Why talk about God if you don't believe?

You are right, that does sound superior. It is not how I meant it. I was trying to figure it out. All I can see now is that you want to put me down.

By the way, I never tried to convert you to anything. However, you have tried to make yourself superior.

I do not believe in bloodshed, killing or knocking on someones door to sell anything. You have judged me, and proved how intelligent you are. I am not well versed in history as you pointed out so gently. I don’t even enjoy this arguement or discussion as you may see it. I feel attacked and belittled. I am still here at the minute because I don’t want to sign off without hearing you out or misjudging you.

So… you were shown how little you know. That’s not attacking you, that’s merely giving you an opportunity to learn more about your own religion, and potentially strengthening your faith as a result…

But it was me who was spoken to here.

Well, it was you who asked the question. And none of it was a personal attack.

Ok, if that is how you want to finish up. You see what you want to see. That was a very superior statement. There is always opportunity to learn more.

if you don’t believe in God, why do you want to talk about the subject so much?

An atheist, or agnositic OR one of different faith than the majority…will always have an interest in the discussion.

It’s why wars are fought, it’s why so many people can’t get along…simple, clear as day. If people, and that includes me :) sadly, would respect other religions, faiths, and belief systems, then we’d all get along better.

I’ll relax if I know and can prove, I’ll never have another religious zealot knocking on my door to sell me their belief system.

And if you were looking for, truly, ‘why’…it should be self evident:

1. Religions convert people - who are ignorant (any religion)
2. That same people had a belief system, a priori
3. Such people converted, at some point in history, thus leading to the destruction of many cultures for many people.

So…if “god” any “god” exists, then, well, which one is right? The one that caused the most bloodshed? The least?

Or, is it as simple as, we’re still ignorant, and through science & technology, we’ll discover immortality and become “god like” ourselves?

If that is the case, then, those atheists & agnostics might have the same reason to discuss as those religious zealots I despise who’ve knocked on my door: to attempt to share the truth, as they see it, with those who lack the truth, again, as they see it.

Wow, Thanks for enlightening me on your site! Who is the judgemental one? Who put who down. I will leave your site now as you wish because I don’t want to be condemned for my belief. What a kind and caring person.

Clearly, you haven’t studied history much.

Allow me to enlighten you:

1. Christianity - converted at the sword point. If it weren’t for that, YOU wouldn’t be Christian.
2. Islam - converted at sword point, again, if it weren’t for war, there wouldn’t be so many muslim countries.

Now that you’ve been made “enlightened” should I continue to preach at you? Nope.

However, the reason we have a religion & spirituality category, here on my site, is pretty simple: the founders come from three different countries, each with it’s own native religion, background, etc. So…we’d like it, if the world at large could do as we’ve done - accept that different people have different beliefs.

Have you been bothered by an Atheist or agnostic door knocker? Of course not, don’t be absurd. HOWEVER, I’ve been bothered by dozens of door knockers from all sorts of religions.

The day the planet can accept we all want our own beliefs, and not force those from one group onto another, is the day we can all live in peace. I look forward to that, however, do you?

Can you accept that you can’t preach to the unbeliever anymore? Can you resist slamming them in the face with the Torah, the new testament or the Qu’ran?

Can you for one minute think, and consider: at one point in history, we all had unique belief systems. Many of those were destroyed by people, conquering others. Is that what your god intended? That we should kill each to have one god, one surving culture?

Nope. Not in any religious text I’ve read (and I’ve read plenty).

So, if you give up your preaching, so, too, will the unbelievers. :)

However…there’s the small matter of the changes (in the last 60 years) to add “god” to the pledge of allegiance, etc, etc, that first have to be dealt with.

If you look up, it was I who was preached to and shown how little I know, of course I am defensive. If you want someone to leave the site, just ask.

We never said that YOU believe in those things, but religion has definitely encouraged those things throughout the ages.

You’re just a little too defensive; how exactly have we put you down?

I never said “shouldn’t discuss” if you reread. I merely asked why? It was a genuine question, I was not looking for an outcome or did I envision one, I was curious. I truely am not trying to gain ‘ brownie points’ for converting anyone.

By your question…assuming people who don’t believe, shouldn’t discuss, you were assuming a superior, enlightened position :)

What point was there in saying “if you don’t believe, you shouldn’t discuss” if you didn’t wish to provoke discussion?

Were you looking for a minister to justify their actions in converting people to their faith? Justfication for people (like I’ve met personally) in preaching & attempting to gain a foothold for their religion in a given country, but doing nothing to help the people in the way they need most, with clean water, basic sanitation and necessities that we take for granted in western countries?

Or were you looking to make people who don’t believe in a given relgion “back off” of any kind of religious discourse?

I’m curious: what possible outcome of your question did you envision?

I totally agree with you that religion has cause all those things through the ages! But it was me who was spoken to here.

You must have some doubt about your convictions.

That sounds superior… and why MUST we?

The biggest reason I bother is that I find religion, theology, apologetics, and philosophy in general really interesting. You don’t have to believe in order to be absorbed with the topic. :)

I do have bias, in that I’d prefer people to be much more liberal in their beliefs. I’d also see it as an improvement if someone were to question their religion altogether, so long as they’re emotionally strong enough and able to transition into an alternate worldview, but I’ve really been trying not to preach or coerce. While I think certain alternate belief systems would be more beneficial to the individual and to humanity, the vast majority of people who’ve changed their religious views say they did so because they themselves realized inconsistencies or unanswered questions within their belief systems, so there’s probably not much to gain by evangelizing in the first place.

Even if exposure to people critical of ones belief system had an effect, I think that, for the most part, the best way to have a useful dialog on emotionally charged issues like these is to explain your position. Having someone enthusiastically attack your ideas tends to provoke a defensive response, causing the person on the receiving end to argue their position without really considering the opposing ideas. In the end I think it also tends to make a person less likely to bother thinking about the debate; they’re left with a negative image of what it means to be on the other side, and so won’t even want to touch the subject.

At the same time, I’m interested in (good-natured) discussions regarding proofs and arguments, and that can be a tricky minefield to navigate. Sometimes no matter what you say, someone is going to take it as an attack or as somehow offensive. I guess it all stems from how you approach the discussion: is it a chance to learn and inform, or is it a chance to win a fight?

Of course I can get caught up in an argument myself, and sometimes end up focusing on winning my position to the point where I lose sight of the dialog. In fact, I’ve only recently put much effort into doing anything other than pushing my points. When I first realized my positions on religion I wanted to go out and deconvert the world, by force if I had to. :) I was driven by the same opinion I have now, that worldviews incorporating strict religious beliefs can be more harmful than certain ethically-oriented, more lenient worldviews, but I really didn’t think things through. I was probably motivated by resentment for the indoctrination I received and what I would have considered wasted years too.

In the end, there are jerks on both sides of every position, but I’ve been trying not to be one of them.

As for whether I doubt my position: not really. I’m open to the possibility that I’m wrong, and I’d like to be exposed to all the arguments and evidence on the other side, but I’m pretty comfortable with my views. In my eyes the supernatural cannot be known, because any search for it will inevitably dead end in the natural. The only abilities we have are those that allow us to explore the natural world and to think about theoretical possibilities based on the framework of our logic. I can only assume that there are no gods, as I’ve never found a good reason to think that there are. Sure, it’s possible that gods exist, but I can’t think of any way I’d be able to know it if they did.