Why do Athiests challenge Thiests?

[Thana]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

I'm genuinley curious.

(Also, I'd rather not have the fact that it's because religious people killed others who weren't of the same faith, Wars that were caused by religion because
Most religion teaches you not to kill, So if you go against that, Then you'd kill for greed, lust, politics etc regardless of your faith.)

 

[fantome profane]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

I'm genuinley curious.

(Also, I'd rather not have the fact that it's because religious people killed others who weren't of the same faith, Wars that were caused by religion because
Most religion teaches you not to kill, So if you go against that, Then you'd kill for greed, lust, politics etc regardless of your faith.)

First let me say that although I am an atheist, I do not challenge people about their belief in "God", I make it a point to avoid those kind of debates. But I can understand why some atheists do this, if you really want to know.

Some people believe (and again, I am not among them) that religion, and particularly the belief in "God" is harmful, both to the individual and to society in general. They may sincerely believe that you would be better off, and that society would improve without this belief. They may be wrong about that belief, but that is what they believe and that is why they do it.

So why do some theists challenge atheists? I think you will find the answer is fairly similar. The theist who challenge atheists sincerely believe that it will be a benefit.

 

[LuisDantas]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

There are many possible reasons, but you provide one of the best right here in your next paragraph.

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion

Then it would seem that it was your choice to press them into either submitting to your judgement or challenging you back, doesn't it?

No doubt there are subtleties in the situation which I can't perceive right now. But going by what you say, it sure looks like it.

(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

Sorry, but that is arguable at the very best. It is certainly not a clear, uncontroversial fact.

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

Self-defense, mostly

What do you gain from it?

Coherence, intelectual freedom and honesty, for a start.

It must also be noted that religious wisdom often demands the occasional challenge, or dharma combat as we often call it.

What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

If challenging one's beliefs is enough to "take" his or her faith, as you call it, then it seems to me that not doing it would be quite immoral.

Are we supposed to consider them unworthy of the truth or something?

I'm genuinley curious.

(Also, I'd rather not have the fact that it's because religious people killed others who weren't of the same faith, Wars that were caused by religion because
Most religion teaches you not to kill, So if you go against that, Then you'd kill for greed, lust, politics etc regardless of your faith.)

I'm not understanding what you mean here, sorry.

 

[outhouse]

The only issues I fight theist for, is when their personal faith crosses scientific lines, like evolution. That and when they let mythology dictate their personal view of history, placing mythology before real evidence.

I could care less in how they define a deity concept that they believe exist.

 

[Thana]

The only issues I fight theist for, is when their personal faith crosses scientific lines, like evolution. That and when they let mythology dictate their personal view of history, placing mythology before real evidence.

I could care less in how they define a deity concept that they believe exist.

So I feel that's fair enough, If science does not agree with what a Religious person is preaching, Than I suppose one would want to challenge that.

Self-defense, mostly

Interesting, I didn't actually ever look at it as simple like that

First let me say that although I am an atheist, I do not challenge people about their belief in "God", I make it a point to avoid those kind of debates. But I can understand why some atheists do this, if you really want to know.

Some people believe (and again, I am not among them) that religion, and particularly the belief in "God" is harmful, both to the individual and to society in general. They may sincerely believe that you would be better off, and that society would improve without this belief. They may be wrong about that belief, but that is what they believe and that is why they do it.

So why do some theists challenge atheists? I think you will find the answer is fairly similar. The theist who challenge atheists sincerely believe that it will be a benefit.

So they truly believe a religious person is not beneficial to society, And therefore worth less to society than a non-religious person?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

There are of course those who actively seek to undermine theism for different reasons, generally these people are not just atheists but anti-theists (this could be for a number of reasons); but for the most part atheists dont particularly care if someone else believes in the supernatural or not - they just want to be left alone (and as such would be willing to leave others be).

However in some countries (and it is a relative minority within western nations, though more common elsewhere) that option is seldom afforded them because there is a concerted effort by a significant portion of the theistic community (in some countries such as america, iran etc) to enact theologically based controls on society. When an atheist does not agree with the theological claims (let alone the agenda or impact of the implementation of the agenda) why would you expect that all atheists should remain silent on these impositions.

In America for example, you will seldom hear atheists challenging hindu claims or discussing some of the troubling consequences of certain types of zen buddhism; no instead atheistic discourse is generally reactionary towards the challenges posed in their own society and were the local theological communities to leave them alone - there would be significantly less debate (for example, Australia has vastly less debate compared to the US on this matter because there is significantly less attempts to force non believers to conform to theological standards).

Just as it is difficult for an Australian Christian to fully understand the plight of a Syrian Christian or an Egyptian Christian, it is likewise difficult to fully understand the plight of an American Christian (or Atheist for that matter), because while in many respects our societies are similar - the degree of focus on religion within america is amazingly atypical in western societies, it really is astounding the level of religiousity and its impact on society... you just dont see that anywhere else in the developed world and that level of fervor has significant sociopolitical consequences, including a major shift in the type of discussion that occurs within the country (which has a very significant international presence due to their control of the internet).

 

[hexler]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

I'm genuinley curious.

(Also, I'd rather not have the fact that it's because religious people killed others who weren't of the same faith, Wars that were caused by religion because
Most religion teaches you not to kill, So if you go against that, Then you'd kill for greed, lust, politics etc regardless of your faith.)

I think it is a competition of world views. Atheists have lost their faith. They are embarrassed. They are also not relaxed. There are many people who know very well that their traditional religion is not sufficient. But they still believe in God.
The most important thing in life is always to search for truth.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think it is a competition of world views. Atheists have lost their faith. They are embarrassed. They are also not relaxed. There are many people who know very well that their traditional religion is not sufficient. But they still believe in God.
The most important thing in life is always to search for truth.

You... don't know a lot of Atheists, now do you?

I must say that your perception of us folks is... less than fair or respectful.

Actually, I must say that it is not very realistic either. You are assuming an awful, awful lot, to the point where it would be difficult to truly find Atheists that fit your perception.

 

[Windwalker]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God,

Whoa, stop right there. As I first read this topic title I was thinking along a certain line, until I read this. How is challenging their beliefs, taking them to task with their points of view, showing them the love of God? Isn't love shown by actions, and not logic arguments? What do you believe is being communicated? "I'm right, and I'm justified in my beliefs, and you're wrong and I'll have to pray for you because you're lost"? How pray tell, does this communicate love? I'm sure to them it sounds like it's about you. Don't you think?

To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion

So, to them again, you are presuming to be in the upper position. Doesn't this come off as patronizing to them? Do you actually know what is right for them? I don't believe anyone can take a belief system and know that is the right fit for them, just as theirs isn't right for you. But I'll grant you this, it is normal for people to assume that what they found that works for them must be right for everyone else, at that exact time in their lives, ironically.

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

Probably for the exact same reasons you believe. Right?

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

Aren't you taking their faith from them?

I'm genuinley curious.

Then this should be helpful to you.

 

[Mycroft]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

But I don't wish to be immortal. The idea of immortality to me is utterly boring. Made even more boring by the idea of worshipping god for that eternity. Immortality, the idea of it, is simply a function of man's fear of death. The idea of immortality is a very human idea. But in reality? Give it six billion years or so and you'd be bored to tears. There'd be nothing new for you to discover, given a certain period of time across eternity. I'd rather live one full single life full of wonder and fascination and then die a happy, quiet death. I do not need immortality and do not desire salvation for simply choosing to live my life in a way I see fit. I don't think anyone does, really.

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

I'm genuinley curious.

(Also, I'd rather not have the fact that it's because religious people killed others who weren't of the same faith, Wars that were caused by religion because
Most religion teaches you not to kill, So if you go against that, Then you'd kill for greed, lust, politics etc regardless of your faith.)

Because extraordinary claims (in this case that god exists and the earth was created) requires extraordinary evidence. It's something called burden of of proof.

To me, faith represents the antithesis of human progress. It is the enemy of reason, the nemesis of critical thought. Faith is so unoriginal, so unimaginative, it is the opposite of creativity. It teaches to accept without evidence, a paradigm the world cannot make its progression on (you owe your way of life to people demanding evidence for claims). Imagine if everyone took everything on faith. How chaotic would the world be? Would we have even progressed beyond the stone age?

Science and Reason prevailed over 'faith' in the past. When people believed the earth was centre of the universe, or that the earth was flat. Science prevailed over faith. Why? Because we could demonstrate that these things were true. And I think even the staunchest Christian and Creationist doesn't believe the world is flat, so in some way accepts what science teaches them.

But also because faith is vicarious. It contains no genuine information for a person to work with. When put to the test faith will always fail because it is vicarious. Science, however, will always prevail because it has the ability to solve problems.

So while you're off praying with your faith. Science is restoring people's eyesight, hearing, mobility, curing illnesses, diseases, vaccinating you against all manner of horrible things. I very much doubt if you were offered a vaccine for a new kind of virus that killed people that had broken out you'd reject it based on your aversion to science.

When science finally manages to cure cancer. Just as it is doing with AIDS at present, how many children will be saved by science and medicine where the alleged god simply let them die? Sure, you'll claim 'well god made the scientists, so it must be part of his plan', but I find this view to be pretty offensive. Particularly to the children whose lives were and are at risk.

Imagine. Science cures cancer. Lots of children are saved. You come along and say 'Praise the Lord, for he gave those scientists what they needed to devise that cure!' What about those parents who lost their children to cancer in the many years preceding? What will you say to them? God only just got around to it now? God was thinking about it for the last century? Because their question will be 'If god gave us this cure, why didn't he do it while my children were still alive? And the children of everyone else?'

The reason I challenge theists is because it's your belief. And therefore it is upon you to provide the evidence.

 

[Mycroft]

I think it is a competition of world views. Atheists have lost their faith. They are embarrassed. They are also not relaxed. There are many people who know very well that their traditional religion is not sufficient. But they still believe in God.

That's a bit of a projection. I don't feel embarrassed at having lost my faith. Rather, I feel enlightened. And I do not, in any sense of the word, believe in god. Or anything of a supernatural nature. At all. I accept only what I find evidence of.

The most important thing in life is always to search for truth.

But you're not searching for the truth. You're just searching for any way to validate your truth. The truth, after all, is a three edged sword: Your truth. My truth. And the truth.

 

[fantome profane]

So they truly believe a religious person is not beneficial to society, And therefore worth less to society than a non-religious person?

That is not what I said. But some people might believe that.

But I think it is more likely that they believe that you are missing something important. They believe that your belief is preventing you from seeing the world as it is. I am not supporting this, but I understand it. And if you really try to put yourself in their position I think you will understand it as well.

I also understand why some theists, some Christians in particular, try to force their beliefs on others. I have often said if I believed like they do I would do what they do. But I don't. I also don't believe that religion or belief in "God" is always a bad thing. But if I did believe that I would challenge theism. If you believed that theism was dangerous you would challenge it. It is that simple.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A lot of my Athiest friends challenge my beliefs, And it got me wondering, Why?

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God, To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

So my question is: Why do some non-religious people challenge the beliefs of those who are religious?

If we're talking about discussions like the kind that happen here, I've found that engaging in debate with people who disagree with me and putting my own beliefs to the test can help me find the holes and weaknesses in my positions. Once I've exposed these weaknesses, I can correct them by changing my beliefs.

If we're talking about religious issues in society (same-sex marriage, for instance), then it's because I believe that restrictions on liberty can't be legitimate unless they're justifiable, so when people try to impose religious-based restrictions on society at large, I demand justification for those restrictions.

What do you gain from it?
What is there to gain from 'taking' someone's faith from them?
Is that not immoral to you?

Why would that be immoral? What's wrong with someone changing their mind?

 

[outhouse]

Atheists have lost their faith. .

Possibly

They are embarrassed.

I think this borders on intellectual dishonesty.

They are also not relaxed.

I think this is more intellectual dishonesty

The most important thing in life is always to search for truth

I have always found atheist in general do not have closed minds and have no real issues searching for the truth.

Its certain theist I see with closed minds avoiding the truth because it challenges their faith. I dont think you have an example like that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I skipped over a couple of things in my first post. I think I should go back to them:

I challenge an Athiests beliefs because I want to show them the love of God,

Isn't God capable of showing people his love on their own?

To help save their immortal soul, And because I believe one can live a better life with Religion
(I base this on the fact that most morals conincide with the teachings of the Bible)

That's flat-out false, IMO. For example, I don't know anyone who thinks slavery is moral, but this is A-OK by the teachings of the Bible.

 

[Thana]

But I don't wish to be immortal. The idea of immortality to me is utterly boring. Made even more boring by the idea of worshipping god for that eternity. Immortality, the idea of it, is simply a function of man's fear of death. The idea of immortality is a very human idea. But in reality? Give it six billion years or so and you'd be bored to tears. There'd be nothing new for you to discover, given a certain period of time across eternity. I'd rather live one full single life full of wonder and fascination and then die a happy, quiet death. I do not need immortality and do not desire salvation for simply choosing to live my life in a way I see fit. I don't think anyone does, really.



Because extraordinary claims (in this case that god exists and the earth was created) requires extraordinary evidence. It's something called burden of of proof.

To me, faith represents the antithesis of human progress. It is the enemy of reason, the nemesis of critical thought. Faith is so unoriginal, so unimaginative, it is the opposite of creativity. It teaches to accept without evidence, a paradigm the world cannot make its progression on (you owe your way of life to people demanding evidence for claims). Imagine if everyone took everything on faith. How chaotic would the world be? Would we have even progressed beyond the stone age?

Science and Reason prevailed over 'faith' in the past. When people believed the earth was centre of the universe, or that the earth was flat. Science prevailed over faith. Why? Because we could demonstrate that these things were true. And I think even the staunchest Christian and Creationist doesn't believe the world is flat, so in some way accepts what science teaches them.

But also because faith is vicarious. It contains no genuine information for a person to work with. When put to the test faith will always fail because it is vicarious. Science, however, will always prevail because it has the ability to solve problems.

So while you're off praying with your faith. Science is restoring people's eyesight, hearing, mobility, curing illnesses, diseases, vaccinating you against all manner of horrible things. I very much doubt if you were offered a vaccine for a new kind of virus that killed people that had broken out you'd reject it based on your aversion to science.

When science finally manages to cure cancer. Just as it is doing with AIDS at present, how many children will be saved by science and medicine where the alleged god simply let them die? Sure, you'll claim 'well god made the scientists, so it must be part of his plan', but I find this view to be pretty offensive. Particularly to the children whose lives were and are at risk.

Imagine. Science cures cancer. Lots of children are saved. You come along and say 'Praise the Lord, for he gave those scientists what they needed to devise that cure!' What about those parents who lost their children to cancer in the many years preceding? What will you say to them? God only just got around to it now? God was thinking about it for the last century? Because their question will be 'If god gave us this cure, why didn't he do it while my children were still alive? And the children of everyone else?'

The reason I challenge theists is because it's your belief. And therefore it is upon you to provide the evidence.

Faith is not the enemy of science. Science is not the enemy of faith. Science explains, Whereas faith explains who created the things that science explains and why He created these things.

I could say, God works in Mysterious ways or It's God's will or Everything happens for a reason, But that's to vague for one without faith in God.

And I don't think a Christian Scientist would be offended by 'God made the scientist and gave him the ability to help'
Nor do I think that statement is offensive, Unless one is not Religious.

But you bring up some interesting points.

 

[psychoslice]

The only time i really challenge Theists is when they try to shove their beliefs down my neck, the whole thing really is that the theist cannot really debate or argue, for the simple reason that they have nothing to debate with, the only thing they have is hope and faith, these cannot stand up in any argument or debate.

 

[Thana]

That is not what I said. But some people might believe that.

But I think it is more likely that they believe that you are missing something important. They believe that your belief is preventing you from seeing the world as it is. I am not supporting this, but I understand it. And if you really try to put yourself in their position I think you will understand it as well.

I also understand why some theists, some Christians in particular, try to force their beliefs on others. I have often said if I believed like they do I would do what they do. But I don't. I also don't believe that religion or belief in "God" is always a bad thing. But if I did believe that I would challenge theism. If you believed that theism was dangerous you would challenge it. It is that simple.

Okay then, give it to me.
How is Theism dangerous?

 

[Mycroft]

Faith is not the enemy of science. Science is not the enemy of faith. Science explains, Whereas faith explains who created the things that science explains and why He created these things.

I could say, God works in Mysterious ways or It's God's will or Everything happens for a reason, But that's to vague for one without faith in God.

And I don't think a Christian Scientist would be offended by 'God made the scientist and gave him the ability to help'
Nor do I think that statement is offensive, Unless one is not Religious.

But you bring up some interesting points.

I said faith is the enemy of reason.

Of course a Christian Scientists wouldn't be offended by those notion. He's a Christian Scientist. But for the rest of the world who aren't christian, or religious in any way. The idea is offensive.

Just as I said faith produces nothing where science does all the work, in reality.

 

[outhouse]

Whereas faith explains who created the things that science explains and why He created these things.

.

False

faith goes directly against factual evidence in many scientific cases.

Anything to do with creation is non scientific, and there is not a single part of science that accepts the supernatural explanation most people call mythology.