Kassiana

People in liberal versions of religion will probably agree more with atheists than with their conservative counterparts. After all, a Christian, Rev. Barry Lynn, is the head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. I don't doubt that most Unitarian Universalists would agree more with atheist views than Southern Baptist views. Most people I've known in liberal religions believe in separation of church and state, no preferences based on religious faith (positive OR negative), freedom to worship or not based upon individuals' beliefs, etc.

Heck, I'm a liberal Pagan theist, and the people I agree with most tend to be either liberal theists or atheists.

**Note: "liberal" here refers to religion, not politics, and is meant to denote those who tend to take any religious text/dogma lightly, not dogmatically. Bringing up politics is wrong and you will be voided where prohibited by Cardinal Law. **

HelenM

I think you'd be happier if you generalized less. I can recommend books about learning not to, if you like...

Anyway, it's not my experience that I see little else than hypocrisy - but then, I work hard to have a balanced perspective and not over-focus on what upsets/angers/concerns me. Because doing that would only make me miserable and wouldn't change those things anyway.

Helen

Eudaimonist

That's an overgeneralization. I think this is only true of some -- perhaps the most vocal. Maybe they stand out to you and you don't notice the rest.

So do I.

Hold on a moment... atheism isn't a way of life. Of course atheism can't produce enlightened people. But perhaps you should ask yourself if, say, some secular humanist or other nontheistic philosophical group is accomplishing this.

They do? I'm a Libertarian and have no love for the major parties, but even I wouldn't say that those parties are intentionally cruel.

ex-xian

GeoTheo--I'm still waiting for you to explain that passage to me.

JLennon Re:Marxism:
As neo-colonialism was coming to an end in Africa, the leaders there were searching for a political system that avoided their previous problems that were caused by capitalism, but still avoided the pitfalls that the USSR had fallen into. IMO, marxism or socialism, which they attempted to institute was the best decision. The totalitarian regimes of the soviet union are not a good example of what socialism stands for. When you use them to attack socialism, you are attacking a strawman.

To an extent, I agree with this. Frequently, xian assume that I left xianity b/c I was hurt and burnt by people in a church. While that is true, everyone who goes to church has been burnt by a church. The reason I gave up xianity is b/c it an absured, unreasonable faith.

However, xianity makes testable claims; we can be pragmatic about it. Xianity claims to make people into better people. Your analogy between children and xians is a false one; yes, xians are supposed to be god's children, but they are also supposed to be indwelt by god's spirit who is increasingly making them better people. Everytime a xian displays consistent bad behavior, that is more evidence against the claims of xianity.

JLennon

Kind of strange that many christians tout family values as being important and biblical. Where in the Bible is there a half way decent example of family values in the bible? With Lot? With David? With Solomon? With Samuel? with Paul? with Jesus? With Noah? With Noah's kin? with Abraham? Just the opposite again.

GeoTheo

Yeah, I admit atheists and Christians have their humanity in common, but atheism and Christianity have nothing in common. Like I said they have as much in common as being and nothingness,Life and death, light and darkness etc. Would you agree on that?

GeoTheo

xX:
I refuse to explain it to you. I think such conversations are useless. I only debate interpretation with fellow Christians. You have no pre-suppossition that the text is inspired and that it is supposed to make sense. Therefore the conversation is fruitless from the get-go. You have to be at least a little sympathetic to the text in order for this type of discourse to work. If you said to someone "Explain to me why you like Rap music." in order for the person to do that, you would have to be at least a little sympathetic and willing to see it from their perspective at least. What you are doing is kind of like Bill O'Reilly inviting someone on the Show to talk about Rap music and saying:
"Rap music is pure trash, the lyrics are laced with profanities and imagery that denigrates women and glorifies criminal behavior. Rap Artist's are a bunch of charlatans! What say you?"
At that point there can only be a shouting match. Nothing else can be accomplished.

Actually, you are contradicting yourself here. You are saying Christianity is supposed to make people better and then you say you can test this claim and prove it false because Christians aren't perfect. better is a relative term. I once worked at a Christian retreat for lifelong substance abusers who wanted to dedicate their life to Christ and get off drugs. I can assure you Christ made them a whole world better. But not perfect. These were people who had been in and out of prison and had often committed murders and other violent crimes. As Christians We believe we are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, but that we still sin because of our sinful nature.

philechat

Actually not true. We do not need to presuppose beliefs in a text's divine inspiration (or the gods' factual existence) to interpret a text. Otherwise all literature courses can go down into the dumps--why would discussions about the characters in a Shakespearean play be meaningful if we did not believe in the characters' existence?
What if we were enrolled in a classics course? Do we need to believe in Zeus and Apollo in order to discuss Greek texts? No.

HelenM

Well, first of all


If you want to say 'atheism and Christianity have nothing in common' that's up to you but, speaking for myself it's not the sort of thing I say. It seems overly simplistic to me. I'm not sure it even tells us much except that what you think of as 'atheism' and what you think of as 'Christianity' must be worlds apart.

For one thing I'm inclined to agree with those atheists who say that there's not such a thing as 'the atheistic worldview'.

And furthermore, even if there were, I don't like to discuss abstractions. Atheism and Christianity have significant meaning insofar as they are used to describe the belief or non-beliefs of particular people. And it seems quite possible to me that those particular people may have a variety of beliefs/non-beliefs in common.

And besides, a person's actual beliefs are not always what they say they are (if you observe how they behave - because that is a better indicator of what they believe than than what they say). And their beliefs don't always arise from the source they claim.

So, someone who claims to be a Bible-believing Christian might actually live a life quite similar to an atheist. Or not. I just don't see how one can generalize as you did and be saying anything meaningful. I know that what you wrote is very much the style which many preachers use; it's hyperbole; it's simplistic; it's very rhetoric-based. I don't really like it much myself.

Helen

GeoTheo

I see your point, but I still think it would be a fuitless discussion.
I also grant you that there are a lot of intelligent discussions in the Biblical criticism and archeology forum. But often these types of discussions like what Ex-xian wanted to do amount to proving that the Bible is not utter crap. I think it is a waste of time. Too much emotional baggage. Plus I think if we wee to discuss a verse that doesn't relate to this topic we should start a new thread. My point on wisdom as relates to common ground is that Christians believe God is the foundation of all wisdom, so in that sense we can't view an unbeliever as having it in an ultimate sense. Obviously atheists aren't going to agree with me. that was my point.