Really? I’d think you were kidding, except… maybe you’re not. If you’re not, color me surprised.
What, you think that would actually clarify someone’s thought processes, and not just muddy them even more?
Which other religions would you recommend researching to acquire this revelatory knowledge? Are there any religious groups that you feel are unworthy of the title?
[Moderator Note]Take the religious debates elsewhere. Now.[/Moderator Note]
You can respect a *person *without believing in the validity of their personal experience as objective evidence. The rest of my reply I’ll take to PM, since I just saw Czarcasm’s note, and I’m not sure how much of it would qualify as “religious debate.”
Sure it is, but it’s not a dichotomy that anyone has proposed xists.
[raising hand] Right here. I majored in Religious Studies in college. I studied deeply into all the major world religions and a great deal of the minor ones. Still an atheist. Just out of curiosity, though, what do you imagine exists in non-Christian religions that would be any more convincing to an atheist than Christian beliefs?
Just out of curiosity, Dio, because I was wondering - which college was this at? I had a History & Literature of Religions major* at Northwestern and I wonder if our college experiences were similar.
Also – were you an atheist at the time? And if so, why were you motivated to major in Religion? (Not that none of my relgion professors were skeptics; I can think of at least one that was).
*Technically I never completed the major program because in my very last semester I needed to take a class in Buddhism to complete the requirement, but it conflicted with a class in 20th Century Protestant Theology with one of my favorite professors. So I took the theology class instead of the Buddhism class and failed to get my second major.
Personal experiences are all valid. They’re just not valid debating points.
I would look oddly at anyone who claimed their own personal experiences had no impact on their worldview, because they’d be stupid. Also, wrong.
Yes, thank you for that semantic hairsplit, RNATB. I think it was pretty clear from the context that they were being discussed in the context of their validity as debating points.
University of North Dakota. I was already an atheist, but was fascinated by several aspects of religion, including mytsticism and what William James called the “universal religious experience,” but I was also very interested in Bible stories, and finding their historical roots, as well as historical origins of other religions and religious foubnders. I was always highly motivated by an intense curiosity to find out “what really happened.” Who was that Jesus guy really? How about that Buddha guy?
Most of my profs were Christians. One was a Catholic priest. One was a former Catholic priest, one was a Buddhist.
On the contrary:
[Moderator Warning]The next poster who talks about something other than the OP will receive an infraction. If you disagree with my decision, take it to ATMB.[/Moderator Warning]
Since apparently I’m the only person paying any attention to Czarcasm, RNATB, keep an eye on your PMs.
Well, that’s not what I said, is it? I find it curious that, at this point in the thread, most if not all atheists refer to their belief system in terms of it being the opposite of Christianity – as if those are the only two options. I, personally, wonder why this is. I wonder this because from my own personal experience, I grew up in a culture where basically the “two religions” were Catholic or Lutheran. And because of that limited, and limiting, worldview, I spent several years believing I was an atheist simply because I didn’t have access to information that showed me there were more than two options. I didn’t discover alternate options until I was around 14.
So yes, I’m curious as to why there seems to be the prevailing assumption of “atheism vs. Christianity” in this thread, and why other options don’t seem to have been a factor for most people in this thread. Why did that happen? Particularly since we’re talking about this board as a (possible) influence on conversion, and this board is nothing if not chock full of information – so it seems a bit odd that as yet virtually no one seems to have deviated from the “two choices” model.
I’m curious. I want to know why. I wonder if the outcome may have been different if the information had been different. That’s it. I’m am completely, totally, absolutely uninterested in attempting to convince you of or convert you to anything at all. I honestly don’t really care what you believe.
Dammit, RNATB beat me to it :D, but yes, I was not talking about debating points at all. You can talk about whatever you want, but all that means is we’re talking past each other. But again, when the first line of PRR’s response in essence says “I don’t believe you experienced what you say you experienced” (and not even in reference to a spiritual experience, but a human-interaction one), that leads me to walk away from the “debate” as a big fat waste of time.
Which is, as I said, one of the reasons that the SDMB had no real influence on my spirituality.
Then, if I may make a post not in response to the OP in order to admit such, that was my misreading. Guess we were just speaking past each other.
Athiest here, was a little softer about it here, but after learning about some of the more developed and eloquent arguments against religion, and some more reading on my part, my athiesm hardened up quite a bit.
This board facilitated (a bit) my downfall from Christianity. The comment board on the Salt Lake Tribune was a bigger factor, although ironically I once posted a comment there that all the arguments and apparent hatred for either side were pointless since no one was ever going to be converted. Really, Google was what destroyed my religion, in part from topics brought up by Tribune posters, and the SDMB made me realize that it’s okay to identify myself as an atheist.
As to the discussion of why this is Christianity vs Atheism: when I got rid of my belief in Christianity, I had no desire to replace it with another equally silly religion.
This. I used to find myself agreeing more with the atheist point of view in arguments about religion, even though I was a deist myself. The atheists just made more sense. However, lumping in liberal and mainstream Christians in with the evangelicals and born-agains that throw around the word “Christian” the most, along with the snide comments about rubes that worship invisible sky wizards and cloud fairies, just soured my opinions about atheists on the SDMB. Not atheism, but atheists. The bluehairs that bring casseroles to St. Olaf’s, or the suburban families that only go to church on Christmas and Easter, have about as much in common with foaming Bible-thumpers as Buddhists, yet many Dopers lump them into the same camp.
I was probably in the “believer, but non-dogmatic and open-minded” camp 10 years ago, while today I lean agnostic, yet more connected to a faith or belief system. The transformation had nothing to do with the SDMB, but rather my own spiritual journey, from Luthernism to UUism to Judaism.
Ditto.
This message board was one of several interactions in my life that led me to look deeply into my held Christian beliefs. I am logical and reasonable by nature and I was very disturbed by some facets of religion.
I can say now that I was afraid of what I would find when I started picking apart my beliefs. But I honestly attacked them from an outsider’s point of view. I read Dawkins, Borg, Freud, Kant, etc. I studied the ontological argument and its defenders and attackers. I didn’t want to base my life and the way I taught my children on beliefs that I could not honestly defend, and it is not my nature to just accept things that don’t make sense because someone else just told me to.
I also read apologetics, and responses to these challenges by people that I considered intelligent and worthy of respect. The ones that I hold in highest regard are C.S. Lewis and Timothy Keller. Alvin Plantinga also in the philosophical debates. I never accepted arguments like ‘just accept it on faith’ or ‘don’t question God.’ I believe atheists do have valid things to say about religion and we should take these criticisms seriously. If our intellect and ability to reason comes from God then He should make sense. Sure, some people come across as mocking, but that happens just as often from religious people as atheists. I don’t get offended when people question or attack Christianity because I can see why that happens and many of the attacks are valid no matter who is making them.
My faith now is stronger than it has ever been and I can honestly say it is because I examined it and continue to do so. I think there are many misconceptions about Christ and a lot of those misconceptions have to do with religion. I myself also held misconceptions about Christianity. Religion is not Truth, it is a human construction of trying to understand God and is prone to mistakes. But at some point there is absolute Truth and I am interested in finding that. I think that is something most of us have in common at least, that we value Truth. I really don’t believe in the idea of truth relativism, so it wasn’t satisfying enough for me to say, well this is true for me but not these other people. If God exists then he cannot not exist for everyone.
For me, it is good for me to be here. I really think that to fully understand an issue it is good to see both sides as much as one can.
Jjimm, thanks for that reference. That was a fascinating exchange. SentientMeat did indeed argue beautifully.
Doper Lamia made a WONDERFUL comment in that thread. It’s rather off-topic in this thread, but is worth repeating, just for the hell of it. So please forgive me, but I simply must: