Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
#26

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
Individually and collectively, in a moment and over deep time... yeah.... they do. Monolithic christianity is a political conceit with it's origins in recent and living memory.

The rate has been picking up these past few years too. Religiosity has become a zero sum game. The only way to get new bodies in pews is to rifle through some other churches couch cushions, and they're all running out of heads as a group. We could credibly posit that the remaining christian service providers are making progressively unhinged claims because they have to in order to stand out in a crowded field of similar products. That the bad actors (scam churches by any name) are doing better than "regular" churches because they're bad actors in an unregulated market and, thus, possess inherent advantages.

Who wouldn't church shop, in that scenario?

One of the biggest single shifts of late (in the us, anyway) is trumpist christianity. The shamans and witchdoctors realized that unless they started preaching trumpism from the pulpit, they'd have to shut up shop...particularly during covid...so what do you think they did? If we wanted to get super meta, consider the endless parade of "but what would you replace my religion with!?!" questions we field on sites like this in that light.

Ultimately, I don't think that atheism or theism are any more or less honest than each other. There's certainly a difference in outcomes with respect to people who've become atheists through the dissonance that religious beliefs have -always- produced in their populations but I suspect that either outcome is equally honest as a matter of our lived experiences. The people who went full trumpist tend to believe that they have always thought that way, and that their religions always said so-and-so. Their former church was out of line. Their former pastor was wrong. It's prudent to leave room in the world for an honest mistake, lol, especially when we can quantify just how much uncertainty and seeking and sorting is present in the religious space right now.
Reply
#27

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
Christians switch between sects frequently. Conversions to other religions much less so, though, Muslims are having more success converting Christian’s than vice versa…neither numbers are large, however. I think some people that experience a cognitive dissonance usually look to other churches first and if it’s still not resolved, look to other faiths. They aren’t willing to give up on religion altogether as it’s been so deeply ingrained.

Those that can entertain the idea of “no god” have a much easier time leaving religion behind even though some still struggle with parts of it. Hell is a hard concept to overcome as is being an unworthy sinner (compared to just making mistakes). They all seem to eventually get there.

Those few atheists that return to religion, in my opinion, are those that couldn’t break those final bonds of their indoctrination or, they are so weak in their self worth that religion is appealing…the religion confirms the bias of not not being a worthy person on their own.

On a Catholic website I visit, Everytime some Protestant converts to Catholicism, there is great excitement while they ignore the other 100 who left to attend a Protestant congregation. Oh, they are plenty aware that they’re losing members daily. It’s interesting what they like to blame it on…mostly the Priestly sexual scandals.
Reply
#28

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-24-2024, 05:45 PM)pattylt Wrote: Those few atheists that return to religion, in my opinion, are those that couldn’t break those final bonds of their indoctrination or, they are so weak in their self worth that religion is appealing…the religion confirms the bias of not not being a worthy person on their own.

And yet many atheists embrace the teachings of Buddhism. I think you're overgeneralizing from a small subset of religious beliefs, primarily Judeo-christian.

I don't know whether I count as I formerly was a theistic Hindu and am leaning towards non-theistic Hinduism. However, my current leanings seem largely disconnected from my prior Hinduism.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
The following 1 user Likes Dānu's post:
  • pattylt
Reply
#29

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-24-2024, 06:03 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 05:45 PM)pattylt Wrote: Those few atheists that return to religion, in my opinion, are those that couldn’t break those final bonds of their indoctrination or, they are so weak in their self worth that religion is appealing…the religion confirms the bias of not not being a worthy person on their own.

And yet many atheists embrace the teachings of Buddhism.  I think you're overgeneralizing from a small subset of religious beliefs, primarily Judeo-christian.

I don't know whether I count as I formerly was a theistic Hindu and am leaning towards non-theistic Hinduism.  However, my current leanings seem largely disconnected from my prior Hinduism.

That’s fair as I was referring to Christianity and should have clarified.

I’m not familiar enough with Hinduism or Buddhism to know what indoctrinations they undergo.  They may change faiths or leave and return for similar or entirely different reasons.  I’m just not knowledgeable enough to have any opinion on those faiths.
Reply
#30

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-24-2024, 06:03 PM)Dānu Wrote: ...And yet many atheists embrace the teachings of Buddhism.  I think you're overgeneralizing from a small subset of religious beliefs, primarily Judeo-christian.

I don't know whether I count as I formerly was a theistic Hindu and am leaning towards non-theistic Hinduism.  However, my current leanings seem largely disconnected from my prior Hinduism.

Rather than describe Buddhists as "atheists", I'd be more inclined
to describe them as agnostics.

In early texts, the Buddha is not depicted as an atheist, but
more as a skeptic who is against religious speculations, including
speculations about a creator god.

"So, then, owing to the creation of a supreme deity, men will become
murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, abusive, babblers,
covetous, malicious and perverse
in view. Thus for those who fall
back on the creation of a god as the essential reason, there is neither
desire nor effort nor necessity to do this deed or abstain from that deed."

"The Buddha and His Teachings": Venerable Nārada Mahāthera.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply
#31

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-24-2024, 09:04 PM)SYZ Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 06:03 PM)Dānu Wrote: ...And yet many atheists embrace the teachings of Buddhism.  I think you're overgeneralizing from a small subset of religious beliefs, primarily Judeo-christian.

I don't know whether I count as I formerly was a theistic Hindu and am leaning towards non-theistic Hinduism.  However, my current leanings seem largely disconnected from my prior Hinduism.

Rather than describe Buddhists as "atheists", I'd be more inclined
to describe them as agnostics.

In early texts, the Buddha is not depicted as an atheist, but
more as a skeptic who is against religious speculations, including
speculations about a creator god.

"So, then, owing to the creation of a supreme deity, men will become
murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, abusive, babblers,
covetous, malicious and perverse
in view. Thus for those who fall
back on the creation of a god as the essential reason, there is neither
desire nor effort nor necessity to do this deed or abstain from that deed."

"The Buddha and His Teachings": Venerable Nārada Mahāthera.

I never described Buddhists as atheists, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#32

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-24-2024, 09:40 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(04-24-2024, 09:04 PM)SYZ Wrote: Rather than describe Buddhists as "atheists", I'd be more inclined
to describe them as agnostics.

In early texts, the Buddha is not depicted as an atheist, but
more as a skeptic who is against religious speculations, including
speculations about a creator god.

"So, then, owing to the creation of a supreme deity, men will become
murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, abusive, babblers,
covetous, malicious and perverse
in view. Thus for those who fall
back on the creation of a god as the essential reason, there is neither
desire nor effort nor necessity to do this deed or abstain from that deed."

"The Buddha and His Teachings": Venerable Nārada Mahāthera.

I never described Buddhists as atheists, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

 Well... thank you kindly Ms hall monitor.      Tongue
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply
#33

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
Atheism is the antithesis of theism, not the antithesis of religion. The vast majority of atheists in the world are religious - while the vast majority of the religious are not atheists.
Reply
#34

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-21-2024, 06:45 PM)airportkid Wrote: I think most of us who reached atheism from an earlier mindset of belief did so because we kept finding aspects of belief that conflicted with not just our experience of reality, but also our advancing knowledge that accompanies our accumulating experience.  Becoming atheist in essence was choosing to stay intellectually honest.  Becoming atheist ends having to rationalize or excuse or ignore the absurdities that theism unavoidably raises.  Atheists don't struggle to find sensible answers, unlike the theist posters herein who find it necessary to write thousands of words of convoluted sophistry to avoid answering (for them) difficult questions.

Does this mean that theism is therefore intrinsically dishonest?  Beyond a certain level of knowledge, I think so.  A child believing in a god hasn't attained enough experience or knowledge to know better.  But by adulthood, somewhere along that journey we all take (if we're paying attention - not everyone does), honesty starts having to be set aside in order to sustain belief.

I'm sorry, I missed the memo outlining how exactly the 'honest atheist' has disproved the evidence for God, disproved the evidence of Jesus, disproved the evidence of personal experience. It seems to me the only honest position available to the unbeliever is to be agnostic about the question.  

You do realize that saying that belief in theism in general is dishonest is to assume burden of proof...right? It is a big, bold claim that you could not possibly show, even probabilistically, to be true.

This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist have to understand Christianity to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP or the thousands of similar statements made in this forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity and mischaracterize >90% of it?

ETA: and if you can't be accurate and constantly mischaracterize while asserting it is untrue, why doesn't that make you a 'dishonest atheist?'
Reply
#35

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: I'm sorry, I missed the memo outlining how exactly the 'honest atheist' has disproved the evidence for God, disproved the evidence of Jesus, disproved the evidence of personal experience. It seems to me the only honest position available to the unbeliever is to be agnostic about the question.  

You do realize that saying that belief in theism in general is dishonest is to assume burden of proof...right? It is a big, bold claim that you could not possibly show, even probabilistically, to be true.

This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist have to understand Christianity to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP or the thousands of similar statements made in this forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity and mischaracterize >90% of it?

ETA: and if you can't be accurate and constantly mischaracterize while asserting it is untrue, why doesn't that make you a 'dishonest atheist?'

Most Christians don’t even know what they believe in...

Quote:They don’t have any sense of standard, which would be the original bible. Ask a Christian who they believe in as God. Some might tell you just God himself, some might tell you Jesus, some might tell you God and Jesus, some might tell you Jesus is the direct son of God, some might tell you Jesus is God, and some might tell you they believe in a variation of the holy trinity. Obviously there’s no consistency in Christianity. If Christianity was true, there wouldn’t be so much ambiguity in something as simple as “Who is God?“ That’s literally the most basic question of religion. All these variations came about because it is a man made religion and man is not perfect.

Lifted from Here
Reply
#36

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
Meh, doomed arguments. Our states of belief don't have to be accurate to be honest, agnostics who don't believe in gods are atheists, and there is no evidence for the great fairy.
Reply
#37

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist a Christian have to understand Christianity Hinduism to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity Hinduism is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP Steve writes or the thousands of similar statements made in this Christian forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity Hinduism and mischaracterize >90% of it?

Interesting question.  Care to answer it?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
The following 3 users Like Dānu's post:
  • airportkid, brewerb, pattylt
Reply
#38

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 02:17 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist a Christian have to understand Christianity Hinduism to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity Hinduism is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP Steve writes or the thousands of similar statements made in this Christian forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity Hinduism and mischaracterize >90% of it?

Interesting question.  Care to answer it?

Three things.

1) I am not writing hundreds of posts a month filled with inaccurate claims about Hinduism, calling into question the intelligence of Hindus, nor passing myself off as (or falsely thinking I'm) an expert on Hinduism.
2) I believe I do know the basics of Hinduism accurately.
3) I have specific beliefs about the nature of the world and they are incompatible with Hinduism. So while I do believe Hinduism is not true, it is for a long list of reasons/experience/evidence for Christianity. This is not exactly what is going on with the atheist who claims Christianity is not true. To be as charitable, it is an absence of evidence claim (the lowest rung on the argument ladder). My claim is there is a more compelling and complete explanation. Epistemologically, these are not equivalent.
Reply
#39

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 04:15 PM)SteveII Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 02:17 PM)Dānu Wrote: Interesting question.  Care to answer it?

Three things.

1) I am not writing hundreds of posts a month filled with inaccurate claims about Hinduism, calling into question the intelligence of Hindus, nor passing myself off as (or falsely thinking I'm) an expert on Hinduism.
2) I believe I do know the basics of Hinduism accurately.
3) I have specific beliefs about the nature of the world and they are incompatible with Hinduism. So while I do believe Hinduism is not true, it is for a long list of reasons/experience/evidence for Christianity. This is not exactly what is going on with the atheist who claims Christianity is not true. To be as charitable, it is an absence of evidence claim (the lowest rung on the argument ladder). My claim is there is a more compelling and complete explanation. Epistemologically, these are not equivalent.

Okay, cite the basics of Hinduism. By the way, having a list of other things simply means one of the two is wrong - not which one is wrong. And yes, the two are comparable. The situation is symmetrical, with the Hindu believing the same about you. You just don't realize it because being biased is comfortable to you.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#40

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 05:36 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 04:15 PM)SteveII Wrote: Three things.

1) I am not writing hundreds of posts a month filled with inaccurate claims about Hinduism, calling into question the intelligence of Hindus, nor passing myself off as (or falsely thinking I'm) an expert on Hinduism.
2) I believe I do know the basics of Hinduism accurately.
3) I have specific beliefs about the nature of the world and they are incompatible with Hinduism. So while I do believe Hinduism is not true, it is for a long list of reasons/experience/evidence for Christianity. This is not exactly what is going on with the atheist who claims Christianity is not true. To be as charitable, it is an absence of evidence claim (the lowest rung on the argument ladder). My claim is there is a more compelling and complete explanation. Epistemologically, these are not equivalent.

Okay, cite the basics of Hinduism.  By the way, having a list of other things simply means one of the two is wrong - not which one is wrong.  And yes, the two are comparable.  The situation is symmetrical, with the Hindu believing the same about you.  You just don't realize it because being biased is comfortable to you.

I don't have time to write bullet points on Hinduism (in any case, you wouldn't know whether I just looked it up or not). While nothing in my post implied it (I was talking about atheists), I do not think the Hindus/Christian rejection is symmetrical because the rejection would not be based on the same rubric nor consist of weighing two answers to the same question. Some questions do not make sense or will simply not have answers in the other's view. In other words, a western mind has trouble understanding the eastern mind (and vice versa).
Reply
#41

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
Nope. I'm fine. i can understand what they're saying even when I don't agree. So it must not be "a western mind" with issues.

Is your christian mind malfunctioning? Why?
Reply
#42

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: I'm sorry, I missed the memo outlining how exactly the 'honest atheist' has disproved the evidence for God, disproved the evidence of Jesus, disproved the evidence of personal experience. It seems to me the only honest position available to the unbeliever is to be agnostic about the question.  

I’m an honest Atheist!

Your god doesn’t exist!

Prove me wrong
Reply
#43

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
I’ve heard this about “the Eastern mind vs. the Western mind” before but have never had it explained what’s meant. I could possibly see a difference in world views in general but having different mindsets? Is there some basic list or something? Or, is it just a way for one group to blow off the other?
Reply
#44

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 10:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve heard this about “the Eastern mind vs. the Western mind” before but have never had it explained what’s meant.  I could possibly see a difference in world views in general but having different mindsets?  Is there some basic list or something?  Or, is it just a way for one group to blow off the other?
Don't know how accurate this is but it's an attempt to explain the differences:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/west-east...sponsibly.
[url=https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/west-east-difference-thinking-ganjiguur-bukhbat#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20difference%3F,rights%3B%20Easterners%20in%20social%20responsibly.][/url]
Reply
#45

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 04:15 PM)SteveII Wrote: [quote="Dānu" pid='423333' dateline='1714054674']
To be as charitable, it is an absence of evidence claim (the lowest rung on the argument ladder). My claim is there is a more compelling and complete explanation. Epistemologically, these are not equivalent.

That's the thing, it's the complete absence of concrete evidence. If you can't meet the 'lowest rung' then you're thru. But I'm sure you'll continue to attempt to argue your god into existence (as something more than just a concept).

Look Steve, if your god makes you feel fulfilled and gives you all of the wonderful things in life that you cherish just be humble and accept, faith (belief without evidence) should be enough. For the life of me I don't understand why you're here, continually arguing and failing, then not having the ability to recognize that you're failing. That might be the narcissism of the christian believer. It's what brings most of your type here.

I'm sure that there are many people IRL that would appreciate what you have to contribute, unless you've already alienated them also. I doubt your god will reward you for your actions and behavior here. Time to move along.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
The following 2 users Like brewerb's post:
  • pattylt, Deesse23
Reply
#46

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 11:34 PM)mordant Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 10:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve heard this about “the Eastern mind vs. the Western mind” before but have never had it explained what’s meant.  I could possibly see a difference in world views in general but having different mindsets?  Is there some basic list or something?  Or, is it just a way for one group to blow off the other?
Don't know how accurate this is but it's an attempt to explain the differences:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/west-east...sponsibly.
[url=https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/west-east-difference-thinking-ganjiguur-bukhbat#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20difference%3F,rights%3B%20Easterners%20in%20social%20responsibly.][/url]

I apologize for being too dense to understand what that link was trying to tell me.  Bits of it made sense such as the East being more society oriented and Westerners being more individualistic. But the rest kind of went over my head.  I do appreciate you proving the link.  I think I need to look into it a bit more to grasp the rest. Thanks!
Reply
#47

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: ...I'm sorry, I missed the memo outlining how exactly the 'honest atheist' has disproved the evidence for God, disproved the evidence of Jesus, disproved the evidence of personal experience. It seems to me the only honest position available to the unbeliever is to be agnostic about the question.
 
It's not up to any atheist to "disprove" the existence of God or gods.
It's been explained here—several times!— that as the proponent of
a claim (in this case that God exists) it's the task of that proponent
to firstly provide evidence supporting their proposition.  This is pure
logic.

Unless the subject of the proposition has been accurately identified
in real time, rational terms, then—obviously—it's impossible for anyone
to rebut whatever the proposition may or may not be.

I've asked you a couple of times here to prove to me that unicorns do
not exist
.  Which is identical to me proving your God doesn't exist. In
both cases you've avoided responding.       Why?

(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist have to understand Christianity to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP or the thousands of similar statements made in this forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity and mischaracterize >90% of it?

Well Steve, I was reading my first bible in 1958, so I'm guessing I know
as much about it as any supposed Christian.  So unless you have a
doctorate in theology, I'd say I know as much about Christianity as you.

(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: ETA: and if [one] can't be accurate and constantly mischaracterize while asserting it is untrue, why doesn't that make [one] a 'dishonest atheist?'

Uh... this is strange non sequitur.  You claim that we atheist inaccurately
mischaracterise theism (Christianity in this case)—which we of course don't
under any 21st century rationale—and them say that somehow it's "dishonest".
You haven't posited any evidence that our characterisation is inaccurate or
untrue, other than your own personal opinion.

And opinions are not evidence.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • 1Sam15
Reply
#48

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-26-2024, 11:18 AM)SYZ Wrote:
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: ...I'm sorry, I missed the memo outlining how exactly the 'honest atheist' has disproved the evidence for God, disproved the evidence of Jesus, disproved the evidence of personal experience. It seems to me the only honest position available to the unbeliever is to be agnostic about the question.
 

It's not up to any atheist to "disprove" the existence of God or gods.
It's been explained here—several times!— that as the proponent of
a claim (in this case that God exists) it's the task of that proponent
to firstly provide evidence supporting their proposition.  This is pure
logic.

Unless the subject of the proposition has been accurately identified
in real time, rational terms, then—obviously—it's impossible for anyone
to rebut whatever the proposition may or may not be.

I've asked you a couple of times here to prove to me that unicorns do
not exist
.  Which is identical to me proving your God doesn't exist. In
both cases you've avoided responding.       Why?

I did not say at all that the atheist needs to disprove God. I was pointing out, in a thread dedicated to the dishonesty of the theist, that the atheist does not have a warrant for such a conclusion (aka claim). At best, the atheist's argument is an 'absence of evidence' argument and because we should all know that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" it is therefore the lowest and least convincing form of an argument.

So, that is why I ignored your question about unicorns. It isn't about disproving. I am more interesting in discussing knowledge, belief, warrant, and errors in thinking.

Quote:
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: This brings up an interesting question: does an atheist have to understand Christianity to positively (as in stating it is not true) reject it? What level of knowledge of Christianity is required (aka sufficient warrant) to believe things like this OP or the thousands of similar statements made in this forum each month from people who could not accurately articulate the basic doctrines of Christianity and mischaracterize >90% of it?

Well Steve, I was reading my first bible in 1958, so I'm guessing I know
as much about it as any supposed Christian.  So unless you have a
doctorate in theology, I'd say I know as much about Christianity as you.

Then when you answer me in the future on a wide range of topics related to Christianity, I expect you will articulate my belief back to me and then clearly tell me where I am wrong.

Quote:
(04-25-2024, 12:49 PM)SteveII Wrote: ETA: and if [one] can't be accurate and constantly mischaracterize while asserting it is untrue, why doesn't that make [one] a 'dishonest atheist?'

Uh... this is strange non sequitur.  You claim that we atheist inaccurately
mischaracterise theism (Christianity in this case)—which we of course don't
under any 21st century rationale—and them say that somehow it's "dishonest".
You haven't posited any evidence that our characterisation is inaccurate or
untrue, other than your own personal opinion.

And opinions are not evidence.

The fact that you think that most people here don't constantly mischaracterize or have a ridiculously simplistic view of Christianity makes me doubt my last point.

But let's make it hypothetical. If an atheist does not actually know much about Christianity but asserts that Christians are dishonest, how are we to think about that? Does the accusation of 'dishonesty' require actual knowledge and if such required knowledge not exist then make the claimant actually the dishonest one?
Reply
#49

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-26-2024, 01:13 PM)SteveII Wrote: But let's make it hypothetical. If an atheist does not actually know much about Christianity but asserts that Christians are dishonest, how are we to think about that? Does the accusation of 'dishonesty' require actual knowledge and if such required knowledge not exist then make the claimant actually the dishonest one?

I don't think christians are intentionally dishonest regarding their belief, they suffer a commonly accepted societal delusion that appears to some as dishonest.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply
#50

The Intrinsic Honesty of Atheism
(04-26-2024, 01:13 PM)SteveII Wrote: ...But let's make it hypothetical. If an atheist does not actually know much about Christianity but asserts that Christians are dishonest, how are we to think about that? Does the accusation of 'dishonesty' require actual knowledge and if such required knowledge not exist then make the claimant actually the dishonest one?

Hypotheticals are a waste of time.  They don't prove anything.

At any rate, I've never accused practising Christians of being
"dishonest".  Generally speaking they're just as honest as are
atheists (or not LOL).  Some of my best friends are Christians,
and I certainly have no beefs with them, and they're certainly
as intelligent and articulate as I am.  One's theism or atheism
is only one part of the many characteristics that make a person
who they are, but that doesn't—and shouldn't—stop me from
taking the piss out of religion per se.

Obviously I've never met you Steve, so it'd be absurd to judge
you from the distance of a forum.  But that doesn't change my
attitude to your religion, which I believe is devoid of 21st century
logic and the science of reasoning, coherence, pragmatism, and
even old-fashioned common sense.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • pattylt
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)