There's just something about theists that say they were once atheists....

by logansrun 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  OrbitingTheSun

  I agree that it's improbable for an authentic atheist to become a Christian...but I do not think it is improbable for an authentic atheist to develop a belief in God. I consider myself somewhere between Agnostic and Pantheist but at one time, before I opened myself to the idea of God existing, I completely rejected God. So, I'm not a theist now but I can see how a reasonable atheist could become one.

  Two quotes of I thought of:

  "If you would be a real seeker after truth,
  it is necessary that at least once in your life
  you doubt, as far as possible, all things."
  Rene Descartes

  "Doubt is not a pleasant mental state
  but certainty is a ridiculous one."
  Voltaire

  This also reminds me of the ideas of St. Anselm. I have some different ideas, but I don't think his are completely invalid.

  http://http://www.lostinthecosmos.com/anselm2.htm
• 

  lisaBObeesa

  Ok, I don’t want to start anything here, but I have to rant because this thread really gets me. My thoughts:

  Number one, regarding CS Lewis:

  Because Lewis lost a debate one time (‘one jarring bump in his intellectual road’) about his book Miracles, we come to the conclusion that he has a ‘sad grasp of logic’?

  I don’t think that conclusion is based on good critical thinking… or logic.

  Number two, regarding atheist converting:

  I think it is ridiculous to say that an atheist can’t come to change his or her mind about what they believe and become a theist… and then perhaps convert to a particular religion, like Christianity. Give me a break it happens all the time. It just pisses off some current atheists.

  Number three, ‘and another thing!’:

  It’s is as if some atheist think that if everyone THOUGHT hard enough about what they believe, everyone would be atheist. I find that very presumptuous.

  Thank you…I will now step off the soap box…..

  -Lisabobeesa
• 

  greven

  Good points all!

  The problem lies greatly in how the atheist is portayed in theist litterature: they make out of the atheist a strawman, making the position such one takes unreasonable. Becoming an atheist because one is angry at God is impossible as has already been pointed out. You can't get angry at something you do not think exists.

  Btw, why do people keep misspelling atheist as athiest? Or am I missing something?
• 

  garybuss

  
  From my perspective, there is no difference in atheist and theist by nature. They are opposite sides of the same coin. The theist says I can prove that god does exist and the atheist says I can prove that god does not exist. Both need a concept of a god and both need the other. Both are threatened by skeptics.
  
  I am not aware of a realist abandoning free thought by decision. They may exist, I am just not aware of any. A humanist sees every element in life as human and every problem as a human problem that requires a human solution. I, for one, have never seen theism solve one human problem. I have never seen theism or a-theism fill a glass with water. I think they can't do it. I may be wrong.
  
  Skeptics can be theists. Two of my favorite skeptical theists were Jefferson and Paine. Paine was a deist and I have learned much from his writings.
  
  Skeptics solve every problem on the planet simply because they doubt it is unsolvable. Good topic, thanks for starting it.
  Gary
  
  
  
  
• 

  dedalus

  The theist says I can prove that god does exist and the atheist says I can prove that god does not exist.

  Neither should be saying he can prove anything. Substitute the word "believe" for "prove" and you've got it right. And I suppose it could be that disbelieving God is therefore something like an act of faith -- you gather as many fragments of logic and fact (and probably experience) as you can and leap the gap where conclusive evidence should be. But there are far more compelling reasons for it, in my opinion.

  How about that, though? Does it take faith to be an atheist? Or is that simply too clever?

  Dedalus

  "It's not God that I don't accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return the ticket to him." ~ Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoevesky's The Brothers Karamazov
• 

  Skeptic

  Some people become atheists for similar reasons that others become Christians. In talking with such atheists, the reasons include: "my Christian father beat the crap out of my atheist mother"; "my parents were atheists", "God is a bastard", etc.

  People who are atheists for the above reasons can be converted to belief in God fairly easily, as their atheism is basically a religious belief or an emotional response.

  Others become atheists because they see logical inconsistencies that believing in God would require. They base their belief on solid evidence and are willing to seek out and challenge inconsistencies in their beliefs. They also tend to have a good understanding of the scientific process and understand the makings of a good logical argument.

  These atheists are much more difficult to convert to a belief in God. They can be, but it is more difficult.
• 

  Skeptic

  The theist says I can prove that god does exist and the atheist says I can prove that god does not exist.

  I don't know any atheists who claim to prove that God does not exist. Most will claim that the probability of God existing is so close to zero that it might as well be zero.
• 

  rem

  Lisabobeesa,

  Number one, regarding CS Lewis:

  Because Lewis lost a debate one time (‘one jarring bump in his intellectual road’) about his book Miracles, we come to the conclusion that he has a ‘sad grasp of logic’?

  Perhaps you didn't read what I wrote. I said based on his apolgetic workS... this would include the others like the Screwtape Letters and Mere Christianity. The fact is that C.S. Lewis employs many logical fallacies throughout his apologetics. No, he did not have a firm grasp of logic, at least not when it came to his religious beliefs. I did not base my comment on the one debate (in fact he did not write any more apologetics after this). It was just an example of how his irrationality was exposed when he tried to defend his beliefs.

  I don’t think that conclusion is based on good critical thinking… or logic.

  That's because you jumped to conclusions without really reading what I wrote.

  I think it is ridiculous to say that an atheist can’t come to change his or her mind about what they believe and become a theist… and then perhaps convert to a particular religion, like Christianity. Give me a break it happens all the time. It just pisses off some current atheists.

  It happens all the time by the caricatures of Atheism that Christians just love to trot out. Real atheists are not angry at god. Most intelligent atheists are where they are at due to much study and use of logic. Do some intelligent atheists convert? I'm sure it happens, but it's very rare. Much more rare than Christians would like to think.

  It’s is as if some atheist think that if everyone THOUGHT hard enough about what they believe, everyone would be atheist. I find that very presumptuous.

  Why is it so presumptious? Agnosticism in whatever flavor (theism or atheism, with extra credit for atheism because of the lack of extraordinary evidence) is the only rational decision. It's not so much that the thinking part is hard - most anybody can do that. It's allowing yourself to doubt that is the kicker.

  rem
• 

  crownboy

  Nice post OrbitingTheSun.

  My guess would be that it would be fairly unlikely for an atheist to be converted to Christanity, but perhaps to some other god belief. (I consider myself agnostic too, BTW). I couldn't read the site that you linked in your post, but I'm guessing that it isn't a link trying to prove Anselm's ontological arguement?

  logansrun, valid points there as well. Not being aware of the bible's flaws can lead you to be taken, I suppose, but at the very least, hopefully it wouldn't be because of something as innane as Josh McDowell's books.

  lisaBObeesa:

  Because Lewis lost a debate one time (‘one jarring bump in his intellectual road’) about his book Miracles, we come to the conclusion that he has a ‘sad grasp of logic’?

  I don’t think that conclusion is based on good critical thinking… or logic.

  I think rem mentioned that the lack of logic was found in many of his apologetic works. When I was going through my stage of de-conversion from Christainty, and wanted to find reasons to still accept it, among many books that were reccommended to me was Lewis' Mere Christanity. This is probably Lewis' most famous and widely acclaimed apologist work, and quite frankly, the logic in that book was quite lacking. If his other books are even remotely close to that one, then his grasp of logic would indeed be quite bad.

  Number two, regarding atheist converting:

  I think it is ridiculous to say that an atheist can’t come to change his or her mind about what they believe and become a theist… and then perhaps convert to a particular religion, like Christianity. Give me a break it happens all the time. It just pisses off some current atheists.

  Well, I don't know about (re)conversions happening "all the time", especially given the fact that the non religious population doubled during the last decade in the US. However, since I've already stated it's perfectly possible for that to happen, I have no problem with your sentiments, really. I doubt atheists are "pissed off" by such conversions, but perhaps dissappointed if the decision was made due to extremely emotional or irrational methods.

  Number three, ‘and another thing!’:

  It’s is as if some atheist think that if everyone THOUGHT hard enough about what they believe, everyone would be atheist. I find that very presumptuous.

  Well, I think if most thought about or researched enough, certain things like a literal belief in the bible or quran (or other religious books written by men) would be rejected due to those books many unfactual, or unverifiable, or silly, or evil claims (in the case of the bible, all of these are true ). Belief in some sort of creator should be grounded in facts, not "faith".
• 

  crownboy

  I posted before I saw your reply rem. Nice comments as usual.