How to talk to an atheist - Unintended Humor

[Synnical]

This is too funny . . . gave me a much needed laugh. Notice the obvious mis-statement . . .

"my former girlfriend was too much of a fundamentalist "

then,

"When my relationship with my atheist girlfriend ended"

C'mon dude, surely you can get AT LEAST your reasoning straight??

If you click on the link you can send an e-mail to the writer . . . .

:evilgrin:

-Cindy in Fort Lauderdale

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/ma20050124.shtml

How to talk to an atheist (and you must)
Mike S. Adams

January 24, 2005

When I pulled into the parking lot this morning, I saw a car covered with sacrilegious bumper stickers. It seemed obvious to me that the owner was craving attention. I’m sure he was also seeking to elicit anger from people of faith. The anger helps the atheist to justify his atheism. And, all too often, the atheist gets exactly what he is looking for.

In fact, just the other day, I heard a Christian refer to Michael Newdow as an “attention-craving SOB.” It reminded me of the time I heard someone refer to Annie Laurie Gaylor as a “b**ch.” I don’t have the same reaction towards atheists, even when I see them attacking my basic religious freedoms. When I look into their eyes I see an emptiness that evokes pity. Maybe that’s because I was once one of them.

I still remember the night I publicly declared my atheism. It was April 3rd, 1992. I was a long-haired musician, playing guitar at a bar called “The Gin” in Oxford, Mississippi. The subject of religion came up in a conversation during one of my breaks. An Ole Miss Law student, who had been an undergraduate with me at Mississippi State years before, asked me whether I was still dating my girlfriend, Sally. Then he asked why I had broken up with my previous girlfriend two years before.

After I explained that my former girlfriend was too much of a fundamentalist while I was an atheist, his jaw nearly hit the ground. “Are you really an atheist?” he asked. He assured me he didn’t mean to pry and that he was merely concerned. He didn’t have to tell me that. His reaction gave him away. It was a reaction he could not have possibly faked.

That law student, whose name I have forgotten, made no effort to convert me on the spot. But he did plead with me to pick up a copy of Mere Christianity. “I’ve heard it all before,” I said. He told me I was wrong. He said that C.S. Lewis was the best apologist of the 20th century, but he didn’t push the matter. The conversation ended abruptly. I never saw him again.

Years later, I read Mere Christianity and it did have a great effect upon me. But, recently, I was thinking about what really drove me to read the book. How could I have remembered the title of a book I heard only once? After all, it was many years before at the end of a long night of drinking in a bar in Mississippi.

The answer is simple. The advice was given to me by someone who sincerely considered the matter to be urgent. And that sense of urgency was conveyed without a trace of anger. It was just a matter of one human being communicating his concern for another without being pushy and holier-than-thou.

If a Christian really believes the things he professes to believe, he will go to great lengths to share it with others. He would even crawl on his belly across a desert of broken glass if he thought he could reach an atheist. He would certainly do more than utter profanity and show contempt for the atheist.

When my relationship with my atheist girlfriend ended on April 4th, 1992, I thought it was the end of the world. I didn’t know I had just taken my first step on the road to freedom. I certainly didn’t believe in divine intervention. But I do now.

I don’t think about those days as often as I should. But the next time I see Michael Newdow on TV, I will try to remember. And when I feel some sadness, I will try to keep the faith that there is always hope.

Between faith and hope and something, the greatest of these things is something. As long as there are atheists among us, we cannot forget that greatest thing. I am glad that law student remembered. I plan to thank him when I see him again.

Mike S. Adams will speak at Wabash College (Crawfordsville, IN) on January 27th at 7:15 p.m. The speech, to be held in Hays Hall, will be open to the public.

©2005 Mike S. Adams
:eyes:

[fshrink]

1. That was fast!

3rd of April 1992, Dude longhaired musician, who was already at least one generation behind, is impressed by a guy and the day after, 4th of April 1992, he ends his relationship with his "atheist girlfriend" (what the heck is that!?). Now, the guy in the bar hands the dude a good book, that the dude reads only "years later", but the dude breaks up with his "atheist girlfriend" (what?) two hours after the guy couldn't believe that the dude was an atheist and told him that the "matter was urgent". Sounds like a computer-generated item. I hope it is.

[Synnical]

3. Are you saying this is a journalistic fraud?

From Townhall.com? No, cannot be!

:evilgrin:

[Taxloss]

2. A concocted pile of shit.

"When I look into their eyes I see an emptiness that evokes pity."

This is hate speech. This is the hate the "persecuted Christians" cannot see.

[immoderate]

4. I don't have problems with the chronology.

Could be coincidence. He doesn't say he broke up with his atheist girlfriend because of the conversation. I don't get contradiction here.

BUT...

Phrases like:

"The anger helps the atheist to justify his atheism." and...

"I don’t have the same reaction towards atheists, even when I see them attacking my basic religious freedoms."

Are indicative of extreme ass-holiness.

--IMM

[fshrink]

5. That's the only 2 dates he gives.

Conversation with the messenger and end of relationship with girlfriend. If you ask me that's an attempt at subliminal conviction. He should also remember the day he saw the light, "I remember the day when I understood the message of god, May 27th 1993 etc..." But that's too obvious. Like he says, it's all about "subtlety" (!!).

[trotsky]

6. C.S. Lewis.... *SNORK*

"Mere Christianity" is a sniveling whining piece of tripe. I've read it. If you first accept Christianity, then read it, you'll think it's the most brilliant apologist work ever. Which explains why all the evangelists think it's so great.

Yeah, this piece is just more atheist bashing. Sure, a lot of us are angry. Angry that we were duped for so long. Angry that condescending Christians feel "pity" for our "emptiness." Angry that they assume EVERYONE needs their little crutch to deal with the harshness of reality. But one thing we are not, is angry with god, because that's kind of pointless, is it not? It's like being angry with the tooth fairy.

Sounds to me like this guy was one of those "atheists" who was simply angry with god, or hadn't quite sorted out what he felt about god, and declared himself an "atheist" to be cool.

[onager]

7. Ever read about Lewis' conversion?

It wasn't exactly as dramatic as falling off/on your ass, like Paul on the Damascus road.

According to Lewis he was an atheist at college. I've always suspected he was a faux-atheist who just wanted to make his later conversion more impressive...sort of like the dork who wrote that article Synnical shared with us.

Three of his friends proselytized him until, according to Lewis, "I gave in and admitted God was God." Yawn. He makes it sound about as much of a spiritual struggle as choosing a new smoking-jacket.

But even better, one of the friends who converted him convinced him that Xianity was...are you sitting down?

A true myth.

And that friend was none other than the author of "Peter Pan," J.M. Barrie.

I guess they weren't teaching Logic at Oxford back then, or something.

And I agree that "Mere Christianity" is tripe. When I finally read it, I was amazed at how many people had recommended it to me as the best intellectual defense of the faith.

I also think his children's books are way over-rated. Most of them are just stale re-hashes of the Xian myth. At least J.M. Barrie came up with something original...and at least as believable as the book of Genesis.

[trotsky]

8. Ha! I had never heard that.

Yeah, quite the theological revelation. :eyes: "A true myth." Oy.

When I finally read it, I was amazed at how many people had recommended it to me as the best intellectual defense of the faith.

Yes! Exactly what I thought! I even bought the book to make sure I would have the time to read it thoroughly. But while reading it, I kept wondering, "Is this it? Am I missing something? Is this really Sunday School logic I am reading?"

I think it grasps people who are struggling with their god belief, not those who have logically rejected it. For most believers, merely questioning your belief in god amounts to thinking you're an atheist for all intents and purposes. And like you say, a lot of them clearly want to at least claim they were atheists before, to make their "conversion more impressive."

[JNelson6563]

10. You have to wonder

what went into their "atheism" to begin with.

I recently had an interesting conversation with my brother in law. He's supposedly the brains of the outfit. Ugh. Proclaimed himself an atheist as a child, no doubt to irritate his manipulative mother. Now he tells me, "what's the harm if I believe?" It pleases his wife and it gives his family an hour away from whatever they normally do. Wow.

I realized this is not a man of principle. The talk of religion coupled with the talk of politics had me convinced this guy bases so much of his thinking on emotion it renders him an idiot.

Juile

[progressoid]

9. Yep, just another book

trying to rationalize the irrational.

I'm always bemused by how many apologists are needed to support christianity. Such an all-powerful god and such a feeble religion.