points. I initially took the position that we should agree to disagree, being that, ultimately, all of these positions boil down to a matter of faith. But he refused to see my faith as valid. (I'm afraid I didn't win any points after that when I mentioned that I thought that an outbreak of ergot poisoning in 33AD caused some very weird hallucinations.)
Yeah, I asked for it. Here. On this forum. Where people will use a more enlightened view of argument. Hatrackers that are religious seem to value others opinions, even those that do not agree with them.
But why is it, every time that a devout Christian learns that I, who they thought was a very moral person (and I am), am athiestic, they make it their mission to convert me? I know it's their doctrine, but, boy is it annoying! And don't get me wrong, I don't go around declaiming their religion, or proudly wearing my athiest badge. (Which I know is kind of ironic in this rant.)
I love all of you trying to save my soul (another thing that I don't believe in), but come on. I wasn't looking for a fight with my in-laws! Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Hey, be glad they don't start with the boiling oil and the noose and all. Back when I was an atheist I thought a couple of times I was going to have to run (like Stravinsky after the opening of Rite of Spring) and jump out a bathroom window to escape an angry mob.
[ August 23, 2003, 10:07 AM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Alucard... (Member # 4924) on :
Sorry E,
But you will have no such luck having me trying to convert you. But I would have a pint of Guinness with 'ya. Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I had that sort of experience in Jr High during a memorable Thanksgiving dinner. Now I just sort of nod and agree and all. But I'm totally faking it.
[ August 23, 2003, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Synesthesia ]
Posted by Geoffrey Card (Member # 1062) on :
If it makes you feel better, they do the same thing to Mormons. Only difference is, we can spend two years of our lives getting back at them Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
I figured as much, Geoff. I had a very good LDS friend in High School that I miss very much, and he never seemed to think that my faith (as an athiest) was invalid.
You Mormons are all right! Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
It's almost worst when someone finds out your of a different faith and then tries to act as if they're totally fine with it but keeps glancing at you and always take 5 seconds to respond to anything you say. I'd rather get in a debate since I have enough confidence that I'd win.
Of course, if people are really tolerant of each other's beliefs that's the best outcome, and it seems to be more common than one would think.
quote:Only difference is, we can spend two years of our lives getting back at them
Hobbes Posted by Toretha (Member # 2233) on :
I get a few coversion attempts, being that I do believe in God but have absolutely no religion. Seems to encourage people. It's annoying, but generally not worth the fight. Mostly the easiest way to handle it is say "I'll think about it" and then leave it alone.
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
A while back, while I was unemployed, I got cold-called by a Jehova's Witness. She asked if I had some time to talk. I checked my calendar, saw that I had nothing going on for the entire day, pulled up my list of Bible contradictions, and said, "Sure. Why not?"
A half-hour later, she's squirming to get off the phone.
Jeff
[ August 23, 2003, 07:24 PM: Message edited by: Jeffrey Getzin ]
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
quote:You Mormons are all right!
you heard it, folks. i never want to be contradicted again. the atheist has my back.
well he said all of us, didn't he?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Only difference is, we can spend two years of our lives getting back at them..."
You know, this is why setting up an athiest/agnostic mission is starting to appeal to me....
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: A while back, while I was unemployed, I got cold-called by a Jehova's Witness. She asked if I had some time to talk. I checked my calendar, saw that I had nothing going on for the entire day, pulled up my list of Bible contradictions, and said, "Sure. Why not?"
A half-hour later, she's squirming to get off the phone.
Jeff
If she felt it was going nowhere, Jeff, she may have simply been trying to end the discussion. Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
Well, porcelain girl, now that you mention it....
Last night another brother in law started a tirade on LDS! I had to say that it all boiled down to faith, and Mormons had the faith that they were right, and Baptists had the faith that they were right.
He then stated that I, being an athiest, was neutral to this discussion. As an outsider, he continued, I can see why it would confuse you. Then he started saying that the BoM was full of contradictions. I had to laugh at that.
And his bible is not? After so many translations, second hand accounts, and, well, contraditions?
So, yeah. I had your back. Posted by seriousfun (Member # 4732) on :
I was having this talk with one of my employers yesterday...
She and her husband are 7th Day Adventists, I, a non-religious seeker (for want of a better term).
I was telling her about OSC, and some LDS friends. She has non-LDS relatives in UT that she visits on a yearly basis, and was telling me that, as much as they would like to escape the crime/smog/whatever of LA, they wouldn't move to UT because the Mormans are "just kinda nutty".
Another employee and I have stopped talking religion, after he made it clear that his religion (something fundamentalist Christian) isn't faith, but they are chosen, and theirs is the One-True_Religion.
I'm still happy not choosing any Big-Box religion.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Speaking as a Christian, I wouldn't feel right about actively attempting to convert you. I just believe it's something one would have to come to on their own.
The best I could do is to try to live my life correctly (often failing) and to answer questions asked of me to the best of my ability.
You can't preach true salvation as a human, you can only point to the beginning of an individual's path.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
It is my experience that those who our loudest in their demands to convert others, are actually seeking to bolster their own faith.
And those quiet ones who do not try to convert me are devout, true and pious. They are the ones whom debate would seem to be easiest to win, but who I can not argue with.
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
quote: If she felt it was going nowhere, Jeff, she may have simply been trying to end the discussion.
Exactly. She was so stymied that she simply gave up. Man, that was so much fun. For every question she asked, I had both an answer and a question she could not answer.
Of course, she didn't stop believing, but perhaps she'll act like less of a know-it-all the next time she runs into an atheist. If you're going to convert me, you need facts and logic: not just blind assertions.
Jeff
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:. . . pulled up my list of Bible contradictions . . .
Where can I find such a list?
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: Of course, she didn't stop believing, but perhaps she'll act like less of a know-it-all the next time she runs into an atheist. If you're going to convert me, you need facts and logic: not just blind assertions.
I'm sorry she came off, in your opinion, as a know-it-all. I don't think anyone really has the right to express themselves in this way, no matter what their degree of knowledge is.
But I guess, having been on the other side, this may or may not have been a triumph. You had a list of objections that you had the obvious advantage of having deliberated on. The theological realm is vast, and there are many explanations/objections/theologies/rebuttals. It's difficult to keep every single one in mind, especially when you're doing something as difficult as calling or knocking on the door of a complete stranger (frequently an intimidating task from the beginning). By no means requesting sympathy for the task itself, as it's the decision the proselytizer makes him/herself, you must understand that it's not uncommon to have a Momento moment and lose everything you ever thought you knew just based on the circumstances.
I've had those moments myself. They're tough to get through, and I like to think my knowledge about the Bible, religion and my own theology is pretty competent.
Also, I've never felt it necessary to become a Biblical/religious apologist at the door or on the phone. With all due respect, if a person confronted me with a list of 'questions' to which they felt they had all the answers AND a rebuttal to any possible answer I might have, I would assume that nothing I said - whether reasonable or not - would penetrate their wall of objections. They've pretty much found their theology, or lack of, and they're happy there. With utmost sincerity, kudos.
I'm there looking for people who have NOT found satisfying answers to their questions. Who are hungry and looking for something to fill a spiritual need, and they have not found that yet. I offer them my take, and whether or not THEY find it reasonable is far more relevant.
Sometimes it's satisfying to think you've put someone who's attitude you don't like in their place, and that I understand. But I'm not sure if I'd chalk one up for the mind-blasting, bullet-proof logic of atheism vs. the ignorant religious on this conversation alone. It's hard to know with absolute conviction what's going on in the mind of the person on the other side.
[ August 26, 2003, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
Posted by BelladonnaOrchid (Member # 188) on :
Oh...I'm sorry. I thought I walked into a thread about sewing. Guess I misread the title...
But since I read this far into it anyway.
I've never had any problems with people on Hatrack trying to convert me from my Wiccan ways. I suppose that might have something to do with that when I approached Hatrack with my beliefs, I let them know that I had also tried other religions first, and had nothing but respect for the faithful of other religions.
Which is why I'm comfortable talking about my beliefs here. Nobody has protested me talking about them (I suppose that if they did it would make a good deal of the people talking about LDS and Christianity around here hypocrites, but who knows), and there have been quite a few people asking me about my religion in an attempt to better understand it.
Perhaps that's a better approach than 'Than those pesky Christians and their bible! Ha! I'll prove them wrong!'
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
We've just been waiting for the right moment to have a mock trial and burn you at the stake.
It's more satisfying if you don't rush these things.
Posted by BelladonnaOrchid (Member # 188) on :
I would be honored to be burnt by my fellow Jatraqueros just so long as it's done by Burnination from Trogdor.
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
Alright! The Mormon/Wiccan/Athiest alliance.
(reminds me, I need my new sn burninated!)
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I'm there looking for people who have NOT found satisfying answers to their questions. Who are hungry and looking for something to fill a spiritual need, and they have not found that yet. I offer them my take, and whether or not THEY find it reasonable is far more relevant.
Sometimes it's satisfying to think you've put someone who's attitude you don't like in their place, and that I understand. But I'm not sure if I'd chalk one up for the mind-blasting, bullet-proof logic of atheism vs. the ignorant religious on this conversation alone. It's hard to know with absolute conviction what's going on in the mind of the person on the other side.
Amen, sister. Once you've spent at least three months talking to people, there are very few arguments you haven't heard before. If someone has a ready-made rebuttal and flicking question, it just means the conversation isn't the right time, and their thinking has been done already. That's fine - they're not the audience the conversation is meant for. Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Also of use is this list of Biblical attrocities, for when a theist tells you that you shouldn't be watching or reading X, Y, or Z, but should instead spend your time reading "the good book".
Jeff
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
quote: I'm sorry she came off, in your opinion, as a know-it-all. I don't think anyone really has the right to express themselves in this way, no matter what their degree of knowledge is.
But I guess, having been on the other side, this may or may not have been a triumph. You had a list of objections that you had the obvious advantage of having deliberated on. The theological realm is vast, and there are many explanations/objections/theologies/rebuttals. It's difficult to keep every single one in mind, especially when you're doing something as difficult as calling or knocking on the door of a complete stranger (frequently an intimidating task from the beginning). By no means requesting sympathy for the task itself, as it's the decision the proselytizer makes him/herself, you must understand that it's not uncommon to have a Momento moment and lose everything you ever thought you knew just based on the circumstances.
I've had those moments myself. They're tough to get through, and I like to think my knowledge about the Bible, religion and my own theology is pretty competent.
Also, I've never felt it necessary to become a Biblical/religious apologist at the door or on the phone. With all due respect, if a person confronted me with a list of 'questions' to which they felt they had all the answers AND a rebuttal to any possible answer I might have, I would assume that nothing I said - whether reasonable or not - would penetrate their wall of objections. They've pretty much found their theology, or lack of, and they're happy there. With utmost sincerity, kudos.
I'm there looking for people who have NOT found satisfying answers to their questions. Who are hungry and looking for something to fill a spiritual need, and they have not found that yet. I offer them my take, and whether or not THEY find it reasonable is far more relevant.
Sometimes it's satisfying to think you've put someone who's attitude you don't like in their place, and that I understand. But I'm not sure if I'd chalk one up for the mind-blasting, bullet-proof logic of atheism vs. the ignorant religious on this conversation alone. It's hard to know with absolute conviction what's going on in the mind of the person on the other side.
Ralphie,
I couldn't agree with you more. I mean, let's face it: of the two of us, one (or both) of us is a damn fool. The only hard part is determining which.
That being the case, I have no problem with you believing whatever it is you want to believe ... so long as you don't try to impose your views on me. And I'll return the courtesy. But when people cold call me, or stick pamphlets on my car, or yuck!, put "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance or the 10 Commandments monument in a federal courthouse, then we've got issues.
And what really disturbs me is this. If someone is cold-calling me and trying to convert me, and can't address the arguments of my position, then how the heck does this person convert others? It frightens me that others can be converted without the use of logic and it frightens me more that these same people vote.
(Not that our vote makes any difference, anyway ...)
Jeff
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
Jeff - I'm not saying either of you was a fool, goober.
I'm just posing that perspective is sometimes clouded in victory, if that makes any sense.
And, for the record - JW's don't vote, and all of them remain staunchly neutral, politically. If that makes you feel any better. Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Actually, I meant either of us: you or I.
At least one of us is a fool regarding religion, right? The only problem is we can't know for certain who it is. [ ]
Jeff
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Personally, I think it's possible to be wrong without being a fool. I'm probably both, though, right?
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: Actually, I meant either of us: you or I.
It looks like english, but it's not making any sense...
And don't worry, Jeff. I pray for your eternal soul every night and have been assured in a vision featuring Lambchop the Sheep Puppet that the Lord God loves you and your adulterous, heathen heart anyway.
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Papa Moose,
You rock!
Jeff
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
quote: And don't worry, Jeff. I pray for your eternal soul every night and have been assured in a vision featuring Lambchop the Sheep Puppet that the Lord God loves you and your adulterous, heathen heart anyway.
That's fine. Pray all you like: but you don't have to tell me about it. If you do, you'll get my favorite response: "What exactly does a prayer do?"
Jeff
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
You're kindofa serious guy, aren't you Jeff?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Icarus - for a serious examination of the Biblical inconsistencies from a peson who sincerely believes in Christianity without accepting the engraved and unassailable authority of the Bible, try reading anything by Ret. Bishop John Shelby Spong. I particularly liked Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism.
I still have questions, but for people of Christian faith whose faith has been challenged by inconsistencies in scripture, he serves as a excellent popular writer with the ability to help you understand tricky bits of theology. Sort of like what Carl Sagan did for science, he writes books that are not as precise, but much more accessible.
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Ralphie,
No, actually, those who know me tend to think I'm not serious enough. I make a lot of jokes, love bad puns, and have been told on more than one occasion that I'd be an excellent humorist.
However, I'm scared. Very, very scared. This is not a great world to be an atheist in. Assuming for a moment, just for the sake of argument, that we're right and that there is no god, can you see why the religious fervor of this country might be somewhat frightening to atheists?
Jeff
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Chris,
Sounds like my kind of book. Again, I don't mind people believing in a deity: after all, I can't prove that one doesn't exist. But I can prove that the Bible isn't self-consistent, and anybody who tries to convince me otherwise is pretty much wasting his time.
Frankly, I wish more theists would try to avoid the Bible literalism route and just stick to their core beliefs, which are unassailable. I'd be much more inclined to take them seriously.
Jeff
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Jeff,
Spong strongly believes literalists are destroying Christianity. The book I mentioned has an excellent history of the way the Bible was created. He discusses how different versions of stories were combined to draw together the different tribes, and how new books were edited to fit the needs of the Israel nations and keep them strong despite incredible adversity. The book of Job is mentioned specifically as a lesson for Israelites in captivity to help them accept what was happening to them at the time. He also devotes an entire book to discussing the different Gospels and their likely creation.
He also writes at length elsewhere about the relationship and contradictions between Judaism and Christianity.
What his books did for me was to make the Bible an even more amazing document, as it became a symbol of the struggles of a proud and indomitable people. The fact that it had inconsistencies became almost irrelevant, and through it all his unswerving faith in God is an impressive thing.
Didn't sway me from my apatheism, but it gave me more appreciation for the subject.
[ August 27, 2003, 05:32 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Certainly, it's a much more reasonable position to hold, logically speaking. If you claim that much of the Bible is correct, I'll have a difficult time disputing it. If you claim that all of it's true, I've got it made in the shade.
Jeff
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
(btw - psst, Jeff. The puppet bit was a joke. Chill. )
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Thanks, Jeff and Chris
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
Had a chance to check out those links Jeff. Invaluable! Thank you so much.
Posted by Equality 7-2521 (Member # 5586) on :
quote: I'm still happy not choosing any Big-Box religion.
Big Box religion, eh. Hmm...sounds like one of those late-night info-mercials (sp?) on tv... "Get Big-Box Religion now for only 7 easy installments of $19.95, and if you order right now you'll also get a set of Ginsu knives, at no extra charge!"
But seriously, it's best to look at the core beliefs of a religion. If the religion has any rules of conduct or health guidelines, do they apply equally to all members of the faith, regardless of what position they hold? Also, if they ask for money where does the money go?
quote: If you're going to convert me, you need facts and logic: not just blind assertions.
But facts are no fun! They just ruin everything!
quote: JW's don't vote, and all of them remain staunchly neutral, politically.
Why is that? I really don't know much 'bout JW.
Equality 7-2521
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
[off topic aside]
quote: (like Stravinsky after the opening of Rite of Spring)
aka, can I tell you that I love you for that incredibly educated simile?? I love that story of the riot in the theater when that ballet premiered. HA! Yes, I'm a dorky music major and you've made me happy. [/off topic aside]
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
quote: btw - psst, Jeff. The puppet bit was a joke. Chill.
Not a particularly good one. Even now that you've explained that it was a joke, I still fail to see the "punch line". I understand you were trying to be silly, but is there some reference I've missed?
Jeff
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Erik Slaine and Icarus,
You're very welcome. I hope that they prove informative and entertaining. They do not disprove the existence of God, but they do disprove that the Bible is self-consistent and innerrant.
Jeff
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
quote: [off topic aside]aka, can I tell you that I love you for that incredibly educated simile?? I love that story of the riot in the theater when that ballet premiered. HA! Yes, I'm a dorky music major and you've made me happy. [/off topic aside]
Yeah, sorry, I should have complimented AKA on that, too. In terms of sheer obscurity and wit, that comparison rocks!
Jeff
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
edit: Actually, nevermind.
[ August 28, 2003, 03:45 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
By the way, apparently George Gershwin (I believe it was he) once went to study under Stravinsky, but Stravinsky refused to teach him. When Gershwin asked why, Stravinsky asked Gershwin how much money he had made. Gershwin told him. Then, Stravinsky revealed how much money he had earned and told Gershwin, "I should be studying under you!"
Jeff
P.S. I'm certain this story is true, but I'm not 100% certain it was Gershwin. It was definitely an extremely popular musician at the time, and I'm pretty sure it was Gershwin.
Posted by Jeffrey Getzin (Member # 1972) on :
Ralphie,
Who loves ya, baby?
Jeff
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote: Even now that you've explained that it was a joke, I still fail to see the "punch line". I understand you were trying to be silly, but is there some reference I've missed?
You know, this is what I’ve always worried about with the Jack Chick parodies, and some other internet church parodies – that people will not realize that they’re satire and take them seriously. There are enough actual Christians doing embarrassing things on the internet without satire being taken for the real thing.
Edit: I should have said “Christians doing actual embarrassing things” so as not to imply that Ralphie is not an actual Christian. No offense meant. I thought your joke was hysterical.
[ August 28, 2003, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: dkw ]
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
Whoa. When dkw thinks she may have offended me, things ain't right in Beantown.
Actually, the only thing that will offend me is slamming my comedy. (Jeff - You kill my father. Prepare to die.)
[ August 28, 2003, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
When you say "the Jack Chick parodies," do you mean the ones here? You don't mean the original tracts themselves, do you?
-o-
On a related note, I once had someone send me a Landover Baptist Church link (in semi-serious outrage), thinking it was a real Baptist church!
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Yep, I meant the parodies here. I only wish the originals were parodies too.
I have seen Landover Baptist used as an example in online arguments by anti-Baptist or anti-Christian people who think it's a real Baptist church. And a friend of my brother's had a website where he pretended to be a "fire and brimstone" Christian columnist and answered questions. It was hideous, and again, people would use it as an example of how ridiculous Christians are, not realizing it was satire. I think he's quit doing it, but I'm not sure.
However, anyone who doesn't realize that a vision involving lambchop the sheep puppet is satire needs to get his humor meter adjusted.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I get a few coversion attempts, being that I do believe in God but have absolutely no religion. Seems to encourage people. It's annoying, but generally not worth the fight. Mostly the easiest way to handle it is say "I'll think about it" and then leave it alone.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)