An open letter to religious people

[ThatIsEnough]

Such truth is rarely put in such a staggeringly powerful punch. Let this be the year humanity takes an unimaginabley massive step forward and STOP religion once and for all.

[img]http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2667/1207458295984jpgroflposwu9.jpg[/img]

[ChrisH]

I know one shouldn't feed trolls but really...

Panel 7 does kind of answer the question, people did think about the questions, and guess what came up with answers.

Its called theology, perhaps if people actually studied it they might be able to come up with arguments against God that were slightly more cogent.

Stupid atheists
You've always been owned

[rob 'f*ck off' wine boy]

Words fail me.

[LonelyPilgrim]

It has often seemed to me that the most zealous of proselytizers, whether of religion or of atheism, are prompted to 'spread the word' as a result of insecurity in their own worldview.

Why is it not enough that you yourself do not believe in God? Must we all conform to your idea of truth before you can feel secure in it? The inability to tolerate and accept differing viewpoints is the hallmark of a small mind.

[hr]

Man is free; yet we must not suppose that he is at liberty to do everything he pleases, for he becomes a slave the moment he allows his actions to be ruled by passion. --Giacomo Casanova

[Humphrey]

I put this in the 'tiresome evangelism' category, along with those Jehovah's Witness leaflets which drop through my letter box on occasion.

The illustrations were quite intrieging though. Did anyone notice Commander Keen in that comic ?. Haven't played that game in a while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander_Keen



[hr]

http://humphreyclarke.blogspot.com/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/humphrey_clarke/

[beeny]

Quoting Humphrey from 07:27, 29th Jul 2008 Did anyone notice Commander Keen in that comic ?. Haven't played that game in a while.

First thing i noticed! Fricking loved that game. Now to find an emulator on the net...

[hr]

'But what do I know? I'm a bear; I suck the heads off fish.'

[Haunted]

Whilst I am rather sympathetic to the OP's sentiment, I do think things are being a little trivialised.

However, the courtiers reply twice in one week?

Posted by ChrisH at 02:29, Today

Its called theology, perhaps if people actually studied it they might be able to come up with arguments against God that were slightly more cogent.

Perhaps when you have studied fairyology you will yourself have a better understanding of the arguements against fairies.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[munchingfoo]

Quoting LonelyPilgrim from 04:01, 29th Jul 2008
Why is it not enough that you yourself do not believe in God? Must we all conform to your idea of truth before you can feel secure in it?

One arguement against this is that Religion (all of the main ones, not just Christianity) takes an active part in governmental decision making and law making in the U.K. (I think it does in the U.S. too, even if its not supposed to)

It's hardly a fair state of affair if you want a live and let live attitude, is it?

[hr]

"The entirety of these definitions lie outside the gamut of the sRGB color space — such a pure color cannot be represented using RGB primaries. The color swatch to the right is a desaturated approximation, created by taking the centroid of the standard definition and moving it towards the D65 white point, until it meets the sRGB gamut triangle."

[Delts]

Mary was impregnated through the ear. When I heard that Christians dropped a few thousand notches in my book

Virgin births, yep, they exist. God sex with the ear? Nah, not buying it.

[hr]

Quotes: For when you can think of nothing to say yourself.

[Andy Monkey B]

Quoting LonelyPilgrim from 04:01, 29th Jul 2008
It has often seemed to me that the most zealous of proselytizers, whether of religion or of atheism, are prompted to 'spread the word' as a result of insecurity in their own worldview.

Why is it not enough that you yourself do not believe in God? Must we all conform to your idea of truth before you can feel secure in it? The inability to tolerate and accept differing viewpoints is the hallmark of a small mind.

[hr]

Man is free; yet we must not suppose that he is at liberty to do everything he pleases, for he becomes a slave the moment he allows his actions to be ruled by passion. --Giacomo Casanova

Thats a little generalised isn't it? Is it not possible that some 'religious' people are telling you about their beliefs out of a sincere and honest desire that you don't end up in their hell? I have many Christian friends who are neither insecure or small minded, but are passionate about spreading the truth. They are sincere people with a great love of those around them.

Yes some may spread their religion out of insecurity (many Christians included), but evangelism is difficult, hard work, demoralising and generally unpleasant to do (I find anyway). There are far more easier ways of being secure in your religion, for example imagining unbelievers (maybe the OP and the comic writer?) burning and rotting in hell. strangely this is very much discouraged in Christianity in particular, whereas love and truth are valued over petty jelousy, insecurity and trickery.

[Humphrey]

Quoting Andy Monkey B from 14:50, 29th Jul 2008
There are far more easier ways of being secure in your religion, for example imagining unbelievers (maybe the OP and the comic writer?) burning and rotting in hell. strangely this is very much discouraged in Christianity in particular, whereas love and truth are valued over petty jelousy, insecurity and trickery.

Here's a theological question.

How do you reconcile these messages of love and truth with this interpretation that unbelievers will be packed off to hell to burn and rot?.

It would be an interesting piece of trickery to create a universe, go out of your way to disguise yourself from its inhabitants and then purge them in the next life for not realising you existed.

[hr]

http://humphreyclarke.blogspot.com/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/humphrey_clarke/

[Andy Monkey B]

Was really just offering a hypothetical response. Yeah maybe you're right, and I'll take your question into consideration.

In the end, there's a little piece of advice which applies to Christian evangelism as much as it applies to this sort of thread. You'll never convert anyone by posting things on the internet, or by handing out leaflets etc. If you really want to convince people that religion is wrong then you have to go and find them and talk to them.

[Frank]

Quoting Andy Monkey B from 16:27, 29th Jul 2008
Was really just offering a hypothetical response. Yeah maybe you're right, and I'll take your question into consideration.

In the end, there's a little piece of advice which applies to Christian evangelism as much as it applies to this sort of thread. You'll never convert anyone by posting things on the internet, or by handing out leaflets etc. If you really want to convince people that religion is wrong then you have to go and find them and talk to them.

Bollocks you won't, discussion on the Sinner have had a huge effect on my own personal stance. Tireless discussion about religion certainly influenced my move from Catholic to an apostate (and hence possessing an atheist conviction and agnostic rationality).

Similarly, one would've exlcaimed that arguing on the internet won't get you anywhere with politics, yet I was happily moved from a strong Labour/SNP leaning in my politics (I was happily pro-Independence) to a now more refined and restrained pro-Union, pro-Federal UK outlook.

Simply reasoning things out works well on the interent. Making outrageous accusations and unleashing silly, irksome and/or rage-inducing cartoons on the internet does tend to be banging your head off of a brick wall. There's ways; reason prevails.

I much prefer the Epicurus poster.


[hr]

"There is only ever one truth. Things are always black or white, there's no such thing as a shade of grey. If you think that something is a shade of grey it simply means that you don't fully understand the situation. The truth is narrow and the path of the pursuit of truth is similarly narrow."
Also, some years later:
"here we are arguing about a few uppity troublemakers with a bee in their bonnet and a conspiracy theory."

[d_24]

Quoting ChrisH from 02:29, 29th Jul 2008
I know one shouldn't feed trolls but really...

Panel 7 does kind of answer the question, people did think about the questions, and guess what came up with answers.

Its called theology, perhaps if people actually studied it they might be able to come up with arguments against God that were slightly more cogent.

Stupid atheists
You've always been owned

The OP's sense of 'ATTACK' doesn't match my own and a few things said I don't entirely agree on, but between the OP and the one I just quoted...I know which side is 'winning' and why.

[hr]

Before Bauer...There Was House

[LonelyPilgrim]

Quoting munchingfoo from 12:26, 29th Jul 2008
One arguement against this is that Religion (all of the main ones, not just Christianity) takes an active part in governmental decision making and law making in the U.K. (I think it does in the U.S. too, even if its not supposed to)

That's a tricky one, regarding the US. Certainly religious individuals have a lot of influence over things, particularly when they are elected to, oh, the presidency, for example. However, there is no church or religious organisation that can exercise a direct or active participation in either the forumlation or enactment of policy. They have neither the right to vote, the right to veto, the right to budget, nor the right to even debate the issues before Congress unless invited by the Congress.

[hr]

Man is free; yet we must not suppose that he is at liberty to do everything he pleases, for he becomes a slave the moment he allows his actions to be ruled by passion. --Giacomo Casanova

[LonelyPilgrim]

Quoting Andy Monkey B from 14:50, 29th Jul 2008
Thats a little generalised isn't it? Is it not possible that some 'religious' people are telling you about their beliefs out of a sincere and honest desire that you don't end up in their hell? I have many Christian friends who are neither insecure or small minded, but are passionate about spreading the truth. They are sincere people with a great love of those around them.

Yes some may spread their religion out of insecurity (many Christians included), but evangelism is difficult, hard work, demoralising and generally unpleasant to do (I find anyway). There are far more easier ways of being secure in your religion, for example imagining unbelievers (maybe the OP and the comic writer?) burning and rotting in hell. strangely this is very much discouraged in Christianity in particular, whereas love and truth are valued over petty jelousy, insecurity and trickery.

Finally! An opportunity to argue the other side of the question on something. That hasn't happened since Paul went away. I like being able to take off my "Defender of the Faith" hat once in awhile.

I believe the original guidelines for evangelisation were along the lines of 'give it one try, if they don't like it, leave them alone.' I've really no problem with that, but when one group or another comes knocking at my door every couple of weeks, threatening me with fire and brimstone and hellfire if I don't convert to their ONE TRUE FAITH, things have gotten ridiculous.

Fundamentally, I suppose it comes down to this: If you want to spread the joy of salvation, fine, go spread the word. Joy. But if your idea of spreading the word is to spread fear and terror and scare people into worshiping an angry God, then I have a hard time accepting that the impetus to find converts arises out of any real Christian feeling, but rather arises out of a desire to validate one's own decision to join the universal church.

After all, if you really have some sort of personal relationship with the divine Creator of the universe and all that, isn't that a far more wonderful motivation to spread the word than fear of some sketchy account of eternal suffering? I just have a hard time accepting that someone who has truly experienced the former would even be able to formulate a credible message about the latter.

[hr]

Man is free; yet we must not suppose that he is at liberty to do everything he pleases, for he becomes a slave the moment he allows his actions to be ruled by passion. --Giacomo Casanova

[Delts]

Quoting Andy Monkey B from 14:50, 29th Jul 2008
but are passionate about spreading the truth.

No, not the truth, their belief. For truth, don't believe a 1,700 year old book that has been edited many times. For truths you need proof.

[hr]

Quotes: For when you can think of nothing to say yourself.

[Jack]

Are we really all that closed minded as a university? I am a Christian, but I welcome any opportunity to speak with a Muslim, Jehovah's Witness, Buddhist, etc. And I don't welcome this in order to evangelize; in fact, in the many conversations I've had I haven't talked about Christianity at all. Most of these people have implied that I am wrong as a Christian but I have nothing but respect for them because they are individuals searching for truth and I am an individual searching for truth and we are both open minded enough to have a dialogue without resorting to crappy straw man arguments and ad hominems like the OP and some other posters seem to be keen on.

Sure, I can make untrue claims about athiests and knock them down and refute them, that's easy. But I have more respect.

Honestly though, are we really so arrogant as a society that we can just dismiss religion, a staple of almost all societies for thousands and possibly millions of years, (I'm an old earther but I not a historian and can't remember how long humans have been around for) with stupid comics and ignorant generalizations about religious people.

I can refute most (and maybe all if I have some time) of the comic and I am not stupid. I graduated high school (a secular school) at the top of my class, I study philosophy in my spare time (though I'm a bio major), my parents and family are very non-religious and my life is probably harder because I call myself a Christian. I am searching for truth and my search, after following reason and logic, has led me to Christianity. Who are you to say that you are smarter than me because you are an athiest?

People generally write of Christians as stupid and there definitly are stupid Christians out there (just like there are stupid athiests, buddhists, muslims, mormons, etc.) but to write us off because we are religious is incredibly closed minded. Just like to write us off politically because we are religous is to deny our voice. Are we not citizens? Do our voices not count? We all base our views and decisions on something, (there is nothing new under the sun) we have chosen to make a big part of that base our religion.

In the end, I can write a comic about athiests that goes along the same lines as the one in the original post. I can ask questions that athiests can't answer logically in my opinion. I can claim that athiests use pathetic rationalizations and can claim that athiests are afraid of religion being true and have a lack of interest in the fundamental nature of reality. I can claim that God's existance has major consequences on how we live and that the athiest argument of a place holder God is a huge straw-man argument. I can claim that all religions are different and some therefore are more reasonably true than others. But, that would be too easy. Much harder to actually talk with people.

As for Christians being jerks, it was G.K. Chesterton who said "It's not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, it's that Christianity has been found difficult and left untried". If we have not shown the love of Christ then it is we who are messed up. But we are human and we struggle to get it right. Ultimately, the Church is for fucked up people and we Christians are pretty fucked up. But, it is a good thing the true Christ (the Biblical Christ, not the Christ of politicians and the like) likes fucked up people or I'd be pretty screwed.

[Andy Monkey B]

This is going to take a few quote boxes to respond to. Firstly:

Quoting Delts from 22:08, 29th Jul 2008
No, not the truth, their belief. For truth, don't believe a 1,700 year old book that has been edited many times. For truths you need proof.

I was actually being a little ironic using the word 'truth'. Sorry that doesn't come across in type.

Quoting LonelyPilgrim from 19:36, 29th Jul 2008
That hasn't happened since Paul went away.

I have read some of Paul's posts, and I certainly don't agree with everything he says lol. sorry about that. Though I am willing to argue rationally as far as my ability goes.

Quoting LonelyPilgrim from 19:36, 29th Jul 2008
After all, if you really have some sort of personal relationship with the divine Creator of the universe and all that, isn't that a far more wonderful motivation to spread the word than fear of some sketchy account of eternal suffering? I just have a hard time accepting that someone who has truly experienced the former would even be able to formulate a credible message about the latter.

Spot on. Again my response about hellfire/brimstone was a little on the ironic/hypothetical side. Yes Christian evangelism is about spreading the good news of knowing Jesus Christ, the creator of the Universe, rather than telling people how to avoid hell. I would like to think my own desire to spread my beliefs is out of this motivation (although nobody's perfect eh?).

Incidently, I think most Christians have a completely skewed, un-Biblical and perverse idea of what Hell actually is. When they preach about it they aren't in any way spreading 'truth' at all. Paul would certainly disagree with me on that one.

Quoting Frank from 16:50, 29th Jul 2008
Bollocks you won't, discussion on the Sinner have had a huge effect on my own personal stance. Tireless discussion about religion certainly influenced my move from Catholic to an apostate (and hence possessing an atheist conviction and agnostic rationality).

OK then fair enough, I'm up for a reasoned debate on the sinner (I need something to do till I actually get a job). I can only offer it as far as my skill at reasoning goes though:

If God goes out of His way to hide Himself from people, who was Jesus?

[Frank]

Right, I think we've got a basis for discussion founded here. I'd draw my first point of 'order' from the recent C.L.A.N gathering in St Andrews. Tipped as I was for being very helpful to a lady who'd locked herself out of her room, I recieved a money-tip and a loveletter from God. I'm afraid I don't have said letter with me, but I'd raise some of the claims as ones which the average chappie on the street finds...curious.

Now, noting that I've little academic theology behind me, I'd question the following ideas as they came up in reading the aforementioned loveletter:
1- Omnipotence
2- Omniscience
3- Creator of Everything
4- Whatever the word is for 'always loving'
5- Infinitely perfect
6- Finding truth in God
7- Why truth found in the Bible is better than truth found via His Church (as the Catholic emphasis is) or simply via personal revelation (i.e. the Holy Spirit in the much personal-God outlooks)?

Now, I've got a poor understanding of things as they are, so asking sensible questions about it are probably not my forte. To open then I'd wonder if anyone can pose and answer questions of a sensible nature on them. Try to be reasonable about these straw men and set them up as close to the real thing as possible!

[hr]

"There is only ever one truth. Things are always black or white, there's no such thing as a shade of grey. If you think that something is a shade of grey it simply means that you don't fully understand the situation. The truth is narrow and the path of the pursuit of truth is similarly narrow."
Also, some years later:
"here we are arguing about a few uppity troublemakers with a bee in their bonnet and a conspiracy theory."