Talking with Atheists

[stovebolts]

I didn't have an abortion because I love my (now ex) wife. We made the decision together to keep it. Now I have a son who I love. Yes, there was the option of abortion but I never really considered it. It would have been easier, it would have freed me from responsibility and my life would be very different. But I wanted to have a baby and so did she, we didn't TRY, we weren't in a rush or anything in fact we both wanted to wait a few years. It just happened and we accepted it and were happy about it despite the fact that it was sooner than expected.

Sorry to hear that your marriage didn't work out. But it sounds to me like you still very much love her. I'll be praying that the two of you can work out your differences. It is very important for a child to be raised with both parents.

But as far as having a child, it sounds as if the two of you wanted to share your love with one another by having a child. Would you agree?

Within Christianity, we see God somewhat the same way. Out of his great love, he created humanity, because by nature, love wants to share, it is not selfish. Perhaps in this sense, we were in part created in the image of God.

Christianity is more than just some theological world view though. It must be put into practice, which is harder said than done. To be honest Chad, I wasn't drawn to Christianity because I was in fear of my soul, though the idea of a life beyond this one is alluring to me. A life without suffering... Anyway, I was drawn to Christianity because it had the answers to my messed up and wrecked life at a time where I had nowhere else to go up up, and it offered somebody that would be there by my side, guiding me along the way. I realize that my personal relationship with Jesus must look like my imaginary friend to you, and honestly, I'm ok with that. But I also expect you to respect that of me, as I respect your views.

If your raised in a Christian home, you're going to be taught "No sex before marriage". Yes, I realize that few actually live this way... But it sets a bar, and some actually make it. And when you're married, you're committing an oath to God and your spouse "till death do you part". Again, many Christians don't make it in marriage either, but it sets a bar, and there are a few that make it. But for those that I know that have made it, they are truly happy, and live such full lives. And yes, I do know many, many people like this.

I am on my second marriage. My first marriage went horribly wrong. But then again, what should I have expected when we slept together on the first date and she eventually got pregnant? Everything I did in that relationship, I did the way I thought was best. Again, it ended up horribly, and I mean horribly wrong.

When I met my second wife, I tried it the way the Bible teaches and yes, that meant no sex before marriage. And once we were married, I tried, and still try to take on the biblical role of being a Father and Husband as head of our house. I've got to tell you, it's not easy all the time living up to a standard, but God gives us grace if that makes sense to you, and I know that he's growing me into a better person.. not just for me, but for my family as well. What I can say though, is that my life is so full and rich. I dare to say this, but I caught myself this summer looking around at my family and thinking, "This is pretty cool". And I give the credit to God for guiding me to be the man I am today.

One mistake I made with my first marriage was taking on a job where I was gone for two weeks at at time driving semi truck. My focus was on providing for my family, but what I didn't understand back then, was that to provide for your family means a paycheck really is the least responsibility I had. Don't get me wrong, I had to work (every father should work), but that was the easy part... and it was easy for me to hide in my work, instead of doing the hard work of being a husband and a father.

The Bible has a lot of good stuff in it on how to live... And I'll be praying for you.

Jeff

 

[stovebolts]

The thing about reading the Bible, is that you have to discern it. The Bible is full of people making mistakes.. lot's of them. And for many athiests, they look at these mistakes and because they can't discern the passage, they get the wrong ideal.

Isn't that true of many/most things? That one can get the wrong message if they don't read it with a certain mindset or a certain pre-education?

I think of Aristotle, Darwin, Carroll (Sean), Hawking. How many people can't understand or appreciate Stephen Hawking's first book? I would say many, and that it has to be "discerned".

Well, generally speaking, you're not going to understand multiplication before addition. But what I think you're talking about is one's bias. Personally, I've learned not to talk about anyone that I don't know, and when it comes to theology, it applies to those who I've not read as well. Thus, you won't hear me taking about Hawking unless it is something specific that I have heard from him. I don't believe in hearing it in abridged form from a third party.

And so the question becomes, WHY would a god trying to get a message to all his creation allow ANY misinterpretation to occur? Why would an all-knowing, all-powerful being, capable of writing DNA codes sufficient to create the human brain with a success rate of 30% (sounds small, but is not bad for something so complex), be unable to include the program code for biblical discernment in every human just as reliably as the one for sphincter control?

It just doesn't make sense to me that a being who "could design an eye, a wing and love" could not make an easily discernible bible, yanno?

I realize this is kind of rhetorical, because I'm not expecting or even asking for an answer, I'm not trying to force a debate or claim a point - I don't want to stir an argument. But it puzzles me and it's just another something that makes me unable to muster belief. Yet another something that doesn't compute for me.

Ohh my, if I could only count how many times I've heard this argument. :waving But that being said, I do think it's a fair argument.

But it reminds me of a story in the Bible. You see, Jesus meets this gal in the middle of the afternoon who's getting water at a well. Normally women got their water in the cool of the morning, so this sends us a red flag immediately. Anyway, Jesus asks her for a drink of water, and the discussion turns into a Jewish / Samaritan debate. You see, the two ideologies clashed, and they clashed hard. The Samaritans even defiled the temple on numerous occasions. The two groups hated each other.

So, there is Jesus talking to this woman who has been married multiple times, and the man she is with is not her husband. She is an outcast, and one has to imagine that she's doing the best she can, even if she's shunned by the rest of her people and that's got to be an emotional pain she carries each day as she physically carries her water in the heat of the day. And there is Jesus, offering her hope and healing. And how does she respond? She responds just like a real life human being when confronted. She responds with "THE" argument.

So I really got a chuckle out of your reply above, because really, humanity hasn't changed that much in the past 2,000 years. You see, it's in our nature to hide our hurt, our discomfort and exchange it for "THE Argument".

When we argue, we're able to control the way we see the world around us, but often, the argument keeps us at a distance from ourselves... It's a distraction to the healing work that needs to take place inside.

I don't know why you think the way you do about God, nor do I understand what is driving your rhetorical questions. But perhaps a better question might be, why do we see God so vastly different when in reality, we think so much alike?

Something to ponder...

People say, "you can't get the bible's message unless the holy spirit is in you" and it seems to beg the question, "if the holy spirit is in you, what do you need the bible for, then?" For a God, a superpower, to cause a book to be written that cannot deliver its message upon just reading it, well.... Why? : Is God not capable of creating a bible that is easily understood, that has no argument about its meaning? Or what reason would be behind such an action?

What does the Bible say? Now that's a discussion that's been going on since Moses...

God Bless,
Jeff

 

[leftyatbest]

So is this a re-opening of the thread I got locked down?

 

[Mike_S]

I was beginning to think StoveBolts had lost his marbles and was having a conversation with himself - he's a Chevy guy after all, this is a common practice

 

[reba]

So is this a re-opening of the thread I got locked down?

No. Please remember you are a guest here and this is first and foremost a Christian forum.

 

[stovebolts]

So is this a re-opening of the thread I got locked down?

huh? Its just me, one human being trying to have an open, honest and respectful discussion with another human being that shares those three values.

if you don't think this can happen here, we can do it via email.

 

[Rhea]

And so the question becomes, WHY would a god trying to get a message to all his creation allow ANY misinterpretation to occur?
[...]
It just doesn't make sense to me that a being who "could design an eye, a wing and love" could not make an easily discernible bible, yanno?

Ohh my, if I could only count how many times I've heard this argument. :waving But that being said, I do think it's a fair argument.

It's important to me that you understand that this was not an "argument" or a debate point. Definitely not a "gotcha".

It's simply and honestly a QUESTION to which I do not see the answer. That's why I reflected that it's really a rhetorical question, because I don't expect you to be able to answer it (if it were easily answered it would have been long ago, verily, even in religions before Christianity).

It's truly and simply a question. An unanswered, open, dangling question. And perhaps the reason you have heard something like it so many times is that it is a show-stopper question for many minds. (Minds that you will believe your god made... hence the importance of the question)

I don't know why you think the way you do about God,

I think the way I do about EVERYTHING. You will find that an awful lot of people who think in mathematical, pragmatic contexts will have a hard time believing in gods. It's how we think. We cannot find satisfaction in anything less than repeatable, predictable patterns.

You think I have a pitbull-like persistence on the god issue, you should see me trying to find the ultimate stereo system or determine the cause of my back steps lifting up on the east end of the porch. You think I question too much about theology, you should see me attack the Fire Department budget. You think I demand exactitude in scripture, you should see my lawn-mowing patterns.

nor do I understand what is driving your rhetorical questions. But perhaps a better question might be, why do we see God so vastly different when in reality, we think so much alike?

Perhaps for the same reason some people are sensory-defensive and others are sensory-seeking. Perhaps the same reason some people love okra and others, like my son, think it is the vegetable form of the garden slug. Perhaps for the same reason some people are radical conservatives and some are radical liberals and some of both are anarchists.

Some people like rap and some like bluegrass. Some like both, but many cannot understand the interpretation of the other.

I like math. I like tough math. I like the kind of equation that takes two or three pages to solve. Or even the ones that cannot be solved and require a best guess, plugged back in to the beginning and a hundred iterations to narrow down to the most probable answer plus a caveat on what could go wrong.

I find it fun to take practice SAT exams. I like to read books about science and math. I buy videotaped college courses on brain anatomy and physiology because it is kind of cool to me. I also listen to college courses on linguistics and language development. I read car repair manuals and medical journals. I also devour literature and human psychology, so it's not just math-related, but it is all sourced and researched.


I am QUITE AWARE that many people do not think like me at all, and would find all of this either relentlessly dull or not worth the attention it would take to enjoy it.

And I am QUITE AWARE that many people see the way I think and assume motives of trolling, inciting and troublemaking when I ask questions - when in fact it is just the way I think. I follow trails, they are interesting to me. I try to ignore the accusations of mal-intent because trying to explain it to them only works if they have not already decided they "have my number" (and I'm not interested at all in banging me head against a brick wall, I can just say "think what you like" and ignore the false accusation).

So I don't know if I've answered "how I think about god" but maybe there is some insight. If there were a god, it would know how I think and not expect non-evidential theology to be an impossible hurdle I would need to navigate prior to understanding its (the god's) mere existence.

 

[stovebolts]

Thanks for your insight Rhea,
BTW, I don't miss having to use three pieces of paper to solve one equation in my old applied Trig class. I can say, however, that it was exhilarating to actually get the correct answer

It's important to me that you understand that this was not an "argument" or a debate point. Definitely not a "gotcha".

And I thank you for clarifying that. I don't like a debate either, but I do enjoy a good conversation. One that makes me think. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to pursue this conversation with you. Also, you do have the right not to answer any questions that you don't want to answer. So keep that in mind if anyone tries to suck you into an argument. It's called self control ;)

So I don't know if I've answered "how I think about god" but maybe there is some insight.

Yes, actually you've given me a pretty good insight. And know that I don't fault you, or think less of either you or Chad for your veiw point. It is important for you to understand that about me.

If there were a god, it would know how I think and not expect non-evidential theology to be an impossible hurdle I would need to navigate prior to understanding its (the god's) mere existence.

I see that you like to think, and that you're a great thinker. How did you come up with this thought? I mean, I've got an idea on how to answer you, but what I find more important is what formed this view of god for you? What's behind it, what's driving it? Or, would you rather me take the lead with some of my ideas on how to answer your questions? Either way, let me know.

BTW, I may be on tomorrow morning for a bit, but probably won't have much time until early next week.

Take care.

 

[Rhea]

I see that you like to think, and that you're a great thinker. How did you come up with this thought? I mean, I've got an idea on how to answer you, but what I find more important is what formed this view of god for you? What's behind it, what's driving it? Or, would you rather me take the lead with some of my ideas on how to answer your questions? Either way, let me know.

It comes from this idea - That the definition of god(dess)(es) in my opinion is something above/better than ANY HUMAN. It may be omnipotent, it may be super-potent-but-not-omni, but in any case a god(dess) would not be human-like in its limitations.

Now, I have done a lot of work with children. Many very young, some non-verbal. Many of them have been diagnosed with Aspergers and Austism. The key, from all the professionals in all of these *PLUS* in almost any other mental disorder known AS WELL AS in dealing with people of other cultures is this simple premise:

==> It is your (generic) job to get into their head and speak their language, whether literally or metaphorically, and not try to force a square peg into a round hole.
​

(notice I made that bold, underlined, colored and indented for emphasis!)

So in any of these cases, you need to find out how they think, and use language that will make sense. It means NOT being the person who realizes their audience speaks Spanish and just shouts English louder, or worse yet, just shouts at their lack of understanding without ever even noticing, out of arrogant narcissism, that the audience speaks a different language!


When I am able to connect with an autistic kid, it is always because I got a sense of THEIR thinking and I used THEIR language to get my point across. When I am successful at communicating, even if it is something they didn't want to do, they can comply because they understand my request - made in THEIR language.

Me shouting louder and getting mad because they didn't comply with my request when I was not speaking in their language is beyond arrogant and narcissistic, it is IMPOTENT.

...

And no definition of any god or goddess would include them being IMPOTENT in communication, in my humble opinion.

...

Therefore if someone presents me with a case of a god or goddess who is unable to understand what any public school special ed assistant knows, I am forced to conclude they are not describing a god or goddess that is real.


...so that's how I formed that opinion.

 

[Vic C.]

I expect everyone participating in this thread to act in a civil fashion. If it goes astray, you all will have each other to blame.This IS a Christian site. I expect the non believers to consider that when posting. I also expect the believers to act accordingly also.

 

[stovebolts]

Thanks for your lead.

It comes from this idea - That the definition of god(dess)(es) in my opinion is something above/better than ANY HUMAN. It may be omnipotent, it may be super-potent-but-not-omni, but in any case a god(dess) would not be human-like in its limitations.

I've done a lot of studies on the Ancient Near Eastern religions, many which predate any biblical writings and ironically, they seemed to view the gods in much the same manner as you and they served the gods out of fear. Furthermore, this idea of being "better" than humans often carried the idea that the gods were angry, and needed to be appeased. Do you see the God I serve as such?

As far as the gods being human like in their limitations, the only human like limitations I've ever seen, are those which put said limitations on their gods. Often, people like to create gods in their own image, but what we see in the biblical texts, is a God creating humans in His image. Furthermore, when God creates, he also empowers. Take for example trees and grass. God creates the land, but he empowers the land to bring forth vegetation. He does this with the sea too, as the sea brings forth the fishies. It's almost like when this God creates, he packs His creation full of potential and it just starts rolling... and we still see that creative work today in the Amazon etc.

You said you liked philosophy, so when you read that this God created humanity in His image, the only way we can truly understand this would be by constraining God with our own understanding, thus God would be created in our image. Right? Or, how would interpret the passage that humanity was created in the image of God?

Now, I have done a lot of work with children. Many very young, some non-verbal. Many of them have been diagnosed with Aspergers and Austism. The key, from all the professionals in all of these *PLUS* in almost any other mental disorder known AS WELL AS in dealing with people of other cultures is this simple premise:

==> It is your (generic) job to get into their head and speak their language, whether literally or metaphorically, and not try to force a square peg into a round hole.
​

(notice I made that bold, underlined, colored and indented for emphasis!)

So in any of these cases, you need to find out how they think, and use language that will make sense. It means NOT being the person who realizes their audience speaks Spanish and just shouts English louder, or worse yet, just shouts at their lack of understanding without ever even noticing, out of arrogant narcissism, that the audience speaks a different language!


When I am able to connect with an autistic kid, it is always because I got a sense of THEIR thinking and I used THEIR language to get my point across. When I am successful at communicating, even if it is something they didn't want to do, they can comply because they understand my request - made in THEIR language.

Me shouting louder and getting mad because they didn't comply with my request when I was not speaking in their language is beyond arrogant and narcissistic, it is IMPOTENT.

...

And no definition of any god or goddess would include them being IMPOTENT in communication, in my humble opinion.

...

Therefore if someone presents me with a case of a god or goddess who is unable to understand what any public school special ed assistant knows, I am forced to conclude they are not describing a god or goddess that is real.


...so that's how I formed that opinion.

You know what's sad thing about what you said? You're absolutely right. You see, as Christians we claim to be the body of Christ and when you look at us, you should see Christ because Christ lives in us. But I've seen it time and time again where people scream and yell and push away what they don't understand and they figure that they have to yell louder to make sure everyone know that they are right. You see, we build this fortress of who we think God is, and then feel the need t defend it and honestly, sometimes it can be pretty ugly. Anyway, I have tried to ask you and Chad questions so that I can better understand you, and I don't think I've yelled at either of you, nor do I think I've been disrespectful to either of you. If I have, I'd ask that you forgive my human limitations and as I stated in another thread, if you see a log in my eye, maybe I need somebody to come pull it out.

But what I find amazing, is that what you just described is exactly how I understand the scriptures. The God I serve acts within his creation exactly how you've described your interaction with those with special needs.

I'll spare you a few pages recapitulating the story of the Bible, but God has always reached out to humanity and gotten down to humanities level. Name a human trait, and you'll find it in the Bible where God is interacting with that human trait. You know, there was a guy named Jacob who only knew of a God that occupied a certain geographical area. Jacob wasn't an upright guy... actually he was kind of slick, like that slippery car salesman we all know. He did something really wrong and ended up running away because his brother was going to kill him. He even had the audacity to make an agreement with God that went something like, "You do this for me, and I'll serve you". Ironically, God met him where he was at and played along. But God always kept Jacob accountable, and one day when Jacob had to face his past, he also had to wrestle with God before he could overcome his old self.

Jacob started out with the wrong idea of who God was or how God functioned and his relationship with God wasn't by any means ideal. But God spoke Jacob's language. He got down to Jacob's level.

We ultimately see this in Jesus. Way back God made a promise to Abraham, and the children of Abraham 400 years later were driven out of Egypt. It was these people that God, for the first time in history claimed a people to represent Him,and he called these people his Son. To say the least, they failed time and time again and didn't represent God very well. Actually, there are accounts in the Bible where Israel is described as being a stench in their neighbors nostrils simply because they weren't living the way God had commanded them to live... a way in which they agreed to live. As Christians, maybe this is good for us to remember.

So God sent his only Son, Jesus to show us how God functions, and to show us the way to live so that we can be drawn closer to God. Imagine, God sending his own son to these dysfunctional, miserable people. Imagine, a God who gets down to your level who's patient, understanding and long suffering. A God who is willing to accept me where I'm at, with all my limitations. That, and I'll us a disclaimer of "in part", is the God I serve.

 

[stovebolts]

By the way, I do hope that everyone can keep it cool and chill so this thread doesn't get locked.

Chad,
Would you please engage my earlier reply to you as I try to get to know you as well?

Hopefully everybody stays on topic, and an argument doesn't start. If anyone disagrees, I would appreciate a "We'll have to agree to disagree". and move on. It's not productive to dig in the heels, have attitudes start flaring, and the thread locked. Be duck, let it roll off your back. You don't have to be right, and nobody has to reply to anything they don't want to.



Let's just try to take a more mature approach here... can we?

 

[Rhea]

But what I find amazing, is that what you just described is exactly how I understand the scriptures. The God I serve acts within his creation exactly how you've described your interaction with those with special needs.

I've been told that I will learn nothing by reading the bible because the bible is not able to be understood unless interpreted by the Holy Spirit. I've been told that my interpretation of the bible is flawed and unreliable.

I've been told that I have to think differently to receive it. That I must leave my language behind and "become as a child" and stop questioning everything and stop insisting on evidence but instead use faith.

The book, therefore, insists that a person learn God's Language before God will give them the message. So He is defined in this sense as not being willing to talk in the language of the pragmatist, the literalist, the experimentalist, but only in the language of the faithful.

This definition, then, does not create a picture of an all-knowing god in my mind. All-knowing, in my opinion would not have this communication problem. Would not require faith of those who do not understand faith.

 

[stovebolts]

Rhea,
you've not offended me, and I am thankful for your honesty in this thread. Had your comment ben made in a different thread, I would understand the offense.

regardless, I don't own that.

it seems to me that it isn't christianity that bothers you, but rather how some represent Christianity. I am sure you will find this in many other religions as well. I understand.

I boldly say that those who told you what christianity was in those terms, were being defesive and callouse.

with that, I would echo and affirm my view. And you are more than capable for reading the bible for yourself and coming up with your own conclusions.

I would be more than willing to discuss with you, in a respectful, non domestic, judgmental way.

 

[stovebolts]

i hate posting from my smart phone grrr..

dogmatic, not domestic. Stupid spell check... Grrr

 

[Christ_empowered]

I think atheism is a belief system. I wouldn't go so far as to say "religion," but I do think rejecting all forms of religion is a stance. You don't necessarily need a deity to have a religion. Some sociologists classify deeply held, powerful secular belief systems (for instance, the atheism+obedience to the state in the former USSR, intense patriotism in the US) as "secular religions." From my perspective as a Christian, I think that when people reject God, they make up their own Gods. The same people who reject the creator of the Universe for lack of evidence (or whatever reason they may have...) may believe in humanism, libertarianism, psychology+psychiatry, marxism...on and on it goes. Living without beliefs of some sort is a) impossible and b) a sure path to misery, should one choose to embrace nihilism.

At this point, no one can prove the existence of any deity, whether the God I serve or Allah or the numerous deities the Hindus worship. This fits perfectly into my own Calvinist belief system, since I think God makes Himself known to the Elect and everybody else is left in bondage to sin, satan, and death.

As for reading the Bible...its tough going, when you're a non-believer. Honestly, even as a believer I don't do it as often as I should. I'm not going to say "think as a child," or whatever, but I will say this: God owes you nothing. God is the creator, you and I are the creatures. Its probably a bad idea to open up the Bible looking for "proof," which is basically putting God on trial, demanding "evidence" and interpreting the Bible through your own 21st century perspective. I don't know God--He doesn't talk to me or anything--but I'm pretty sure He doesn't work that way.

 

[reba]

Liked your post CE

 

[Nick]

This threa is titled "Talking With Atheists" not "Talking About Atheism". Let's leep this civil and on topic please. This thread, and indeed this forum is not a platform for atheism.

Final warning

 

[Artie]

Really my post isn't here? I typed all of that for nothing? It wasn't removed, it just never showed up.

EDIT: never mind. It was removed. All I said was atheism is not a religion. That's all. How is that promoting atheism or putting down christianity in any way? All I said was atheism is not a religion. How is that in violation or any TOS or any of your rules in any way?"

From TOS:

"You will not post any messages; links, images or photos that promote a religion or belief other than Biblical and historical Christianity (atheism is considered a "belief" for the purposes of this rule). Discussing these doctrines are fine, as long as the beliefs are not actively promoted."

I think atheism is considered a belief and I think talking positively about atheism is considered promoting atheism.

 

[jasoncran]

this thread is locked temporaliy pending staff review it may or maynot be reopened.