http://www.joethepeacock.com/2008/03/how-to-actually-talk-to-atheists-if.php
I’m sharing this with my Christian as well as non-Christian friends. I love his explaination.
(If this has been posted before, I’m sorry - I don’t have my old search skills at the ready)
That’s a very long article*. The bit of it I have read just now makes perfect sense though. “Atheists do not believe there is a God”
*Correction: It’s a sensible sized article with a very long comments list.
Too late for edit: It’s a very nice sensible article.
Someone should write an article called “How to talk to your Children (If you’re Christian)” because Witnessing is not how religion spreads. It spreads like an infection through birth. non-religious children get the infection from their religious parents and become religious themselves.
That article is astoundingly arrogant, nasty, and condescending. It is not helped at all by the author’s continual bragging about the fact that he or she is not being arrogant, nasty, or condescending. The basic message is that since all Christians are morons, they need to gather round and listen to the author’s all-holy wisdom. My basic response is that Christians are already doing what he suggests. Prominent atheists like Dawkins and Harris respond by telling us that we’re terrorists.
As for his threat that Christianity will soon be wiped out by a surge of neo-atheists (whatever those are) if we don’t do as we’re ordered, I’m not too afraid.
…
I don’t agree. My main objection is that it’s too helpful. The religious should be more obnoxious and loud so that they’re easier to ignore. Not nice and reasonable.
If it makes you feel any better, the author doesn’t say anything of the kind.
That was actually pretty cool. Well-written with bits of good humour. I particularly liked the big about Jesus tapping people on the shoulder and asking, “Hey, have you heard the good news about me?”
As an atheist I agree with pretty much everything. I wasn’t pushed into atheism by Christians though, I just wasn’t brought up in a religious household. I was left to make up my own mind, and although I tended to half-assedly self-identify as an agnostic for many years, I pretty much picked a side of the fence only a few years back. I’m perfectly cool with religious folks being religious – I’m even fine talking to believers about it just so long as it’s understood that I’m having none of it.
But Christians witnessing in my face does turn me off of the religion – I mean, I’m not turned on to it in any way in the first place, but while left to my own devices I’d simply dismiss and think nothing of it, being accosted by Christians witnessing in my face while I’m trying to go about my day tends to make me take a bit of a dim view of Christianity as a whole; it casts a pall on the very thing they seek to promote.
Granted, I’m not their intended audience, but it makes me wonder: Are there enough fence sitters willing to listen that it makes witnessing a worthwhile endeavor? I’m tempted to think that this sort of witnessing must surely produce results that not even door-to-door marketeers would consider an acceptable return on investment.
Anyway, good read and written with good deal of respect for both sides.
I can’t speak for other atheists, but I view those two the same way I view prominent Christan preachers who seek to convert the world to Christanity: They’re doing more harm than good for their cause by slinging mud at those who don’t follow their beliefs, Dawkins especially. They’re taking the same tack that Christian fundamentalists do and it’s just as annoying and makes me want to disassociate myself from them.
I’m amazed that this is the message you got from the article. Amazed.
I don’t recall him calling Christians morons or anything like that. I’m going to re-read now to see where you’re coming from.
So was I. But now that at least one other person has said it, I have the confidence to speak up.
And I agree with your post.
Did you click a different link, ITR champion? I read nothing you described in your post.
There’s a woman who preaches on S.R. 85 in Riverdale, GA.
S.R. 85 in a divided highway (3 lanes on each side) with almost no foot traffic.
She shouts at the cars driving by at 35-50 MPH. She shouts at the cars stuck at the stoplight with their windows rolled up.
I’m sure that to her she’s doing “the Lord’s work”.
I really wonder what’s the point of shouting a message that no one understands.
This article might be helpful to this woman.
Yeah, I was utterly stunned that was what he read in that article.
I’m not sure we were reading the same article, so I clicked the link a few times (to make sure there wasn’t a sneaky redirect) and read through it two times after the first.
I didn’t pick up on any “Christians are morons” sentiment, just “Christians are coming on too strong.”
Results aren’t the point. As long as God sees you putting forth the effort, you get a gold star next to your name.
I was brought up going to a very liberal Protestant church that didn’t engage in proselytizing, but as an adult have simply not been interested in being involved in a church. I guess, for lack of a better definition, I’m an agnostic – the existence of God not something I care about particularly one way or another (although my mother keeps dropping hints that she’d like to see me going back to church, any church, which I keep ignoring) as long as I try to live a good life and be a good person.
But I will say that I’ve known religious people for whom I have had nothing but admiration because of the way they practice the tenets of their faith – even if it’s one (such as the Mormons) I would never in a million years be interested in joining. Of course, I feel the same way about a lot of nonreligious people, too. Being a person who is nonreligious/agnostic/atheist ≠being a bad person, and people who try to claim it does automatically lose any interest on my part in discussing the matter further with them.
Anyway, I sent the article to my mother; I suspect she’ll end up using it as a discussion vehicle in some church meeting or other. Especially since her church doesn’t go in for most of the annoying activities listed as useless in the article, so they can pat themselves on the back for being good examples. 
Well, I did. Consider, for one example:
“Yep, I’m using the definition of Atheism as my first point. And I do this not because I think you don’t know what the word means, but because I’m fairly certain you’ve not yet realized the concept.”
That’s a straightforward declaration that the reader is an idiot. There’s no other way to interpret it. Everybody has realized the concept. To suggest that someone has not is to call them an idiot.
How many Christians live in Riverdale? How many are preaching on S. R. 85? Given the answers to those two questions, where’s the justification for using this woman as a justification for trashing all Christians?
Also, do you have any evidence that this woman’s preachings are directed specifically towards atheists? And what about the photos that accompany the article–is there any evidence that those people are aiming specifically at atheists? If not, then isn’t the entire thrust of the article misleading?
My goodness guy, I don’t want to debate you or get into any type of dispute.
The way some (not all, not most) Christians have approached me in the past leads me to believe that they don’t understand what a non-believer is and that by saying many of the things mentioned in the article, I’ll change my mind.
I’m not trashing all Christians. Where are you coming from? I love some people who happen to be Christians. Why the negativity?
I’m saying that the woman shouting on the highway needs to read the article. I don’t know how many Christians live in Riverdale - there’s a bunch of churches here.
All Christians I know “Understand” what atheism is, but quite a few simply don’t get it, ITR champion, when they try to go about convincing me of their particular viewpoint on life they always forgo the part where I don’t believe that there has to be a God, they simply try to convince me their God is so much better than the rest.
Well, the best of fake is still fake. First, convince me of the underlying premise, and then show me yours is the best. You understand now, ITR champion?
Sure, there’s another way to interpret it. You can interpret it exactly the way he’s written it.
A conversation I had a while back is a perfect example of what he’s trying to say, I think. A friend’s sister was in town visiting, and she learned I was an agnostic, leaning towards atheist. She was a fairly religious person, but open, and was very interested in talking to me about my beliefs (or lack thereof). She understood that I didn’t believe in god. She got the definition of “atheist”. But she started quoting from the bible and asking me how I could reconcile my beliefs with what it said there. She understood and recognized the fact that I didn’t believe in god, but there was a disconnect when it came to understanding that that also meant I didn’t believe the bible was the word of god.
This wasn’t a stupid person, and it didn’t take her long to understand. But her religion was so ingrained in her her whole life, that while she understood the dictionary definition of the word “atheist”, the implication of what it meant hadn’t really sunk in.
Again, this wasn’t a dumb person. I didn’t think so then and I don’t now. But I think she was a perfect example of what the linked author was talking about… someone who fully understands the dictionary definition of the word “atheist”, but hasn’t really stopped to think about the full implication of it.
ITR, you’re the target audience of the article, I think. It looks as though the article may not be as effective as I’d hoped.
Daniel