Get Over Your Fear of Atheism

I've just read through this thread, thinking alot about how my beliefs have changed over the last five years or so. I've been pondering about how I didn't go to church on Easter Sunday for the first time in my life this morning, although I've certainly been thinking about God most of the day. Instead I slept a bit too late for the early service, had a crummy workout, and had lunch with my girlfriend. Here I sit, while I should be doing homework, listening to Johnny Cash's version of 'Hurt' while I try to offer you some fairly on-topic assistance:Your fears of atheism, so I pertain to this topic, seem to be based on the fact that so much of your life revolves around this beloved belief system as it is. I, for the longest time, was planning on becoming a Methodist minister. Once on that path, I felt that any deviance would be turning my back on God, and the worldwide congregation.You must understand that even if you decide that you no longer want to believe in your belief system as you know it, you are still responsible for your actions. If you choose to break chasity(I'm still abstaining, by the way), then it's your responsibility and you will suffer the consequences just the same. In fact, it's even more your responsibility should you no longer believe that Satan had his hand in your decisions.Take that in for a minute before you swallow this next part: the above paragraph was a bit bifurcating. Just because you change your belief as you know it, doesn't mean you have to become an athiest. It doesn't mean you have to renounce Jesus Christ as your lord and Savior, and it DOES NOT mean you have to withdraw from the life that you know and love, nor does it give you the right to abandon it through amoral actions. It simply means that you have changed your beliefs to some extent, whatever that extent might be. Want to know what's changed in my beliefs from straight Christianity to what it is now? Here it comes:1.God is not so evil as to send nonbelievers and homosexuals to hell.
(And even when I did believe that, I resented Him for it.)2.The parting of the Red Sea was probably an exxageration of a nonetheless exiting actual event; same with many other things in the OT.3.Evolution is the best theory out there regarding how life, once began, became what it is.4. Metal is so much more Metal than Christian 'Metal'... Skillet just doesn't have the raw power that Pantera does, and they probably never will.Point of this rambling post? It's wrong to lie, regardless of your beliefs or lack thereof. Don't lie to yourself and the ones you love. That, in itself, would be the first step toward being more ethical in and of yourself. Indeed, the wisdom we obtained from eating that fruit gave us knowledge of good and evil--we know full well what hurts others and what doesn't, and God also gave us the strength to do what is right. I don't believe we lose that strength in leiu of our change in beliefs.With that in mind, don't you dare lose track of the things in this world that love you. No matter where you go or what you believe, God knows who does and doesn't care.Edited by One_Charred_Wing, : Had to un-derail my train of thought. I'm still going through another METAL phase, so reason #4 sticks. NYAH!

Finding God and solving the problem can sometimes be synonymous. Alchoholics and chronic drug users can sometimes find their spiritual calling, and with it the strength to get over their addictions.Granted, this is not always the case. Office Space, which I just watched for the first time last week, gives a pretty clear cut exception to that rule.Just, please bear in mind that 'finding God' doesn't always entail running from your problems.

Hello, mpb1. I'm sorry to hear about the tough times, really. I'm not encouraging you to keep nor denounce your faith in this post, but regardless of whether or not you hold certain beliefs, you are certainly capable of performing these immoral acts. You clearly have a strong connection with God if that's a big part of the reason you're holding back. However, in the unfortunate event that you decide your faith is no longer reflecting what you believe, surely the love of your children and your concern for their well-being would be considered?God or no god, you know full well that extramarital sex is wrong. As an adult, husband, and father, no lack of belief relieves you of this much moral responsibility. I actually agree with this statement; no one of clear conscience will fight you on it. Honestly, because you can't prove nor disprove through science whether or not God is the origin of morality, it comes down to faith. Don't listen to anyone who disagrees with that much.You make a much more reasonable arguement in this post for the most part, I must say. Always remember that even if the Bible implies an 'us vs. them' mentality, it has no beef with tolerance.Blessings to you in your spiritual undertakings here and abroad.

Okay, then we'll say it's a story to encourage the jews. I was, however, trying to compromise given the context.

You're excellent at debating, Crashfrog--at least, if the objective is to crush the opposition. But the way you're stomping a mudhole in this kid isn't helping the stereotype that atheists are heartless, amoral bastards (and I know from other things that you've said that you aren't really any of these things, although you do suffer the occasional bastard streak ) You're making a generalization fallacy here, that all people who 'adamantly' believe in a god are going to believe in other things adamantly despite evidence... 'belief' in the superiority of private accounts is a completely different topic than belief in a higher power. Are you going to say that I'm going to believe in a theological dictatorship just because I hold a belief in a higher power without any objective evidence? How about the ghosts in the Bermuda Triangle?You asserted here that theists are loose cannons, and are quick to believe anything in disregard to evidence. This is far from universally true; you and I both know that, and you're better than to say something that extreme. Please clarify or retract.

---

I'm bent, bruised, broken, and a little lost. But you know what? I'm not so afraid as you are, who has never ventured away from the trail.

And that's your perspective, and that's fine. But the way you're presenting this isn't going to help anybody 'Get Over Their Fear of Atheism'. The way some of these people have been brought up to generalize atheists, they may start to believe that all atheists are forceful about pushing that they're right and everyone else is stupid to believe otherwise.That's just not true, and in fact one thing I like about atheists is their tendancy to tolerate different opinions... but other theists aren't going to be able to see that through the black eyes you're giving their egos. So is intellectual arrogance and hostility towards different perspectives; the latter case is usually what gets these guys with suitcases to level said cities. It certainly won't help them get over their fear of atheism, which was the whole reason that YOU started the topic. Oh, and now you use a creationist tactic, so I'll use the usual evolutionist response: You don't know very many creationists, do you?Scratch that, I'm sure you've known your share. Judging by your attitutde towards them, they've all been stupid. But you said yourself that you know that the stereotype that you seem to be promoting isn't universally true. You're sounding off like it is, and all you're promoting by being that harsh is prejudice rather than your intended point.Back in my hometown I certainly have qualms with a certain ethnicity, but even though I despise this large group of individuals I know it isn't universally true. Despite my schema, I can still introspect this as prejudice, almost racism. I don't condescend toward people for telling me that not every person of this ethnicity does this or steals that, even though 95% of the ones I've ever known certainly fit every stereotype in the book.Do you see the connection? Prejudice, whether over race or religion, is prejudice. Again, certainly not going to make atheism less frightening if there's a boogieman with a Road Frog avatar around.Am I just accusing you of prejudice? Please don't think so. I'm warning you that the unneccessary force of your arguements is turning your arguements here into it. You know why you started this thread, and by the title we can infer (hopefully) the whole reason you started it. The title's intention will never be accomplished for even one person with an attitude like that at the head of the discussion.Edited by One_Charred_Wing, : Fixed some typos. I'm a grammar nazi. Also clarified the whole 'prejudice' thing so I didn't appear to jump to conclusions.

---

I'm bent, bruised, broken, and a little lost. But you know what? I'm not so afraid as you are, who has never ventured away from the trail.

Okay then, you very strongly implied that a large number of people were stupid. That's still not too inviting.And I couldn't help but infer, as brenna had, that you were strongly implying stupidity. Clearly it's not just me being a hypochondriac.
I wasn't putting words in your mouth, so I'm sorry if you felt like I did. I completely agree with this. I realize the method to the madness, I'm just saying that the madness is making people, well, mad. No such request. Yes, it certainly would be a lie, because you obviously don't feel that way, if it's okay for me to gather that much from what you've written. A condesc... okay, let's go 'brutally honest to the point of hurtful' tone, regardless of the intentions, will inevitably bring more hostility. EVEN IF YOU AREN'T TRYING TO BE HOSTILE. You can be honest, without sugar coating, and still debate less forcefully than you are now. Then please don't accuse me of putting words in your mouth. Mistaken inference? Sure. But I didn't decide to put words in your mouth just because. I've heard it, and I still don't quite buy it. We all need to hear that we're wrong whether we are or not, because that allows us to critically analyze our perspectives. But this doesn't alleviate this abstract fear we're trying to cure, here. Sure. How about "I do not believe in what you believe because there is no objective evidence." 'You' sounds accusing, 'I' sounds explanatory. That's stuff I learned last semester to counsel people in relationships about. Mistaken inference; I don't wish you were saying that. Don't accuse me of putting words in your mouth when you yourself said that what you're saying can certainly appear as I interpreted it to be.Oh, and the creationist part? Not that big of a surprise, although I might've heard this from you way back in the day considering I'm getting that strange deja-vu feeling. 'We'? I was taught to call them 'coping mechanisms'; logical fallacy is a pretty general term and is usually employed when referring to arguements.Oh, and that 'psychic torsion' is sustainable with a little vigilance and self-awareness. Not perfectly, but nobody's perfect.BUT BACK TO WHAT I WAS SAYING: A nicer tone would do somebody as articulate as you a lot of good in the convincing department. This thread appears to be here to persuade, not just to win, right? You say here that cold, hard, facts appear hostile. There are simple mechanisms to make it seem slightly less so, and get more people listening.

---

I'm bent, bruised, broken, and a little lost. But you know what? I'm not so afraid as you are, who has never ventured away from the trail.

Good point about the battle of wits vs. the battle of bullets that theists usually employ, but come on!All I said was that the way you were generalizing was taking a walk down prejudice lane, and you can certainly save youself when you say that you know not everybody of ___ creed is like this. You didn't say that yet, that's why it was a WARNING.

You know, from the perspective of arguementative ethics, you're absolutely right. Sorry I mistook that for accusations of stupidity-- bad reasoning, by its technical definition, is certainly present. *Preparations complete*. Yes. Okay, that's really all I was trying to get across when I called you out in the first place. Honestly, you make the image of a terrified road frog more intimidating than anyone ever thought possible, but if your opposition is greeted with a kinder tone, they might be able to take in what you're saying better as opposed to when they're simply being annihilated. Yeah, agreed. But that's why we're all here. Actually, I'm on here because it gives me stimulation to keep reading my Biopsychology book, but a little ethical reasoning is a great supplement. Never thought of it that way. Judging by the 379 'visitors' we have right now, that's a good sized potential audience. Alright, I'm probably done in this thread. Carry on.

---

I'm bent, bruised, broken, and a little lost. But you know what? I'm not so afraid as you are, who has never ventured away from the trail.

Well according to mine, it does so work. Again, my own personal experience, which is as weak as the evidence you presented, disagrees. Just because someone starts something childish doesn't mean you have to stoop to that opening statement's level. I KNOW--it's so very hard not to. But really, if you think the statement is that childish and narrowminded, you should hardly feel the need to retort. Killing with kindness works very well here as opposed to face-to-face situations where someone could physically attack you... and even then, there are times when you can talk your way through things rather than kicking your way through them, as I've learned since I used to post on this site.

---

I'm bent, bruised, broken, and a little lost. But you know what? I'm not so afraid as you are, who has never ventured away from the trail.