Cornered by a theist.

Sam Vimes

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Why would that be considered offensive?

It would depend on teh approach, granted, but why be offended if someone genuinely wanted to know?

generally people get offended because they can't answer the question beyond "that's what my parents told me"

Sam Vimes

estebancambias wrote: »

There is only one religion, but thousands with different beliefs.

i don't understand.....

estebancambias wrote: »

God is the most important aspect of faith. This is why I love Religion, not Catholicism. That is why I don't buy the argument, if you were born in Tripoli would you be Christian....no I would not but I would believe in God.

which god? they're not all the same. and doesn't that say more about your mindset than the chances of there being a god

Cactus Col

Where does all this approaching people and finding about their religious beliefs happen?!?!

I've never been approached by anybody demanding why I do or don't believe in God!!!!!

Should I wear any special type of clothes? A cross? A spaghetti monster tshirt? I used to own an Axl Rose style Kill Your Idols tshirt...

I just don't talk about this stuff in public, it's nobody else's business, so noone ever corners me about it
and that's just fine

Dave!

Think I've only ever talked about it 'IRL' twice... Even with atheist friends, I find it's a taboo subject and it's a bit awkward to talk about Maybe it's just me though

Nightwish

I've had many a street evangelist shout at me, but that was probably due to the long black clothes and the plethora of pentagrams I was wearing. I must admit I was rude and stuck my finger up at them.

I've had plenty of experience with evangelical christians, as my dad is presbyterian and his church has a very strong proselytizing ethos. My dads side of the family are primarily like this, so I've had lots of arguments throughout my teenage years regarding their beliefs versus my lack of. The usual debate concerning believing and worshipping mythical beings was thrown at them so much they just stopped.

Zillah

Cactus Col wrote: »

A cross?

That might do it. I've started such discussions when I've seen people wearing a cross before. Obviously not strangers on the street mind you...

bogwalrus

the only conversations i ever get to have about beliefs is with the odd Jahovas that come to the door ( i dont meen odd as in weird looking though one of them did look a bit quasi). Funnily enough the ones in my area always agree with what you are saying about life and existence and say that it is what they believe as jahovas until you open the pamphlet they hand you and its the exact opposite preachings as what they were previously agreeing with you on. Stuff about magical fairies and all this mess of stuff. Now that i think of it one of them was preaching some buddist beliefs. A buddhist infiltrating the jahovas maybe??

Scofflaw

bogwalrus wrote: »

the only conversations i ever get to have about beliefs is with the odd Jahovas that come to the door ( i dont meen odd as in weird looking though one of them did look a bit quasi). Funnily enough the ones in my area always agree with what you are saying about life and existence and say that it is what they believe as jahovas until you open the pamphlet they hand you and its the exact opposite preachings as what they were previously agreeing with you on. Stuff about magical fairies and all this mess of stuff. Now that i think of it one of them was preaching some buddist beliefs. A buddhist infiltrating the jahovas maybe??

Jahovas? Some kind of Rastafarian?

cordially,
Scofflaw

5uspect

Scofflaw wrote: »

Jahovas? Some kind of Rastafarian?

cordially,
Scofflaw

They're like Pastafarians only they worship a Flying Jaffa Cake Monster.

Zamboni

I was standing waiting on Grafton St waiting for the missus around xmas and happened to stand near some guys with a crib.
One of them made the mistake of offering me a prayer card. It all went downhill from there.
It was the first time I was 'cornered' by a theist in public and I really enjoyed the argument until his muppet sidekick came over and started quoting scripture from the old testament rather than engaging in a mature discussion.
The sad thing is if I stood on Grafton Street taking about atheists to random member of the public, people would think you're a nutjob.
Whereas these clowns get away with their silly cribs.:rolleyes:

Whispered

Nightwish wrote: »

due to the long black clothes and the plethora of pentagrams I was wearing. .

Are you an athiest? If so, just wondering, why the pentagrams?

Sangre wrote: »

If a theist actually did confront me with such a question I'd tell them that I couldn't believe in a god that would give my 8 year old brother cancer and allow him to die a slow, painful death.

That would probably make him think twice about approaching someone else.

When we are talking about "confront" do we mean in an agressive way or just asking questions? I'm a very nosey person and tend to ask questions a lot! But it is genuinely to find out, not to be confrontational. I think there is a big difference between the two. If someone was asking you about your (lack of) faith and was genuinely interested, would you reply like that?? I would be mortified if you did and to be honnest, pretty upset that you would use something like that to avoid answering a question.

Also, an athiest is someone who does not believe in God due to lack of sceintific proof? An athiest is not someone who doesn't believe in God because something truly awful happened to them and they're mad at "God". Obviously I'm not an athiest but from the questions I've asked here before (which were patiently answered TVM) thats my understanding of it. So apologies if I'm wrong.

Dades

helena.ryan wrote: »

Also, an athiest is someone who does not believe in God due to lack of sceintific proof? An athiest is not someone who doesn't believe in God because something truly awful happened to them and they're mad at "God". Obviously I'm not an athiest but from the questions I've asked here before (which were patiently answered TVM) thats my understanding of it. So apologies if I'm wrong.

Since you can't scientifically disprove something as intangible as an invisible "god", evidence of non-existence takes on other forms.

Frankly, for me, Sangre's reference to his brother's death seems like reasonable evidence that a benevolent god isn't in fact watching our backs, and that life and death are inevitable and occasionally cruel events over which we, or anyone else have no control.

My 2 cents anyways.

Whispered

I see what you mean, my understanding of athiesm is not the best anyway. Up until recently I thought it was just a non-belief in everything. I'm still only learning.

I just thought the post about his brother reads a bit like. "something bad happened to me, so i wont believe in god because i'm mad at life" not an actual decision based on rational thought which i thought was the basis of athiesm? Obviously I cant read tone of voice so it may not have been the sweeping emotional statement it seemed to be.

Zillah

helena.ryan wrote: »

I just thought the post about his brother reads a bit like. "something bad happened to me, so i wont believe in god because i'm mad at life" not an actual decision based on rational thought which i thought was the basis of athiesm?

It is a very rationale argument against an all loving God. Either God doesn't exist or if he does he's not very nice/doesn't really care about us.

Also, an athiest is someone who does not believe in God due to lack of sceintific proof?

An atheist is someone who does not believe in God.


The reasons for them not believing don't matter, they're still an atheist.

Whispered

Zillah wrote: »

It is a very rationale argument against an all loving God. Either God doesn't exist or if he does he's not very nice/doesn't really care about us.



An atheist is someone who does not believe in God.


The reasons for them not believing don't matter, they're still an atheist.

Ok I see what you are saying but an athiest does not believe in God, be it an all loving God or otherwise so I still think that the comment is more of an emotional reaction then a thought out decision to not believe.

Technically an athiest is anybody who does not believe in God, no matter their reason, fair enough. But most athiests reasons for not believing are extremley well thought out and rational (yes thats a compliment). An emotional reaction is never well thought out and seems to me to be as bad as someone saying "I believe in God because............." because its not thought out, it's a sweeping statement made without any thought, and is like acccepting a (non)belief without rationalising it. You know what I mean?

By the way I just want to mention that I am not attacking beliefs or lack of, I just find it interesting, so please dont take insult with anything I'm saying. It's all genuinely interesting me and I'm not here to try "convert the heathens"

Dades

helena.ryan wrote: »

Ok I see what you are saying but an athiest does not believe in God, be it an all loving God or otherwise so I still think that the comment is more of an emotional reaction then a thought out decision to not believe.

I think in the context Sangre's remarks are relevant. The type of god promoted when "cornered by a theist" (!), is almost always the benevolent God that loves us all. We should not turn our backs to God as he would never do that to us... etc. etc. It's that 'type' of God that appears inconsistent with that particular experience.

I doubt the tragedy would be brought up in a discussion with, say a self-professed pantheist or a deist for example.

helena.ryan wrote: »

By the way I just want to mention that I am not attacking beliefs or lack of, I just find it interesting, so please dont take insult with anything I'm saying. It's all genuinely interesting me and I'm not here to try "convert the heathens"

I think that's recognised.

Whispered

So is someone who disbelieves in God, and does so for a non-rational (by rational I mean thought out) reason does that make him or her any less of an athiest? I dont think I'm explaining myself properly, religion is believed through emotions mainly because you just can rationalise it! So belief in God is, (besides learned) an emotional response. So if a person has an emotional dis-blelief in God, is he still an athiest? Do you know what I mean?

Dave!

But in the case of Sangre, it would not merely be an emotional response -- it would be a rational one. A god who is all good and philanthropic, and wants only the best for everyone would not give a child cancer, so therefore cannot exist.

I don't think that that's actually Sangre's reasoning for not believing though... I took from his post that that's just what he'd say because it would put a theist in their place!

There is no "more" or "less" of an atheist BTW. You either believe in a deity/creator or you don't -- your reasoning for that are irrelevent really. If you do not believe out of spite for the Catholic Church for example, then you're still an atheist... you just probably won't get much respect from your fellow atheist for it! lol

Dades

helena.ryan wrote: »

So if a person has an emotional dis-blelief in God, is he still an athiest? Do you know what I mean?

I don't really understand what an "emotional disbelief" is. What that sounds like your getting at is the situation where someone believes they have been 'forsaken' for want of a better word. I don't believe you can become an atheist through anger of disillusionment with God. With the CHURCH, maybe, but not God as this would require belief in something to be angry with to begin!

An atheist can't be angry with, or hate the god of a religion any more than you can with Hans Gruber in Die Hard! In essence there's no personal or emotional connection as the other party is considered fictional.

That said, I don't presume to speak for the atheists here, as I don't think there's a criteria for being one - other than disbelief.

Whispered

Mr McG and Dades, thanks, thats exactly what I was asking. Except Dave, I did ask what about a belief in a God who does not involve himself. Yes it's a good reason not to believe in an all powerful, loving God who watches us 24/7 but it does not exclude any other type of God (using that arguement I mean). I know you can tell me why there cant be a god but solely using the argument I'm talking about it doesn't really work. And in fairness if you are dealing with a theist, nothing is going to "put them in their place" no more than a theist using exaples of good things to persuade you of the existance of god.

Perhaps you're right though about him just using it as an example of what he'd say but seriously guys, thats just going to make the person asking wonder why he can't just answer the question. If I was to ask someone and they answered like that I would immediately put it down to the disillusionment which Dades described and would not imagine a rational athiest to use that as an arguement for the nonexistance of a God. And disillusionment was what I meant by emotional dis-belief. Thanks for clearing that up!

spinandscribble

Zillah wrote: »

That said, I've convinced loads of people that they aren't actually Catholics/Christians. Most people start off the conversation going "I'm a Catholic" and by the end they understand they are in fact a marginal deist. Its so easy to do really. As the poster above shows, it truly is a ludicrous proposition.

- Do you believe that Jesus was the literal son of/incarnation of God, the supreme ruler of the universe and the entity featured in the Bible?
- Do you believe that the Virgin Mary literally flew into the sky and went to heaven rather than dying like a normal person?
- Do you understand and agree with the notion of the Trinity?
- Do you understand and agree with the notion of Papal infallibility?
- Do you understand and agree with the notion of transubstantiation?

etc etc

Once people, especially those in my age group, are confronted with what Catholicsm really is about they feel a bit embarrassed.

actually the church has got rid of papal infallibilty, im not a catholic though so that isnt me trying to question your logic, just something i was made aware of back in my catholic days.

tbh im not sure if i believe in god anymore but when any of my family questioned why i stopped going to mass i just acted offended that they wouldnt respect my beliefs like i did theirs. but apparently i wasnt respecting them by not going to mass :rolleyes:

spinandscribble

Dades wrote: »

I don't really understand what an "emotional disbelief" is. What that sounds like your getting at is the situation where someone believes they have been 'forsaken' for want of a better word. I don't believe you can become an atheist through anger of disillusionment with God. With the CHURCH, maybe, but not God as this would require belief in something to be angry with to begin!

An atheist can't be angry with, or hate the god of a religion any more than you can with Hans Gruber in Die Hard! In essence there's no personal or emotional connection as the other party is considered fictional.

That said, I don't presume to speak for the atheists here, as I don't think there's a criteria for being one - other than disbelief.

but being angry is the first stage before you deny his existence in a way. like "gee why is god such as a bastard that he lets x and y happen" then we hear god is good so things dont add up and eventually you just accept there mustnt be any god.

Dades

helena.ryan wrote: »

If I was to ask someone and they answered like that I would immediately put it down to the disillusionment which Dades described and would not imagine a rational athiest to use that as an arguement for the nonexistance of a God. And disillusionment was what I meant by emotional dis-belief. Thanks for clearing that up!

If the response is emotional in it's appearance - perhaps the emotion is directed at those who are attempting to push a belief on you that you have found through bitter experience to be false.

spinandscribble wrote: »

but being angry is the first stage before you deny his existence in a way. like "gee why is god such as a bastard that he lets x and y happen" then we hear god is good so things dont add up and eventually you just accept there mustnt be any god.

That's a good point. Anger with God may well be the catalyst that sends someone down road toward becoming an atheist. But IMO it's what you discover along the way that forms your beliefs, not what started it.

Whispered

Ok, if it is being pushed on you, which is fair enough in the context of this thread but in general? I would never push a belief on someone, by my asking questions it is through interest, by my expressing my beliefs it's through conversation nothing more. I'd imagine a lot of people are the same.

How would you react if in a pub having a conversation and a theme of religion comes up, you let it be known that you are, in fact, an athiest, and someone asks you about it. Would you automatically assume that they are dis-respecting your beliefs, by asking you about them? I get asked to explain my beliefs all the time! I would never in a million years throw something like the death of a family member at someone who doesn't agree with my beliefs whether to "put them in their place" or otherwise!

Dades

helena.ryan wrote: »

How would you react if in a pub having a conversation and a theme of religion comes up, you let it be known that you are, in fact, an athiest, and someone asks you about it. Would you automatically assume that they are dis-respecting your beliefs, by asking you about them?

I doubt anyone here is averse to a religious pub conversation - or concerned about their 'beliefs' being disrespected! The difference is the approach. Open minded or not...

helena.ryan wrote: »

I get asked to explain my beliefs all the time! I would never in a million years throw something like the death of a family member at someone who doesn't agree with my beliefs whether to "put them in their place" or otherwise!

Why not though? If you're actually having an adult conversation I don't see the problem. As mentioned above it is a valid reason to disbelieve in a benevolent god. It doesn't have to be either thrown in someone's face or swept under the carpet.

bushy...

helena.ryan wrote: »

Ok, if it is being pushed on you, which is fair enough in the context of this thread but in general? I would never push a belief on someone, by my asking questions it is through interest, by my expressing my beliefs it's through conversation nothing more. I'd imagine a lot of people are the same.

When it has come up most people are the same although occasionally you get the special ones.

helena.ryan wrote: »

How would you react if in a pub having a conversation and a theme of religion comes up, you let it be known that you are, in fact, an athiest, and someone asks you about it. Would you automatically assume that they are dis-respecting your beliefs, by asking you about them? I get asked to explain my beliefs all the time! I would never in a million years throw something like the death of a family member at someone who doesn't agree with my beliefs whether to "put them in their place" or otherwise!

I'll chat away no problem , but as above once in a while someone will go into CathoBot mode and try to save you. CathoBot mode overides all forms of reason & logic. You probably wouldn't have experienced it but full on it can be unreal.
Since my opinion is that if "God" is there , he is a prize c*nt , (few other words fit the bill unfortuneately),but "he" isn't there anyway .
There really is nothing worse than someone trying to "save" you, it wouldn't be easy to tolerate just after the loss of someone close or simiar , at other times it can be entertainment.

legspin

helena.ryan wrote: »

So is someone who disbelieves in God, and does so for a non-rational (by rational I mean thought out) reason does that make him or her any less of an athiest? I dont think I'm explaining myself properly, religion is believed through emotions mainly because you just can rationalise it! So belief in God is, (besides learned) an emotional response. So if a person has an emotional dis-blelief in God, is he still an athiest? Do you know what I mean?

From a purely personal point of view I would say yes. Up to last August I was just an atheist. It was (I hope) a reasoned and rational response to the way the world seems to me.
After what happened I am now of the opinion that if a god exists at all then, he/she/them/it is a sick and twisted sonofabitch. I would love for god to exist just so I could give it a really good kicking.
I'm still just an atheist, for all the emotion I now have.

stevejazzx

Helena just ask your question directly:

Do you think all atheists are researched or do some just turn away from God becasue life has thrown something they can't handle?

Is that it?

Well I'm sure some people do just turn away in anger but such poeple, I imagine, would be reluctant to call themselves atheists. It is my experience that when one is comfortable with the term 'atheist' that one has unusally undergone some study on topic and therefore feels a certain lack of restraint in making an open declaration of ones position. Now, I'm sure there're people that have just jumped onto the atheist bandwagon but the same poeple probably jump off and on until they either decide on an sky or God or banish him to legend. The ones who do decide in favour of a sky god usually act through feeling rather than research. A wide range of feelings, spearheaded by fear and a need to feel that something that truly loves them and protects them. Giving into this allows them to explain everthing with the catchall defenses of christianity so life is much simpler, just as Russel said
'Some people would rather die than have to think'
It is an odd thing to see for the grinning atheist who has just retutrned from the library with a plie of anti-theist litreature but at the end of the day one is asking questions and begging evidence whereas the other is surrendering to fairytales and placing their trust in peopole who claim to know things that they couldn't possibly know!

Whispered

stevejazzx wrote: »

Helena just ask your question directly:

there is absolutely no need to be so confrontational. I asked my question and it was answered if you go back a few comments Dades answered it and I thanked him for it. I do believe it is a valid question though, dont you think?