Why is it considered so wrong to be anti-religious or aggressively atheist?

by nicolaou 35 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  nicolaou

  I'm not talking about the simple belief that there is no god and that religion is a brake on the development of humanity but the aggressive and vocal campaign to convince others of such?

  What's wrong with that? Why do believers feel so offended when I try to reason with them on the invalidity of their faith and the abusive nature of religious institutions? Christians are proud of their churches centuries old history of proselytising and evangelism but heaven forbid that some atheist infidel should attempt his own 'conversion of the unbelievers'.

  So if anyone wants to take me up on this, "There is no god and all religion is dangerous bunk. Belief in the supernatural is farcical nonsense that would be comical if it had not produced so much death, misery and suffering."

  Give up on god.
• 

  sass_my_frass

  I've found that one of the great things about going atheist is that I am no longer concerned with bringing people over to my point of view. I don't feel the need to convert anyone. Knock yourself out bro, but I gotta study.
• 

  nicolaou

  Wish I could be more like you Sass. This does bug me though, the whole inequality of the thing. As I said in a previous post, I'm not really a proselytiser for athiesm but so what if I was?!
• 

  Arthur

  "There is no god and all religion is dangerous bunk. Belief in the supernatural is farcical nonsense that would be comical if it had not produced so much death, misery and suffering."

  Well, as a believer in God, I still have the humility to say that I will never be able to prove it. I am willing to admit that my belief in a divine power is a matter of faith.

  How is it then, that those who say emphatically that God does not exist, do not have the humility to admit that they have also taken up a belief as a matter of faith?

  You say all religion is dangerous, do you? That's odd. I find it interesting that the Tibetan Buddhists were viciously persecuted by the atheist Chinese government; not the other way around. Despite this fact; they did not believe in violent retribution. They were actually pacifistic during this era.

  I do believe that there has been some religion that has been a significant force for good in the world. During the colonial American slave trade; there were many small Christian groups who were taking the lead in the Abolition movement. During the civil rights era in the U.S.; many Southern Baptist churches were uniting behind Martin Luther King, and involved in peaceful; non-violent political protests. Many such churches were engaged in secret voter registrations of southern blacks; despite the dangerous political climate.

  Let's not forget other "religious" individuals that have been a force for good; people such as St. Francis of Assisi, Mother Theresa, Gandhi, and the Dalhai Lama.

  I understand how non-religious people do not like religious coercion or proselytizing of any kind. I don't appreciate it either. I for myself; do not like anyone trying to proselytize, manipulate, or coerce me into any point of view; whether it be a Born-Again Christian, a Mormon, a Republican, a Democrat, and yes; an atheist.
• 

  Double Edge

  Belief in the supernatural is farcical nonsense

  I suppose you're right, if that's all you've ever experienced..... how could you say or believe otherwise. However, your experience is not shared by millions of people, including myself. I can not deny what I know.
• 

  Quentin

  I understand how non-religious people do not like religious coercion or proselytizing of any kind. I don't appreciate it either. I for myself; do not like anyone trying to proselytize, manipulate, or coerce me into any point of view; whether it be a Born-Again Christian, a Mormon, a Republican, a Democrat, and yes; an atheist.

  Well said...

  Do you have to be godless, or a believer in god to be evil?...seems to me anyone of any kind of ideology can do bad things, or cause them to be done...what makes a believer in god worse?
• 

  nicolaou

  Hi Arthur and thanks for your input.

  Well, as a believer in God, I still have the humility to say that I will never be able to prove it.

  Why believe in something you cannot prove? Admitting such is not really an act of humility but it is honest and I applaud you for that. Isn't the belief in something unprovable a sign of . . . . dare I say susceptibility and conditioning? Not that everything does require proof to be believed but when the object of the belief is so enormously fanatastical then shouldn't proof be offered? Demanded even?

  How is it then, that those who say emphatically that God does not exist, do not have the humility to admit that they have also taken up a belief as a matter of faith?

  Because it isn't a matter of faith! Is there conclusive evidence that god does not exist? Nope, and frankly there doesn't need to be just as evidence is not required to prove that aliens are responsible for crop circles - the onus is on the believer to prove his case not on me to disprove it. There is also 'weight of evidence' as opposed to 'conclusive evidence'. I'd argue that the weight of evidence leads overwhelmingly to the conclusion that a creator god does not exist.

  You say all religion is dangerous, do you? That's odd. I find it interesting that the Tibetan Buddhists were viciously persecuted by the atheist Chinese government; not the other way around.

  Let's not forget other "religious" individuals that have been a force for good; people such as St. Francis of Assisi, Mother Theresa, Gandhi, and the Dalhai Lama.

  I'd like to approach this in reverse order if you don't mind Arthur. I make no claims for the morality or ethics of atheists. Some are complete and utter bastards though most are lovely people. I think the same applies to christians, jews, buddhists and other believers. People are people with all their flaws and graces whatever paradigm they hold to.

  As for the danger in all religion that I referred to. Yes this even applies to Tibetan Buddhists, Fransiscan monks and orders of nuns. Why? Because the irrational dogma perpetuated by all these belief systems clamps down on human potential. It may be a peaceful life, a pleasant existence and yes, even a charitable and philanthropic one but remove the belief systems, the reverential deference to invisible gods and the divisive creeds and tenets that go along with structured belief systems and the benefits that such good religious people produce would be magnified immeasurably.

  I do believe that there has been some religion that has been a significant force for good in the world.

  Perhaps we can agree that some religious people, many in fact, have been a significant force for good in the world. As for the slavery issue, yes there were good christian men and women who took a stand against it but perhaps that might not have been necessary if religion had not provided bigotry with divine 'justification' for their actions. To say that Genesis was misinterpreted would be missing the point.

  I understand how non-religious people do not like religious coercion or proselytizing of any kind.

  It winds me up I admit but I honestly do respect religious proselytising. If you believe you have a 'better way' or the 'message of salvation' then share it by all means. Be prepared to defend yourself though. I apply the same standard to myself, I honestly feel that people would be better off ditching the myths and mysteries of religion. I especially feel that the ex-JW community would benefit from it - but that's just my opinion.

  I hope it's sufficiently clear that I have no problem with individuals who have faith - it's the religious institutions, the traditions, the non questioning acceptance, blind belief and credulity that I deplore.
• 

  Arthur

  Hi nicolaou. You wrote:

  Why believe in something you cannot prove?

  This question can cut both ways. Can anyone prove that a supreme power / intelligence does not exist out there which is beyond our finite human comprehension? If they can; how?

  I have absolutely no emotional investment in convincing other people to believe in God. Their beliefs are totally inconsequential to me. This is why I never criticize an atheist for not thinking in the same manner that I think. I do however, find it interesting when an atheist is trying to convince me that God does not exist. I sometimes find them just as coercive and dogmatic as the very religionists that they denounce.

  you wrote:

  Isn't the belief in something unprovable a sign of . . . . dare I say susceptibility and conditioning?

  Well, yes; as it is in most human interactions and endeavors. How do you really know who to vote for in an election? How do you really know which new medical procedure will be most effective in a life and death situation? Susceptibility and conditioning is a factor in all human communication and education whether we are talking about politics, economics, physics, or even dating advice. Even if we demand to see the data for whatever ideas are being put forth; utimately, we are puting our trust in those people who have collected, compiled, and presented such data. And most importantly; we are trusting in our own limited intellect to analyze such information in a way that will lead to the best choices.

  you wrote:

  Not that everything does require proof to be believed but when the object of the belief is so enormously fanatastical then shouldn't proof be offered? Demanded even?

  Whether an infinite power / intelligence in the universe is a "fantastical" idea or not is really just a matter of perception. Recent discoveries in areas such as quantum mechanics for example; are yeilding insights that would have been deemed "rediculous" to many "sober minded" individuals just fifty years ago.

  Concering myself; and my own personal beliefs; should I demand "proof" for the existence of God, before I believe in God? The short answer is NO. Remember, I am not trying to convert, coerce, or convince anyone that God does exist. Also, my belief in God is not moving me to engage in any kind of conduct that is injurious to my fellows. My belief in God does not involve jihad, martyrdom, manipulating the political process, proseletyzing, or the subjugation of others. My belief in a divine power moves me to behave in a way in which I am ultimately accountable for all of my actions; and the way that I treat others.

  you wrote:

  I'd argue that the weight of evidence leads overwhelmingly to the conclusion that a creator god does not exist.

  If you are talking about God, as described in the book of Genesis; I totally agree with you. I personally, do not reject the evidence for evolutionary transitions. And, I personally, I reject the silly anthropomorphic projections of God as being an angry, jealous, arbitrary, insecure despot as described in the Old Testament.

  you wrote:

  I'd like to approach this in reverse order if you don't mind Arthur. I make no claims for the morality or ethics of atheists. Some are complete and utter bastards though most are lovely people. I think the same applies to christians, jews, buddhists and other believers. People are people with all their flaws and graces whatever paradigm they hold to.

  I completely agree with you; I have made the same observations myself.

  you wrote:

  As for the danger in all religion that I referred to. Yes this even applies to Tibetan Buddhists, Fransiscan monks and orders of nuns. Why? Because the irrational dogma perpetuated by all these belief systems clamps down on human potential.

  It does not clamp down on human potential when the spiritual aspirant himself choses this lifestyle for himself; and to unselfishly inspire others without threat of coercion.

  I do however, see your point, and I do agree in large part. All I have to do is look in the mirror to see how my own religious dogma so seriously hindered my own development, and choices for so many years. I do see how dogma is hindering scientific discovery in many respects (the fight over stem cell research in the U.S. for example)

  Islamic extremism is another undeniable example of the sorrows that religious dogma has unleashed. Events such as these, the crusades, and the inquisitions are inexcusable.

  you wrote:

  As for the slavery issue, yes there were good christian men and women who took a stand against it but perhaps that might not have been necessary if religion had not provided bigotry with divine 'justification' for their actions.

  Very true.

  you wrote:

  I hope it's sufficiently clear that I have no problem with individuals who have faith - it's the religious institutions, the traditions, the non questioning acceptance, blind belief and credulity that I deplore.

  I suppose my belief in God can be ascribed to "blind belief" and credulity. I would like to comment on this much more; but it is very late here, and I must go to bed. Maybe I can address some of these issues later.

  It was good chatting with you.

  .
• 

  Stephanus

  What's wrong with that?

  Ever heard of "manners"?
• 

  Stephanus

  Ever heard of "manners"?

  Heh, heh! I didn't think of this addition until I was signing off:

  "Or don't you believe in those either?"