Arguing hard against Christianity = Not wanting to believe?

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:51 pm

In another thread, these comments were made to another member:

justifyothers wrote: The reason I can't understand that you are struggling TO believe is because you argue so strongly against the idea. I mean, you don't just raise questions or throw up a mental block now & then - you really argue hard, opposing any possibility, from what I can see on this forum.

The person this was said to said that they were struggling to believe in God, where is Justifyothers believes he is trying not to believe.

So, if a skeptic argues very hard against religion, seeming not to back down, does that mean they don't want to believe? Does it mean they don't want to believe in God?

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:58 pm

IMO Arguing strongly is necessary to be able to obtain answers that make sense. I do a similar thing, but do really want to believe myself. But if the arguments are there in the mind, they have to be asked. Answers need to be convincing and if they're not then I can't believe. If I see weak arguments, I am going to want to challenge them, because if I am to believe then I can't have doubts plaguing my mind.

It's possible that there are no good answers on many issues, which is why people continue to argue against it and appear to be anti. It may also be true that God in fact does not exist, which means that there will never be any good arguments to convince a skeptic.

Just because one may want to believe doesn't mean one should automatically accept every answer they are given. That's Pascal's wager rearing it's ugly head. Some people may be willing to accept the first adequate answer that comes along in support of Christianity, however many of us don't. Many of us are not wearing the "God glasses" and see no reason to put them on.

C-Nub · Post by **C-Nub** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:56 pm

I'd love to believe in God, myself, but I really, really, really don't. The whole concept, as a physical possibility, is just extra-ordinarily unlikely. So much about a powerful, non-physical creator of the Universe is difficult to believe, I need, I require some very hard questions be answered before I'll start considering it.

There is so much about "God," any god really, that doesn't make any sense at all to me. There's a lot of reasons not to believe or have 'faith' in such a being, and the only thing that I think keeps people believing is fear. I don't think there's anything anti-god about the disbelieve, I don't think it's closed minded or obtuse, I just happen to think that a claim as extra-ordinary as that which states there exists a Creator-Being responsible for everything everywhere requires a lot of validation before it should be the least bit acceptable.

Furrowed Brow · Post by **Furrowed Brow** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:33 am

I really dont want to believe in any deity. Aesthetically I find it very unappealing to live a life as if there were deity, or that this whole darn universe was the creation of an all powerfulthingy. However Id like to think I only argue hard against views and arguments that are flawed on points of logic and methodology. So to answer the question.

Does it mean they don't want to believe in God?

no.

The question seems to assume a lack of self knowledge on the part of the skeptic. But us skeptics are not one dimensional. Im pretty sure I am least two.

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Considering the amount of damage done in the name of religion, I think it imperative that we argue strongly, loudly, and oftenly.

onefaith · Post by **onefaith** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:34 pm

joeyknuccione wrote:Considering the amount of damage done in the name of religion, I think it imperative that we argue strongly, loudly, and oftenly.

Christians make mistakes just like everyone else. If a Christian makes a mistake while trying to stand up for their religion, it is usually looked at as damage done in the name of their religion. But really, just because a person has a religion doens't mean that they can't make mistakes. Yes, some people really DO do damage in the name of their religion, but those people imo are fools. But I think simple mistakes shouldn't be considered damage in the name of their religion.
Its really hard for Christians because we're "supposed" to be "perfect" (even though we can't actually attain perfection) and we can't be. So people look at Christians and think we're hypocrites and such, when we're human like everyone else.
I also think Christians try to focus too much on being perfect Christians when we should just be ourselves and be kind and loving to others. That is much better than telling people they're going to hell because they're not a christian.

onefaith · Post by **onefaith** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:36 pm

Maybe I should just say don't judge a book by its cover. Except don't judge a religion based on the people who believe it. We're all human and we're all gonna make mistakes and cause damage.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:26 pm

onefaith wrote:Maybe I should just say don't judge a book by its cover. Except don't judge a religion based on the people who believe it. We're all human and we're all gonna make mistakes and cause damage.

Well, you have to realize that yes, there will be those who use their religion to justify things that cause damage.

What about the average though? What if there are vastly more people who use the religion to cause damage than do good?

What does that say about that religion?

onefaith · Post by **onefaith** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:33 pm

goat wrote:
onefaith wrote:Maybe I should just say don't judge a book by its cover. Except don't judge a religion based on the people who believe it. We're all human and we're all gonna make mistakes and cause damage.
Well, you have to realize that yes, there will be those who use their religion to justify things that cause damage.

What about the average though? What if there are vastly more people who use the religion to cause damage than do good?

What does that say about that religion?

The people of a religion aren't the religion. Average isn't everything. It just proves that everyone makes mistakes.
The first and second most important commandments are: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Causing damage isn't loving anyone, so of course when people cause damage it isn't really saying anything or much about the religion, just about the people.

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:01 pm

onefaith wrote: Christians make mistakes just like everyone else. If a Christian makes a mistake while trying to stand up for their religion, it is usually looked at as damage done in the name of their religion.

This is what is so hard to debate about religious beliefs. Where good, reasonable, honorable people hold 'the faith', they can't understand why their religion could be blamed. When someone says, "You don't believe Jesus boy?" and proceeds to beat you to a pulp, who is to blame? Of course this is an individual acting, but he's doing so on what he believes to be God's orders. I have come to understand that the actions of the individual should not be placed on the group, but 'the group' has in the past not given a damn about what happens to non-believers. Religious texts condemn people who don't believe. They call us evil, foolish, unwise, reprobate, lacking morals, and on and on and on and on and on and on. Where is the line between what peoples' religious texts tell them, and the individual begins?
It is nigh on impossible to convince good people that folks have in the past, are currently, and will in the future act in horrible ways in the name of their God.

onefaith wrote: But really, just because a person has a religion doens't mean that they can't make mistakes. Yes, some people really DO do damage in the name of their religion, but those people imo are fools. But I think simple mistakes shouldn't be considered damage in the name of their religion.

In your opinion those doing horrid acts in the name of religion are 'fools'. Are you aware that it is acceptable in these forums to quote Bible verses that claim atheists are fools? It is perfectly acceptable for someone to place in their signature that anyone who does not believe in God is a fool. This is accepted because God said so. Its accepted because its in someone's religious text. But call someone who believes in a God a retard ( a common, colloquial term meaning lacking common sense), and the condemnation is swift and sure.

I appreciate your take on the OP, but it does not address cases where folks have legitimate concerns about the accuracy of God claims. Let the record state that you disavow acts of barbarity done in God's name. But let the record also show these things occurred, and will occur again if we lose vigil. Religion will always claim those who disagree have not thought enough, tried enough, cared enough, given enough, prayed enough, tithed enough. It will always claim those who do not see God are somehow flawed. And all along it will dismiss anything that does not conform to its perception, facts be danged.

onefaith wrote: Its really hard for Christians because we're "supposed" to be "perfect" (even though we can't actually attain perfection) and we can't be. So people look at Christians and think we're hypocrites and such, when we're human like everyone else.
I also think Christians try to focus too much on being perfect Christians when we should just be ourselves and be kind and loving to others. That is much better than telling people they're going to hell because they're not a christian.

Nah, I've been able to see that all are human, all are capable of good and bad. What I see is claims for a god that are imperfect, fallible, and in many cases outright false.