Friday, 22 August 2008
The following post is taken from my comment from >>>here<<<. The above ^^^ comments were taken from the same post and the main quote being responded to (amongst other questionable opinions and metaphors from the author of his own post) is immediately below.
SaS: "For the Christian, discussing religious matters with an atheist is like a submarine commander discussing underwater nuclear propulsion with a shark. Neither are speaking the same language and the shark's main concern regarding the commander is 'lunching', not 'launching'."
WOE: woo who! I survived 89 plus comments not addressed to me! How's it going, SaS? It's been a while (my screen name was "agnostics_r_us"). I love the music. Really helps getting through all the reading. Anyway...if this post were addressed to me (and I know it's not), this is what I might say:
If you’ve been a non-evangelical atheist who still felt accountable to yourself and others, then it should not be much of a surprise to know that not everyone like that turns into a Christian such as yourself. The first half of your post actually made perfect sense, but then you dovetailed in the same bigotry and cult think that underpins Christian thought and lets those sharks know the periscope doesn’t actually go all the way up, if you know what I mean. I couldn’t help but notice all the apatheists in the world who didn’t respond here. On the other hand I’m sure there are enough atheists out there that fit the stereotype well enough to justify valid complaints. But does it makes sense in the same post to justify their complaints, too? Your choice, I guess. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a Christian who is secure enough with their beliefs to allow for atheism to be a perfectly valid moral option and content lifestyle (till death do they part) even though they still disagree about the greater truths of reality.
I subscribed to revelife for a month or so but got quickly tired of seeing the same “Christians really aren’t crazy and can be normal people, too” parade that filled up my inbox. I think I defended the sanctity of lolcats on one occasion and offered up a link to my own review of Chesterton’s “Orthodoxy” on another in that time. The shear absurdity of Christians who can never hope to truly adapt to the positive aspects of the modern world was more than enough for me to sate my anti-theist passions from a distance. After I unsubscribed, they even invited me back! Lol, I didn’t take them up on it.
I will freely admit I desire to change minds. It wouldn’t make any sense to attempt to make persuasive arguments without the intent to persuade. If you care about the world, our culture, our country, and what bad ideas do to it, I don’t see why this would be a crime. Naturally, moderation and having a life on the side is in order.
I'll even attempt one of those persuasive arguments right here:
Dolphins are animals. Dolphins can’t fly. Birds are animals, therefore birds can’t fly. Is it not possible that humans differ from other animals in their ability to contemplate the dynamics of social and empathetic situations and the long term consequences? Is direct observation and being one not enough evidence for you? Mkay…I'll get right on believing in all that other-worldly submarine stuff.
SaS: @torkenheimer - ". . . Christian style of argument . . . "
Frankly, the perception that there even exists a "Christian style of argument" is part of what has created the communication problem between Christians and atheists. We need to stop arguing, period.
The whole idea that we should even be discussing matters of faith - or the lack thereof - is ludicrous.
SaS: @WAR_ON_ERROR -"I will freely admit I desire to change minds."
That's all I was looking for - thank you for your scarce honesty among those of your belief system, misguided as it may be. And thanks also for voluntarily avoiding revelife.
I'll have to stop by someday and ask you which "positive aspects of the modern world" you think Christians struggle with. Someday. Not today.
Well, case in point: You yourself are struggling to get along in the modern world where freely discussing controversial ideas should be a staple of a healthy society. You may have heard of the Apostle Paul Peter (right?) who said something like, “Always be prepared to give an answer for the hope that you have…” And here you are 2,000 years later doing a 180. Why is that? Because faith is not justifiable on rational grounds and yet that is where it needs to be justifiable in the modern world in many matters of solidarity as the new atheists continually call attention to. The Bible has set you up for a catch 22 somewhere between “spread the good news,” “be all things to all people,” and “people who ask for evidence are evil.” I contend that Christianity cannot adjust to the real world given its cultic architecture. It will irrationally struggle one way despite itself or irrationally struggle the other way despite the obvious and no quantum of solace is possible given the terms that cannot change. For further unending examples of this, review the last 20 or so posts at revelife and merely ask yourself what scandalous mundane thing the Christians in the posts are trying to adjust to, that the unbeliever next door will likely never have a problem with. I can almost guarantee the reason is that there’s a Bible verse out there that says the exact opposite of what they are attempting to get along with, much like I’ve pointed out here.