Proinsias wrote:Mariolee wrote:The problem I see with people when they doubt God is they stop in the middle of their research. They look at the non-Christian side exclusively, and then they go: "Oh, that makes sense. Yeah, Christianity is a bunch of bull." And they forget to look at it all objectively. They just look at one side and stop. And that's a bit disappointing.
It's pretty tough to look at things objectively when you're not God. There are atheists who have looked at the Christian side, the guy who started the Atheist Toolbox, an old atheist forum I used to frequent, had been an evangelical pastor for many years. Most atheists I know were Christian beforehand, they have both looked at and lived the other side. There does seem to be a rather problematic assumption that anyone who turns from Christ was not really Christian in the first place, whereby a newly converted Christian can dismiss the experiences of someone with many years of experience on them as they must not have been genuine anyway - one man's 6 month long faith in Jesus is more relevant than someone with 30 years under his belt and a current rejection of Jesus.
A lot of Christians become atheists because a lot of people are Christians. I suspect if the majority of the population were atheistic and Christians therefor arose out of atheistic roots, there wouldn't be the same morbid presupposition that 'expanding objectivity' in observing belief systems is only a precursor to atheism. However, the thing that fascinates me is how people act after their 'conversion'. One of the people I used to respect the most went from a Christian to an atheist and lost virtually all of his old friends (Christian and non) because of his manipulative and narcissistic personality that developed out of it. Former atheists I know tend to gain people's respect. Maybe its biased based on who i know, but I haven't seen evidence to indicate the same is as common in the opposite direction, though I know it does happen sometimes.
In order to admit that someone was a 'True Christian', you have to admit to true Christianity (the reality of it, not the belief system). If you cannot admit that someone could truly be a member of God's family, than its hard to say "well, this atheist WAS a true Christian". There would be no such thing. It is quite sane to assume that a "True Christian" could only exist in a world where Christianity was true, and one simple evidence of this is that Christianity condemns lies and Christianity itself would be the mother of lies if it were to be untrue.
If anything modern atheism seems more a rejection of Christianity as opposed to a default position in ignorance of Christianity. Most atheism isn't really based upon a rejection of Brahman or Taoism, it's based upon a rejection of the Judeo/Christian all good, all powerful, all knowing creator God/judge. In short much of the argument seems to be based around - if you reject it then you don't get it, you can't possibly understand me and disagree with me.
Correct. Most atheists, just like most people who move from one worldview or another, always have far more critical things to say about the worldview they just left. They know it better than the new one in many cases and its a way to gain a footing in their new worldview. What I find interesting though isn't the opposition, but the hatred. Hate enters into the realm of spiritual things if you ask me, and I've never seen it in more of its fermenting, acidic nature than when I go to Youtube and read atheistic comments or read books written by atheists in the early 20th century. Its hatred of something without a belief that anything is worth hating. Its condemnation from a mindset that claims to view all things as natural and ammoral.
I think the problem works both ways, most Christians don't get overly deep into studying and experiencing other religions, they right them off as a bunch of bull. If we could all look at each others beliefs objectively, would we still feel the same about our own?
It is true that the problem works both ways. But indeed it does work both ways, and atheists are not left off the hook of responsibility. Many people, atheists included, tend to disregard all additional information once they are grounded in their worldview. But there is a catch here. Christianity (and other Theistic beliefs) can provide one more level of evidence above and beyond the natural order. They can provide revelation. Two atheists might be inside of a box, but have no idea as to where the box is or where it came from. But if one received a letter from a being outside the box documenting both of those topics, he might jump up and become a theist from the Revelation. The other atheist might claim his evidence as fallacious or insane, but he cannot claim that he has confirmation to the opposite position. He has received no letter.
In this sense, atheism and theism are not under the same guidelines for evidence 'objectively' as you put it. And the fact is that no religion on earth has touched more foreign faiths than Christianity, and it still remains a dominant belief system on the planet.
I think most people who go from being Christian to atheist do go through a phase along the way of heavily criticising religion, it's part of the process. I'm sure others use their atheism to justify behaviour which alienates them from their friends but religious converts can also do this.
