are atheists guilty of intolerance?

[th1b.taylor]

Thank you and God bless you for your service to our country. Many people in my family and my husband's were in the service. My dad wanted to serve as well but because of health issues he was not allowed (he has a rare pancreas defect he was born with). If he did, he would've gone to Vietnam as well.

Tell your dad that the summer graduation trip came without a party so he didn't miss anything important and that I said I pray God's blessings on him and his for being a good American.

Oh, and tell Big Man I sad he's cool. I no longer smoke meat for my wife but only because I'm in this stupid Hospital Bed that he and the other citizens of the US bought for me and express my gratitude to him, you, first hand, thank you.

 

[ReginaForbes]

Hospital bed? How? Why? Who? What? Where? When?...???
That can't be good. I hope you get better soon!

 

[jasonc]

As my parents taught me, in mixed company, it's better not to talk politics or religion. And that's fine, if I'm hanging out in a group of people of various backgrounds I know not to start thumping my Bible...as I would expect an atheist not to start touting Dawkins. However, my gripe was with wherever Christians are gathered, if there's an open forum, you bet some jerk is going to start saying hateful junk. I don't like it when atheists do it to Christians and I don't like it when "christians" do it to anyone else (like the westboro baptist kooks!) So, for example, I may think youtubers like thunderfoot are raging morons, but I don't go onto his channel and start dropping f bombs. Then it really makes me wonder, the atheists who go onto Christian sites and start bullying people...maybe they're not just atheist, maybe they're anti-theist?

I call that trolling, I wouldn't go to the large jewish community in Miami and do that unless I was called by god to go there. I would be upfront and tell them what I am and why I am here and allow them to ask me.

 

[WIP]

The word tolerance has been twisted over the years to mean acceptance. But tolerance is not acceptance. To quote South Park "Look, just because you have to tolerate something doesn't mean you have to approve of it! ...'Tolerate' means you're just putting up with it! You tolerate a crying child sitting next to you on the airplane or, or you tolerate a bad cold...."

True. I also think intolerance has been twisted to mean antagonistic, which it is not. I like to look at our example, Jesus. He did not tolerate sinful behavior but he wasn't antagonistic toward sinners either. In fact, He loved them.

 

[WIP]

We shouldn't tolerate willful wrongdoing within the Christian community, and that is to be worked out within the local church leadership to discipline that individual.

With regards to tolerance of the world's wickedness, I think that Paul's words are very clear on this.

"I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (ESV)

We are not to judge or break off association with those of the world, but rather those who call themselves brothers and do the things that God forbids. God judges those outside of the church, and we are to be ministers of reconciliation to these people, not judges.

Understood but I must have given the wrong impression. I was not suggesting being judgmental. Another common reaction to correction is to accuse one of being judgmental. We are not to just turn a blind eye either, are we? If we do that how are we to make disciples?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Understood but I must have given the wrong impression. I was not suggesting being judgmental. Another common reaction to correction is to accuse one of being judgmental. We are not to just turn a blind eye either, are we? If we do that how are we to make disciples?

I don't see how outward attempts at moral reformation of people without Christ does anything to draw them towards Christ. The Gospel does that.

 

[WIP]

Curious. How does one show another that they need our Savior, the Christ, Jesus, without showing them that they need a savior? The first step is to recognize and admit that one is a sinner. Unless one is shown that they are a sinner by the law, one never comes to the realization that they are in fact a sinner as Paul puts it, "I would not have known sin except through the law." Romans 7:7 NKJV

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Curious. How does one show another that they need our Savior, the Christ, Jesus, without showing them that they need a savior?

It's the Holy Spirit's job to convict the world of sin, and it is his job to draw men unto Christ. Our job is to simply proclaim the love of Jesus and how the love of God has been revealed in the Gospel.

Moral reformation, comes with spiritual transformation and continual sanctification.

I've never seen the go and tell people how much of a sinner thing work too much in our modern day. What I have seen work is genuine compassionate love for one's neighbor, where they live out the implications of the gospel, and share it with conviction when the time is right.

 

[WIP]

Sorry, I edited my post while you were typing so I'll add my edit here.

Paul put it this way. "I would not have known sin except through the law." Romans 7:7 NKJV

A non-Christian can appear as a Christian in his/her behavior and attitude but that doesn't make them Christian. Knowing Jesus and accepting Him as their Lord and savior is required. So how does one demonstrate he/she is Christian in such a way as to draw a non-Christian into the fold? Does it not require at some point demonstrating to them that they are broken and in need of the Savior? Until the non-Christian understands, I don't see them wanting to change.

I am a sinner.
The wages of sin is death.
On my own I cannot save myself.
Jesus lived a perfect life and died in my place and rose again.
I have salvation by faith in Him.

Does the Holy Spirit randomly or selectively pick people out of the crowd or do we need to take that first step and like the prodigal son turn our hearts toward the cross? "Ask and it will be given to you. Seek and ye shall find. Knock and the door will be opened." Seems we have to take a step.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Sorry, I edited my post while you were typing so I'll add my edit here.

Paul put it this way. "I would not have known sin except through the law." Romans 7:7 NKJV

I disagree about the purpose of that particular text, I think he is talking about Israel and the Torah.

How do you reconcile that understanding with this text.

For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them Romans 2:14-15 (ESV)

 

[WIP]

I better quit editing my posts. Sorry about that. Please look back at #69.

That is good text that bears consideration. I wonder if they still must recognize where that law comes from and until someone points that out to them, they may not ever know. For example, a non-Christian may recognize that stealing is wrong but they may not know why they recognize it or they may have another reason for having that understanding. In the Questions for Christians forum I posted a situation I had with my wife this week. What she was preparing to do was wrong and at first I tried to not to do it because it was not the right thing to do. She wouldn't hear me until I also dug up the legal implications of what she was considering. She finally dropped the idea but was it because of her understanding about it being the wrong thing to do or because of the secular risk she would be facing?

So how do we get the cross of salvation across without pointing out the law?

 

[turnorburn]

So how do we get the cross of salvation across without pointing out the law?

That's just it WIP we don't, there's a right way and a wrong way, our ways aren't the Lords ways, neither are his ways our ways..

tob

*edit: Oops' forgot the most important part "again"

Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I better quit editing my posts. Sorry about that. Please look back at #69.

No problem, I'll go back and take a look at those.

That is good text that bears consideration. I wonder if they still must recognize where that law comes from and until someone points that out to them, they may not ever know. For example, a non-Christian may recognize that stealing is wrong but they may not know why they recognize it or they may have another reason for having that understanding. In the Questions for Christians forum I posted a situation I had with my wife this week. What she was preparing to do was wrong and at first I tried to not to do it because it was not the right thing to do. She wouldn't hear me until I also dug up the legal implications of what she was considering. She finally dropped the idea but was it because of her understanding about it being the wrong thing to do or because of the secular risk she would be facing?

Good example! My position differs because in the instance of someone becoming a Christian it isn't a, "I'm going to stop sinning because I have seen how wrong it is." Rather it's a, "I'm going to worship and love Jesus because of how glorious and beautiful he is." This isn't about ethics, this is about establishing a relationship between Jesus and the person, and it is the kindness of God that draws us toward repentance.

 

[WIP]

Maybe it's a little of both?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Maybe it's a little of both?

Perhaps you should present an example of how you would actually talk about this.

 

[turnorburn]

After spending a year in an atheist forum i can validate these statements, they are militant, they do have an agenda.. we have/had a member that was/is a member at that forum..

How militant of an atheist are you?

I think directly confronting religious people is pointless. Their beliefs are irrational and cannot be changed by reasoned arguement. Demonstrations are not useful as they can only be used to rouse the emotions of the rabble, and it is their minds and not their emotions that need to be reached. Writing about what you think and having it published is powerful, it gives those who are undecided a boost in the right direction. Political action should be limited to trying to ensure the freedoms we have are preserved and maintaining separation of church and state. This is a benefit to everyone and so should not be undertaken as an atheist cause, but an inclusive effort where individual beliefs are not even part of the issue.

You seek to "become more active in confronting religion in an appropriate manner. " Direct confrontation will not yield any worthwhile results and is more likely to have the opposite effect. Rather than promoting atheism, I suggest promoting critical thinking and skepticism. When people use these tools, they are most likely to end up in the atheist camp. Atheism can only be promoted one mind at a time, and the one mind itself must do the promoting.

http://nogod.tribe.net/thread/4192733e-b7d3-4f12-b7d2-a271395e9f47

tob

 

[jasonc]

After spending a year in an atheist forum i can validate these statements, they are militant, they do have an agenda.. we have/had a member that was/is a member at that forum..

How militant of an atheist are you?

I think directly confronting religious people is pointless. Their beliefs are irrational and cannot be changed by reasoned arguement. Demonstrations are not useful as they can only be used to rouse the emotions of the rabble, and it is their minds and not their emotions that need to be reached. Writing about what you think and having it published is powerful, it gives those who are undecided a boost in the right direction. Political action should be limited to trying to ensure the freedoms we have are preserved and maintaining separation of church and state. This is a benefit to everyone and so should not be undertaken as an atheist cause, but an inclusive effort where individual beliefs are not even part of the issue.

You seek to "become more active in confronting religion in an appropriate manner. " Direct confrontation will not yield any worthwhile results and is more likely to have the opposite effect. Rather than promoting atheism, I suggest promoting critical thinking and skepticism. When people use these tools, they are most likely to end up in the atheist camp. Atheism can only be promoted one mind at a time, and the one mind itself must do the promoting.

http://nogod.tribe.net/thread/4192733e-b7d3-4f12-b7d2-a271395e9f47

tob

I have learned that with the internet, atheist are a bit different then the ones I know in person. not saying you are wrong just we for the most part post under a pseudonym. I know what your name is from being a mod. I wont post it but in person I would know your name first not some alias.

 

[turnorburn]

i know atheists as well Jason, so what are you getting at?

tob

 

[jasonc]

i know atheists as well Jason, so what are you getting at?

tob

they aren't the same in person as on the internet. some people do things that they shouldn't and wouldn't do in person. others wont and some are consistent and do both. I have debated athiests. it didn't have to and these two in the unit wouldn't usually start the debate. i had a rabble soldier that would start a debate then drag me into it. i stopped that when i told him, if you are going to start a debate then finish it.notice that if he wasn't there to start it or another then they didn't start one. they did have arguments and one of them did debate but he wasn't usually as militant as some here.

its like this if they aren't interested in debating you they wont. there are militant athiests and there are those that aren't. i have met both.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

After spending a year in an atheist forum i can validate these statements, they are militant, they do have an agenda.. we have/had a member that was/is a member at that forum..

Huh?