Cipher Girl

Hi Muffinstuffer

Besides, from what I have seen, a) my frustrations don't get quite as violent as some I have seen on the IIDB, and b) even when I wasn't 'saved' I didn't get witnessed to anywhere near as much as people here discuss religion with me.

Well this is General Religious Discussions. Many atheists come here to express opinions that they may be unable to "real life". To vent their frustrations here. Its sad that religious people seem to have no problem critisizing(sic) atheistism and atheists but get upset when we return the favor. But at least I usually try to critisize the beliefs, not the person.

After all if you simply wanted everyone to agree with you, you would hang out in a christian board wouldn't you?

wildernesse

Bwhahahahahahaha! I could laugh until I gasped for breath at this one.

--tibac

The Other Michael

Hello Muffinstuffer,

You may want to do some reading in the Biblical Criticism & Archeology forum - you may come away with a different feeling on the amount of "fact" that the Christian religion is grounded upon.

cheers,
Michael

Rational BAC

There is nothing more boring and unenlightening than everyone agreeing with each other and patting themselves on the back and saying "Oh--you are SOO right"----whether theist or non-theist.

What would the atheists do without us theists making them think a little bit and more clearly defining their lack of faith?

What would us theists do without the atheists making us think a little bit and more clearly defining our faith?

I think we need each other.

We also all need very thick skins to at least (a little bit) get along --------------and maybe learn something from each other.

Biff the unclean

My goodness, go to Africa for a few weeks and you miss all the fun.

Hello Muffinstuffer, I'm an old Navy man myself. And one of the more "harsh" Atheists. I've just finished reading your well written thread here and it is a pleasure to read. I hope you can stay around for some time to come.

But, of course, the irony is very, very, thick in your writing. Your main concern seems to be on the subject of manners and the social obligation of those being witnessed to, to be polite. If I might I'd like to discuss why--from what you have written here--that you have left me with the opinion that you are acting hypocritically by taking offence.

You make the boast right off the bat that you only witness to those whom you have sounded out and are receptive to being witnessed to. Yet if that was the case why are you complaining about the hostility you are receiving? (We'll just assume that your excursion to the Atheist web is one of exploration and not missionary work)

You hemmed and hawed over coming out and saying that Atheists are damned to Hell for all eternity. Yet this "after life" is what this "message" is all about. You pointed out that the intentions of the people who were warning we Atheists that we were damned to Hell should be considered. (I must agree with those who said that they thought that the only motive was self-aggrandizement.) Yet you took offence at those who said that your claims were ludicrous without ever considering their intentions. I'm sure that they were telling you out of "Atheist love" so that you could be saved from such wackiness. And how much milder, and more polite, is it to tell a person that they are being ludicrous than it is to tell them that they are damned?

I am left with the impression that you are taking such offence at these efforts to save you because you are already afraid that you are being ludicrous. You have already admitted that Christianity is illogical and when some of the sillier parts (loaves and fishes, belly of the whale, etc.) you made no attempt to explain why they weren't ludicrous.

--Biff

Muffinstuffer

First, I'm only Navy for the next 3 months. Spent nine years in, and then I am going Army Reserves. Yes, you read that right.

Second, at pretty much every single duty station I've ever been at, we always get in these discussions...what's your life been like, what do you believe, do you drink/smoke/etc., and so on. And just about all the time, when I get ASKED questions - why I don't like to drink, why I didn't have premarital sex, etc. - and when I give my answer, the response is usually not too cordial. Which cracks me up, and the reason, is the response to your next paragraph.....

I do not admit that CHRISTIANITY is illogical. I admit that PARTS of it seem to be illogical. I hardly think that 100% of it can be illogical, considering many of the Scriptures mirror many of the rules that people follow even if they don't practice Christianity, many archaeological discoveries support Biblical history/claims, etc. So obviously it's tough for ALL of it to be illogical. But what cracks me up is that I have almost NEVER seen ANY person who has witnessed to someone else, witness by saying "You KNOW you're going to Hell if you don't accept Christ, dontcha." They preach Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, and all that stuff, and they preach His love and grace. You know this, I'm SURE.

Yet, none of this is considered. The bottom line is that if 100% of the faith can not be proven, then it's illogical, and why waste time on it?

To make a long story short, when I DO talk to someone about the Gospel I DO NOT sit around and tell them all about Hell. You ought to know this, and I would think everyone here knows this. You make it seem as if a) this IS the case - that we DO witness by preaching eternal hellfire and damnation, and b) as if I am personally trying to be a jerk, by trying to share my belief with someone, when in fact I am sharing the Bible. It may not be the most objective of texts, but it's a lot more objective than if I just came up with a set of moral standards on my own and tried to foist them on everyone else becaue I thought it was a great idea.

And yes, the doctrine does believe Hell is the fate of non-believers, but it still is not 'preached.' That would be the equivalent of me completely ignoring the advertised benefits of atheism - being liberated from a 'genocidal/intolerant' doctrine, being able to apply logic and rationality to everything in that search for truth, etc. - and saying 'Well heck, it doesn't know all the answers, it doesn't give satisfactory answers for what happens in the afterlife' and any other negative attributes I can think up.

To make a long story short, it's not being told that Christianity is ludicrous that bothers me, nor is it personal attacks, so much as it is the lack of courtesy. I may even be hypocritical at times, even though I do not mean to be, and I certainly do not set out to be, but when I ask questions, get ask questions, try to answer them, get told numerous times that my faith is ludicrous and intolerant and genocidal, have it called a book of 'Mother Goose' nursery rhymes...and the list goes on....and THEN am called hypocritical because I take offense....that just doesn't make a lot of sense. I did not 'hem and haw' over coming out and saying that. I pointed out that Ronin - and virtually everyone here - knows where Christian doctrine places nonbelievers after they die, and that I didn't need to tell them this. It's not MY OPINION that they are damned...it is where the Bible says they are going. And yet I'm offensive because someone took offense at a statement that they had to draw out of me.

And yes, I was sort of elusive on that point for a reason...because I sort of saw a 'point' coming, and this is one of them. I did not go on the offensive and preemptively tell everyone this.

One last question. What were you doing in Africa? Just curious.

Biff the unclean

And just about all the time, when I get ASKED questions - why I don't like to drink, why I didn't have premarital sex, etc. - and when I give my answer, the response is usually not too cordial.
Guilt by association. I'm not saying that you would do this, but the common behavior of those religionists who deny themselves is to condemn and insult those people who live lives filled with experience. You are being tarred by their brush which, if understandable, is wrong.

I hardly think that 100% of it can be illogical, considering many of the Scriptures mirror many of the rules that people follow even if they don't practice Christianity, many archaeological discoveries support Biblical history/claims, etc.
You do realize, I hope, that there is no historic or archaeological evidence that there was ever an actual God or even Jesus.

But what cracks me up is that I have almost NEVER seen ANY person who has witnessed to someone else, witness by saying "You KNOW you're going to Hell if you don't accept Christ, dontcha."
Really? I get it all the time. I even had a JW step back from me a few steps so that he wouldn't be scorched by the lightening bolt that he was sure was about to strike me.

They preach Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, and all that stuff, and they preach His love and grace. You know this, I'm SURE.
Which is side stepping the point that the only reason anyone would care about the "love and grace'" of some Jew who has been dead for 2000 odd years is because they will "save" you because you are damned. The "grace" were are talking about here isn't the type of grace Fred Astaire had. We are talking about magic anti-damnation grace. The only reason you would need it is if you were damned. Which means that they are saying that people that the don't know are damned which is hardly the polite thing to do.

The bottom line is that if 100% of the faith can not be proven, then it's illogical, and why waste time on it?
The faith is grounded solely on the existence of one particular God.
A God whose existence you are unable to prove. By your own words, it's illogical and you shouldn't waste your time on it.

To make a long story short, when I DO talk to someone about the Gospel I DO NOT sit around and tell them all about Hell.
Unlike the Jesus character in the NT who spoke much more of Hell than he did of Heaven.

You make it seem as if a) this IS the case - that we DO witness by preaching eternal hellfire and damnation,
If you talk about grace and salvation then you are most certainly preaching about Hell, because that's what you are being saved from.

as if I am personally trying to be a jerk, by trying to share my belief with someone, when in fact I am sharing the Bible.
And, in fact, sharing that relic from the Bronze Age and pretending that it is relevant and not a collection of primitive myths is the problem.
If I were sharing the Iliad with you not as literature but as being fact, as a guide to live your 21st century life, of a guide how to find the "love" of Aphrodite or the "grace" of Hermes--would you not think that I was personally trying to be a jerk?

It may not be the most objective of texts, but it's a lot more objective than if I just came up with a set of moral standards on my own and tried to foist them on everyone else becaue I thought it was a great idea.
But that is exactly what we do do. Take a look at the moral standards of Abraham who was the most moral person on Earth according to the OT. God himself is called the God of Abraham. The 3 major western religions see him as their root. Were he alive today he would be doing hard time for his lack of modern morals.

And yes, the doctrine does believe Hell is the fate of non-believers, but it still is not 'preached.'
If salvation is preached instead then what is it you are being saved from?
I may even be hypocritical at times, even though I do not mean to be, and I certainly do not set out to be, but when I ask questions, get ask questions, try to answer them, get told numerous times that my faith is ludicrous and intolerant and genocidal, have it called a book of 'Mother Goose' nursery rhymes...and the list goes on....and THEN am called hypocritical because I take offense....that just doesn't make a lot of sense.
The Emperor in the Hans Christian Andersen story didn't like being told he was naked either

It's not MY OPINION that they are damned...it is where the Bible says they are going. And yet I'm offensive because someone took offense at a statement that they had to draw out of me.
Yes, just as I would be offensive if I held some philosophy such as that held by the Nazis or the Klu Klux Klan, but only wanted to talk about the positive aspects of the group. The KKK is great for social bonding, singing around the fire and all that good stuff. The Nazis have terrific social programs, the trains run great and the economy is on the up turn.
Don't blame me if the Jews are being sent to the ovens. It's not MY OPINION that they are damned...Mein Kempf says they are going.

We ourselves are responsible for what we ourselves believe, not the book the beliefs came from.

One last question. What were you doing in Africa? Just curious
Fact finding visit about the bush meat trade and plight of low land gorillas.

Biff the unclean

Thing I find interesting about this thread is that it shows some basic differences in the thought process between religious thinking and scientific--or at least secular--thinking.
I don't know if it is because I have a wife and children or because I work in such a fringe occupation as interspecies communication but I'm somewhat used to people telling me that I'm wrong.
When I am told that I believe something that is ludicrous I do not internalize and reinterpret this to mean, "I am ludicrous."
Since I try very hard to take as little on faith as possible I can usually defend my thinking with the facts I have at hand. If I cannot successfully defend my thinking I will (somewhat grudgingly--I am an old fart after all) change it.
I remember when I first met Penny Patterson and Koko the gorilla, I went into that meeting with a boat load of preconceptions. That night I was working and it came over me that "everything I know about what the word 'human' means is wrong."
As emotionally wrenching an experience was it wasn't upsetting, rather it was thrilling.
Christianity is very destructive to an individual's ego. Some of the more rabid sects of Protestantism focus on little else. I wonder if that explains the difference in thought process--the different concept of self-worth making the difference between internalizing and externalizing?

Muffinstuffer

FYI for any of those who cared.....I've been somewhat absent the last few days because my wife got sick so I had to spend time feeding her chicken soup and stuff. That, plus I just needed a break from ALL bulletin boards (I post on about 5 of them). I'll be back this weekend probably.