The Journal of Joe The Peacock. Yay.: How To <u>Actually</u> Talk To Atheists (If You're Christian)

3.27.2008:

How To Actually Talk To Atheists (If You're Christian)

6:58 AM

Update 3.31.08: A number of people have emailed and asked if they can print and distribute this article / email it to friends / tattoo it on their buttocks, etc. If you think there's value in it, feel free to print or email it :) Also, thanks to Bishop Alan for his kind words about the article. It's nice to see an actual church blessing on my work.

* * *

You know what's great?

Unicorns.

In fact, unicorns are freakin' AWESOME. And you know why? Because once you accept one into your life, they provide you with a lifetime membership into the Beer, Massage, Chocolate and Steak club. Have you not heard about the beer, massage and steak club? Well, let me tell you all about it - it doesn't matter if you don't like beer, or steak, or chocolate, or massages - whichever one you like, you get 24 hours a day for the rest of your life. And if you like all four or any combination of them, well... You're in luck! Because That's what the rest of your eternity will be - massages (happy ending or not, your choice), steak cooked just the way you want it, chocolate of any sort coated in any topping (or as a topping on anything you want), and any beer ever made or ever conceptualized, always on tap and never flat. And to get all of this, all you have to do is accept a unicorn into your life.

What? You don't believe in unicorns? Well, I assure you that they are very real! And I know this because I've accepted a unicorn into my life, and I trust that it will one day gain me admittance into the BMCS Club. How could I have accepted it into my life? Well, I just believe in them. And I trust they exist, because there are texts available to me that discuss them, as well as people available to teach me all about them. I mean, after all, with such great eternal rewards, why wouldn't you believe?

Okay, fine, don't believe in them - you're going to end up in the Pushups For Eternity club. That's where you have to do knuckle pushups on mounds of broken glass with Rush Limbaugh sitting on your back for all eternity. All because you won't accept a unicorn into your life.

Pretty silly, right? Well, my dear Christian friends, that's exactly how you sound to an Atheist.

Now, I know that the message of Christ's death and resurrection sin so that humans can spend eternity in Heaven isn't being sold by (most) Christians as steak and chocolate and unicorns. That's not my point. I do not want or intend to discuss the actual merits (or lack thereof) of the Christian faith. My point is simply that you're asking a group of people to believe in something they do not believe exists, for a reward they cannot prove they'll ever obtain.

And I'm sure that the first reaction that you, as a Christian, felt toward my example was distinctly negative. I'm sure your feelings ranged anywhere from marginal discomfort to outright repulsion; given the notion that your chosen religion - the belief system that you've based everything you know and do around - could be compared to unicorns, steak clubs and push-ups in hell, well... I think I'd be offended myself. But I assure you, it is not my intention to offend you. I have but one goal, and that is to illustrate a single fact:

What you're currently doing - cold-call witnessing and talking to strangers at the mall about your faith and standing on street corners holding signs that read "REPENT"? Well...

It's not working.

This? Not working.

It's at this point that you're probably ready to just write me off as yet another heretic. And that's your right, and I certainly can't stop you. However, you need to understand that I didn't intend to upset you. If I did, however, I will not apologize. Instead, I'd ask that you give me a chance to explain my case by pointing out that your reaction to my comparison actually proves my point:

Confronting a person by attempting to convince them that everything they believe and know is wrong and that you are right is quite possibly the worst way on Earth to persuade them.

But I'm getting a bit ahead of myself. Before I illustrate how your current arsenal of witnessing tactics are not only ineffective, but are actively harming your religion and its' stance in an ever-growing public consisting of non-believers, I need to give you a bit of background information. And it's very important that, no matter how much you THINK you know these points, you pay attention to what I'm about to say, because the rapid swelling of the ranks of the Neo-Atheist movement have proven that what you think you know about them is absolutely, unequivocally, 100% WRONG.

First (and most important):

Atheists do not believe there is a God.

Yep, I'm using the definition of Atheism as my first point. And I do this not because I think you don't know what the word means, but because I'm fairly certain you've not yet realized the concept. When you witness to an Atheist, the person whom you are addressing does not believe there is a God - therefore, any information about God, Jesus, the holy trinity, the parting of oceans, great floods, and the creation of man falls on deaf ears.

To put this in more universal terms, you're attempting to sell a concept for which there is no proof other than the beliefs of men who have spread the word before it.

Whether you like it or not; whether you accept it or not, the fact remains - you're attempting to convince someone that something they cannot see, feel, hear, or otherwise partake of any empirical evidence of its existence, exists. Regardless of how much you believe in the story and how much it has affected your life and the lives of those around you, they do not.

This is important to understand. Until you do, you're arguing with a stop sign.

Second, Atheists do not need to believe in a God.

We've established that you're communicating with a person who does not believe what you are sharing with them exists. You're asking them to buy on faith the fact that spending time in church, telling other people about this belief and living a life based on it may one day reward them. That's difficult enough. When you add to this the fact that you are not only selling them something you can't prove exists, but that they don't even want, things turn from difficult to impossible.

Atheists assert that the foundation for their actions and deeds lie in proven methods related to science and the establishment of undeniable fact. In this, they believe that they have everything they need to live a healthy, rewarding life.

They're not wrong - no more than you are in asserting that your faith in the tenets of Christianity are all you need to live your life. And that's the point. It's hard to convince a man with two working legs that he needs to buy a third, or worse, get rid of his and try the ones you have on. And when he looks for your version and cannot see, feel, touch or otherwise prove that they actually exist, he's going to completely dismiss you. It's not personal, it's just how we work as people.

You're no different. Think about the last time you heard about a confidence scheme on the news - twenty or thirty elderly couples were duped out of their life savings by a man promising investment returns or selling a product which did not exist. If you are honest with yourself, you'll admit that your very first reaction - the one you had before you caught yourself and realized that these poor people are victims - was "Holy cow, why didn't they research it before they invested?"

It's crazy to buy something you can't prove exists, isn't it?

Witnessing is interruption marketing.

It's unfortunate but true - just about every method of "witnessing" to non-believers equates to human spam. To start, I'll list just a few of the methods we all know about:

Knocking on doors and talking to strangers about your new church / Christ / a church-related event designed to get new members
Cold-calling people from the phone book / phone lists to invite them to your church / discuss Christ and his teachings
Direct mail campaigns
Holding up signs on street corners
Walking up to strangers at Starbucks / the mall / anywhere besides your church
Handing out literature (i.e. "Chick Tracts")

This = Human Spam.

It's really easy to point these out as interruption marketing because... Well, they are. Honestly, they're low-hanging fruit. Easy targets, right? Probably unfair of me to just pick those and use them to illustrate the tactics all Christians use to witness. So let's talk about some techniques you may have employed that, to you, probably didn't come across as brazen as the above mentioned tactics:

Have you ever asked a co-worker to attend church with you?
Have you ever asked a stranger to attend church with you?
Have you ever asked either of the above about their faith in God or Jesus Christ?
Have you ever shifted a conversation that had nothing to do with church, Christ, or God into a conversation about any of the above?

When you did any of those things, did you notice an eye roll? Did the person groan? Did they shift in their seat and, at the very least, say they would go (or research what you just said, or give the matter some thought) and then never got back to you?

These techniques probably feel natural to you. They feel like you're sharing the good news of your faith and the joy it brings to your life, and it probably feels great to share that joy with others.

There's another organization / concept that those involved are equally as glad to share, because it's changed their life and they can't wait to spread that good news. This organization thrives on new members. Each individual collection of people works diligently to get more folks into the stable, because the larger they grow, the more they thrive and the farther they can spread the word of this great, life-changing group.

Surely, you know who I'm talking about. It's called Amway.

Now, before you get up in arms, I did NOT just compare your belief in God and Jesus to selling cleaners and credit cards and pre-paid cellphones. But I did, however, compare your technique of spreading the word about your belief to the technique of spreading the word about Amway.

Again, try to put yourself outside of your own perspective and into the shoes of your intended audience. You're interrupting their time and space to bring them a message you feel is important. And sure, you have the right to choose your faith and the right to free speech, but as GK Chesteron said, to have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it. And ultimately, "You need to hear this because I need to say it" is the ultimate in self-serving causes... And if you're serving yourself, you certainly aren't serving God.

So. You're dealing with an audience that doesn't believe that what you want to share with them even exists. They don't need it. They don't want to hear about it. Your attempts to share it with them are seen largely as annoying or, at the very least, an interruption in their day. And the result of these tactics is a massive swelling of the ranks of the "New Atheist Movement" (Neo-Atheism) in America and abroad; a movement that has been covered in great detail and has caused great concern within all denominations of the Christian church.

What to do, what to do...

Well, considering the facts, you've really only got two choices. The first is to just keep doing what you're doing. After all, it worked in the past. Your church regularly asks you to do it. It feels good to witness, and at the very end of the day, you can justify a few "lost sheep" if you gave it your best effort, right?

Well... If you're fine with that - if screaming your message through a megaphone and praying (literally) that someone hears you - is okay with you, well... Look forward to staying as frustrated as you are now (if not moreso). Stay persistent, right?

Well, to quote Seth Godin, quite possibly the most brilliant modern marketing guru alive today:

Persistence isn't using the same tactics over and over. That's just annoying.

Persistence is having the same goal over and over.

And the goal is to get people to follow the teachings of Christ and live a Christ-like life, right? Well, telling them to do so over and over again in ways that disrespect their time and personal space is nothing more than simple badgering. It might FEEL like you're doing the right thing, but as we all know, feeling like you're doing work, and actually getting work done are two different things. But there's something you can do that will bring you far closer to your goal than just talking and hoping:

Become the prototype.

Live the example, and let your actions spread the message. Get people to see the merit in the life you live and adopt your practices.

Let's follow two scenarios - one for each path you can take.

Using the traditional, human-spam model of witnessing, you use interruption-marketing techniques to spread the word about your faith. Because you are Christian, and because you are employing techniques that are unwelcome and unwanted, you communicate the following through your actions:

Christians would rather be correct than listen to differing opinion.
Christians do not respect the personal space (mentally and physically) of non-believers.
Christians feel they are superior to non-believers because they have salvation.
Christians would rather rely on faith as evidence than rely on fact.

All of these are going to lose your audience. Period.

And as I said before, if you're fine with that - if you're okay with the notion that saying the words and annoying or inconveniencing people with your methods of spreading what is supposed to be a message of brotherhood, unity, respect and love... Well, let's just say that you might need to evaluate the motives behind your actions, for they couldn't possibly be borne of love, respect or brotherhood.

Did Jesus ever hand out a pamphlet about himself? Did he ever tap people on the shoulder and say "Hey, have you heard the good news about me?" No... Not according to any of the literature I've ever read... And I've read a lot of it.

No one pays attention to magazine ads and billboards. People use Tivo to skip commercials on television. There are any number of email spam filters available to prevent just that sort of communication from inflicting itself on you digitally. In every segment - including yours - interruption techniques fail.

Considering your audience's opinion that you are infringing on their freedom to choose not to follow your faith, and their personal space with selling tales of what they consider to be mythical tales and arguments based on belief, you've lost before you've begun... And to go ahead with that program anyway implies a selfishness that only further harms your cause.

Its time for a new tack.

If I am the target for your message, I'm going to be far more receptive to one that incorporates respect for my time and my belief (or lack thereof). I will probably dismiss, as you do, the one which interrupts my routine and infringes on my time to tell me you're right and that everything I have spent years figuring out and pondering and basing my life and views around is wrong.

The second scenario, using my proposed example of witnessing by example, you employ the exact methods that Christ himself used to bring people inline with a respect and love based lifestyle. Live the teachings of your faith and sway action by your deeds. It may not feel like it’s as effective as talking and handing out literature - but the rational being will concede that that stuff has already failed everywhere it's being employed. And ultimately, living the example may not SEEM like it's as much work as hitting the street to hold posters or cold-call people to invite them to your church... But it's far less intrusive and far more effective in the long run.

Make no mistake - this is NOT giving up on saving souls or witnessing. Its a changing of tactics, one which requires diligence in action, commitment to the lifestyle, and confidence that those around you are taking notice.

Spreading the 'good news' is fine... But its hardly news at this point, and there's nothing good about not respecting my right to be who I am. And I can't guarantee or even suggest you'll convert everyone you meet with this new tact. But obviously, judging by the level of concern within all denominations of the rapidly spreading New Atheism, what you're doing isn't working the way you think it should. In fact, its doing more to push people toward the movement you're fighting so hard against. That doesn't seem like a good plan to me.

Eventually, living the example will entice someone who is paying attention to ask you your motives, or at the very least, inquire about the specific actions you're undertaking (such as volunteering for community service, feeding the hungry at a shelter, working with Habitat for Humanity, etcetera). And when they do, you'll have to engage them in conversation about your faith.

When you do, you should know that electing to enter into conversation with an Atheist equipped with your faith and scripture as tools is akin to electing to explore the ocean with a torch. The equipment you've chosen simply will not work in that environment. You can't blame the environment - after all, it is what it is, and you chose to go there.

So, here's a few pointers:

Don't bring it up first.
If you do bring it up first, and the other person is disinterested or reacts negatively, just let it go.
If the conversation does continue, remember that respect is paramount. You're not right, and I'm not wrong - you simply have faith in something I do not. That's not a weakness on my part, even when you consider it a strength on your part.
The faith you have? It's belief in the absence of proof or fact. That's the definition of faith. So, don't offer belief as evidence. You can, however, offer it as motive. "I believe in God" does not prove that God exists. "I volunteer at hunger shelters because I believe in God" does prove that you have a motive for your actions.
You will not sway an Atheist with promises of eternal reward or threat of eternal damnation. You can't point to heaven or hell on a map, so there's no evidence of their existence. Furthermore, bribery and intimidation are the tools of those who seek power, not those who seek redemption.
The Bible is not regarded as the word of God to an Atheist. It's a book written by men. Using it as evidence or proof of anything more than your motives for doing what you do is going to be dismissed.

Even if the conversation never ensues, it's a universal truth that action speaks louder than words. People DO take notice of those who act in accordance with a respect and love based lifestyle. They feel good when they see a person helping another person - and in fact, it makes them want to help out themselves. One need only look at the total figures of collected donations for the victims of Hurricane Katrina and the World Trade Center attacks to see this in action. Deed follows deed. Tell a person what to do, and you may get them to do it... Make them want to do it, and it'll get done, no matter what.

Ultimately, salvation has very little to do with saying the words "I believe Jesus Christ is the son of God and died for my sins." There are many, many people - some of whom hold the highest offices in the American government - who say this, and then go on to live lives that, by any account, are not at all Christ-like. How many people in your church have spent a week engaging in debauchery and other 'sinful' behaviors, only to appear in church on Sunday, ready to ask forgiveness for what they've done? And how many go right back out and do it again? How are these people better than those who live good lives and help their neighbor and further advance brotherhood and unity... But don't believe in God?

Which of these two types of people would you rather point to and say, "I taught them that?"

If you're more interested in lip service than in actually influencing people to live better lives, I'd say you need to revisit that book you proclaim to live by and, you know...

...Actually read it.

* * *

(Permalink)

238 Comments:

chronicbliss said...: Sadly, I know plenty of people to whom the words really are the most important thing. It doesn't matter how good a person someone may be, how Christ-like and charitable and humble, if he doesn't walk into that church every week or give enough money to it or have himself dipped in the sacred dunk-tank, he's on par with murderers and devil-worshippers. But if you do get baptised you've got a free pass for assholishness. Why? Because these people are Saved, and once you're Saved it doesn't matter what you do, you will be forgiven. So they can be hypocritical greedy adulterous jerks all week long because they pay their tithes and say their prayers and donate to causes that send bibles, not food or medicine, to undeveloped parts of the world.

Seems that even atheists understand the message of the bible better than the Christians. Be a good person is what I always thought it meant, but churches seem to teach that it means to be an annoying fuck who strives toward a convert-quota.; 3/27/2008 12:49 PM
opiumfireworksandlead said...: Christianity is an absolute stain on society. Take a good read-through of Proverbs or James and put a check-mark next to every command that is utterly ignored by "Christians".

I believe that the Bible is God-inspired, etc. etc. The hypocrisy just pisses me off.; 3/27/2008 1:04 PM
Deliasgone said...: You should print this out as a pamphlet to hand back to the human spam and leave on bathroom counters.; 3/27/2008 2:45 PM
Mike said...: Great job on this one, Joe! It's very thorough and comprehensive, and it needed desperately to be said.; 3/27/2008 3:09 PM
Scott said...: Insert "Some" in front of everyone's group attack on Christians here and I'll agree!

Also, mmm bacon.; 3/27/2008 5:19 PM
Anonymous said...: The abridged version: "Practice what you preach while living and let live." How novel!; 3/27/2008 5:30 PM
Thom said...: First off, I am an atheist. Now, onto my actual point. I very much respect the author of this article. Very much indeed. However, it is true that Christians and other religious people tend to become absorbed in the technical aspects of the religion because that is precisely what the people "running" the religion want, and therefore the incentives for the believers line up accordingly. Crippling the reasoning faculty directly produces passionately driven, weak-minded, hypocritical assholes who think they're Saved. I of course have no issue with people being truly good, but the "enlightened" religious people would have done that regardless, in their own way.; 3/27/2008 7:27 PM
Anonymous said...: I have encountered Christians who knock on my door to just "have a little chat". I also have an ex-colleague who constantly requests me to just "drop in his church" for a Sunday.

And the irritating part to me is that these people know I'm a Muslim . I think that they just need to realise that not everyone can be Christians or agree with their doctrine.

To be fair, I've also met some Christians who are pretty nice and not pushy; 3/27/2008 10:23 PM
Dunlap said...: Very nice article, very nice indeed. Should be required reading for all Christians.; 3/27/2008 10:58 PM
Sue said...: I'm a Christian, and agree with this post. The Amway comparison says it all. I am happy to report, though, that I don't hang out with people who push their beliefs on others, even though I can relate to what you're saying. (In fact, I avoid conversations with people who do, because even as a Christian, I feel like I'm being "taken hostage".) Luckily, most people I know, regardless of their religion, seem to follow the advice given here.; 3/27/2008 11:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Screw you, you aren't a christian, don't tell me how to live my life.; 3/27/2008 11:43 PM
Rick C said...: Awesome article! I agree with much, if not most of it, and it is very well put.
I am in fact a Christian - I am studying to enter into ministry one day and may in fact leave my 6 figure job to do so-(but I will likely wait a few more years until my kids are out of school-I don't expect to make much money where I think I will be going).
Anyways, I am currently taking a course on evangelism, so I have been giving a lot of thought to the topic as well.What you say makes a lot of sense to me, and I really appreciate your respectful approach that you bring to the conversation.
I used to be quite 'conservative'.Now I am much more modrate, and the irony of it is that my faith is stronger than ever, and my awareness of God's love in my day to day life is deeper than any day I might have felt 'on fire' for God after pushing tracts into peoples hands.

There is a new stream of thinking that is flowing in the church-it is called by some the 'emerging' church, and you hear a lot about the 'conversation'.It is all about sharing,relationship with others, and looking for common ground with people of all faiths (including good atheist folk like yourself!).Like you have said yourself,if there is any truth or merit to our(Christians) claims, why should it not be more evident by our very lives and prescence?

The holy lives of the saints have been portrayed by painters over the centuries by halos. When was the last time you met a person that exuded such a prescence that it was palpable?
I guess it's because many of them would rather help the orphaned babies of aids striken Africa than pass out tracts in Maconalds. Although you will find them with their sleeves rolled up at the shelters and soup lines too...
God Bless you,sir.
Rick; 3/27/2008 11:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Agreed. I'm a Christian college student involved in a Christian organization on campus that, at least in my perspective, pushes "random evangelism." It very much frustrates me for the reasons you stated. I do think that in some cases, God makes it possible for this to work (I have seen it happen). However, just talking to a random person, they have no reason to believe you. Your best piece of evidence for God is your life, which is why living according to the Bible is so important.

At least, that is what I believe. I hope it helps someone to understand that not all evangelical Christians fit the stereotype.; 3/27/2008 11:58 PM
Oldestgenxer said...: Yeah, I'm a Christian. So many of the evangelicals...have no idea what the other side is like, so they have no frame of reference when dealing with anyone who doesn't agree with them. Like the supervisor I had who didn't think I was Christian enough because I belong to the wrong church. This lesson you wrote should be taught in missionary schools, swear to God. It's a lesson I learned, but also my temperment: I don't want to force you to believe anything you don't want. It worked for me, it makes me happy. Live and let live. Don't mock me, and I won't mock you. You know, to your face.; 3/28/2008 12:15 AM
jacob said...: dude I'm totally with you.
you should join my club.
you should join my family.
you should join my life.

I love you.

fucking retard.; 3/28/2008 12:21 AM
Tanner Allison said...: This post has been removed by the author.; 3/28/2008 12:29 AM
Tom said...: I didn't read all the other comments - time constraints suck - but as a Christian who somehow comes in frequent contact with hardcore Atheists on a regular basis, I have to compliment you both on your content and your approach. Oh, and the writing style was clever. But that's just my desire for constant entertainment speaking.

It seems like both sides (that is, the religious and the non) forget that they speak primarily from personal experiences when they make most of their arguments. We forget that other people haven't seen, heard, and felt the same emotions as we have. We forget that we're different. I certainly do. Christians assume (and rightfully so, from their perspective) that any individual who doesn't worship Christ is going to Hell. Though unpleasant and perhaps delusional, the fact remains that Christians honestly desire to help those around them. In an eternal and temporal sense of the word "help." As irritating as he is, the Christian that keeps asking if you wanna hang out or check out his bible study ("because it's a great group of people") does so not out of some kind of churchy obligation, but because he cared. Whether Christians succeed in telling people about Christ or just piss people off depends on the methods they use. As evidenced by...well, every example I've ever witnessed, megaphones don't really work.

At the same time, Christians forget that "saving the damned" is far less about what they say than about what they do. I think you hit that point on the head. I think hypocrisy might just be, as the quote goes, the greatest single cause of atheism in the world today, in a very pitiable way. Yet it is an intrinsically unsolvable problem. I mean, even brief observation of the world leads to an easy conclusion: people suck. Though we have our bright moments, a good portion of each person's life is devoted to trying to take care of himself, not others. We kind of miss that whole self-sacrifice bit.

Unfortunately, being Christian doesn't make you perfect. And it certainly doesn't make you morally invincible. I think to most Christians, it means to have an unshakeable comfort in the sacrifice of Christ Jesus. I'm a Christian and I fail daily in more ways than I could possibly describe here. Christianity, if nothing else, gives me hope.

Maybe right now you're thinking "kid, you have no idea what you're saying. I don't need hope. I can accept life as it is, and I don't need any unicorns or back massages to make me feel better." That's fine. I understand. I try really hard to at least realize your position. Of course, because I am in my position, I certainly don't believe you. I would ask if you have actually considered the moral and eternal ramifications of that statement. And of course you would tell me that you have, and that I should back off and stop yelling into the megaphone. Fair enough.

I guess the point of this ramble is that miscommunication goes both ways. I, as a Christian, fully accept the responsibility to follow Christ both in my actions and my words, yet I also realize the monstrous impossibility of my fulfilling that responsibility.

I guess the point is that, where Christians should try to understand the perspective of the atheists, atheists should realize that Christians honestly believe what they say. I will speak from experience (it's all I have; I must sing a song of myself - thank you Walt Whitman) and say that I don't want to irritate you. I certainly don't want to condemn you. I do, out of the love given me, want to help you.

I hope I have made myself clear. My intentions are to insult no one. God Bless.

Feel free to e-mail me with hate/input/agreement/discussion - I probably won't come back to this page, but I always like to talk to people...thanks.; 3/28/2008 12:45 AM
jacob said...: that was good tom.

and really good, not like I was making fun of the real douchebag.

go us.; 3/28/2008 1:22 AM
Cindy said...: Excellent and intelligent. You appeal to logic.
I'm a Christian Buddhist. My boyfriend is a Atheist Buddhist (he follows the practices for their benefits while not actually believing in the deities, etc). We differ opinions on the role and need of religion, and why it persists. Religions can have a huge and negative hold on people. Wars are fought over beliefs. Some doctrines contradict common sense. Why would people do this? They are vulnerable and need to make sense of their existence. In some parts of the world, people don't have their basic needs met and religion is their only comfort, as illusionary as it may seem to you or I. It may be the thing that keeps a community together and is the vehicle that provides them support, not just emotionally but on day-to-day needs.
Yes, you and I know better. So why can't they finally "get" it? Much more of a complicated answer that we like to acknowledge.
I realize you weren't stating "This is how you turn an Christian into an Atheist". But wanted to point out...there are so many reasons people refuse to give up religion. I won't go into what would be a very, very long comment post. But only ask atheists to remember the reasons people persist in their own beleifs are complicated and varied, and that religion serves a purpose in their lives. Just as them asking you to believe in unicorns will never convert you, appealing to their logical side will not convince them.; 3/28/2008 1:42 AM
Dave Dunwoody said...: Wonderful post!

-Dave; 3/28/2008 2:33 AM
Grace said...: marc and i just read this and we have determined that it is really insightful and deliciously written. what inspired you to write it? do tell!

m&g; 3/28/2008 5:15 AM
JtP said...: Just a quick note:

By "go us," I'm going to assume that "Jacob" means Christians... Which would put him in league with Christians - fair assumption, right?

So, it would seem that a Christian with a viewpoint different from my own (which, I will gladly say, I took GREAT measure to ensure was fair, honest and uninsulting) found it necessary to call me both a fucking retard and a douche. And another "Anonymous" Christian decided to tell me "screw you" because I'm not one.

Now, unless I'm absolutely mistaken, this would be the first transgression toward Jacob (and almost all of you) I've made, since we've never met before. So, by Jesus's math, I've got 489 more forgivings to go before you're allowed to go insulting me (Matthew 18:22).

Way to win me over by following the teachings of your savior, guys. Glad to see you guys got so much from my article :); 3/28/2008 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: ** an atheist’s unapologetic apology **

“Theology is a subject without an object.”

Don’t forget belief is not only optional, it’s really unfit for human consumption.

There is no supernatural realm — from which it follows that there are not two worlds (the “spiritual” one superordinate to nature), eternity is a fiction, no god whatsoever exists.

Xianity, like its murderous near eastern brother islam, its idiot father judaism, and its hate-based grandfather zoroastrianism, arose late in recorded history and it has been decaying at an increasing rate since 1600.

Enough of this heresy born of Paul’s perverse twist on hellenistic judaism and overlaid with rites and symbols gleaned from the back alleys of slums in the eastern roman empire. Batman is more real than “Christ” ever was . . .

Enough xian intellectual nihilism and perversion of sexuality and hatred of woman and self-righteous revenge seeking. (1Cor1 1:end)

“God’s only excuse is that he does not exist.” — Stendahl

What a relief!

I feel better now, thanks.

celsus2
© 2008; 3/28/2008 12:59 PM
Anonymous said...: I would rather die believing and find out I'm wrong than die not believing and find out I'm wrong.; 3/28/2008 1:31 PM
Robert said...: Jeez Joe, can we please separate the 13-year-old forum flamers whose parents drag them to church and bible study every week from the Christians that actually live their lives trying to emulate their/our Savior. I'm really trying to figure out why this article was written in the first place, was it to get a bunch of Diggs for your site? Or were you just looking to provide a forum for Christian-bashing? Our religion is attacked daily, by the non-religious, or radical extremists, but I can see why you would want to pile on. Thanks; 3/28/2008 1:49 PM
JtP said...: If you see what I wrote as "piling on", you've either misread it or have some obsession with being the martyr.

The entire point of the article was to help the whole of your faith from repelling folks, which it's doing. Christianity isn't being "attacked" - it's being reacted to negatively.

It's like that kid in the classroom who keeps talking to everyone while they're trying to do what they're doing and wonders why everyone avoids him at the playground.

And I run no ads on my site, and this is just my journal - a place for me to throw up what I think and feel. There's no real reason for this thing to be popular on digg or reddit or (insert social whatever site here). That stuff is for Mentally Incontinent :); 3/28/2008 1:55 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm going to put it out there for all of those who do not understand what it means to be a "Christian". It does not mean that we think we are perfect, holier than thou, or better than anyone. Christian means that the person is a believer in Christ and nothing more. Very well written post and you are right. There are some holy rollers out there that all they do is preach hellfire and damnation and that reaches noone. God is love and that's what they should be preaching. Love thy neighbour as thyself. Peace....One Love...

Marshall E. Smith II (A Believer); 3/28/2008 2:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, Written! Though, I think that for some reason those that are agnostic are lumped in with atheists. I believe that a good portion of people who are categorized this way Believe it is arrogant to believe you have the answer without empirical data. They are looking, but they also believe it to be foolhardy to pass judgment either way without tangible evidence. So most of what you are saying applies to this group also.; 3/28/2008 3:40 PM
Eric said...: A post that unapologetically explains the divide without indulging in juvenile religion-bashing. I'm quite impressed.; 3/28/2008 3:43 PM
Matt Ladwig said...: Thanks Joe, except for causing me to piss my pants from laughter. I will send you the dry cleaning bill.

I will reply to the atheist/agnostic by anonymous:

From my experience all atheists that I have ever met are agnostic and most agnostics are also atheists. A lot of agnostic just don’t like to use the term or and some don’t understand it’s meaning. People are either believers in a god or they don’t think there is one. Even if you call yourself an agnostic (you don’t think there is evidence to KNOW if there is a god or not), you still either believe that there probably is or is not a god. If you think there probably is a god, you are a theist. If you don’t think there is, than you are an atheist. That is it, you are either one or the other.

The only way that you can be an agnostic without being an atheist, is to realize that there is no reasonable evidence for a god, but still choose to believe. That position makes little sense from my perspective. I am an agnostic atheist towards god for the same reason that I am an agnostic non-believer towards unicorns… there is no evidence to “prove” the existence of unicorns either way, so the logical stance is to remain an unbeliever until reasonable evidence comes forth.

When someone asks you about the existence of unicorns, do you tell them you are agnostic?; 3/28/2008 7:58 PM
Anonymous said...: First off, I want to say I didn't read through all of this. BUT I did read through the main points.

Secondly, as a Christian, I must say that I fully and completely agree with everything you've pointed out.

Even in different church groups there's this "human spam"; if you're not part of MY division (i.e. Catholic, Baptist, etc.) then you're going to hell because you're not a true Christian.

I have many atheist friends, and many other friends who don't share my beliefs. And I think it's great. Religion/beliefs/faith whatever you want to call it is always a topic to talk about with us and I find other views absolutely intriguing.

Anyway, the reason I wanted to post a comment is to say how much respect I have for you for not attacking the Christian faith and simply stating your point without being offensive. The unicorn thing was brilliant. And it shows that even though you may not share the Christian beliefs you still respect a person's choice to that religion.

I have one atheist friend who does nothing but attack what I believe in and does it in a mean, spiteful way. He calls me ignorant for believing in what I believe and I call him ignorant for not respecting my faith when I fully respect his beliefs.

Ah. I wish more people could be like you.

Cudos.; 3/28/2008 8:48 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm a Christian from the UCC, Barak's church. I would just like to say that all those proselytizing fucks annoy the hell out of me even. I just think jesus said to love thats all. No political bullshit, just love everyone. I just wish more people viewed the Bible as a good source for metaphors for life rather than hard fucking fact. Well, I think people need to believe, or not believe what makes them happy. Diversity makes this world what it is. We need to love each other.; 3/28/2008 9:13 PM
Kagehi said...: I swear that I had read this post before some place, and even commented such someplace else. Nearly everything stated has been something pointed out by moderates, used as examples (unicorn arguments are common some places as examples of why, "let me tell you about X", just annoys people, etc.

The only flaw in the whole thing, as someone pointed out already, is that such witness won't help in what is presumably the underlying goal of suggesting to people that god is worth believing in. We, i.e. those who mostly don't, or completely don't, believe already know people can do good deeds and that many things can drive them to do so. That your source of such is in some qualitative fashion better, and therefor should be considered is a) built of premises already rejected, in at least 70-80% of the cases of atheists I know of, by people that rejected religion, having started from *your* perspective in the first place and b) not supportable by the evidence of history, again, both from the perspective of outsiders *and* those that rejected the inside perspective.

You will get respect for your *personal* actions, possible respect for the group you belong to breaking the usual mold, and a lot more friends, all around, but.. you are not going to get respect for the underlying ideology. Not from those who have never experienced it, and absolutely not from the those that finally took the leap from your side, and instead of finding cause, found relief, amazement and freedom to question things that they never previously had.

Still, I commend the ideas, if not the expected outcome. The other sort are making themselves extinct, even among other believers, by being pests, predators and parasites to everyone, including other faithful.; 3/29/2008 12:58 AM
Kagehi said...: "finding cause,"

should have been: "finding chaos,"

Long day at work, not enough sleep, and a bad habit of not proof reading. lol; 3/29/2008 1:00 AM
Abbie said...: Absolutely spot on!

Napalm Evangelism has completely destroyed Christianities credibility in most of the world, especially here in the west.

As a Christian who grew up in a form of Napalm Christianity, I can state that it not only negatively affects those you're supposed to come in contact with, it also negatively affects you, and shrinks your horizons dramatically.

This is a breath of fresh air in a society that seems to be Christians VS. Atheists when it doesn't need to be that way.

Great, great article.; 3/29/2008 2:00 AM
Xaviermuskie said...: Joe, I believe you have now missed my point. While I have some quarrel with your original post content-wise, I have no problem with your act of posting it. I wish I could turn my thoughts into words that I myself could understand, not to mention a segment of the outside population. But you must know that by allowing comments to be made on such a post you allow others to bash both my religion and those of us that follow it. We've been called hypocritical greedy adulterous jerks and proselytizing fucks, and with these comments being on your website you are alloted a sort of ownership over them all.

What I don't get is that most Christians of the missionary kind don't preach or attempt to convert out of some sort of superiority complex, they do it because they truly want you to be happy, not only physically, but eternally. No one yells at people who work at soup kitchens for shoving food down homeless people's throats. No one berates doctor's for taking the hypocratic oath. We all as Christians have taken a spiritual hypocratic oath so to speak, and I don't believe that's such a bad thing.; 3/29/2008 2:13 AM
The Jen said...: The people who really need to digest your message are, unfortunately, the people saying "screw you" and "f-ing retard", and the people not bothering to read these types of messages at all.

Christians are not necessarily offensive, it's the jingoistic way some of them assume that everyone else needs Jesus shoved down their throats.

The pendulum is starting to swing in the other direction.; 3/29/2008 12:21 PM
Kagehi said...: No one yells at people who work at soup kitchens for shoving food down homeless people's throats. No one berates doctor's for taking the hypocratic oath. We all as Christians have taken a spiritual hypocratic oath so to speak, and I don't believe that's such a bad thing.

Some people *might* get a bit annoyed about the people feeding the homeless, if all evidence tends to suggest that a great many of those people choose to be, and that building such a place will just attract more of them (having that argument in my own city, and its just as stupid imho as giving out needles to prevent drug addicts from passing diseases to each other, which lacking the higher morals that would *require* curing the problem, instead of just fixing a symptom. And yet, all we do is fix the symptoms, by jailing the ones we catch, without treatment on one hand, while helping them stay vaguely healthy on the other. Its just too "expensive" and, the one I really don't get is, "somehow *wrong* to help them quit using medical means..." Huh?!? Guess who makes that argument the most often..

As for doctors, sure, but part of their oath isn't just "do good", its "harm no one while doing it". The Hippocratic oath of religion (and ironically your spelling may be more accurate) for religion is *usually*, do what I think will be good, and damn the real consequences. Doctors that tried that would be fired and their licenses revoked.

Its not enough to think you are doing what will benefit society, you need to be right too. Otherwise, the unintended consequences will almost always make the cure worse than the disease. And the one thing generally common to "all" missionaries is that they start with the premise that what they bring is "always" best, and ignore all evidence they may be wrong. Its hasn't exactly produced great successes in foreign countries, and its created a mess in the US too, often with two *missionary* groups siting on opposite sides of the same street, both convinced without one shred of reason to be such, that they are right, and the other people over there are screwing up the world. The only time they do agree is if someone that thinks they are both wrong comes along, and then all differences, temporarily, dissolve, so they can challenge their common enemies.

As one website that specializes in denialism and its examples, this is one of the traits of cranks, not clear thinkers. And some of the examples can be positively absurd. Like the two bozos, one insisting on Biblical literalism, and the other on theistic evolution, who also can't agree on how old the world is, but both of which are just happy as clams to help each other attack some completely made up version of the real theory, which bares the same resemblance to the real thing as Lego Star Wars does to Star Trek.

Again, thinking you are right is not the same as being right, and if you are wrong, the effect may be either immediate, or long term, and the worst problems arise when the advocates are long dead when the chickens finally come to roost. Better to be at *somewhat* skeptical of your own certainties, instead of just taking oaths to uphold things, which most of those which do so will never examine.; 3/29/2008 12:26 PM
JtP said...: Xaviermuskie, I believe that Kagehi said pretty well what I intended to say in reply.

Christianity does have it's own oath of sorts. Witnessing is ingrained into the practice of the religion (for the most part).

The problem with your analogy is that your decision to undertake that responsibility is your decision - not mine. Who knows - maybe I've been a Christian before and now I no longer choose to be. Maybe I have no knowledge of Christianity as a faith, but things are working just fine for me. Maybe I just plain don't feel like talking to strangers today... In any case, I repeat my point from my article:

Just because YOU need to say it does not mean that I want or need to hear it. Knowing that I might not, if you choose to go forward with talking to me about it, you've just shown a rather immodest concern for my feelings on the subject.

Whether or not being disrespectful is "right" or "wrong" on a grand spiritual scale is a topic for another discussion. THIS discussion pertains directly to the result of doing that, and how it's hurting the adoption rates of the tenets of your faith.

Your actions are driving people away. If that's alright with you / your minister / your church / the faith as a whole because "hey, we tried," then I must not understand the intended purpose of witnessing.; 3/29/2008 12:52 PM
Xaviermuskie said...: (aka Robert) Joe and Kagehi, I'm obviously overmatched here intellectually, and I applaud your cleverness in taking my misspelling and turning it around to suit your own argument. But lets cut the bull here and understand that your comments go deeper than just "if Christians were a little less forward with their message, perhaps we would receive it better." We both know that's not the case. I think the root of this argument is the feeling that Christians are stupid for believing in something they can't see or prove, and atheists don't want to listen to that stupidity. Fine, don't.

What I have a problem with is the lumping of Christians together as if we're not a collection of individual parts. If I get robbed by a black man, am I correct in calling all black people niggars? Then why if you witness people who call themselves Christians acting not-so Christ-like, do you have the right to say that all Chrisians are hypocrits who sin all week and are forgiven on Sunday. I would venture that Atheists have as many sinners as we do, even if you call them something else. Our religion never claims perfection, either as a whole or individually. Being Catholic, I get to see first-hand the fallacies and failings of our leaders. That being said, Christ has given us a template with which to mold our lives, as impossible as that may be. Would you tell me that if everyone in the world tried to live more like Jesus (without taking into account religion, but just actions) that the world wouldn't be a better place?

Someone said they would prefer being a good person over a Christian who gets weekly forgiveness and acts like an asshole. I'm sorry, but we believe that neither of these are good enough. If heaven is our ultimate goal (it is) then we must strive not only to be a good person, but to do so in a manner that emulates Jesus. Since Joe, you claim to have read the bible, you will know that Jesus was not only our savior, but a prophet as well. Our religion and beliefs require us to walk in His footsteps, and be a prophet for Him.

I don't really know what else to say, I know that this is an argument that has endured for 2000 years, and won't likely be solved on a blog such as this. What I feel can be fixed is the misrepresentation of Christians as a group of hypocrits, when really what we are is a group of peaceful people who strive for Heaven, and want to see as many people there with us as possible.; 3/29/2008 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: @ The Jen *everyone else needs Jesus shoved down their throats.*

i don't know much about Christianity but wouldn't that be some kind of sin ... ;)

immature humor aside, on the point of the 'Christian Hippocratic oath' being at its heart a good intention i can't help but be reminded of a quote from a book i once read 'the greatest harm comes from the kindest intentions...' then going on to describe a person who broke his leg and slowly because his friends did so much to help him let his leg rest to speed recovery he permanently lost use of both due to atrophy.
which is kind of what you have described with over prosterisation (sp?) causing a drop in conversions to Christianity and a rapid increase in smaller faiths such as paganism and Atheism (though i think that the large number ale, cake and nudity may have something to do with paganism's popularity...*joke*).
keep up the good posts; 3/29/2008 4:45 PM
Kagehi said...: Umm. Ok. First off, living like Jesus presents a number of odd positions. It could mean, "allowing destiny to happen, because you think the long term result of allowing harm to yourself will help others.", it may mean the goofy, "render unto Caesar what is his", but then you have to work how *who* that is, and what precisely is theirs, instead of yours. Does it mean casting out demons? Umm, yeah, that has worked.. How about making things happen by *believing* strongly enough that you can heal, walk on water, etc. The only people even claiming to do that stuff in the last 2,000 years have all been frauds and charlatans. It has to either be considered a lie, an exaggeration, or something make up later, then inserted into the story to make the whole thing sound more plausible.

The point being, you can't talk about Jesus without dragging all the baggage along for the ride, much of which is questionable, absurd, or obviously fabricated. But, here is the odd thing. You can divorce the principles themselves from the supposed stories they come from, and then you find that they are shared by a vast number of faiths, all of whom have their own silly claims as to what "produces" them and how its somehow impossible for them to be derived without knowledge of that set of fables. You also find that even people that reject the fables, or never heard of them, manage to derive the same ideals and moral frameworks. There are any number of answers to this, but its **pure** hubris to presume that because you think your answer is the right one, when you can't even effectively provide evidence of the myth and fable behind it, never mind provide a solid and irrefutable connection between the belief system and the moral frame works.

Frankly, if you really want an answer to if the world would be better if everyone was like Jesus, I would say no. Rational people don't curse out of season fruit trees for refusing to bear fruit for them, for just one example. And anyone that thinks Caesar should get to tell you what *is* Caesars, without any challenge to that declaration, isn't democratic. And those are just two interpretations that could be applied to what "being like Jesus" could mean. Who gets to say those are "wrong" interpretations, and having made such a proclamation, how are they any different than the sort of "preach first and do good works second" people we are talking about?

I also wish you would stop doing two things - 1. Presuming, while arguing that we shouldn't, that atheists are some uniform group. Ever hear the phrase "herding cats"? Its commonly used to describe precisely why, until recently, atheists have have *no* organized effort to speak of, while trying to defend their general views (which are not always even agreed on). 2. Putting words in our mouths by automatically presuming that we are a) talking about *all* Christians when we point out some behavior we dislike, or b) that because we comprehend satire and irony, any use of it means we are calling Christians stupid.

You are hardly stupid. There is however a term that is sometimes applicable to believers, "willfully ignorant". This is the opposite of stupid. It implies a concerted effort by a very smart and intelligent person to invent justifications, apologetics and explanations for what they believe in, which *they* find reasonable, in the face if things that the *choose* not to see, recognize, accept or acknowledge. Einstein had fits when we realized that quantum physics was a consequence of *his* ideas, and despite being genius, spent much of his remaining life trying to come up with reasons why it *couldn't* be what his own theories suggested. He didn't however have 2.85 billion people all going, "Gosh! Our faith also says that's impossible, so you're right, God really doesn't place dice with the universe!" That is the reality with faith. There are 2.85 billion people in the US, convinced that some form of theology "must" be correct. Its kind of hard to escape that, just as it was damn near impossible to escape every other "belief" that 95% of the people in the known world agreed with, at one point or another.

As, to the last Anon post.. I would love to here what supernatural ideas and or presumptions atheists cling to as a whole that makes it a faith... The very definition of the word implies *belief* in things that atheists reject, either based on there being no point in believing in them, or the odds being so small that there isn't much chance of them existing. Worse, the fact that you can actually get some atheists that believe in things like ghosts, but reject gods... also kind of undermines the idea that it qualifies as a "faith". The only reason its legally considered one is because it would be perverse to suggest, for example, that one should protect someone's right to free speech, but not their right to shut up, or their right to wear bow ties, but not their right to dislike, and not choose to wear one, etc. If you are going to lend any sort of special protection to someone's *right* to a thing, the default position is to *also* protect their right to "not" have it.

As for your contention about paganism.. You are wrong, there are Christian nudist/naturist groups that make a good case for the Bible not being against nudity, so long as its done in humility, and not to show off. You may be right about the beer and cake, and since the nudity often involved sex... lol; 3/29/2008 9:10 PM
Xaviermuskie said...: You know, part of me wishes that I could go back and fix my original post to read...

TL.. DR

lol; 3/29/2008 9:49 PM
TT said...: I gotta say that I appreciate the original posting. It was insightful. I think it also indicates, possibly, a lack of understanding of Christian motives. I, as a Christian, only broach the subject of my faith when it is obvious that I am welcome to do so. This being said, all Christians have a responsibility (the Great Commission, ie, Mt 28:18-20) to tell of the faith that we have. We are not directed to exactly how to do so, so I choose to use methods that have shown to be reasonable, such as getting to know a person before discussing the subject, unless specifically invited to do so.

I think another thing that seems to have been missed by many who posted comments is this. I have the faith that I claim for real, valid reasons. Others, Atheists included, often have reasons as well. That's a good thing. Simply because God cannot be "whirred up" in a test tube does not mean that there is no evidence. Imperical evidence is not the only form of evidence. Our western culture puts way too much emphasis on measurable data. There are many things that cannot be measured, but are very real despite that fact. (emotions, for instance)

A point that many Christians seem to miss is that it isn't the man that causes anyone to be "saved" anyway. God (through action of the Holy Spirit) convicts, enlightens and draws people to God. Man has the right of free will to accept the offer of relationship or not. God respects the free will of man, so why shouldn't I? The ultimate point is this...no matter what I say to a person who isn't a believer, that person has free will and God is the one who actually does the work anyway. My part is to simply be a part of the process, which can be very humbling and rewarding. Finally, not everyone will accept Christ's offer of a relationship. That's just the way it is.

Finally, there are many, many good people in the world who do great things, and they aren't Christians. There are many Christians who do reprehensible things. God does not request me to judge anyone, but to love people and serve people as I believe Christ did on the cross of Calvary. If I stick to Loving God, and loving others, I'll be doing what God asks of me. I don't believe that loving someone means trying to force them to believe me (which can't actually be done), but I also do believe that part of loving people is to find a way to tell them that I truly believe that without a relationship with Christ, they are in great danger.

No insults to people of any faith (or lack of faith in God) is intended. I only wish to try and share my thoughts on a subject that happens to be very important to me, and should be important to Christians in general.

Thanks for reading my ramblings.

TT; 3/30/2008 1:03 AM
Sir Padfoot said...: I would just like to address the one comment made in which it was stated that "being an agnostic theist is irrational." This statement is completely false.

Being a gnostic is always completely irrational, since there is no evidence for either side. Most atheists are gnostic, saying that they think that they do know whether or not a god exists, and that the answer to that fundamental question is no. Most Christians too are gnostic, citing things like the bible as evidence for the existence of God. However, these are both irrational stances.

The only viable ones are those of agnosticism. Whichever way you then choose to lean is completely alright. Now, agnostic theism is the only rational defensible form of faith. At the point where you honestly acknowledge the lack of evidence for God, but emphasize rather the effect that your faith has had/has on your life, your belief in the existence of God is justifiable.

A belief in a factual basis for God is dangerous, because it undermines faith. I have to paraphrase Douglas Adam here, and mention his story about God disappearing in a poof of logic when he proves his own existence. Faith is what really does the trick, not knowledge.; 3/30/2008 1:58 AM
Anonymous said...: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe."
1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 3/30/2008 2:43 AM
Jon Price said...: Thanks Joe for a well thought out post. As a Christian, it does give me food for thought. I do have a message that I believe in and that is that "Jesus Christ died to save sinners of whom I am chief"

However, I cannot believe that no commentor pointed this out. If you are a Bible believing Christian (which would imply that you are a reading one too) you would know that the unicorn is/was an extinct species that was difficult or impossible to domesticate.

http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=unicorn&qs_version=9; 3/30/2008 9:17 AM
Doug Hagler said...: This is an excellent post, and I couldn't agree more.; 3/30/2008 7:31 PM
Kagehi said...: Well, Sir Padfoot. You are correct, one could be a gnostic, and faithful. I find it slightly absurd thought, since you have to reach that conclusion without *any* data, or with a lot of *bad* data. I.e., you have to, on some level, ignore the fact that *every* case that has been tested, by every person that has "allowed" themselves to be tested, as well as pretty much all phenomena, have either been debunked, or explained without the supernatural. That kind of just leaves you with what is called goal post moving, i.e., "Yes, well, all 'those' cases where debunked or explained, but what about --this one--? Huh, huh... Answer that one!" Its also the same goofy method ID tries to use to suggest irreducible complexity, when they are not a) busy using already shredded examples, or b) ignoring all evidence that irreducibility "can" develop randomly. Or, alternatively, the other "source" for belief becomes entirely personal, and no honest person would call that credible, not even the believer.

Beyond that, one atheist on PZ's site, during a discussion of just what the terms really mean, stated, "I am agnostic about the existence of god, since its not possible for me to prove such a thing *can't* exist, but I am also 100% agnostic about every goody made up description of what god is that man ever came up with." As near as I can tell, the only difference between gnostics and atheists is that the former figure that, maybe, sort of possibly, *one* of the descriptions we have *might* describe the real thing, while atheist take the view that there is jack in any of them that isn't solely human, and usually by the religions own rules on the subject, also logically inconsistent with the faith, since almost all of them that insist on some definition being "right" also babble about god being unknowable, indescribable, and a whole list of other things he/she/it can't be *if* any of the existing descriptions for god come even vaguely close to being accurate.

A theists is an atheist with one god they don't reject. A gnostic is a theist that hopes one of them is real, or actually hasn't seen Homer Simpson's glorious rebuttal to Pascal's Wager. An agnostic is a gnostic that just isn't sure which god might be the right one, or there is one, or how close to true that description is. An atheist is someone whose view ranges from, "None of them can be the right one, even of there *is* one", to, "And besides, if you want to claim there is one, you need **some sort** of evidence for it, or otherwise, its not necessary to explain anything. Claims that it doesn't explain stuff like love, which are just as 100% human derived concepts, which describe behaviors, and which 'can' differ in expression by a fair margin, don't count as evidence, especially when there *are* emotionally unsatisfying, but which do describe why they exist, and what they are."

So, to put it simply, until/unless someone digs up the note books of Moses, or some writings from an ancient priest, or, in modern terms, someone forgets to burn the notes and papers of the current pope, then accidentally lets them into the hands of the public, and one of those documents provides a clear description of the "invention" of religion... Once you have something that people believe as a reasonable answer, the only way it gets abandoned is if its replaced. And, since everyone, including atheists, are stuck with a world where a lot of people believe, and someone invented the whole mess, *everyone* is agnostic, just with varying degrees of how much disbelief they are willing to suspend to fit in to the group (or how much understanding they have to help them suspend it).

Oh, and Annon... Corinthians 1:18-21 speaks to a time where the "knowledgable" would be considered special ed students in our time. Religion had no problem confounding such people, because such people had almost no understanding of *anything*. They where scholars because they wrote more, read more, and knew a bit more of the prevailing wisdom of the time. But, they knew almost nothing compared to today, or 200 years ago, or even 2,000. We are talking about the equivalent of if the professor from Gillagin's Island where frozen in time, then rescued from the island in Futurama's year 3,000. Most of the stuff they *knew*, all but the brain damaged, would consider foolish, absurd, or just plain wrong, today.

In modern times, its **far** more common for the faithful to be confounded by things the knowledgeable and wise manage to come up with. Its precisely with Luddite sects, literalists and others like them are panicked, paranoid and desperate at this point.; 3/30/2008 11:26 PM
Anonymous said...: so let me get this straight.
you're saying the crazy right wing evangelical people don't know how to convert people... so you give them pointers...

how about this as a pointer... "stop trying to convert people... ever"

i actually am offended about your comments on the unicorn, you've trivialized it and left out important details... first. it's invisible... and second: it's pink.; 3/31/2008 3:36 AM
Andy said...: I think the Bible should come with a bonus book: "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie. To oversimplify the book we can say that it is all centered around one ideal that we've all been taught our whole lives and that Christ himself said to follow over all other commandments. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The essence of this "golden rule" is present in, and in my opinion, the nucleus of every religion.

In Judaism - "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary." Talmud, Shabbat 31a

In Islam - "Not one of you truly believes until you wish for others what you wish for yourself." Mohammed, Hadith

In Buddhism - "Treat not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5.18

The list goes on, they're all the same.

So what happens when we force our beliefs on others? We are met with circumstances in which others force their opinion on us. I won't speak for everyone but I know I'm much more eager to listen to someone who has genuinely listened to me. To be respected we must respect. My first roommate in college used to play the victim and say, "Why do people always complain about Christians being intolerant? Christianity is an intolerant religion! That's just the way things are."

He was 100% right.

Anyone who pays attention to the magnitude of wonderfully informative bumper stickers that we are so lucky to have in such abundance knows that Gandhi once said, "I like your Christ but your Christians are so unlike him." I'm paraphrasing of course.

Jesus wouldn't have been a very big deal if he had run around condemning everyone he felt wasn't living his or her life correctly. He walked the walk and he got peoples attention.

This is probably really long and so in closing. EXCELLENT article. And correct me if I'm wrong, the point of Atheism was never intended to be an opposition to Christianity, right? And at the same time, those who fight and seek to stamp-out groups of people and ways of thinking must be met with like forces. None of this is new. :)

awelsh@utk.edu; 3/31/2008 3:40 AM
Bill Vincent said...: Another poster suggested copying this and printing it out to hand to people on occasion. I intend to do just that. (unless you contact me and ask me not to) This is probably the best written, most to-the point article on the subject I've ever read. Bravo, man, just bravo. Intelligent and witty, inforative without being condescending or insulting.; 3/31/2008 9:00 PM
JtP said...: Hey, if you think there's value in it, feel free to print and distribute this all you want :); 3/31/2008 9:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Sadly, I can't join Christianity - my testicles were ripped off in a bizarre boating accident, and I can't get into the kingdom of heaven (Deuteronomy 23:1).

I guess my point is that you had it so right with the unicorn analogy, why doesn't that carry through to Christianity?; 4/01/2008 12:50 PM
Greg Myers said...: While we're being honest, another question: Suppose you are to live with love and integrity, and that life of love and integrity was intriguing to an atheist. How much of what is appealing is a bi-product of faith, and how much is the work of the Holy Spirit?

A Christian will SAY, "Every good thing you see in me is God." But there are people of all faiths (and no faith) who live optimistic lives of loving service. Is this really God, or is this the power of living for others and the winsomeness of being happy, content and focused?; 4/01/2008 8:28 PM
Elaine said...: Excellent diatribe.; 4/01/2008 9:57 PM
Anonymous said...: The unicorn sounds more likely than a Christian following their own example. I am sure there is one in this world (Christian with jesus like qualities, not unicorn) however I have yet to meet one.; 4/01/2008 10:10 PM
Kelli said...: A large part of the anger and resentment that gets portrayed to Christians from atheists is from the very real repercussions of our lack of faith within society. As the majority, Christians in positions of power can reward other Christians because, naturally, being a Christian makes you more trustworthy, kind, etc. This is at least what Christians like to believe of themselves, so they do. I consistently do not reveal my true beliefs because I receive rude and insensitive comments that would not be acceptable against minorities even of other faiths.

For example, can you imagine a Presidental candidate claiming to be an atheist? No. Do you know why? Because the majority of Christians would not believe that an atheist would have their interests at heart. This despite the fact that most Christians and atheists live very similar lifestyles (charity-giving, golden rule, etc).

Also, the "New Atheism" is largely overblown. I always hear about this from Christians and it's so weird. You are a HUGE majority in the US. Your lobbies have huge control over congress. Just because the most conservative of you don't get your way on every piece of legislation, does not mean that you are being attacked? This is merely a fear tactic employed by churches to rally followers and fill the coffers.

Joe, I used to try to be as accepting and apologetic as you, but I have stopped. I will respect those who respect me (immensely), but not those who do not. But as even many of the Christians on this post admit, it is a part of their doctrine to be disrespectful. We probably aren't going to get along.

If I could say one thing to Christians, it would be:
I think you are just as stupid as you think I am. You probably already know why you think I am stupid. It has been highlighted with the unicorn argument. Why not believe in the unicorn? I don't just believe in the unicorn not because there is no proof. I don't believe in the unicorn because I can see right through it. I can see what went into making it. I can see the purpose that it served then and now. I can see human bias in it that proves that it was created by humans. The best analogy to the unicorn argument for Christians would be aliens. Plenty of people believe they exist. There is documented evidence. There is actually every reason in the world to believe in them. But if aliens are supposed to be foreign, why do they look so familiar?; 4/02/2008 1:44 AM
a said...: This... R... ossem!; 4/02/2008 3:32 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm sorry, I really don't want to be base about it, but when I read the comments left here by the obviously nice and friendly Christian faithful I get absolutely FREAKED OUT!!!

How the hell can these people 'live' their lives with their eyes glazed over in the BELIEF that they'll have a BETTER LIFE that lasts forever AFTER THEY DIE????? How can they be prepared to take that risk with the undeniable reality that is the here and now??

If you believe in a god then FOR GOD'S SAKE, forget all of your imaginary friends and concentrate on having real life grown up relationships with the people standing right in front of you! Religion is nothing more in REALITY than some common ground for the faithful to bond on that is an easy source of endless hours of animated discussion, but FOR CHRIST'S SAKE discuss some real modern life conundrums that society needs help in solving and MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE HERE AND NOW!

That way you don't need to thank the lord for a miracle, you can thank yourself for creating a better world.; 4/02/2008 5:18 AM
Anonymous said...: I, personally, think there's something wrong about marketing any belief in any way(annoying or not). You're basically telling them the most effective way to spread their "good" word(Have you seen what's written in that damn book?). Here's a new comparison: It's like your helping people selling machines that brainwashes people back into the Dark Ages. Yes, I am an atheist and I also respect whatever crap people choose to believe in, but whenever someone is spreading their faith(no matter how annoying they are)it's wrong. That's right, wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't religion's got a bad enough grip on our world? Someone(obviously a smart guy) once said(and I quote): "Religion once ruled the world. It's called the Dark Ages."

So, to sum up my incoherently written heretical ramblings: I'm not telling you to stop believing... I'm asking you to take a look at our history and maybe figure out that spreading belief well and effectively isn't such a good idea after all.; 4/02/2008 12:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Joe,

You get it.

Here's a little story...there once was a spring where the water was sweet and had the ability to heal any ailment that plagued any human. Some people found this spring and they told others of it. Soon after, many more people would visit this well in order to get a drink or just to satisfy their own curiosities. Soon after that, some people saw that the distribution of the water and the access to it was very chaotic. They decided to write rules and laws regarding how one should and should not use the water. After everything has been organized, they took it even further and started charging for access to the water. They built walls and buildings and installed security systems to ensure that the laws were being obeyed, and they punished those who disobeyed. As the years passed, they water has been receding. The people in charge did not want to cause a panic and so, they did not tell anyone that the water was completely gone. They have been secretly bottling water from another spring, one that did not have the same qualities as the water from the spring, and sold it as one that was from the spring. Many more years had passed. The well is now completely empty...yet, the walls, the buildings, the laws and the people in charge still existed - selling fraudulent water to the masses who still continue to come to get a drink from the well.

the end.

This is what happens when people find something good; regardless if they are Atheists or Theists. Whenever something is good, people want to bottle it, distribute it, and incorporate it - for the sole reason of wanting to control the rights to that particular good.

The funny thing about God is that He would never infringe upon anyone's right to choose. This is why bad things happen in the world. God doesn't cause things to happen, He allows them to because He cannot take away anyone's power to choose.

This is not to say that Christians or Xtians are blameless. They are just people too...they can also choose to do terrible things, same as the Atheists and the Muslims and the Agnostics.

The point is that God is the only one who is perfect.

In terms of doing good deeds, there are two types. a) People do good deeds for selfish reasons - so that they may be viewed by everyone present as a good person. b) People do good deeds for unselfish reasons - someone has done good things to them and they want to emulate that person out of gratitude. All in all, good deeds do happen. Whatever the reason may be, it is good that it does happen.

In terms of churches, there is absolutely no indication in the Bible, whether explicit or implied, that churches need to be Incorporated so that they can take advantage of the Non-Profit tax breaks. Neither was it mentioned that a believer should Win Souls for Christ in ways that is comparable to corporate or military tactics. Neither was there anything about Judgment - whether one was qualified to judge themselves as going to heaven or to judge others as going to hell.

One thing was clear, however. Anyone can fulfill the entire requirements of the Judaic Law by loving God above all things, and loving his/her neighbor as himself/herself.

The main thing that people miss about the Bible is that it is neither proof or lack there of of the existence of God. One only need to look as his rectum and wonder how fecal matter comes out of it without any prompting and how nothing comes out most of the time. the rectum is a wonder of bio-engineering that cannot be explained by science. The fact of the matter is, shit comes out and shit stays in whether we like it or not.

The point of all points is that only the desperate people find a need for God. Everyone else is doing fine on their own and should not be evangelized.

Christians - do not do futile things by trying to convince someone who clearly does not need God to believe.

Atheists - Do not disprove the existence of God to those who need Him to exist.

...somehow, I don't think that things will happen to change anything...; 4/02/2008 4:46 PM
Andy said...: dear anonymous poster above me,

sure things will change, once people use their brains as well as you have

excellent post, excellent.; 4/02/2008 9:26 PM
Kagehi said...: This is what happens when people find something good; regardless if they are Atheists or Theists. Whenever something is good, people want to bottle it, distribute it, and incorporate it...

Well, yes and no. Atheists, for the most part, just want people to think. There was a comment some place about one Christian apologists take of Jesus reappearing. He stated, "Oddly, atheists would all see it happen, see the evidence that it was Jesus, think, 'Ah, well. Guess I was wrong.', and go on from there, but name_here would witness it happening, and insist, despite all evidence, that it hadn't, it was all a trick, and that this person couldn't possibly be Jesus." We are only adverse to blind faith, which is damn hard to justify as anything other than, "La la la! I can't hear or see anything suggesting I am wrong, because I *must* believe or I would be unhappy without it!"

Or, to put it in PZ Myers', the chiwawa of atheism (rottweiler has been taken by some british guy), own words, more or less, "Our only goal is to become irrelevant, while the goal of religions is to be the one that 'everyone' follows."

This doesn't mean that there are not some morons that try to turn atheism into something like a religion. But, we shred their arguments with almost as much glee as the creationists that come along with the latest non-argument against biology.

BTW, what is it with Behe? If you look at the stuff he *writes* he is almost, but not quite, in the "maybe god started the whole thing, so it would happen the way it did", camp, but his most recent court appearance tried to defend books that a school tried to use for science courses, which **specifically** stated that only Biblical literalist YEC *must* be taught, and that the students where *required* to believe it to pass. As the judge put it, "There is no religious litmus test requiring you *believe* anything in existing text books, despite the claim that scientists are trying to make you believe in evolution, however *your* books explicitly doing the very thing you accuse others of." Doh!!! How did the judge figure it out?!

Sigh...; 4/02/2008 10:28 PM
Kagehi said...: ...Jesus reappearing. He stated, "Oddly, atheists...

Should be:

...Jesus reappearing. The commenter stated, "Oddly, atheists...

Sorry, it sounded like it implied the apologist said it. He rather vehemently insisted that it could only be true if it happened when, how, where and under the circumstances "he" thought it could/would. Basically, in other words, he wouldn't accept it at all, without a rather absurd set of conditions, which where all part of his own wacky interpretations, and not one probably any but him thought made any sense.; 4/02/2008 10:32 PM
Kagehi said...: the rectum is a wonder of bio-engineering that cannot be explained by science.

First, engineering has jack to do with it. Engineers have some clear goal in mind, and try to minimize stupid designs. There is a lot of stupid in human biology, and far more than you get in anything engineered. Second, every mechanism in intestinal tract is explainable, including precursors, and that includes the small circular muscles, which exist in "both" the rectum, as well as the stomach, and the throat, and other places. Its a basic mechanism that evolved ages ago, back when there was nothing but an open end for stuff to go into, and one for things to go out of, and some critter lived longer and prospered better because a few of those rings pushed it all in one direction, instead of just letting water wash in and out, in the hope it went the *right* direction.

Point being, please stop claiming "science" doesn't explain things, unless you are willing to have someone like be point out you being wrong, or risk someone with 500 times the knowledge I have, and might even specialize in sphincter muscles and there evolution, cleans your clock over it. ;)

Oh, and leave off calling in "engineering", unless you are referring to what a "person" is doing to insert genes in a critter, to "engineer" it to do something it didn't evolve to do normally. It confuses the issue, blurs the lines in the language, and creates confusion of the sort that leaves ID people constantly pointing at stuff they can't imagine being explainable, so that someone has to *then* explain why it is explainable, has already been explained, or isn't what they think it is. I swear, its like having a five year old run up to you ever few minutes to show you iron pyrite and declaring, "Look, look! I found gold!" After a while you just want to tell them to go play in traffic, so you can get actual work done.; 4/02/2008 10:44 PM
Richard said...: Religious people scare the crap out of me. It is a form of brainwashing, and to believe in any higher power than what you and your fellow man/woman can do, is a slap in the face of all that mankind has accomplished. Every time I see some dumb idiot thank God/Jesus for his accomplishments, I just want to slap them upside the head and point out that THEY did it, not God/Jesus. Great article though, although I think if you are trying to get the message through to religious cults, you will fail, as their ears and eyes are closed, but their mouths are wide open.; 4/03/2008 8:41 AM
Anonymous said...: That is the thing about messages. It is just what it is. A person who hears it doesn't have to listen or truly understand what the message says. One could just choose to understand parts of the message but not the whole thing. One could also choose to merely understand and not heed the message. While others might take it so literally that the message itself is entirely lost.

Messages suck when seen in this humanistic, chaotic and random way of how it is normally received. But, there are a few that do get it...

Therefore, it is not the message at fault. It is in us who filter the message through our wants and needs that make the mistake.

Keep on messaging...I'm sure one out of every one hundred thousand will get it, and everyone else will get it eventually, over time.; 4/03/2008 2:58 PM
Kagehi said...: Everyone filter's the message through their wants and needs. It is **physically impossible** for the brain to do otherwise. It can only process what it experiences in the context of past experience, and under enough stress, it can and does revert to simpler earlier experiences, or even to primitive instincts, neither of which provide *useful* explanations, even if they can provide short term survival.

The message however "can" be the problem. We don't put messages like, "May contain peanuts.", on containers because we "expect" people to magically "get" the message that people allergic to nuts could die from eating it, we do it because its no sufficient to say, "some factories may also process peanuts". If the message is unclear, vague, easy to misinterpret, insufficient to describe the situation, etc., its not very good message. Its the reason that Hebrew made a clear distinction between murder and killing, while the vague version we have now doesn't. Its also why *both* versions are useless. One is so broad *any* death you cause, indirect or not, even if the victim isn't human *may* fall under it. The older version you could just declare *your* killing someone else as just, but them killing you unjust, therefor one murder, and one acceptable.

Clear messages are short, precise, nearly impossible to misinterpret, and everyone agrees the words all mean the same thing. Nothing in religion tends to be a) short, b) precise, c) clear, d) 100% agreed on, or even e) the same message from one congregation to the next. How is the problem *not*, at least in part, the message?; 4/04/2008 12:25 AM
Daniel said...: GODISNOWHERE

In my opinion the atheist is not all knowing and any educated man knows that he doesn't know.

My point is to change the conversation to "if God existed..." what would you expect or what would your beliefs about God would be.

The difference between fun loving unicorns and "creator" I would think would be a fair start, but what I usually ask is if God does exist would God desire to be known.

If the answer is "no" well then we have success.

If the answer is "yes" then we would begin the deliberation by attempting to identify how would he make himself known.

This ultimately leads to the uniqueness of God and if we can provide descriptive attributes that eliminate as many "false positives" as possible then perhaps the King of Kings, Master, Designer of the Universe actually has the opportunity to introduce himself to the atheist.

Remember God doesn't believe in atheists.; 4/04/2008 10:32 AM
Kagehi said...: Grr. You know, I hate this comment system. Too many ways to log in, no way to "keep" the text if you have to back up, because you used the wrong account data, etc.

Ok, Daniel. Lets do a run down of this. Every religion ever created lists "attributes" there god is supposed to have. All of them have **failed** to show any evidence beyond personal experience to claim that **anything** possesses such attributes. Worse, when claims are made about something *having* been found, it *always* has those attributes that the believer knew it would, no matter what they where, which God they where applied to, or how many other people applied other attributes to the search, and also concluded they have "found" evidence.

Like most atheists, my position is, "If you want to go looking for god, first get rid of all the silly lists of things other people have insisted define their gods, and try to come up with something new." I also think this is a) impossible, b) would require reducing god down to something so pointless that "finding" it wouldn't mean anything most believers "want" it to be, and c) since no one has found any "prior" sort of god, using the prior lists of attributes, I find it highly unlikely that *any* such list will ever be useful, or that evidence could be found, which is believable to anyone but the finder, and others convinced it had to be valid to start with, to prove such a thing.

The problem I have seen in all such "searches/searchers" is that they invariably reach their conclusions via revelation, not evidence, they can't "present" anything testable, never mind verifiable as having happened at all, nor do they ever seen to, for some odd reason, find evidence of *any* god other than the ones they started with. One would think that, if such a search where valid, the evidence wouldn't be vague, confusing, personal experience, derived from looking at books written by people *presenting* arguments, without facts, or that "someone" making such a search, without resorting to the last one, would find that someone *else's* god was the correct one.

The only unique aspect of any of the attributes I have ever seen "anyone" use to describe what God should be like is that it a) invariably reflects the believers *own* values 100%, and b) the method of showing evidence of the presence of such a thing is *exactly* the same as the math trick where you confuse people into dividing by zero, in order to prove than 2=3, 1=359, or pretty much any other silly result you want. If you break a rule of logic half way through your "collection" of supposed evidence, all you get is what in computer parlance is called GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out.

But, as O'neil said in Stargate SG-1, "If first you don't succeed, try, try, try, TRY, try again." You might manage to come up with something that isn't either so absurdly limited that its existence is meaningless to us, or which hasn't (I doubt it, but then I am not the one that believes in miracles) been tried before. At worst, you will give atheists, agnostics, and probably about 50% of the Christians in the world a real good laugh.; 4/04/2008 11:52 PM
Bio Engineered Rectum said...: Has anyone seen the BBC documentary series "The Century Of The Self"?

Xtians: after watching the four docs, ask yourself how much christianity has really affected our current society.

Athiests: after watching, ask yourself if people are really ihnerently good or inherently evil when they are not happy.; 4/05/2008 1:16 AM
Voltaire is Laughing said...: Good article....

Let me put another slant on the idea though. If I went to a Christian home, as a gay Wiccan, wearing a pentagram and started my own "witnessing", how would the Christian take it. After all being gay and not believing in God has made me happy, and all I'm trying to do is pass that along.

Point made?; 4/05/2008 12:08 PM
Jude 1:22 said...: Article is well written in many ways.
Unfortunately to broad of a judgement is being passed on "christians", because so many claim this faith, but few practice it. The bible is the center piece of all Christian faith and commands all Christians to spread their faith. You can be a witness in many ways without words and should, but it is part of the Christian faith to vocally express, witness and invite others. These are acts of love. You have the right not to take the invitation, but because of our faith we must offer.
Read Mark 16:15-16, Mathew 28:19, Luke 10:1-17

If you remember nothing else from this blog and all the comments posted remember this;
JESUS LOVES YOU!!!!!!!!!!; 4/07/2008 12:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Thank you for this wonderfully written piece. I am not a Christian, and not an Atheist, but my grandfather was a preacher for his entire life. This ideal, of witnessing by example, he preached from the pulpit, pretty restrained for a southern baptist! During his life, he was a beloved man to all who met him because he lived a Christian example to others. Thank you for your words of wisdom and peace, they mirror the words of another great man.; 4/07/2008 2:14 AM
Kagehi said...: Google did it to me again.. Lets see if I can recreate the post...

Jude, your comment reminds me of the absurd add that some local church paid to have run over and over at the theater. It stated near the end, "remember, even if you don't believe in god, he believes in you!" Sure, and my socks still exist, because even though some of them don't believe in the great Groldobs of Ceti Alpha 5, those illustrious beings believe in my socks.

You seem to have read, but not understood, Joe's article. I place, "Jesus loves you!", right in the same category. Nonsense *unless* you start from the premise that such a being "still" exists and is some sort of god, never mind that he ever existed in the first place. And there isn't exactly universal agreement on the later, due to archeology and historical studies, either.; 4/07/2008 5:08 PM
Trent said...: I didn't make it through the entire rant, as it is just that. You are not a Cultural anthropologist, a Theologist, Philosopher, nore a Historian of any type that I know of, so I have little interest in what you have to say about the topic. However, being a believer, I did skim through it. I was a little upset about the unicorn compairison, but as I read on... I Loved it! It makes sense. Also, when people of Christian faith spray paint righteous messages on the side of their vehicle, or wear signes and act like fanatics, it is the wrong way to go.; 4/07/2008 5:16 PM
Valerie said...: There's a saying in Paganism, "An it harm none, do what thou wilt."

I think its ridiculous for someone to assume that you have to be a Christian to be a good person. I've known many good people, of all religions.

I consider myself agnostic. I'm not vain enough to assume I understand the workings of the universe. I believe in a creative energy, but that's all know.

I enjoy being able to change my beliefs. I don't like being told what to believe. I like ideas, not religion. It's as simple as that.

I don't believe in sin. I don't believe in an afterlife. I may not know what comes next, and I'm fine with that. At least I'm not worshiping a cloud in the sky.

I don't try to push my views on others; that would be arrogant and rude.

I don't need a "god" to tell me what is right and what is wrong. I can think for myself, thank you.; 4/07/2008 11:35 PM
Jennifer said...: It is endlessly interesting that there is an objection to the grouping of all Christians as a mass, when it has not been suggested that you are also grouping all atheists together with the same beliefs. All atheists are not respectful people who would like you to think harder about the choices you are making. Atheists also follow a belief, the belief that there is no god and (usually) that science holds the answers. Science, though less faulty than a 2 century old book, has its problems and is not one hundred percent accurate. This post was well thought out and executed whatever side of the debate you stand on. But I think it should be taken into account that Christians, or anyone of any other religion, does not want the same thing happening to them. Printing and distributing this article to people is in the vein of the attack tactics that Christians use. Arguing will get us nowhere, discussion and truly listening are key. And whether or not you need/have a god, we are all human, and unless psychotic, desire to feel we've been heard, even if you don't convert or whatever.; 4/08/2008 4:07 PM
Wade said...: Well written article, what confuses me is that the writer professors to have read much on the subject of Christianity, however he misses the most important point. We go to heaven through belief in Jesus Christ, not by deeds.; 4/10/2008 11:36 AM
Dennis Alan Gray said...: Having read through this conversation I find myself left with one question. The general consensus seems to be that Christians need to take a step back, keep their moths shut, and let people live there own lives. The problem that this leaves me with is "How in hell can you expect me to be that uncaring??"

As much as you may think what I believe has about as much value as unicorns, the fact remains that I believe it. To say nothing is not, from my perspective, "live and let live", it's more like "live and let die."

You're asking me to say nothing when I see my brother killing himself with a two pack a day smoking habit. You're asking me to say nothing when the little old lady is about to walk out into the street in front of a bus. You're asking me to say nothing when the neighbours down the street are about to drive over the washed out bridge.

I know to you these seem like ridiculous analogies, but to me the danger is every bit as real!!

Try to imagine it for just one moment. Put yourself in my place and ask yourself, "If you really do believe what you claim to believe - How can you stay silent?"; 4/10/2008 8:50 PM
~*~ Jennifer ~*~ said...: Here is why we talk about what we believe... we are going to be held responsible for our actions some day. If God shows me my life up on a screen, and I'm standing by -- standing by an ambulance while people are funning full tilt toward a cliff and all I do is wait around for someone to climb into my ambulance... then I'm sure that is not going to be favorable for me. I should live my life in a way that people will say... "Hey -- why the ambulance? What are you doing? Why aren't you running this way?" Live differently than the world (following God's commands) and having a reason for doing so. Make them wonder... ask questions of me... have a response when their world is falling apart.

You picked up on a very annoying trait of some Christians, and you wrote a long article about it. I commend you.

I'll tell you what I think my responsibility... I've got 5 children. I am to train them up in the way they should go. This includes training them how to stand up for Jesus in their daily walk. I believe that God will put people into their path -- they do not need to stray fro the path, or go out of their way to find unbelievers. Live the way the Bible teaches us to, and people will WANT what we have. Love, Joy, Peace, Patience...

IF... if the time comes that we get questioned about what we believe and we waffle... THEN that's terrible. I haven't done my job. It's God's job to woe them, my job to train them up to be godly men and women.

Keep thinking child... and READING... if you really want to debate -- know your subject. Keep reading God's word! That's my suggestion to you. =) (Was that pushy?); 4/11/2008 9:09 AM
Lee said...: As a Christian who spent quite a long time as an atheist (I know, I 'm still kind of surprised myself) I think this piece is spot on. Too often, Christians think that they can harrass someone into believing and it just plain doesn't work.; 4/11/2008 3:54 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm encouraged by what seems to be the fact that my faith eats a hole in your shell. You think on it constantly as it burns and dents your armor, the purifier of silver will get his reflection from you yet. I love you; your a great writer.; 4/11/2008 4:33 PM
arlenecorwin said...: As a Jewish Vedandist mystic I like the reasoning. The experience of the mystic is always described as 'unexplainable', which implies the existence of a Reality that can be experienced but never clarified through words. After all, how do you describe the smell of a rose? You simply have to say go out an smell it yourself.
A-theism is as valid a road to smelling the rose as any other path. it simply rejects the deistic approach to Reality, that's all. Many roads lead to Rome.; 4/13/2008 3:00 PM
Shoheen said...: This post has been removed by the author.; 4/14/2008 2:40 AM
Anonymous said...: just wanted to say thanks for posting this. you were able to put what i've felt for so many years into an excellent article. thank you!; 4/14/2008 12:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Heh.

I was a Christian until I actually read the Bible from cover to cover. The hypocrisy is sickening. I agree with almosteverything you have to say here. Thank you putting it so eloquently.; 4/16/2008 8:44 PM
Spike Martinez said...: So basically I have the utmost highest respect for you. This article is what the new generation Christians need to read. Luckily I have been taught this and have lived my life accordingly. I'm not one to go out and shove Christianity down the throats of non-believers. I have friends who do not believe in Christ. I respect that but I want them to see. It's all part of faith and TRULY living by what the bible says. No where have I seen that we should go out and force people to believe. People are going to believe what they want to believe, who am I to judge them?; 4/17/2008 1:35 AM
Allison said...: I want to send this to a girl I haven't talked to in about a year. Why? Because we used to be friends until I brought my Atheist boyfriend home to Texas, and she spent a whole FOUR HOURS Bible Thumping him into the ground. I tried to shut her up and stand up for him.. so did our other friends who were there.. but she's so brainwashed and thick-skulled. The worst part is, she's not even living a Christian life.. she's a complete hypocrite. She has two children out of wedlock by different fathers and STILL sleeps around. She got fired from her teaching job because she let her 16-year-old students hang out with her and drink at her apartment!

I just shudder to think that I was ever friends with anyone who could be so two-faced.

This article was beautiful and I agree 100%.; 4/17/2008 2:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Can one articulate the christian message without use of jargon (especially one who doesn't subscribe to the faith)and 'soundbyte' theology? Indeed; however it has not been done here.
Take the time to examine; you may get beyond 'human spam' and actually find tenets--ones that people sincerel (not hypocritically), respond to, and ones that 'people'(not stickered vans)embody.; 4/18/2008 9:52 AM
hope said...: I found this short paragraph very interesting.

"Confronting a person by attempting to convince them that everything they believe and know is wrong and that you are right is quite possibly the worst way on Earth to persuade them."

Whilst I know Christians who do just this, I also know of atheists, evolutionists, charity-workers, politicians, sales-workers who do exactly the same thing. Perhaps the article ought to be retitled "How To Actually Talk To People (If You're Human)".

At the same time, I know of lots of Christians, atheists, evolutionists, charity-workers, politicians [well, some!!??] and sales-workers who don't work like this. Many talk about their faith all the time, but only occasionally use words to do so.; 4/19/2008 3:55 PM
hope said...: TheJen

"The pendulum is starting to swing in the other direction."

Interestingly, TJ, in some parts of the world where atheism and other faiths have held sway for centuries, the pendulum is swinging in the other direction, as you say. It seems as if the West is either vastly ahead of the game or far behind it.; 4/20/2008 12:58 PM
Adrian said...: I am an atheist born and raised. But every time i think about religion vs. science or faith vs. fact I end up facing the same conundrum:

On the one hand there is no empirical evidence confirming the existence of a greater being (God)

On the other hand there are still big enough holes in science to allow for us to one day potentially discover a greater being. Physicists still don't know what happened before the big bang or what will happen when the universe stops expanding.

And so because of the kind of Christians i've been exposed to, notably the ultra conservative catholics in my own family, I continue to believe that there is no god or that if there is a greater being we definitely do not currently have the means to describe it or understand its greater purpose or goal.

All to say that i do not believe in any god that any current religion describes but that science is still to incomplete for atheist to be taking as strong a stand as many are (that no god or greater being could ever logically exist).

I really enjoyed the article and a lot of the comments too, and so to actually touch on the articles content a little I thought Jesus Camp was the single most terrifying movie I have ever seen!! I fear for my generation.

Adrian; 4/21/2008 3:49 AM
galump1 said...: An interesting discussion. I could not read it all and am sorry if this has been said.

There is only one question that we all must personally get correct since we are all going to be dead for a long time. It is "Is God real?" If we believe He is real (and that is all we have to do)the being dead will be quite a different experience. It might pay to really seriously reseach that question.; 4/21/2008 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: The more I live every day of our short lives on this lonely little planet... the more I come to realize there are things very powerful going on all around us, and most of us are so oblivious to it all.

GOD!!! or whatever "thing" or "event" that has created the universe over billions and billions of years is going to remain anonymous for a long time.

As humans, we have the ability to imagine... and if some people want to use this imagination in the form of religion to better their lives, than so be it.

Athiest, Christian, whatever! It's time we need to look around and see the bigger picture of the life we are being forced to live by our governments and corporations. As an athiest myself, I firmly believe religion is a fraud... a story taken from the astrological charts during the egyptian era (research it a little),made up for political reasons to conform humanity and unite everyone eventually.

That is the direction all of humanity is heading, no matter what race or religion we are. I don't know about you guys.... but we are all different and unique for a reason... and whatever made us that way DID NOT intend for us to be united as a single race... but people with power and money seem to think they can control our "simple" minds and make that happen.

WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!

Believe whatever you like... I have friends of ALL religions... beliefs... races... as long as there is LOVE and RESPECT... there will be less problems in this world... this is in the bible... and common sense... no one is more right than the other.; 4/22/2008 1:12 AM
Nick said...: Kudos.; 4/22/2008 1:23 AM
Terratone said...: There are certain deep flaws in the thought that you should not witness but allow your life to be the only example. The Bible commands every Christian to go out and preach the gospel. Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
In 1 Corinthians 9:16 it says...
For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!
It is a mandate that every Christian should give the gospel to as many as possible. The Bible shows the example: 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. The Bible says it pleases God to use this method.
The Gospel itself, the Good News is spiritual in nature and has power given it from God himself. Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. The Bible says there are none that seeketh after God, yet Christ died for them while they were yet sinners and tells us that most people will not repent of their sins. Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
If I tell you that I don’t believe in gravity, it does not negate the power that it actually has on me. If I walk off a tall building the effects will be the same whether I believe in gravity or not. It is God that convicts the heart and draws people to Himself when the Gospel is proclaimed, not eloquent speaking. The power for someone to come to salvation is of God. The Apostle Paul followed in the footsteps of Jesus who preached outdoors to anyone that would listen. In Acts 17:2-5 Paul proclaims the Gospel, some come to salvation but as a result of witnessing there was a great uproar that took place in the city. The Apostle Peter when he preached the gospel was confronted by those who would silence them.
Acts 5: 27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them, 28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.
33 When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.
Even then the reaction of some to the preaching was negative and sometimes violent. Jesus Himself they took and crucified the ultimate rejection, but also the ultimate payment for our sins.
The Bible says that our obedience to God is more important than what we in our flawed intellect think. Proverbs 14: 12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
To Christians who would rather listen to man rather than what God teaches there are strict warnings in the Scriptures:
Matthew 10:32-33
32. Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
We should not be ashamed in proclaiming God’s word:
Romans 1:16
16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Think it not strange that you will face opposition when proclaiming God’s word:
John 15:18-20
18. If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
19. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
20. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.
Ultimately, people would rather you keep quiet because of what is written in John:
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.; 4/22/2008 3:58 AM
Anonymous said...: stop wasting space with your nonsense; 4/22/2008 7:36 AM
Frank Turk said...: Hey Joe --

I'm curious: are you saying that you'd believe in God if and only if Christians were smarter, richer, and nicer than you are? That's what I'm taking away from your post here, but I want to make sure that's what you intended to say.; 4/22/2008 9:06 AM
JtP said...: Frank Turk -

Not sure where you get that. In fact, I'm not sure HOW you got that, since I purposely stray from mentioning whether or not I believe in God in this article.

Regardless, no, I'm saying that in 2008 and beyond, Christians need to wake up to the fact that their tactics of marketing their faith are actually damaging their potential to convert or even have people pay attention.; 4/22/2008 9:08 AM
JtP said...: Terratone:

I think it's fantastic that you a) used the bible to justify believing in the bible (part one of my article) and b) used the BIBLE to justify... Well, anything actually.

Given the utterly glaring contradictions, the irrelevance of antecdotal teachings by discoveries of science, and the sheer ridiculousness of some of the bible's contents, I'd caution anyone from using that book to justify a damn thing.

Not my own discoveries, but one of my FAVORITE list of contradictions:

"For I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever." (Jeremiah 3:12)
"Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn forever." (Jeremiah 17:4)

--

"If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid." (John 5:31)
"Jesus answered: Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid." (John 8:14)

---

"And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth." (Matthew 28:18)
"the whole world is under control of the evil one." (1 John 5:19)

---

And Jesus said, "For judgement I am come into this world." (John 9:39)
"I came not to judge the world" (John 12:47)

---

"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." (Matthew 5:16)
"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven." (Matthew 6:1)

----

"Jacob said, 'I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.'" (Genesis 32:30)
"No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18)

----

We should fear God (Matthew 10:28)
We should love God (Matthew 22:37)
There is no fear in love (1 John 4:18)

---

and how about this for sage advice from the "good old book?"

"I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children." (Leviticus 26:22)

---

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourself every girl who has never slept with a man." (Numbers 31:17-18)

---

"The Lord commands: "... slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women" (Ezechial 9:4-6)

---

"When the Lord delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the males .... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves." (Deuteronomy 20:13-14)

---

"You will eat the fruit of the womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the Lord your God has given you." (Deuteronomy 28:53)

---

"The Lord said to Joshua [...] 'you are to hamstring their horses.' " (Exceedingly cruel.) (Joshua 11:6)

--

"... Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword and; also the women and little ones.... every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall utterly destroy." (Judges 21:10-12)

---

"This is what the Lord says: Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass .... And Saul ... utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword." (1 Samuel 15:3,7-8)

---

"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their women with child ripped open." (Hosea 13:16)

---

"A curse on him who is lax in doing the LORD's work!
A curse on him who keeps his sword from bloodshed!" (Jeremiah 48:10)

---

Enjoy this and more at:

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~slocks/babble.html

And if you'd really like to see how contextually irrelevant the Bible is as resource, check out the completely dispassionate and factually-correct discussions at The Bible's Errancy:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/errancy.html

The bottom line - if I owned a math book with so many contradictions, I think the last thing I'd do is use it to teach math to another person. And God forbid your doctor learn medicine from books with such contradictions and advice...

The bible is a fine book of stories, but to use it as the justification of your willful infliction of your faith upon me without my permission or request is just plain stupid. If you plan to convert me and educate me as to the benefits of it, perhaps you should think more of the modern age and the respect due my time in it.; 4/22/2008 9:21 AM
Terratone said...: I appreciate you taking the time for answering my post. Judging by the strong emotional response I believe that this is something that is very close to your heart. As to your arguments, there are answers for them .

Here are some helpful websites.

http://www.carm.org/evidence.htm
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/bible.asp

My web site also has some information along the creation/evolution line.
http://thoughts4-2day.blogspot.com/

One thing I would like to point out is that to take any book and gauge what is being said you should at least try to follow a few guidelines.

1. Who is the writer speaking to?
2. What was happening at the time?
3. Are the circumstances the same or different from now?

Anything if not looked within context can misinterpreted.

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Romans 5:6-8

Once again thank you for your time.; 4/22/2008 10:10 AM
Lay-Sceptic said...: Hello, Joe.
I thought your post was well informed, on both sides of your argument. You seemed to have a good understanding of why atheists (like me) don't believe there to be any God(s).
We don't just dismiss claims made by Christians trying to 'save' us, we rely on evidence. If, one day, science comes across a problem which absolutely cannot be solved (I'm not talking about things currently unsolved-I mean a problem which is completely unsolvable) without there being a God, any good sceptic would say 'oops, sorry God. I was wrong'. I imagine that there are a few so-called sceptics who would refuse to believe, no matter what the evidence. Which would make them as bad as a 'true believer', or a person who believes something in spite of evidence to the contrary and will continue to do so, no matter how much evidence is discovered against their belief.; 4/22/2008 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...: EVERYONE NEEDS TO WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY "ZEITGEIST"

one site to watch it at is www.watchfreemovies.net; 4/22/2008 1:56 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: First off, your essay is very well-written, and laced with great humor! I like your phrases "human spam" and "interruption marketing". That's funny.

However, I am a Bible-believing Christian. Jesus is my Lord and Savior. He gave His disciples the Great Commission. So using your terminology Jesus is the Instigator who commanded His disciples to be "human spam" to atheists(!) (But perhaps there's a presentation of the Gospel which you wouldn't categorize as "human spam." Is there?)

Also, the unicorn story is a nice intro setup to your thesis. However, it falls flat and fails at a most critical juncture: Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ cannot be compared to an unattested-to unicorn. Jesus is God Incarnate. Jesus is God made into flesh. So on and so forth where your unicorn analogy is shown to be inapplicable.

Lastly, the message and gospel of Jesus Christ is a truth-claim. An ultimate, objective, transcendent truth-claim.

Christians are indeed called to live lives of holiness, to take up the cross, and follow Jesus in loving obedience. But having atheists judge the lives of sin-redeemed Christians must be secondary to discerning the substantive content of the truth-claims of Christ.

See this excerpt: "Christian evangelism does not consist merely in a man's going about the world saying: "Look at me, what a wonderful experience I have, how happy I am, what wonderful Christian virtues I exhibit; you can all be as good and as happy as I am if you will just make a complete surrender of your wills in obedience to what I say." That is what many religious workers seem to think that evangelism is. We can preach the gospel, they tell us, by our lives, and do not need to preach it by our words. But they are wrong. Men are not saved by the exhibition of our glorious Christian virtues; they are not saved by the contagion of our experiences. We cannot be the instruments of God in saving them if we preach to them thus only ourselves. Nay, we must preach to them the Lord Jesus Christ; for it is only through the gospel which sets Him forth that they can be saved."

From: The Importance of Christian Scholarship in The Defense of The Faith

In essence, what really matters is the truth-claim itself, not the lives of those who possess the truth-claim. If you want to dwell in judgment upon the lives of some Christians you know, fine. The more important thing is to spend time discerning whether the gospel of Jesus Christ is really ultimate, objective truth.

Lastly, consider this argument:

Major Premise: If God has revealed Himself, then God exists.

Minor Premise: God has revealed Himself.

Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

The form is valid. The chain of reasoning is valid. What's left is the validity of the minor premise. Namely, Jesus Christ.

Peace and Blessings.; 4/22/2008 4:11 PM
The Neo-Puritan said...: Let us not equate evangelism with marketing. Preach the gospel with truth and love. Leave the rest up to God. I end with a quote from Leonard Ravenhill.

"People tell me that I'm too serious all the time about the gospel and eternity, do you really think that Christ is going to take me aside on judgment day and say, Len, you shouldn't have taken me too seriously."

We are not marketers of the latest product, we are saints of the living God, who draws people unto Him and calls them out of sin into light and to stand firm in truth even unto death.; 4/22/2008 7:30 PM
emergency said...: To Cindy
-------------------------------------
QUOTE: I'm a Christian Buddhist. My boyfriend is a Atheist Buddhist
-------------------------------------

Yeah, I'm a Fighter Mage myself. I was thinking of multiclassing to Buddhist but not sure about the restriction on edged weapons.
:-); 4/23/2008 3:15 PM
Mark said...: One's experiences with bad Christians is irrelevant to the fact that one's emotions have rejected the truth - they have made faith subject to wishful thinking and emotions, not an honest argument over doctrine.

Many times in life our reasoning is defeated by our emotions and desires, that is reality - as real as the tomb of Jesus was indeed empty and predicted before the New Testament texts had been recorded.

Faith is living, is it not about you or I passing some test of obeying God's law. In fact, living faith is carrying on, getting back up, feeding on God's word so we may be reminded over and over again when we fail time and time again that God is our true foundation - not our emotions or wishful thinking.

If your faith is at the whims of your emotions, you will indeed "drift away" - you are afloat in the changing tides of a lost world, not solidly rooted in reason. You have allowed your emotions and desires to destroy what your faith and reasoning know to be the true question on the table - God's way or my way?

btw, "Nice" sarcasm on the approx. 001% of so called "christians" you have ever been face to face with. Good thing you can google such non sense, eh?; 4/23/2008 7:48 PM
December Sun Blog said...: Fantastic material, and definitely thought-provoking.

God bless you.

Rob; 4/23/2008 11:42 PM
Michael said...: to Truth Unites... and Divides
I believe the Unicorn analogy was not intended as a direct comparison to Jesus Christ, but rather as an example of how arguments seemingly baseless in fact are perceived by an outsider.

The point I got from this article was certainly not "Theism vs Atheism", or direct comparisons claiming one thing is like another. I only saw someone calmly explaining how certain tactics are viewed by atheists, leading to how said atheists will react.

I admit, the offered alternative to "jamming Jesus down people's throats" does seem like a lot of work... but really, shouldn't we be living our lives trying to help our fellow man/woman regardless of how people will respond to it? and regardless of whether or not our actions will garner us a spot in the afterlife?

I've always found evangelists handing our fliers amusing. The overriding theme generally seems to be "Be good, praise the lord, accept Jesus, pass the word, or you'll GO TO HELL!"

I personally think that if the motivations for doing the right thing are based on the promise of a reward in the afterlife, or alternately the fear of retribution, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

Damn, I've strayed into Opinion territory.
My apologies.; 4/24/2008 6:43 AM
John Fitz says said...: Why are people always trying to tell me I need to choose between LIVING it and SPEAKING it. Is it not obvious that as a Christian the bible tells me to do both - just like Jesus.

Jesus preached a lot, but his whole life refected the reality of his preaching. As one of my lecturers in bible college used to say, "It's not a case of either or, but both AND!" And the AND is probably the most important part in this case because we can preach till we're blue in the face and living the best life but that will not convince anyone God exists. Only God can prove himself to people, I think he keeps it that way to keep us humble, but it was nice of him to give us a part to play in HIS salvation plan!

I enjoyed your blog, it was refreshing and thought provoking to read, thanks. :)

May God help us to be sensitive to Him and to where others are at, and to see HIM as the saviour!; 4/24/2008 7:00 AM
Adrian said...: Disclaimer:
I absolutely do not mean any offense to the Christians who are respectful of others beliefs and those who live their lives by the lessons that the bible can teach through proper interpretation

To the displeased or aggravated Christian readers:
As many of the over zealous proliferators of the Christian faith do with the bible you have taken Joe's post and particularly the unicorn analogy far too literally.
The unicorn analogy was meant to show how an unfounded or at very least unproven belief comes across to a person who bases their vision of the world in fact, logic and reason be it: unicorns, goblins, God, Allah, The Tetragrammaton, Zeus, Ra...

A belief not founded in fact and having no empirical evidence to support it will seem irrational to a non believer no matter what that belief may happen to be.

Taking any text that contains metaphors, analogies, etc. that were meant for interpretation too litterally can be very dangerous and ultimately will almost always land your understanding of that text quite far from the writer's intended message

Joe please correct me if I've misinterpreted your post!!

Keep the comments coming everyone , I enjoy reading all of them.

Adrian; 4/24/2008 12:21 PM
Bill from Detroit said...: Interesting responses.

The atheists, of course, point to "Christian" hypocrisy (actually a contradiction in terms) while ignoring their own.

And they are right ... the average run of the mill 'Christian' isn't much to write home about. (Sorry folks, 'once saved, always saved' contradicts He 10:26.)

But they need to take a long, hard look in the mirror, too.

You say that you only need to be 'a good person' ... so stop fighting wars, stealing, raping and so on ... or do you think that all the guys in prison are there because they jay-walked on the way home from Mass?; 4/24/2008 9:55 PM
Michael said...: re: Bill from Detroit

I'm not sure how "Christian hypocrisy" is a contradiction in terms, but I do believe the statement to be a gross generalisation.

But if you are saying that Atheists are just as guilty as Christians, I'm afraid that prison populations simply don't agree.

According to U.S. Census Bureau. Year 2000 Census, 76.5% of prisoners in American prisons were Christian, while only 0.5% were Atheist/Agnostic.

These figures correspond to about 15% of American's population actually being Atheist/Agnostic, and about 80% being Christian.

And yes, I know these figures are just statistics that can be viewed with a jaunted eye (and should be taken with a grain of salt) but the point is still valid.

A person, I believe, is not good or bad based on their belief structure, but rather who that person is as an individual.

Being a Christian and reading the (good) teachings of the Bible can give you an idea how you should behave, but if you're a bad person then you're not going to follow those ideals, even if you do believe that you should.

Just like an Atheist who happens to be a bad person. The only difference is that he/she isn't a hypocrite for not following the code he/she claims to believe in.

Put simply, gross generalisations are very dangerous things, and are no different than prejudice and racism.

By the way, not even Singapore will jail you for jay-walking.; 4/25/2008 8:42 AM
ric booth said...: Hey Joe,

Excellent post. Have you read John Shore's book, "I'm OK, You're not" or any of his posts concerning Atheism and Christianity on his blog http://http://johnshoreland.com/ ?? I think you would like many of the posts and discussion threads.; 4/25/2008 3:20 PM
Anonymous said...: JtP:

A couple of questions.

As I understand it, your hypothesis is that current witnessing tactics are not effective and don't work. What standard are you using to conclude they are ineffective? Are you saying they never work? Or, do you have a certain conversion rate in mind? Or, is your standard that Christians should offend fewer or none at all? I'm not clear on your meaning of ineffective.

You direct us to the Bible for witnessing tactics. Can you be a little more specific and point me to an example where a Christian witnessed to someone that fits your definition of an atheist.

Thanks.

Keith; 4/29/2008 2:01 AM
Aaron said...: Some of those complexes you mentioned aren't coming down to bad marketing, they more commonly represent a substitution of your parents for God. We all know how that can feel. Some of it is relateable to a child and his blanket. More directly; security. Complex as the world is, isn't it nice to have some of the answers (real or not)? With the uncertainty of death and the whirlwind of life, we devised a plan to tackle fear: afterlife. Cue the curtains. Now the big story can unfold. Explain away the frightening things, answer to me the reasons why. Imagination. If we can believe anything that the bible teaches, it would be to use your imagination.; 5/01/2008 12:24 PM
Anonymous said...: OK, here’s my take on things. I think you (author of original article) are right that the best way to win over someone to your way of thinking is to be respectful of their views and opinions and to be a living example of what you believe in. I read an article once, I think it was in a Southern Poverty Law Center publication, about a young, idealistic young man that wanted to fight racial hatred. He decided to go live in a small, backward town that had people hosting such feelings. The idea was not to shout and get mad and tell people they were wrong and unfair, but to live with, work with, get to know people, and find out what he had in common with them. Then from this base dialog could begin. I believe he wanted to understand where they were coming from and probably hoped that if it ever got to the point that they could hear his point of view that they would grant him the respect that he had afforded them. At this point there would be opportunity for change. It sounds like a long process. Most of us would prefer to tell someone they’re wrong, and let them know what is right, it’s quicker. I guess that would make one feel like they did something positive, but has no effect on the listener except to drive them farther in the opposite direction, usually, at least in my humble opinion.

To comment on another point, all Christians don’t believe that in order to be “saved” and in order to go to “heaven” you have to believe that Jesus was the son of God and died to save us from our sins. Personally, I believe (for now) that God is an invisible energy/force/essence out there that is purely love. All people go to “heaven” if any do, and heaven would be being in the presence of God. As humans have evolved from lesser life forms they have become more capable of being aware of this other dimension. Jesus was totally united with it. If you had two discs of colored glass, one red and one yellow, Jesus red for instance, and “God” yellow, there would be total overlap and it would show orange. Most of us probably barely overlap. Jesus was an example of the highest form of what human beings are capable of (my opinion). It meant more to him to love others, help others and be kind than to avoid upsetting the status quo of the day, even if angering them meant they would do violence to him. I hate the word “sin” and I don’t believe in “original sin” or Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve is a made up (but not irrelevant, anthropologically) story explaining things in a less scientific age. My take on “salvation” is that Jesus showed us that we’re living a two dimensional life and wanted us to know there’s more out there, another dimension, you’re capable of great joy. What churches call “sin” is being self centered. I don’t know if “sin” angers “God” , but disappoints “him/her”, because he/she wants us to be our best and know great joy. Given two scenarios of how a person could achieve a joyful life, one where the goal is identifying and going about working for all the things that would make that person happy, and the other where that person aims in a different direction and tries to do whatever possible help and serve others in need, my guess is that the second method would produce the most fulfillment. Most of us live lives that are probably some mixture of the two and are pretty happy.

I consider myself a Christian, but I’m still trying to figure out what it means exactly. I have done a fair amount of studying, and the history of Christianity can be very interesting and very complicated. Usually after some big effort to learn more I have some enlightenment, but have to conclude that it really doesn’t matter, the main message of the Bible/New Testament/Jesus is to love God with your whole heart, and to love your neighbor as yourself.

Geez, sorry this went on so long. I just really wanted to say that all Christians don’t think that in order to go to heaven you have to accept Jesus Christ as your savior!

Mary; 5/01/2008 12:49 PM
Terratone said...: A sinner must understand the gospel to be saved (Matt 13:15,19, 23, Acts 8:30-31, Rom 3:11). But before a sinner can understand the mercy of a loving God, he must understand the requirements of a righteous God. Now, the law is not the gospel and the gospel is not the law; but the gospel establishes the law (Rom 3:31). That law which the Gentiles have in their hearts by nature (Rom 2:15), Israel also had written on stone - and the purpose of this law is clearly stated by Paul: "by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom 3:20). Paul further states that he would never have known he was a guilty sinner without the law (Rom 7:7). Since no one can be saved without repentance (Luke 13:5) and no one can repent unless they know they are guilty, the true Biblical gospel must make proper use of the law, the chief end of which is to convince the whole world of its guilt (Rom 3:19).
Paul uses the word 'law' 38 times before he mentions the word 'love'. From Romans 1:17-3:19, Paul sets forth the case against the sinner. It is a sorry tale of condemnation, wrath and guilt. Finally, in chapter 5:8, Paul states that God commends his love towards sinners. Why does Paul present the gospel in this order? Because the gospel will not make any real sense to the sinner until he realizes he is guilty of rebellion against the law of a holy God. If we start by telling the typical Westerner "God loves you", he will puff out his chest and say in his heart "Why shouldn't He; I'm a good person?"
We must understand that simply quoting "All have sinned", followed by a quick "But the good news is..."1 will never awaken anyone. Sinners must be faced with the fact that covetousness (the love of things) is idolatry (Col 3:5), hate is murder (1 John 3:15) and lust is adultery (Matt 5:28). Driving down the motorway, there are a number of excuses one can think of to justify going at 85 mph. ..until the law enters. When you see a Police car on the side of the road, your foot hits the brakes. By the law is the knowledge of sin. That is what will make a man, rushing headlong down the highway of life to hell, sit up and listen. He simply must see his precarious position or he will never repent.
The proper initial reaction to the gospel on the part of the sinner is conviction of sin (John 16:8, Acts 2:37). But what is conviction of sin? It is more than just the ordinary smiting of the conscience (Rom 2:15). It is more than mere fear of hell. Simply being scared of the consequences of sin is not true Holy Spirit conviction. Nor is conviction 'admitting you are a sinner'. Balaam, Pharoah, Judas and many others admitted "I have sinned", but went to hell. Nor is conviction a mere head knowledge of the doctrine of the fall of Adam. Conviction is 'a proper sense of the dreadfulness of my sin against God'. Have you ever realized this? All sinners must echo David's realization in Psalm 51:4 when he said "Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Thy sight." Conviction of sin is vertical, not horizontal.
But what is repentance? It is not penance or restitution (Judas paid the money back - he regretted, but never repented, Matt 27:3). It is not merely tears, fear of judgment (Felix trembled) or sorrow for sin (godly sorrow may lead to repentance, but is not the same as repentance, 2 Cor 7:10). It is not mere confession or admission of sin. The Greek word for repentance is metanoia (from meta, 'after', and nous, 'mind'). It means a complete change of mind - involving turning from sin to God, which results in a change of life. It is illustrated by David in Psalm 51 and the Prodigal Son in Luke 15. It is defined in the following text: "Let the wicked for-sake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him" (Isaiah 55:7).; 5/01/2008 12:55 PM
Anonymous said...: I guess I think "being saved" and "going to heaven" are different things. Being saved is realizing that by doing good you live a more happy and fulfilled life. Going to heaven is being in the presence of God after death.

Mary; 5/01/2008 2:28 PM
Iago de Otto said...: Once upon a time I was home in the States visiting family, and an associate of my father's overheard him saying how his eldest son would be returning to Taiwan soon, and this guy told Dad about a possible business thingee involving Taiwan and would his son (being yours truly) be interested. It was one of those, what kinda business, oh I will let you know, type of sitcoms. Anyway, so I met this guy at his nice, empty home, sitting in the huge living room silent but for the grandfather clock going "Tick tock, tick tock." very obviously, waiting for he and his missus to get ready to go to the place where this business discussion was to take place. They finally emerge, her in a wheelchair. Middle-aged folks, no kids. The clock kept going "Tick tock."

He drives us out into the really nice, upscale, large home sector of Portland (the West Coast one) to the abode of the guy who was going to tell me about this business, and it turned out to be a "presentation" with a bunch of other people, mostly couples, all of whom seemed to grow bigger and bigger hungry hopeful eyes throughout the evening as we get the initial pix of yachts and shit and then the little tour of the storage room and back for the wrapup. And, yeah, it was an Amway presentation, and the reason I got invited was because Amway was apparently looking toward the Taiwan market, and they wanted a front man. At the end of the show by this guy with perfect hair who looked like a Republican or something, I exclaimed, being a naive kind of kid, friendly and open and honest, and never really having heard about Amway before, "Wow! This is like, like some kind of religion or something!" or words to that effect. The Republican with the hair got quite upset at this and demanded that I not say anything like that. And that was pretty funny. And I basically told him, well thanks, but no thanks, but I've got my own mission from God Blues Bros scenario going on in Taiwan.

And eventually Amway did show up in Taiwan, and I spent some time there in my job capacity at the time in Taipei giving language level assessment interviews and helping to set up an ESP program in the company, which had more or less been my "God mission" I guess back in my younger days, teaching English to Chinese-speakers. What goes around, sometimes comes around most mobiusly, doesn't it?

But hey, this article is right on. Do I sense a tongue-in-cheek approach to the content?; 5/01/2008 9:30 PM
Amanda said...: I agree with this article but not about the assumption of christians being perfect. Where is that written? They are just supposed to STRIVE to follow what is written in that book. Where is it written that every christian is perfect and does every little thing the bible tells them to do? If you can find any scientific book or even any book that states that christians are perfect because they are christians please let me know.; 5/06/2008 12:30 AM
believer said...: Jesus told people who he was (God}
and why he came (to die for sin) and he told his disciples to do the same'"Go Tell" ,no conditions on results .He got crucified so did they,you would say that did not work ..the church proves it does. It is better to do it well with Gods close leading but it is better to do it than not evben the funny signs and poor speakers are used by God. Too many christians think is they are not serial pedophiles people will be impressed and repent and seek Jesus never hearing the Gospel.
Or if their church has cool rtereats,cruises,shopping trips,or golf tourneys like Jesus did THAT WORKS!; 5/06/2008 9:12 AM
theviewfromthefirehouse said...: It's a good thing that Peter and the rest of the disciples didn't follow your advice. IMO if you want to learn a biblical approach to sharing you faith try http://www.wayofthemaster.com/ or http://www.wayofthemasterradio.com/; 5/08/2008 7:45 PM
GP said...: Simply ludicrous.; 5/09/2008 11:39 AM
gp said...: Btw, your article uses the same tack and begins with the same premise that you appear to be attacking. Presuppositions can be a b*@#h.; 5/09/2008 11:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Member "Truth Unites... and Divides" presented the following argument:

>Major Premise: If God has revealed Himself, then God exists.

>Minor Premise: God has revealed Himself.

>Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

The argument is indeed VALID, but it is not SOUND. A VALID argument is one where the conclusion follows from the premises; the premises need not be true. A SOUND argument is one where the premises are true; the conclusion need not follow.

A PROPER argument is one that is both VALID and SOUND. The example given is not a PROPER argument because the minor premise has not been verified as true.; 5/23/2008 1:24 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Anonymous writes: "The example given is not a PROPER argument because the minor premise has not been verified as true."

Sure it has. God has revealed Himself in the person of Jesus Christ. The Resurrection of Jesus Christ has been verified as objectively true by legal-historical evidence and reasoning.; 5/23/2008 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "God has revealed Himself in the person of Jesus Christ."

How does the existence of ANY person evidence a deity?

"The Resurrection of Jesus Christ has been verified as objectively true by legal-historical evidence and reasoning."

Hogwash. The resurrection has been verified as BELIEVED by certain people of that era. It cannot be verified as ACTUALLY true by any kind of evidence, and certainly not by reason, which can only lead one to dismiss the very notion.; 5/23/2008 3:28 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Ask yourself whether and how any historical event can be established as being objectively true.

And if historical events can be established as being objectively true, then ask by what methods. You'll find that legal and historical methods, reasoning, and chains of evidence will clearly and firmly establish the historicity of Jesus's physical resurrection.

Then you have a Proper argument that God exists.; 5/23/2008 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: "Ask yourself whether and how any historical event can be established as being objectively true."

We're not talking about "any historical event"; we're talking about ONE claimed event. Try to stay focused here.

"You'll find that legal and historical methods, reasoning, and chains of evidence will clearly and firmly establish the historicity of Jesus's physical resurrection."

Again: hogwash. There are no unbiased historians who claim that Jesus ACTUALLY CAME BACK TO LIFE. There ARE such historians who have shown that plenty of people believed that nonsense. HUGE difference. Night and day.

There are children who LITERALLY BELIEVE that Santa Clause exists and delivers presents via flying reindeer, but that doesn't make it true.

Let's not keep repeating ourselves. That's once for each of us so far (mine by necessity). For your next comment, evidence that the consensus among historians is that Jesus of Nazareth died and came back to life will go far in advancing your position.; 5/24/2008 6:11 AM
DaYouthGuy said...: Oh My God!

(I can say that cuz I'm a believer, lol!)

Please pardon my brothers and sisters who clearly have not read what you actually wrote. I believe you noted the tendency among some of my clan to always have to be right.

Let me say that this is actually one of the finest pieces of evangelism theory/praxis writings I've ever come across. Ever. Anywhere. By anyone. On behalf of thinking believers please accept my thanks.

It's my belief that there are more thinking Christians than most of us realize. The problem is that we don't know how to enter a conversation because the only methods we've been taught are the "human spam" ones (a brilliant concept which I intend to start using immediately). We know in our guts that these techniques don't work because for many of we went through times away from faith or the church (which are NOT the same thing). They've been tried on us and they are every bit as offensive as you say.

Did Jesus preach and teach? You betcha. But he did it either in an existing community of faith (temple) or at places where people came to him. When Paul goes the Areopagus he is going to the place where questions of faith and philosophy are discussed. While there are examples that may be of the "street corner preaching" example in the Bible the majority of the teaching (both style and content) have to do with how we live our lives.

Strange that we have to learn that lesson from an atheist.

God works in mysterious ways.

(Sorry, couldn't resist:) )

Peace
JP; 5/24/2008 10:39 AM
Zymish said...: I was impressed by this article, so much so that I sent it to my close friends, who were also quite enthusiastic about it. I read through about half of the comments before I gave out. =P

I just wanted to mention Paganism. You know, that religion that's been around for centuries longer than Christianity, but somehow ends up in the "New Age" section? The religion whose followers were killed and 'subdued' by Christians; whose holidays were twisted around and re-told to fit Christian lore? It seems that almost every discussion regarding religion is simply Christians, atheists, and the occasional Buddhist. What happened to the Druids? Christians stamped us out, that's what. So, maybe I'm a bit biased against Christians--okay, more than a bit--but I realise that most of them don't even know any of this. That's part of what frustrates me so much about it. I mean, if it makes a Christian happy to be a Christian, that's fantastic, but I think I'm insulted more than your average Atheist when asked to consider converting. I believe in Jesus, and I believe that he was a wonderful person, but I am a polytheist, not a monotheist, and I certainly don't believe in the way I see most Christians behaving. Nor do I believe that one must dress up once a week to meet in a large building in order to worship a higher power. Why can't I pray from home? I don't need everyone else to see me doing it.

I honestly didn't mean for that to become a rant, and I actually shortened it quite a bit. I understand that the point of your article had nothing to do with religions other than Christianity or the lack of religious belief, but I felt that most pagans, especially Druids (the neo-Wiccans seem to consist of mostly teenagers with too much black makeup), have very little say in any discussion anymore, so I just felt that we ought to have a voice somewhere in here. Just sort of a "Hey, we still exist. Sort of. Even though no one even remembers who we are."

Good job, Christianity.; 6/02/2008 11:35 PM
Anonymous said...: To the commenter who said...

Major Premise: If God has revealed Himself, then God exists.

Minor Premise: God has revealed Himself.

Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

...please see:

http://fallacyfiles.org/begquest.html
http://nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html
http://don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#begging
http://skepdic.com/begging.html
http://infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#begging; 6/09/2008 7:20 AM
jeremy said...: I'm not going to lie. A good friend of mine is a friend of yours, Joe. I like your writing, most of the time it's funny. You bring up valid points in this article that could be used generically. For example, it could apply to politics.

However, for you to say "Christians" definitively, as if to say "all Christians" do such stuff is completely and utterly asinine. I don't mean to offend, but it truly is. That's just like during Vietnam (or any war for that matter) when American soldiers, who were fulfilling their contractual duties by going to war, were called "baby killers" by American protestors, all of them; all because a few (and I don't mean like 3, quite possibly a much larger number on the contrary) visciously slaughtered children.

So, come on man, don't be a prick. Just because some Christians do these things does not mean all Christians do these things, and just because some Christians do these things does not mean these people represent the ideologies and principals of their churches. (People's perception is that all Christians are like this because the small amount of Christians that are like this become the "lime light", for lack of a better term, to those who don't share such beliefs); 6/18/2008 3:24 AM
Anonymous said...: i am a christian and do you know something.To those unbelievers that mock the disciples of jesus, well just wait to see the smile on my face as i watch you burn in hell, same goes for you Author, you know im right.; 6/21/2008 2:21 AM
JtP said...: Wow, very christian of you.; 6/21/2008 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: i love this artical. Idon't know what to beleive about god. If he is real, all the power to you beleivers. I for one beleive in myself. oh, and an anonymus person said,"Scew you, Your not Christan, Don't me how to live my life."good for you. you just described yourself as one of those a-holes that are big fat jerks. We could say the same thing to you. Scew you. I've been liven my life without any godly influence, and i haven't once been struck down by lightning or inpaled on a stick.so don't you Christans tell me what i should or shouldn't beleive in.; 7/03/2008 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...: All of you blasted atheists will be slaughtered, your children and families will be cutted down under your nose, and everything you atheists hold dear will be demolished and burned!

DEATH TO ATHEISTS! KILL THEM ALL! DEATH TO ALL ATHEISTS! DEATH!

BLOOD!; 7/25/2008 8:52 PM
aartisans said...: Dear Joe,
I am a christian pastor who just happened to be researching and surfing the net for inspiration, to produce a sermon for my church congregation, when I happened upon your post.

I was absolutely blown away by your post on how to actually talk to atheists if you are a Christian.

You raised a number of very important and interesting points worthy of note in by all who possess the conviction for an idea or belief system, which they want to share with others. I believe this is particularly worthy of note for Christian evangelists.

It is natural, when someone has enthusiasm for any given subject, to want to share that subject with others. Especially when you feel grateful for that knowledge yourself, because it has helped you in some way.
Just ask a stranger on the street who is lost, what it feels like, not to have the information as to where they want to go or how to get there, and being refused that information by people who do know.

Human beings value information that will help them survive their day to day living. There is no doubt that many people want to know how to be happy, how to have peace, how to find love, how to get and keep a job, how to prosper, how to overcome illnesses, or recover from addictions etc...etc..

Information is a very important commodity. This is why we have Educational establishments. This is why we buy magazine, read books, surf the net ask questions etc,,etc...Because we want answers.

True Christians honestly and genuinely believe they have experienced the answers to many of the questions people have about survival. thy see so much suffering around them in the form of broken hearts, broken dreams, loneliness, despair, confusion, distrust, fear, poverty, sickness and strife; and therefore feel the Urgency to do something to help. This is the sense of urgency, that motivates a lot of Christian evangelism.
The intentions of many Christian evangelists are genuinely honorable
to this effect.

Nevertheless, I do believe that you have a good point in your article to be heeded and respected by many
Christians.

It is to do with individual free will and freedom of choice. It is indeed very appropriate for us Christians to be reminded to respect and honor the free will and free choices of others and to refrain from violating their personal space with tactics that amount to what has ben described as spiritual abuse.
There is no excuse for enforcing a belief system, faith or any reality upon another human being, no excuse...none.
In Christian terms that is indeed a sin.
The challenge for us Christians, is in finding the balance between expressing our enthusiasm ( love has a tendency to be enthusiastic) for the well being of others, and simultaneously honoring and respecting their right to make their choices, decisions and conclusions as free beings.

Again in using Christian terminology, adopting n attitude of superiority and arrogance, or a self righteous holier than thou stance when sharing the message of Christ, is considered a sin.

I really liked what you had to say about leading or teaching by example. you are very right to point out that too many of us Christians do not practice what we preach, or what we attempt to project on to others.

it is a Christian saying ;to remove the log from your own eye so that you may see clearly to remove the speck from your brother eye. For if there is a a huge piece of wood in your own eye blocking your viewpoint or perspective, how can you possibly see clearly to remove the little speck that is in your brother's eye?

This Joe, is Christian teaching, and as you have so clearly stated in your post, needs to be paramount Christian practice. Jesus practiced what he preached. He led by example more than anything else. it was his example that really touched others, his preaching was validated by his day to day living and actions.

Habitually giving, unsolicited advice, just like spam, can be quiteannoying and disrespectful. On the other hand so is withholding information or knowledge that would be of benefit to another when it is clear that not having that vital information is causing them considerable hardship.

Would you hide information regarding a cure for cancer from a relative you loved who you saw struggling in terrible pain from cancerous growths and close to dying? most likely you would want to rush them that information as soon as possible, even if they did not ask you directly for it themselves, the pain in their body did. This is why it is so important to check for the motivation behind any communication to us, so that we are neither blocking are good from coming in, nor projecting our own insecurities on to others.

Thank you so much for your article, which I intend to print and share with members of my congregation as part of a lesson in humility versus pride.

I encourage you to continue in your stance of accepting as your own only those beliefs which are true for you.

Kind Regards
pastor Bola; 9/08/2008 8:31 PM
Michael said...: First, let me congratulate you on your excellent essay. I particularly liked the unicorn club analogy.

Next, I'd like to point out to all the folks giving long series of Biblical quotes that if you'd read Joe's essay you'd know that is not going to impress too many atheists. Most atheists in North America and Europe have had a great deal of exposure to Christianity. Many of us have read the Bible. We know, for instance, that the Bible tells us that pi equals 3, that having your virgin daughters gang-raped is better than letting a couple of angels who are more than capable of defending themselves defeat a mob, and that your god is a petulant bully with the emotional maturity of a spoiled five year old.

To the person who claimed that all he needed to go to Heaven was faith, I invite your attention to "faith without good works is dead". (James 2:17) Note: It's permissible for me to quote the Bible because I'm explaining something to a Christian.

To those people who feel the need to preach your beliefs at us poor, iggerant, damned atheists, I have one request. Please don't. If we want to listen to your "good news" we'll ask for it. Thanks.; 9/14/2008 4:31 PM
Scott said...: Nice work!!! I have been left an 'authorative' book on creationism by a couple of local door knockers. I decided to play their game for something different.

I can't wait until they return so I can take an hour to go through the 17 page essay I wrote that does the following...

1) Poke holes in the method of the book and it's devious way of attempting to trick the reader into believing so-called creationist facts.

2) Refuting every so-called creationist fact with a documented and scientific peer reviewed example of evolutionist fact.

I hope to ensnare them for a hour or so and see if I can convert them to atheism!

I may even get my wife to go outside as a decoy for the man that drives these biblical spammers around my suburb after a suitable period to buy me more time.

I'll let you-all know how I go! I think these ones are very close to coming over and accepting science into their hearts!; 10/31/2008 9:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us, we are all sinners.; 11/01/2008 8:39 PM
Bill_Dunlap said...: Joe, I just happened to stumble on your article, and I am afraid that you are giving your Christian friends some very bad advice. While I am very grateful to you for advising Christians to stop accosting atheists, I think you are also doing them a disservice by not mentioning why atheists are becoming so radical.

Once upon a time religion was simply a background annoyance. I collected Chic comic books for fun and my friends and I used to give out Gideon Bibles signed "Compliments of the Author". Religion was a source of quiet amusement which we kept to ourselves because we did not want to hurt anyone's feelings. Then one day a young man named Matt Sheppard was beaten and left to die by a bunch of religious idiots.

Sheppard's death was an epiphany to me. Religion ceased to be an amusing eccentricity and I began to see it as what it actually is, a deadly psychosis. I do not limit this to Christianity or the Abrahamic religions, I mean religion period. I have seen socially dangerous and irresponsible actions from Pagans as well as Mormons, Lubavitcher Jews, or Moslems.

There are two classes of religious people, abusers and enablers. Those Christians who give lip service to Matt Sheppard's death and claim that his murderers were not real Christians, are only enabling the abusers to hurt more people. Note that the Christians are not working to rid their community of the abusers. They are not suing Churches that preach hate for misrepresentation, nor are they working to have preachers like Fred Phelps defrocked. There are no standards in religion. There is no board to prevent actions such as Sheppard's murder. I will even bet that some ding-dong posts that Matt's killers were good and holy men.

Religion has become a cancer spreading through the body politic. The U.S. Park Service disseminates creationist misinformation. The Unification Church is one of the biggest swine eating out of the trough of faith based initiatives. I have come to the conclusion that the writers of the Constitution made a huge mistake when they penned the Bill of Rights. Religion should have been banned by the Constitution.; 11/02/2008 6:20 AM
Adrian said...: Hi Joe, just stumbled onto your article. I run an atheist blog, write for numerous secular periodicals, and am actively involved in this "New Atheist" movement you mention. I have been an atheist for 22 years.

That being said, I really enjoyed your article. The fact is that the behavior you discussed often makes my job easier! I think most christians would do well to heed your advice. One of my best friends is a great example, he is one of those that truly believes and lives his life as though he does. I respect him enough to never attack his belief, because he is such a great person, and gives me the same respect in return. Christians need to realize that the more they push, the harder people like me are going to push back.

So, kudos to you for having such insight

www.eyeroll.org; 11/05/2008 9:02 PM
Anonymous said...: As a Christian with a deep faith in Christ, I want to thank you for your insights. I am saddened that you don't have the kind of relationship I enjoy with God, but I can quietly pray, in my corner of the universe, that one day you will experience first-hand the sort of relationship of which I speak. I actually agree with you completely about the futility of our traditionally-employed "witnessing" methods, and you are remarkably forgiving in spite of us!

My faith compels me to believe the Bible, which states that mankind is "lost," but it was love that motivated Christ to die for the world, and it is love that we as Christians should be expressing in word and deed--to each other as well as to you.

I know about you now, you've let slip how much you have searched out religious belief(!) and I will be praying that God reveals the truth about Himself to you in His irresistable way. No interruptions, no sales--just a few short prayers that you'll never hear. . . :); 11/06/2008 12:02 AM
jv said...: This is by far one of the most interesting articles I've ever read. Outstanding!

I am not a Christian and haven't been for quite some time. I do however believe in a God and not because of a book. I believe in God because of personal experiences in my life. That being the case, I've struggled to parlay that personal testimony of evidence for one reason alone. I don't live a life that exudes that I believe that there is a God.

Before the hate mail starts, I'm typing this while opening up my next box of Camel Lights. I've got porn in my browser history and a half case of Budweiser in the fridge. I'm not a Christian. I'm not advocating a Christian lifestyle. I'm not trying to witness to anyone.

But, in an attempt to play devil's advocate, Christians are simply doing what they're told by their Bible. Go ye forth...

In your opinion, you say Christians are doing it the wrong way and, I agree, but honestly don't care. It doesn't affect me from either aspect. My problem lies in their reasons for doing it.

You illustrate very well that Christians spend their days trying to bring people into their church. I am hard pressed to find where this is scriptural. You won't find instances of the apostles of Jesus Christ going out to find people to bring into their church in attempt to show them the love and power of their God. You will however find them doing these things on the street corners. Or better said by this author, in the soup kitchens.

The early church didn't keep the power of their religion locked away in a church somewhere. They took it with them to the streets through their words and deeds. They proved their beliefs on the streets. Non-believers followed and trusted them because of their actions and the evidence through the power demonstrated.

To use the Bible simply as a book written by men, containing the words and instructions of another man claiming to be the Son of God, read and proclaimed by the followers of that man, I make the following statement:

To the Christian - Your words, your actions, your desires, your intents, your instructions to witness will NEVER be effective until you can understand and accept fully the position of this author. Until you can see past yourself and into the hearts and minds of those you are attempting to reach. Until you can understand your customer you will never sell your product.

To the Author - It's cliche' and overstated within our society to "put yourself in their shoes" but you sir have done the best job I have ever seen of it! I will be forwarding your article to ALL of my Christian friends.

I'll be bookmarking your site for future reference. Thanks for this!!; 11/06/2008 9:43 AM
nay said...: Hey, i really enjoyed this article...as someone who is still making up their mind about the bible and what it teaches, it is so refreshing to find this article. I try to read all sorts of literature so as to get a balanced view of the arguments for and against belief in God and the subsequent responsibilities, and all I seem to find in terms of athiest views are put forwards in really innapropreate, rude and insulting ways, so thanks for your sensitive, well thought out article!
This was especdially interesting as the church I attend has branches all over the world and I went to South Africa recently to see the preaching work there, and it is run by the philosophy of 'touch and teach', show the love of God to people, by helping them get an education, by feeding them or running free training courses. After which the people you help usually turn around and say, why are you doing this for me? At which point the opportunity is presented to say that your motivation is to preach and to show Gods love to people.
I also completely agree with the idea that preaching should be goal orientated, if a particular method does not work, or even irritates people putting them off listening to what you have to say, change the tact, find new ways of reaching people.
Returning to the UK and the preaching methods here were so depressing to see, that again and again the same leaflets were dispached and no one would respond time and time again, yet the same methods are being used.; 11/07/2008 9:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Why don't people quit reading so deeply and negatively to people who try to save them? Why don't those atheists first try to be nice and say, hey thanks for caring about me, a total stranger. And then begin a respected debate?? Why do people have to be so hateful? I listen to ALL religions when trying to be saved or converted by any of them. Because I admire that they even care about me enough in the first place to want me. After I'm respectful to them and hear them out, I POLITELY tell them I'm not interested and that I'm happy with my salvation. And to all you who don't believe in God. I pity you and pray for you. To you who judge us Christians for sinning. We aren't perfect duh. We don't claim to be. We ALL sin daily. But that's why Jesus gave up his life for us ALL. To erase our sins so that we would be accepted into Heaven. Read the ENTIRE Bible before spouting off like you know it all. Because you don't.; 11/10/2008 11:43 AM
Bill_Dunlap said...: "Why don't people quit reading so deeply and negatively to people who try to save them? Why don't those atheists first try to be nice and say, hey thanks for caring about me, a total stranger. And then begin a respected debate??"

Because you do not care, not really. You are not reacting out of care. You are reacting out of untreated Obsessive/Compulsive disorder. People believe differently than you do, and so you have to interfere with their lives and deny civil rights to others. You abuse your own children through stories of hell and damnation, and force the idiotic superstition of Creationism into our school systems so that in later life, your kids will not be able to compete in the job market.

You do all this damage just to relieve the symptoms of your anxiety disorders.; 11/10/2008 1:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I think hypocrisy (so-called Christians blatantly not living according to their faith-lukewarm Christians (if they are in fact Christians)), selfishness (living for oneself), pride (necessity of evidence or complete rational understanding) all rank higher then general annoyance as reasons people reject the Christ.

God delights in everyone who chooses to come to him. And how much better for us who are saved! For we are completely satisfied in Christ who is our savior.

God's heart breaks for everyone who chooses to reject him, and him being a perfect and just God must respect their decision to face the consequence of their sin without the intercession of Christ (who died for them) and give them the full penalty of their sin. Eternal separation from the God who created and loves them.
We as Christians who are seeking to emulate Christ, well, our hearts should be breaking too as we watch our friends slip away. Which is why we try to save them (by Christ through us), but in the end... if we should fail, it'll not be us regretting their lack of faith (as we will be in heaven delighting and being perfectly satisfied w/ God), it is they who will be forever separated from us and God who will regret their hardened hearts.

If you don't believe in God, then that's your choice, but do so knowingly, that if Christianity is true, then you gambled wrong and will spend an eternity away from him.

I don't know any of you, and you don't know me. But If I had a genuine love for you, and cared for you, and believed what I said then I would be doing you an injustice by not telling you. Of course, I have to respect you decision, I can't save or make you change your mind. But if I loved you enough, I'd want to keep asking. I'm sorry if you find that annoying, it is not my intention.

You are right to say Christians should be living their faith as actions speak louder than words. But if you do not see by our actions, then how will you know if we do not tell you?

Again I stress it's your choice whether to believe in Christianity, or another religion, or nothing at all. I hope you choose to believe what I have faith is true, than I can see you in heaven and say hi; in the event that I'm wrong, well, then I guess I won't need to.

Please be patient with me, whether you choose to believe or not.

I just saw this article on Reuters, I'm not sure if any of you are aware of. These Christians in India are being persecuted and killed for their faith. I don't think anyone should be harmed, or killed for their faith (whatever their faith is).

http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-35291320080903?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

~Mike W.
Christian (aka Christ Follower)
Engineering Student (Almost Done!); 11/10/2008 2:21 PM
Bill_Dunlap said...: "You are right to say Christians should be living their faith as actions speak louder than words. But if you do not see by our actions, then how will you know if we do not tell you?"

Why do you assume that we even give a damn? I was never Christian. I was raised by my Conservative Jewish mother and my Orthodox Jewish Grandfather. I was not even raised with the concept of an afterlife. I am not concerned what happens in this life. I am concerned what happens in this life.

I am utterly furious that the Christianoids churches misrepresented (out right lied) to deny basic civil rights to Gay and Lesbian citizens. I think it is long passed time that all churches lose their non-profit privileges. Maybe when we hit you in the wallet hard enough you will learn the virtues of silence.; 11/10/2008 11:59 PM
scott gray said...: you've hit the nail on the head-- live a christian life(style) and non-christins around you may see the value of how you live, enough to become interested in your beliefs.

i'm an atheist, at least about the judeo-christian god. agnostic about other possibilities. i've been witnessed to, and asked about desired programing by local faith communities, and none of the life(style) of the christians i see is anything i'd want to emulate, or participate in.

the only model of church i see of any value is church as servant to the world. if you are a christian, and you want my attention, your witness should be about asking me to participate in a habitat for humanity project, or a weekend at the soup kitchen, or a trip to the hospital to visit lonely oldsters, or a run to the local jail to minister with companionshiup and support needs of inmates and their families. any other witness is of no value.

the local church once sent pairs of people door-to-door and they landed at my house. they asked what programs i thought their church should add to serve the community (they meant local homeowners and retired people as community). i asked how many homeless people lived in a 10 mile radius of the church and what programs they were running for them. the returned look was of disgust, and the answer was none. no programs. conversation over, except for the forced pleasantries of disengagement from these people on my front porch.

why do you insist on offering salvation to people who perceive no need for it? if you as a christian want to witness, your primary text needs to shift from john 3:16 to luke 4:16-19, or isaiah 61. otherwise, i, and the world at large, have no use for your message.

peace--

scott; 11/11/2008 6:44 AM
Susan Stribich said...: Yes, we as Christians need to reach out to others in self-sacrificial ways. But, Satan, The Deceiver, will always seek to silence the verbal proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, because he knows that no one will escape the coming wrath of God (true justice); hell, unless they have both HEARD and responded to the truth therein, and received that which was earned FOR US, by Jesus, on the cross. Believe + Repent (from past sin)= be saved.

This is reality. If you don't acknowledge it, God's verdict against you, on Judgement Day (when God will separate the sheep from the goats), will be: Guilty. Be ready. You will not be able to change your mind then.

Joe the Peacock.... or whoever wrote this:

You said that you have purposely not identified yourself as a believer or a nonbeliever.

My guess is that you are a non-believer, because you are saying exactly what Satan wants believers to believe.... i.e.: 'Don't speak the Gospel to someone who doesn't believe (Satan knows how powerful that message is).... instead, just live a really benevolent life, then they will come to Christ.

Scott Grey,

BTW, we will be restoring a house for a very poor family soon.... you said that such an invitation would change your mind about Christ.... want to come to Calif. and help??; 11/12/2008 1:17 PM
JtP said...: Susan,

I usually don't revisit my old articles to comment, but I just had to mention one thing:

I have a very, very hard time thinking of an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator "judging" his creation who he made in his image. If he's all powerful, and all knowing, he made me how I am specifically because he wanted it that way. Anything less - including the weak-ass arguments based on "free will" - would mean an imperfect creation from a perfect creator, which of course casts all sorts of suspicion on everything you proclaim to be and know.

Just my two cents.; 11/12/2008 1:25 PM
FrogBlogger said...: Great piece, if a bit US-centric. The evangelical approach is less common in Europe, so the wishy-washy laid-back liberal version of Christianity you are sort of advocating instead of the US 'in-your-face' approach is already pretty familiar to Brits such as myself.

The bad news... for Christians anyway... is that it's even less effective, and an ever-decreasing percentage of Europeans believe in deities of any description, least of all nonsense like creationism, the flood, etc.; 11/15/2008 10:10 AM
Anonymous said...: this was a good read!
im an agnostic leaning towards atheism, and have managed to live my life being a good person to others, without requiring a belief in a higher power. i however respect those that can have that faith, even with the negative views and odds stacked against them. to have so much faith in something that cant be seen, touched, or proven takes a big heart, or in some unfortunate cases, a small mind. the christian bible is just another form of mythology, like other religions, and was a way for man to explain happenings without the aid of modern science. it seems to me that these beliefs need some updating to modern times, quite badly. but to each their own, thats your right as a human!
no two people experience the same things in life, and need the same explanations for these happenings. whats right for one, is not for another, and that is why religion, or lack of, is a PERSONAL decision, and should be made in ones own time.; 11/18/2008 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Thanks for that. I enjoyed it.

I have spent a lot of my exploration studying religious ideas such as the Bhagavad Gita, Buddhism and even Christ. I've talked to Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Muslims and others. I'd say in as much as I am religious I use the Bhagavad Gita as my reference frame which sort of makes me a Hindu.

I'd point to the things you point out - the importance of loving others, compassion, generosity, non-greed. Because I associate more readily with Hinduism than Christianity then, according to many Christians, I'll end up in hell for it. Some still try to save my soul.

If your faith in Christ leads you to love others then that's great! I've met Christians who show this. The best of them also respect others for who they are. It's not going to cause me to believe Christian doctrine though because I know that it is possible to find these things from many starting points. I know that this kind of goodness can be found in the major religions, but is independent of them. You can go very right in them or very wrong depending on how you take it.

Still - if you try to force or pressure me into Christianity I _will_ resist. Interruption marketing, witnessing, will not work. If you corner me then you are effectively demanding to know why I don't believe. My only response could be to give you the reasons which would mean I'd end up attacking your beliefs.

On the other hand I can have good discussions with Christian groups about how to live, myself referring to my sources and them to theirs. It's amazing how much we really have in common once we realise that specific dogma is not important.; 11/19/2008 7:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Great post. I was directed over here via the blog of a Church of England bishop who described it as "required reading for all Christians".; 11/23/2008 2:21 PM
Anonymous said...: jtp, At least you removed all doubt for me about where you might be coming from. :-)

Yes, my creator God is loving and powerful, BUT, He is also JUST. Hitler will not go unpunished. Do you think he should?

God did not create me to sin. He created Adam and Eve sinless. I won't get into the whole 'problem of evil' thing, but I will say this:

God has said that the wages of sin is Death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. Jesus suffered in my stead. I deserve God's coming judgement. I deserve, in God's just economy, to be punished. The thing is, God provided a way out of that punishment. It costs me what? I need merely to believe that Jesus that Jesus is the divine son of God, that he lived in the flesh on this earth at a point in history, he died.... suffering the death I deserve, paid the price for me, rose from the dead, and that IF I come to Him in humble repentance (recognizing my sin as an offense to God and turning from it) and receive Him..... then I will be forgiven.... seen by him as completely righteous as Christ is. That's a great deal if you ask me!

So, maybe you have a problem with 'Jesus is the only way'(?)...... to receive this pardon. Christians didn't make that up. Jesus himself said that. He rose from the dead, a fact worth investigating (check out Lee Strobel's *The Case for Christ*. He was an agnostic Chicago Tribune reporter. His wife came to have a relationship with Jesus. He could see the change in her. At first it made him angry. Eventually he decided to investigate Jesus fro himself, the same why he would investigate a news story he was working on. He's done the hard work. Give it a read. Your eternity depends on whether or not you come into a relationship with the only one God has named under heaven, by whom we can be saved.

This is Fact. Whether you believe it, ignore it, are hardened toward it, are angry about it..... it's STILL fact. I would seriously look into it if I were you. Your life depends on it. Hell is a real destination for those who reject God's only path to forgiveness.

You may not like that Jesus is the only way, but if God made five ways, many would be angry that there weren't ten ways.... God made a way for us. He did it once, on the cross, and Jesus said: "It is finished." Even a child can understand these truths.

If your excuse for ignoring Jesus is that so-called Christian are lousy sinners, then so-be-it. The consequences for you remain the same with a just God. Also, keep in mind that there are scads of people who call themselves Christians, go to church, and often truly believe that they are saved, but who are actually only self-deceived. Those people defame God's name. They don't have God's Holy Spirit within them, convicting them of sin and 'sanctifying' (the change toward right behavior which God's spirit brings about over time). Satan does his dirty work through those who claim to be Christians but are not Spirit indwelt. They behave like nonchristians, because they are. Only God knows for sure the condition of a person's heart, so even we Christians have a hard time knowing whether other so-called Christians are truly in Christ.

Thanks for responding.

Susan; 11/26/2008 1:53 PM
Susan Stribich said...: JtP, Sorry, I was responding to your comment to me. I didn't mean to post anonymously.; 11/26/2008 2:22 PM
Michael said...: Susan Stribic wrote:

"This is Fact. Whether you believe it, ignore it, are hardened toward it, are angry about it..... it's STILL fact. I would seriously look into it if I were you. Your life depends on it. Hell is a real destination for those who reject God's only path to forgiveness."

First of all, it's not fact. It's your belief, back by nothing but faith.

Secondly, if your god knew that I was going to hell but still allowed me to come into being, then he's really into sadism. According to the propaganda, your god is a loving god. There are some sick people who think causing pain shows love, but the vast majority of us think those people are deviants. So please excuse me if I fail to believe in your deviant god. I prefer sanity.; 11/27/2008 8:54 PM
Michael said...: Sorry about misspelling your name, Susan. My apologies.; 11/27/2008 8:56 PM
Bill Dunlap said...: Susan, there are a few comments you made that sort of bother me.

"God has said that the wages of sin is Death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. Jesus suffered in my stead. I deserve God's coming judgement. I deserve, in God's just economy, to be punished. The thing is, God provided a way out of that punishment. It costs me what? I need merely to believe that Jesus that Jesus is the divine son of God, that he lived in the flesh on this earth at a point in history, he died.... suffering the death I deserve, paid the price for me, rose from the dead, and that IF I come to Him in humble repentance (recognizing my sin as an offense to God and turning from it) and receive Him..... then I will be forgiven.... seen by him as completely righteous as Christ is. That's a great deal if you ask me!"

This really disturbs me and makes me hope that you find a good therapist to deal with these really deep-seated self esteem issues that seem to be going on here. True, I have been properly bitched out by professional psychologists for psycho-analyzing over the web, but really, stop and read what you posted here. What did you, Susan, do to deserve a ghastly death? Were you Leonard Lake who murdered and tortured innocent women or are you a 95 year old ex-concentration camp guard? Susan you have done nothing in that league. You are a normal human being with normal human urges, and once in a while you make a big or little mistake. Big deal. The self-hatred you are showing makes me feel very sorry for all of you and wonder what I can do to reach out to you and convince you that you are not a bad person because your internalized invisible pink unicorn says you are.

"This is Fact. Whether you believe it, ignore it, are hardened toward it, are angry about it..... it's STILL fact. I would seriously look into it if I were you. Your life depends on it. Hell is a real destination for those who reject God's only path to forgiveness."

Hell does not exist. Hell is an idea that was brought into the Christian dogma long after the death of Christ. It is certainly not a part of the Jewish faith (which I was raised in.) A friend on mine did a long study on the history of the belief in hell. You should take a look.

http://people.tribe.net/wizzard/blog/737f8ef0-a430-4279-b1e6-83b14e249699

"If your excuse for ignoring Jesus is that so-called Christian are lousy sinners, then so-be-it. "

No, Susan, my excuse for ignoring Jesus is that he never existed, not even as a historical figure. The story of Jesus is told amongst the backdrop of the most socially unstable time in Jewish history. Jews were fighting Jews over the correct way to kill Romans, and street corner preachers were calling themselves the messiah. Should somebody have come along and preached what Jesus was said to have preached, he would have been torn apart by the crowds. Jewish law was a matter of national pride to the Israeli Jews of the time. Revising the law would have been suicide. Christianity came out of Hellenic Judaism, and the writers of the Gospels never even saw Jerusalem much less knew Christ.

You are asking us to believe logical and historical fallacies. That is simply not going to happen. There is no God. There was no Jesus, and the sin you fear is simply unrealistic expectations imposed on you by a bunch of greed mongers more concerned that their politicians are elected so that the money keeps pouring into their pockets.; 11/29/2008 3:45 AM
Susan Stribich said...: Bill,
Contrary to your belief that Jesus never existed, not even as a historical figure, how do you account for the references to Jesus, his brother James, and other NT figures including John the Baptist in extra biblical documents including the writings of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews), and Tacitus. You may also want to give a careful read to the Talmud commentaries (dated approximately 500 AD) which refer to "Jesus of Nazareth" as being a transgressor in Israel.
Additionally, Jesus is mentioned by Josephus in Testimonium Flavianum along with Pontius Pilate who condemned Jesus to be crucified. According to Dr. Edwin Yamauchi of Miami University of Ohio, who is one of this country's leading experts in ancient history, he states about the Josephus passage, "But today there's a remarkable consensus among both Jewish and Christian scholars that the passage as a whole is authentic."
There is no doubt that Jesus is a historical figure who did exist.; 11/29/2008 5:59 PM
Michael said...: Susan Strabich wrote: "the writings of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews), and Tacitus."

There is good reason to think that the passage in "Antiquities of the Jews" that mentions Jesus was a forgery written by a Christian apologist to provide historical evidence of Jesus' existence. Historian Michael L. White argues against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's "Jewish War" do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from the "Antiquities," do not mention the passage.

As for Tacitus, quite likely he was writing what the Christians in the year 116 believed, and is not therefore an independent confirmation of the Gospel reports. Historian Richard Carrier writes:

"Tt is inconceivable that there were any records of Jesus for Tacitus to consult in Rome (for many reasons, not the least of which being that Rome's capitol had burned to the ground more than once in the interim), and even less conceivable that he would have dug through them even if they existed … It would simply be too easy to just ask a Christian--or a colleague who had done so … there can be no doubt that what Pliny discovered from Christians he had interrogated was passed on to Tacitus."

As Charles Guignebert notes "So long as there is that possibility [that Tacitus is merely echoing what Christians themselves were saying], the passage remains quite worthless".; 11/29/2008 8:52 PM
Bill Dunlap said...: Michael,

Thank you very much for mentioning Josephus and Tacitus. Neither were any sort of historians. Tacitus was mentioning curiosities that he had encountered on his travels while Josephus frequently confused myth with reality. Rome's dependence on Josephus set the science of history back over 1,000 years. In fact, one of the major problems I have with Edwin Yamauchi, is his insistence that Josephus is accurate. Despite Susan's claims, Yamauchi is not a respected scholar out of the narrow confines of the Christianoids.

Susan,

The Talmud reference you are speaking about has nothing to do with the "historic" Jesus. Jesus (Yeshua or Joshua) is a very common name amongst Jews of that era. The era I am speaking about is 500 years after the supposed crucifixion. The Jesus who was being written about was being tried for idolatry 500 years after the supposed death of your Jesus. The Talmudic Jesus was accused of practicing and teaching the Egyptian religion. Are you trying to tell me that your Jesus came back 500 years later and was then executed for idolatry?; 11/30/2008 2:42 AM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: How To Actually Talk To Atheists; 12/01/2008 1:07 AM
Chris said...: This was a very good article and I did indeed read all of it. You're spot on that the spam-preachers on the street-corners handing out Chick Tracts are not doing anyone any favors, nor are the people that steer every conversation to Christianity. Actions do speak louder than words, and even if you don't convert a single person with this method, at least you don't push anyone away. However, you can be assured that your method will result in more Christians. After all, it's God that saves people, right?; 12/21/2008 9:27 PM
Dan, Pantheist. said...: To start, this article is hilarious, thoughtful, intelligent and practical. I encounter "human spam" almost every day of spring semester, shouting indistinguishable biblical passages across campus. They accomplish nothing but arousing my ire. The preacher has a hell of a voice, I have to give him that. However, I feel that as a Pantheist (and, in some ways, atheist) the complexity of belief systems is misrepresented and/or misunderstood. The Abrahamic GOD exists because he is believed in, as with all deities. Deities only cease to exist once the actions motivated by their thought-forms diminish into nothingness and the thought-form is forgotten. Faith itself must be understood as self-programming in order to accomplish accepted goals represented by the god-head in question. The gods do not literally "exist" as my computer, my body or the planet exist, in physical form with the material being of primary importance. However, they do exist as the United States or currency exists, as ideals who can only exist as long as faith and participation of individuals is provided. So, one can "believe" in god or gods without accepting the supernatural explanation. I feel that the term "Pantheist" (adapted from the Unitarian Universalist World Pantheism movement) is more apt for my personal belief structure. Perhaps this will provided some readers with a more fitting term for their spiritual endeavors.; 12/22/2008 6:14 PM
Grisselda said...: Thought provoking article...thanks for it. I've been able to stop my evangelical family members praying that I will accept Jesus Christ as my "lord and saviour" by pointing out to them that invoking diety with the express purpose of thwarting someone else's free-will is the essense and very definition of black magic. Honestly, if Christian's and other faith-based folk would simply respect other people's beliefs in the same way they demand that theirs be respected, I would have no problem with whatever invisible beings anyone cares to invoke and provoke. Grabbing the hand of a non-believing family member in a public place (notably a restaurant) and praisin' the lawd at the top of one's vocal range as soon as the food arrives counts as being not just disrespectful but ostentatious, rude and perverse. No converts made. No mutual respect possible. Mission accomplished, fools.; 12/24/2008 1:35 PM
Susan Stribich said...: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Corinthians 1:18)

"Fools say to themselves,'There is no God.'" (Psalm 14:1)

God's words, not mine.; 12/27/2008 3:52 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: The Raving Atheist has become a Christian. The blogsite has been renamed The Raving Theist.

Here's an excerpt:

"Three years ago, I promoted and appeared in the atheist documentary “The God Who Wasn’t There,” dedicated to the proposition that Jesus never existed.

TODAY I DEDICATE THIS SITE AND MY LIFE TO THE WORSHIP AND SERVICE OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST."

May God grant Joe the Peacock (and all other atheists) the grace and mercy to repent of his sins and to believe in Jesus as his Divine Lord and Savior, the Lover of his Soul ... just like what happened with The Raving Atheist.

Truth Unites... and Divides; 12/27/2008 5:08 PM
JtP said...: For the last time, I'm not an atheist.

And Susan, I doubt very highly that, if God were to write, he'd choose King James' English. All those Thees and Thous... Such a conflated language. Esperanto is far more efficient.; 12/27/2008 10:45 PM
Grisselda said...: How insulting, if there is a divine presence outside the web of the natural world, to narrow that presence to the limitations of human language and the motivations of a Hebrew war god. The mythology of a resurrected male diety in Jesus is simply the most recent in a long line of such gods. In focusing upon the tribal prejudices inherent in the "absolute truth" mythology, the larger picture, in the form of symbols and intuitive understanding of the balance between the Underworld or the world of spirit and the Upperworld or the world of matter is perverted and largely lost. It seems to me that the most heinous blasphemy against a god if there truly is one is to take anyone else's word (even if it's in print!) for that existence as "gospel".; 12/28/2008 1:58 PM
Anonymous said...: with my debate practice beginning soon, i have only time to write that i believe the original article accurate to an extent, in that pushing Jesus on firm and angry atheists does not have immediate, "sweet jesus i believe in you!" results.
it can anger. it can annoy.
Jesus angered and annoyed many ppl with his testimony, and he still gave it. his life angered and annoyed. so did his actions, even when his actions were HEALING!
with such an example, is it not the Christians duty to talk about Jesus, even when people dont like it?
i completely agree that steamrolling with fire and brimestone is wrong.
however, talking to ppl who hate what they hear is enivitable for a Christian, and i completely disagree that whenever one encounters such an attitude, they should immediately shut up/sit down, and stop trying to evangelize.
as a person who has been a missionary in England, i for one :
a. did not encounter violent atheists, but interested and (even tho EVERYONE seems to know about God and its useless to bring him up) uneducated in the bible ppl who were interested
b. those who initially did blow off mentions of God. then they actually had conversations about our differing beliefs. i learned a lot, so did they.

it seems that to be acceptable to atheists we should attempt to make christianity likeable and easy for everyone, or something that is non threatening to a normal way of life.
this may sound harsh, but dude- God's way is an absolute. suggesting that sugar-coating the fact that God's way is different than everyone elses doesnt change that it is different. now, all you angry pantheists and former jews and pagans and the like dont need to jump on me!
i am expressing what i believe. i believe that the Bible, and Jesus, speak the truth.
call me an uneducated deluded and hopeless person, but i have chosen the way i want to live me life, and i believe that i'm going to heaven when i die. does that hurt anyone? insult anyone? it shouldnt. what may hurt is when i say that i really want you to join me there, and you refuse on the grounds that you just wont believe what i believe.
ok.
soooo i'll pray for you. thats it.

last comment: the ppl who post death to atheists and such are crazy misguided and need more Jesus in my opinion. i have scores of atheist and jewish pantheist and muslim friends that i try to witness to with my life as much as possible,and because i care about them, would never, EVER, want them to go to hell.
It is my love for them that causes me to talk about my faith.
ppl on this post have derided posters for saying its out of love we talk about God. Well it is. get over it!! you are loved. by me, by God. that may disgust you. it surely disgusted Todd Lake, harvard grad. until he became a christian. it disgusted the nazi gaurd of a christian pastor. until he became a Christian.
so i guess i warn you all: God really wants you. the fact you read what i've written...well i hope He uses it.
loves ! :)
-jessica; 12/30/2008 4:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Agnostic chiming in, and I too want to print this out and hand it to every doorstepper, every streetcorner preacher and every other smug know-it-all who thinks that his/her faith gives him/her the right to rub it into everyone else's faces. The Christians I respect are those who wear their faith in their hearts, not on their t-shirts.

If I can't see your faith working in you without you having to mention it, maybe it's not really working in you.; 12/31/2008 6:03 AM
Grisselda said...: This may seem obvious to anyone not enthralled with their own belief system, but no matter how a true believer tries to be reasonable and respectful, their basic premise is still an attempt to foist their particular superstition onto everyone else, often at the point of a gun or a bomb or the legislative pen, often under the guise of "love" I am always amused that the bible thumper who feels entitled to intrude in my life would have a screaming fit if a believer of another ilk intruded in their lives or otherwise tried to legislate what they could or couldn't do. It is a sad reality that monotheists most often claim that they are being persecuted when they are not permitted to persecute others.; 12/31/2008 10:57 AM
jali said...: Here's a link to a debate that started after I posted a link to your essay.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=499658; 12/31/2008 11:41 AM
incunabular said...: Chiming in as well...

Unfortunately, most atheists are too smart to fall for the "why I volunteer at the shelter" line. They know all too well that they can volunteer and feel good about it without religion. Atheists already know from their experiences that it doesn't take a God to know right from wrong and you it doesn't require Jesus' example to try and right injustices.; 12/31/2008 4:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Joe, great article. I would like to link to this in my upcoming book on evangelism. I'm actually agnostic, but have a really unusual twist to evangelism. I think the Christians who react to this are probably a little bit constipated. They're a little bit bunched up. This world is not their home, so I don't know why anything that happens here would bother them.

Stepping outside of one's universe, so to speak, and seeing things from an outside perspective is one of the things that makes us uniquely human. It is a capability that (it would seem) God gave us. So why don't we use it in our intellectual pursuits?

Good job dude.

kennyG; 1/02/2009 8:16 PM
Michael said...: Susan Stribich wrote: "Fools say to themselves,'There is no God.'" (Psalm 14:1)

This Biblical passage has always struck me as one of the most condescending, arrogant, smug things ever written. A book pushing a particular belief has a bit that says those who don't believe are fools. I realize it's preaching to the choir and if the Goddists kept it for home consumption I wouldn't complain about it. However, more than half the time I'm discussing belief with a Goddist they trot out this quote. First of all, the Goddists are ignoring "...whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22 KJV) Another point is that I'm not going to accept a piece of self-serving propaganda. Finally, it's all I can do from saying "and a hardy 'fuck you' to you" whenever someone quotes this verse at me.; 1/03/2009 1:02 PM
Michael said...: Jessica wrote: "firm and angry atheists"

Most atheists aren't angry. However, we get annoyed with smug twits like Jessica who think that we don't know about Jebus and his word. Most North American and Western European atheists have read the Bible. In fact, there are few things more likely to reinforce atheism than a good look at the Bible. There's the Old Testament god who has the emotional maturity of a spoiled five year old bully. Then there's Jebus, whose mother was a one-way virgin, whose father was still the OT bully, and who died because a mythical "first father and mother" were naughty. Add in the misogynist Paul, the Spanish Inquisition, the fundamentalists who don't accept evolution and don't want the rest of us to accept it either, etc, etc, etc, and there's a lot of pragmatic reasons not to believe. Your Jebus may be a god of love, but there's a whole lot of hate that your Jebus is tied to. As Ghandi put it, "I like your Jesus, but not your Christians...your Christians are so unlike your Jesus."

"what may hurt is when i say that i really want you to join me there, and you refuse on the grounds that you just wont believe what i believe."

Nope, no hurt involved in the least. There's the point that I'd rather not to spend eternity with someone as patronizing and priggish as you are, but that's personal preference, not hurt or anger.

No, the point you're missing is not that I refuse to believe what you believe but rather I have no NEED to accept your silly superstition. I live a happy, fulfilling life without Jebus and I see no way how my life would be happier or more fulfilling if I became a Goddist. There are several ways I would become less happy and fulfilled. You see, I like thinking for myself instead of blindly accepting the dictates of some guy who pretends "god talks to me." I don't want to insist on gays not getting married or wanting prayer in school or denying evolution because some hyprocritical wackaloon decides I should do that stuff.

"soooo i'll pray for you."

Thanks Jessica. I'll think for you.; 1/03/2009 1:42 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Joe the Peacock: "Witnessing is interruption marketing."

Penn Jillette, the speaking half of the of the famous magic and comedy duo Penn & Teller, is an outspoken atheist and critic of Christianity.

Yet see what he has to say about Christian witnessing and evangelism here.; 1/03/2009 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Ever seen a door to door Atheist goon squad? All religious folk can keep their beliefs to themselves, if I want to be religious then I'll do so by the power of my own free will, something many religious nuts seem to lack.; 1/04/2009 10:33 PM
Susan S said...: Joe (the Peacock), I'm confused a bit by your comment about the King James. I didn't use that translation, i used the NET (modern English). Did you think that the Bible was originally written in old English? It was originally penned in Greek and Hebrew. Old English came later, in England of course (1611 I believe).... when people spoke that way. It was translated from the Greek and Hebrew original texts, into English, as was the NET version which I quoted.

To all atheists, agnostics and sceptics of Christianity:

I tell people about Jesus because I know that a day is coming when the secrets of all peoples hearts will be revealed. Everyone will stand in judgement before the judge, none other than Jesus, and will face the penalty for their wrong doing (Which they now are able to get away with unpunished for the most part). There is only one way which God has given by which we can escape our due punishment. Jesus. Jesus died the death we all deserve. He payed the penalty required by the completely JUST creator of the universe.... who created me. Through Jesus we are offered the only way of escape from the penalty of our sin. To reject Jesus is to ensure God's wrath upon yourself one day. To receive Jesus, is to be forgiven, and to obtain the free gift of eternal life. Even the nicest person on earth cannot merit this salvation.....because "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". And "The penalty of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ His son". This is the JUST God, who is also loves us so much that He sent His own son to be born in the flesh, and dwell among men, to die the death we all deserve. In love God has offered to us this potential to be set free from our guilt before Him, permanently. He sent Jesus. Will God display His wrath against sin? Yes, one day He will indeed. Can we help ourselves out of this situation? No. That is why He sent Jesus, who lived a sinless life, to take upon Himself the sin of the world, as he hung on the cross. He paid the price for my sin. I don't deserve that. It is free. I cannot earn God's mercy. Three days later Jesus rose from the dead. He was seen by many after His death and resurrection. His weak and doubting disciples were suddenly willing to risk their lives to tell everyone about Jesus, because they saw that He had risen from the dead. Most of the disciples were subsequently killed for proclaiming Jesus, but they had seen this resurrected Jesus with their own eyes, and they would not be silent.; 1/06/2009 2:03 AM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Holding up signs on street corners

An atheist equivalent of atheistic proselytizing would be buses driving around town with the message: "There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”

From Atheists Play their Hand -- Probability:

"I must admit that I find the British campaign nearly humorous. In any event, it is certainly not threatening to the Christian message. No one is really likely to be converted to atheism by seeing a sign on a bus -- and almost certainly not by a sign that declares that "there's probably no God." Probably?

In some sense, this campaign almost looks like a joke on atheists planned and performed by believers in God. The use of the word "probably" does more to demonstrate the weakness of the atheistic argument than could ever be done by outright condemnations of atheism.

Atheism supposedly declares its central conviction that there is no God. But this central conviction doesn't appear to be held very strongly -- not if you look at the advertising message the atheists in Britain have chosen for their own campaign.

I do not believe in God because I have become convinced that his existence is probably true, but because I am convinced that the existence of God is the first principle of all truth. The Christian conviction is not based in probability, but in the assurance of God's existence and self-revelation.

So, in an odd and completely unexpected sense, I am actually thankful for the atheist bus campaign in Britain. When the best atheists can come up with is a message that God probably does not exist, the weakness of the atheist intellectual position becomes clear."; 1/07/2009 6:34 PM
Michael said...: "When the best atheists can come up with is a message that God probably does not exist, the weakness of the atheist intellectual position becomes clear."

On the other hand, the weakness of the goddist position is the complete lack of any evidence that gods exist. Ask any goddist "where's your proof of gods?" and they say "I believe." In other words, they have an opinion that their god exists. Sometimes it's just a hope that gods exist. But actual, physical proof? That's where the goddists fail.

A few of the more honest goddists admit that there's no evidence. But many of the goddists prefer to LIE and pretend that there is proof that the sky fairy exists.; 1/07/2009 8:49 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Michael: "On the other hand, the weakness of the goddist position is the complete lack of any evidence that gods exist."

And your evidence that the goddist position has a "complete lack of any evidence that gods [God] exist[s]"?; 1/07/2009 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: The only reason the bus ads say "probably" is because the advertising people who sell the ads for buses required it as part of their "advertising guidelines":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/07/atheist-bus-atheism; 1/08/2009 3:21 PM
Michael said...: Don't make the mistake of thinking the choice is between Yahweh and nihilism. Just remember how many other concepts for the divine there have been throughout history. Everything from tribal animalism, to the pantheistic eastern religions, to spirit worship, to polytheism, to monotheism, to deism, to alien worship - all with many different forms of the divine to each one. Jesus is just one of thousands upon thousands of concepts of god that have come and gone in the history of the earth.

And if we are doing nothing more than speculating on the unknown, what about the infinite possibilities of what could lie beyond this reality. It could be an infinite number of types of possibilities that humans will never even conceptualise, and infinite combinations inside each of those infinite possibilities. The simple fact remains that we don't know and in almost all likelihood we can't know.

So what makes one belief more likely than another? If the choice is between an infinite number of combinations and the material, I'll take the material as I know the material exists. The only thing that will make Jesus any more plausible than the karmic wheel is (and here comes that dreaded word) evidence. Otherwise you are just stabbing in the dark, and stabbing in a particular direction because you see other people stabbing in that direction and relying on one of them to know something.; 1/08/2009 7:25 PM
Michael said...: "And your evidence that the goddist position has a "complete lack of any evidence that gods [God] exist[s]"?"

The default position is that gods don't exist. If you say that gods exist, then you have to provide evidence. So far, not a single goddist of any flavor has ever presented the least bit of evidence that any gods exist. If there's no evidence, then the best bet is there's no gods.; 1/08/2009 7:28 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: The default position is that God exists. If you say that God doesn't exist, then you have to provide conclusive evidence that there is no God. So far, not a single atheist has ever presented evidence that God does not exist. If there's no evidence, then the best bet is that there is a God.; 1/08/2009 7:54 PM
Susan S said...: Michael, you said, "So what makes one belief more likely than another". Good question.

Consider this. God has revealed Himself to us through His brilliant creation, and through His word.... the Bible. God is Spirit, not flesh and blood, so we cannot see Him. He was manifest in the flesh only through Jesus, 'Emmanuel', which is another name for Jesus in the Bible. The name Emmanuel means: God with us.

What about that Bible then? How do we know it's true? Why believe it any more than the scriptures of any other religion?

The Bible is a historic narrative. Even non-Christian experts of ancient history agree that the Bible is chock-full of accurate historical information, which archeology continues to verify. This is something which you can investigate for yourself. No other 'scriptures' of religions other than Judaism and Christianity can stand up to historic/archeological scrutiny. I would challenge you to read the Bible through (in a modern translation) for yourself. You may come to see it differently than you do now. And, if you are seriously interested in investigating, I would recommend that you read: Evidence which Demands a Verdict, by Josh McDowell, or The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel. These men were skeptics who decided to investigate for themselves.... to follow the quest for truth where it lead. They ended up convinced that Christ was, who He claimed to be....God's son, who died and rose from the dead, to provide a way for us to have a true relationship with God, and to release us from the penalty of our sin.

Are you willing to really investigate? Or do you prefer to take your chances, and decide that eternal punishment doesn't exist. Keep in mind, that what you believe, doesn't determine what IS.; 1/08/2009 9:05 PM
Michael said...: Truth Unites etc. says:

"The default position is that God exists."

By that criteria, the default position is that leprechauns, unicorns, pixies, orcs, and djinn exist. So obviously you believe that these critters all exists, not to mention thousands of other mythological beings. Furthermore, which god? Odin? Vishnu? Huitzilopochtli? Any or all of thousands of gods that you may or may not have heard of?

If there's no evidence of god and no evidence against god, then by Occam's Razor, no god is the default. Especially since there's ZERO evidence of your particular god. By the way, which one was it again? Zeus? Eru? Baal?; 1/09/2009 8:59 PM
Michael said...: Susan S writes:

I would challenge you to read the Bible through (in a modern translation) for yourself...Are you willing to really investigate?

What makes you think I haven't investigated? I was raised as a Catholic. I had 16 years of Catholic education. I've read the Bible cover to cover three times. It wasn't until I started really thinking about first Catholicism, then Christianity, and then religion in general that I realized what a load of bovine feces the whole thing is. "There's an omniscient, omnipotent Big Guy In The Sky who worries about my sex life." Yeah right. Just like I stopped believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, I stopped believing in a supernatural deity.

Furthermore, I think it's pretty insulting of you to think that someone who's lived in modern western civilization (I'm an American) isn't familiar with religion, particularly of the Jebus flavor. I've investigated religion. To paraphrase Daniel 5:27, "god has been weighed on the scales and found wanting."

Or do you prefer to take your chances, and decide that eternal punishment doesn't exist. Keep in mind, that what you believe, doesn't determine what IS.

Your "loving, benevolent" god would give me eternal punishment if I don't believe in it? What an asshole it is. Any god that sadistic isn't worthy of my belief. And if it does exist and does so punish me, I'll spit in its face because that's what it deserves. No, Susan, I most certainly will not believe in or even pretend to believe in such a god. And it doesn't say much for you that you feel the need to worship a sadistic bully.; 1/09/2009 9:28 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Michael: "By the way, which one was it again?"

The Holy Triune God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) who has divinely revealed Himself in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who is also attested to in His Divinely Inspired Scriptures.

Michael: "Your "loving, benevolent" god would give me eternal punishment if I don't believe in it? What an asshole it is. Any god that sadistic isn't worthy of my belief. And if it does exist and does so punish me, I'll spit in its face because that's what it deserves. No, Susan, I most certainly will not believe in or even pretend to believe in such a god. And it doesn't say much for you that you feel the need to worship a sadistic bully."

(Shrug). An apostate uttering blasphemy.

Anyways, I wrote the following to another atheist and it's applicable to your rant above:

"This elicits several responses. One, you are judging God, rather than seeing that God has been and will be judging you. God damns those who don't acknowledge their sinfulness, who don't repent of their sinfulness, and who don't embrace Jesus as their Divine Lord and Savior. (There's more to it than that, but that's a barebones foundation).

And God says that someone who's mistaken in their (prideful) belief that they're not sinful, and therefore have no need of a savior, much less Jesus, then yes, they are eternally damned. You might not like that, and that may not be how you would have handled it if you were God, but get over it, and realize that the Triune God of Scripture declares and sets the terms. Not you.

You don't get to define God. He does. He reveals Himself and He is infinitely worthy of worship, praise, and adoration."; 1/10/2009 1:21 AM
Michael said...: You're right, I don't get to define god. I don't get to define Superman, Frodo, Huckleberry Finn, Dmitri Fyodorovich Karamazov or any other fictitious character either. The authors of those particular pieces of fiction get to define their creations. The authors of the Bible defined god.

The Old Testament god is a really nasty, petulant bully with the emotional maturity of a spoiled six year old. But that's not unusual. Check out how the Greco-Roman gods behaved. Ol' Zeus/Jupiter couldn't keep it in his pants and his wife, instead of doing something about her philandering husband, takes revenge on the women Z/J seduced or even raped. The Hindu gods are similar. The demon Kali (not to be confused with the goddess Kali, same name, different deity) is a negative manifestation of Vishnu with a love of gambling, drunkenness and orgies.

But I forgot. Your pet deity is the one who sends bears out to maul 42 children because they laughed at the Prophet Enoch's baldness. I can hear Enoch whining: "Lord, those kids are being snotty to me, time to do some smiting." That's how your god is defined by the authors of that piece of fiction called the Bible.

He is infinitely worthy of worship, praise, and adoration. According to the propaganda, it's an egotistical, bullying asshole. As I told Susan, if it gives me eternal punishment because I don't believe, I'll spit in its face. Besides, what's it going to do? Send me to Hell?; 1/10/2009 8:41 AM
Grisselda said...: Michael, thank you for stating so clearly what I struggle to say.; 1/10/2009 10:37 AM

The Journal of Joe The Peacock. Yay.

3.27.2008:

How To Actually Talk To Atheists (If You're Christian)

238 Comments:

Archives