Lawlessone777

  • *****
  • 13724 Posts
    • View Profile
Quote
An atheist (if he is one) criticising atheism on another (comedy) site is not the same as you taking an opportunity to start another thread criticising atheists.

As a Christian apologist isn't it my job to criticize atheists, or for that matter any non-Christian religious belief? Apologetics is not only the defense of your own belief, but the dismantling of your opponents. Granted I focus more on the dismantling than the defense, but that's more of a recent trend because its what I'm currently interested in exploring.

If people are being lead astray from the faith through bad logic and social/cultural wars shouldn't the topic of conversation be said bad logic and social/cultural wars? Many young Christians aren't having their faith challenged through intellectual rigour, but rather social and intellectual bullying, mockery, and condescension. Given this shouldn't it be a topic of conversation? I don't believe I'm being controversial at all about illuminating the caustic and vitriolic nature of internet New Atheism and it IS something that DOES need to be talked about.
God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

1

Questions11

  • *****
  • 21037 Posts
    • View Profile
Quote
If people are being lead astray from the faith through bad logic and social/cultural wars shouldn't the topic of conversation be said bad logic and social/cultural wars? Many young Christians aren't having their faith challenged through intellectual rigour, but rather social and intellectual bullying, mockery, and condescension. Given this shouldn't it be a topic of conversation? I don't believe I'm being controversial at all about illuminating the caustic and vitriolic nature of internet New Atheism and it IS something that DOES need to be talked about

Agreed.

2

Lawlessone777

  • *****
  • 13724 Posts
    • View Profile
To add to my point on a personal level I would question the incredulity. If the atheist is able to question what the Christian considered to be sacred by saying that their God who they worship is morally bankrupt, or evil, or to say that our earliest church leaders the apostles lied, or were crazy, why can't the Christian apologist question what the atheist considered to be sacred? Why is it morally appropriate to challenge Christian faith and behaviour, but an insult to challenge the atheists faith and behaviour?
God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

3

Questions11

  • *****
  • 21037 Posts
    • View Profile
This might be a relevant debate for this thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g5qsMW3bt8

4

Johan Biemans (jbiemans)

  • *****
  • 12686 Posts
  • WCBP - http://tinyurl.com/agmwhpj
    • View Profile
Its constant conversations like this that make me worry that I am wasting my time and breath on here.  It is disheartening to hear, that despite all I have tried to do and say on here that it is still the perception of 'the atheist' that he is not intellectual and is using bad logic and flawed reasoning when confronting Christianity. 

It is disillusioning to see so many other voices here simply jump on the bandwagon and agree as well.  I thought we were moving past some of these poor conceptions and misinformation, but it seems that we still have a long, long way to go.

Quote
Many young Christians aren't having their faith challenged through intellectual rigour, but rather social and intellectual bullying, mockery, and condescension

The fact that this is a statement that is both uttered and agreed upon, on this site is itself part of the problem I see with the view of atheists here.  It is amazing for me to think that you are the one who actually thinks that we are bullying you.

5

Questions11

  • *****
  • 21037 Posts
    • View Profile
JB:

Quote
Its constant conversations like this that make me worry that I am wasting my time and breath on here. 

We all have that feeling.  Most of the time it is probably justified regardless of what side you are on.


Quote
that it is still the perception of 'the atheist' that he is not intellectual and is using bad logic and flawed reasoning when confronting Christianity

I'm not sure that is fair.  But beyond that, I think that atheists generally are using flawed reasoning.  No doubt the reverse is true - many atheists think my reasoning is flawed.  How is this a bad thing or avoidable?


Quote
I thought we were moving past some of these poor conceptions and misinformation, but it seems that we still have a long, long way to go.

What bandwagon?  What misconception?


Quote
It is amazing for me to think that you are the one who actually thinks that we are bullying you.

Why?  It seems painfully obvious to me that the bullying runs both ways.  I have a large collection of evidence to support that.  I see denial of it as the very problem that this thread is addressing.

6

searcherman

  • ***
  • 3111 Posts
  • Man makes religion, religion does not make man
    • View Profile
In support of what Lawless said above, I see that such a thing is required for this board, for although the vast majority of atheists here are not of the rude variety, many do however still directly or implicitly support those atheists who are rude, or at least deny that there is a problem which they as part of the 'atheist community' have responsibility to address.

That's quite a stretch, Q11. It's like me criticizing you for not denouncing ECT theology enough, and claiming you are thereby complicit, which you are not, of course.
Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification.- K. Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

7

Questions11

  • *****
  • 21037 Posts
    • View Profile
No, I don't see it like that at all (surprise!) :)

If I never denounced the rudeness or bad behaviour of my fellow Christians, or denied that some Christians are rude and uncivil, or supported rude Christian public figures and went to their meetings and recommended their books etc then you'd have a point.

But I don't.  And you don't.  So there.

Edit (addition):

Let me be more clear.  I think that some atheist posters in here, and many atheists 'out there', either directly support rude atheism, fail to speak out against rude atheism, secretly endorse rude atheism, or deny the existence of rude atheism.  This is a problem.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2015, 09:00:29 am by Questions11 »

8

Lawlessone777

  • *****
  • 13724 Posts
    • View Profile
Quote
The fact that this is a statement that is both uttered and agreed upon, on this site is itself part of the problem I see with the view of atheists here.  It is amazing for me to think that you are the one who actually thinks that we are bullying you.

The problem is, JB, it's true. It's agreed upon because it was considered taboo to even openly talk about the vitriolic behaviour theists receive in philosophy and on debate, but if you want I can provide you with page upon page of links and youtube videos of atheists not challenging the belief of theists with arguments and science, but simply mocking them, swearing at them, and deriding their belief.

Heck read the cracked article, the poster himself is an atheist and cites at least half a dozen examples. The very reason I started this thread was because this method of interaction has become so common that even atheists themselves are now condemning it. Heck, there's an entire meme dedicated to the internet atheist troll who mocks believers.

And my statement that many are lead astray because of that is also not unwarranted. Check out Craig's podcast "confessions of a former atheist" for a discussion on it. As it may offend you, I am not unwarranted in my assertion that this does happen, and is a problem.

Certainly not as commonly on this board (though it does happen on the rare occasion), however given that it exists with prevelance across other internet sites I don't think its unfair to equip apologists to deal with it elsewhere. Not once have I said that the atheists on THIS board engage in this style of posting, and in fact have routinely defended the atheists here to say that they are irenic and substantive in their responses.

But this IS a thing, and as Christian apologists it behooves us to talk about it.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2015, 09:06:57 am by Lawlessone777 »
God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

9

Crash Test

  • *****
  • 20719 Posts
    • View Profile

As a Christian apologist isn't it my job to criticize atheists, or for that matter any non-Christian religious belief?

Notice how you switched fluidly from "people" to "ideas"?  That's your issue, and why your persistent thread spamming on this creates so much hostility here.  You keep attacking atheists as people, and worse, you consistently refer to them as an unqualified demographic.

If you truly were just attacking ideas, then it might, loosely and inefficiently be a part of your job as an "apologist".  But your don't just do that.  Even when you do, you're often attacking ideas that next to no one on this board holds.
-- This user will return on the twenty-fourth of July --

10

Lawlessone777

  • *****
  • 13724 Posts
    • View Profile
Quote
Notice how you switched fluidly from "people" to "ideas"?  That's your issue, and why your persistent thread spamming on this creates so much hostility here.  You keep attacking atheists as people, and worse, you consistently refer to them as an unqualified demographic.

If you truly were just attacking ideas, then it might, loosely and inefficiently be a part of your job as an "apologist".  But your don't just do that.  Even when you do, you're often attacking ideas that next to no one on this board holds.

Specifically I'm attacking methodologies. And again as I said to JB, where have I ever said that posters on this board engage in this behaviour? I've consistently defended atheists on this board, however outside of this board in the real world where Christians are being belittled and attacked for their belief it IS a problem and should be talked about.

And I would even go so far as to say it is a common problem. Like the cracked article said, it got so bad on Reddit they actually censored r/atheism. If it has truly gotten that bad, why is it still taboo to speak of it?
God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

11

Booger

  • ***
  • 1216 Posts
    • View Profile
I still say life is too important to be taken seriously.
-- This user has been banned for abusing forum staff --

12

Johan Biemans (jbiemans)

  • *****
  • 12686 Posts
  • WCBP - http://tinyurl.com/agmwhpj
    • View Profile
Here, let me help you out a little.

Some atheists are horrible people.  Some are rude, some are immoral, some are uncivil, some are downright awful.  Some resort to poor arguments.  Some are condescending to theists.  Some are poorly educated.  Some are ignorant (myself included).

Some atheists are _______ (fill in what ever word you like here).

----------------

Now that is out of the way, what purpose did it serve ?  Did stating it actually change anything ?  Did it actually inform anything ?  Did it make a positive difference in any possible way ? 

----------

To add to this, to address Lawless' point.  Yes, some atheists on various internet sites lack tact, are rude, are condescending, do not address arguments philosophically, etc.  Yes Those places are horrible places to go for an intelligent discussion sometimes.  But I still have to ask, so what ?  What does that have to do with us here ?  Why make a post about it here except to belittle those people and pat yourself on the back ??

What you don't realize is that when you broadly attack a demographic, you unwittingly attack even those in that demographic which you do not intend to hit.  Unless of course you intended to use their behavior as an attack upon us ?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2015, 09:13:39 am by Johan Biemans (jbiemans) »

13

AnimatedDirt

  • ****
  • 7821 Posts
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
krav, I don't care if he later makes the distinction.  He didn't there, at the beginning, in the context of that paragraph.  Making the distinction later doesn't make generalisation early on somehow valid.  You'll also note that Lawless' title (and posting in general) shares the same lack of rigour.

If you make a generalised negative claim, then it is your responsibility to ensure that you phrase your boundaries correctly.  It isn't on me to assume that you don't mean what you say.  If you are too lazy to use language properly, particularly when criticising groups, then don't pretend I'm somehow in denial for calling you out on it.

Interesting to me that anyone would admit to taking something OUT of context just to make a point that really isn't there in context.

It may be that this "atheist" hit the nail on the head and some atheists don't like to hear it.  Of course since this doesn't ever happen here, then none of the resident RF atheists should find much issue with this article...
People are amusing.

14

Lawlessone777

  • *****
  • 13724 Posts
    • View Profile
Quote
Now that is out of the way, what purpose did it serve ?  Did stating it actually change anything ?  Did it actually inform anything ?  Did it make a positive difference in any possible way ? 

It's not simply "some atheists are rude" it's "there is a growing subculture of animosity towards religious belief being championed by some atheists". It's not simply "some atheists are rude" it's that one of the most well known atheist figures in the world, Richard Dawkins, is actually championing a cultural movement where religious belief is not debated, but attacked, debased, mocked, and belittled.

And this DOES happen. This is actually a thing that affects the cultural mindset of an increasingly secular nation. Heck in Canada religious believers are now being told what they're allowed to wear, and what they're allowed to say in public.

Again, it's not simply that a small minority of atheists are jerks, it's the concern of a much larger growing cultural movement which endorses this idea. Heck, my wife and I had the discussion just yesterday about how to equip our son for an increasingly hostile and vitriolic secular society. It's bad enough that we as parents are beginning to talk about how to protect our children from it.

Heck look at the other thread on the front page about the "Benedict option". This is a thing and it should not be taboo to talk about it.
God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.