Has a friend ever tried to convert you to Christianity?

[Sweet P]

Nope. I do have a few friends/acquaintances who identify as Christian, but they're not the evangelical types who wanna convert everyone and everything to their religion. I could never be friends with people with like.

 

[Raw Evil]

I sort of feel for them in a way. I mean, if you are wholeheartedly Christian and truly believe that those who do not accept Christ will in fact go to a horrible place of indescribable punishments for eternity...
... doesn't that obligate you to try and save your friends? By saying, well, it's your choice, I don't push my religion on others - yet I truly believe that you are headed for the worst fate possible... You're a bit of a neglectful prick if you don't try to save your friends right?

You have a point there. I guess they are trying to be nice, even if they are (in my view) entirely misguided.

I don't know, that's just how I've felt in the past when Christian friends have tried to talk me over. Sure, I still don't agree with them, but at least I can respect that they are being strong in their own beliefs.

On this we disagree. Strong belief in anything - be it God, mysticism or a specific scientific theory (String Theory makes a good example) - without the search to disprove it only leads to false reinforcement. There is no substitute for knowing the truth, however thin our understanding of it might be.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

Strong belief in anything - be it God, mysticism or a specific scientific theory (String Theory makes a good example) - without the search to disprove it only leads to false reinforcement. There is no substitute for knowing the truth, however thin our understanding of it might be.

Truth is important, don't get me wrong. But I for one will never understand those who are willing to forgo compassion, connectedness, happiness, and/or a sense of purpose in life, in the name of truth. I take issue with the notion that one must be a skeptic to lead a life worth living, or an ethically responsible life, which is what you seem to be implying (correct me if I'm wrong).

Besides, even the most hardcore of skeptics take many things as 'given' that are not proven and likely cannot be proven.

 

[Mr Wobble]

Isn't he just saying that a steadfast refusal to consider alternative explanations isn't necessarily a quality to be respected?

I'm pretty much an agnostic with strong atheist tendencies, but I have to admit the possibility that I may be wrong and that a God exists (however unlikely I feel that to be the case).

Most religious people I have asked will not even consider the possibility that their belief is wrong - they are '"being strong in their beliefs". I don't think that such a blinkered, active denial of any alternative explanation is particularly worthy of celebration.

I do, however, agree that people with strong religious beliefs can indeed lead ethically sound lives, just as can agnostics and atheists. People's actions may increase the good (reduce suffering, increase happiness) even where their belief system does not hold up to intellectual rigour.

OTOH, there are plenty of examples where dogmatic beliefs, religious or secular, have enabled, for want of a better word, evil (the Holocaust, the Spanish Inquisition) and in such cases evil outcomes might have been averted if more people had questioned the foundations of those beliefs.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

Isn't he just saying that a steadfast refusal to consider alternative explanations isn't necessarily a quality to be respected?

That's not how I read it. I do agree with you in general that outside the box thinking and critical thinking are good things, and I do practice them. But these are not things I expect or hope to find in all people I encounter. My choice to respect, like, or entertain the company of someone depends much more on how good they are to others, and not how critically they're willing to think.

Most religious people I have asked will not even consider the possibility that their belief is wrong - they are '"being strong in their beliefs". I don't think that such a blinkered, active denial of any alternative explanation is particularly worthy of celebration.

Some people would rather be secure than free, and that's entirely their prerogative. I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I question that someone who chooses security over freedom necessarily leads a less worthy or lower quality life. All you or I could say conclusively is that their way is not our way. In the grand scheme of things, Enlightenment values giveth and taketh away, as much as traditional values do. They just giveth and taketh away different things.

I do, however, agree that people with strong religious beliefs can indeed lead ethically sound lives, just as can agnostics and atheists. People's actions may increase the good (reduce suffering, increase happiness) even where their belief system does not hold up to intellectual rigour.

I'm an agnostic too, but with strong theist (panentheist, actually) leanings. I've looked at the alternative(s) but have settled on this, for what I see as sound logical reasons, and am now certain that the alternative is not something I'm willing or able to further entertain. In your schema, do I deserve the same disrespect as someone who wouldn't hear the other side to begin with?

 

[Mr Wobble]

In your schema, do I deserve the same disrespect as someone who wouldn't hear the other side to begin with?

My own, entirely subjective opinion, is that I most certainly respect your position as you have reached it through consideration and I'm sure that you wouldn't claim that your position is absolutist (if you have agnostic tendencies then you admit a level of doubt, no?).

I have little or no respect for a belief (and I did say belief in the above post, not person) that brooks no alternative view and that has been adopted without consideration of other explanations.

And by respect I mean something closer to admiration, rather than a moral judgement, although I think that one might argue that where dogma causes harm or suffering , then such a belief might be considered immoral.

I do have some core beliefs, but hopefully I recognise that these are assumptions - my belief that dogma is wrong-headed is, of course, an assumption too.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

^ None of us can ever be free of assumptions, so I wouldn't sweat it

 

[Mr Wobble]

Some people would rather be secure than free, and that's entirely their prerogative. I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I question that someone who chooses security over freedom necessarily leads a less worthy or lower quality life. All you or I could say conclusively is that their way is not our way.

Sorry, I missed this bit.

People can and will believe what they want and that is, of course, entirely their prerogative. My concern is not that someone's belief my lower the quality of their own life, but I am concerned where someone's dogmatic belief causes harm or suffering to others (which is what I though I was saying in the last paragraph of my post).

I have said elsewhere that one of my core moral beliefs is that people should be allowed to do (think, believe) so as they please, in so far as in doing so they do not cause harm or suffering to others.

But that is of course, a belief, a strongly held one at that, but I am open to persuasion that it is wrongly held.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

Sorry, I missed this bit.

People can and will believe what they want and that is, of course, entirely their prerogative. My concern is not that someone's belief my lower the quality of their own life, but I am concerned where someone's dogmatic belief causes harm or suffering to others (which is what I though I was saying in the last paragraph of my post).

I have said elsewhere that one of my core moral beliefs is that people should be allowed to do (think, believe) so as they please, in so far as in doing so they do not cause harm or suffering to others.

But that is of course, a belief, a strongly held one at that, but I am open to persuasion that it is wrongly held.

Ah, now we've arrived at one of the core and most controversial questions in the philosophy of politics: under what circumstances is someone justified in attempting to coerce another to think a certain way? And where do we draw the line between persuasion and coercion, when it comes to the tactics used by pedagogues?

To tie this back to the original topic, I was assuming we all were talking about one friend trying to convert another to Christianity in the absence of any political agenda, that is, without any long term consequences for the relationship between the would be converter and convertee which hinges on the success or failure of the conversion.

I have absolutely no problem with someone pitching their worldview or ideology to me, whatever it is, so long as if I politely agree to disagree and refrain from judging them henceforth, they reciprocate.

If someone refuses to accept me or treat me well after I've declined to think as they do, then my attitude is that we're just incompatible people, and that's neither good nor bad, but just the way it is. I feel sorry for anyone willing to hurt or reject others for the sake of bolstering their own ideological agenda; as the Buddha taught, most people who harm others actually have a problem within themselves, typically ignorance and futile ego bolstering. My goal at that point is to be a ninja -- to fly under the radar and stay out of such a person's way, while continuing to quietly do what I have conviction is right.

 

[HigherAwareness]

Yes this is always painfull. My family tries to convert me bi-annually. At least 2X a year . Uhhhh

 

[TheAppleCore]

This is really all you need to say. I've never heard a fundamentalist come up with a good answer to this.

Actually, unfortunately because of the fundamental rejection of rationality that (most) religious faith requires, nothing you can say will even give pause to anyone that holds these sorts of religious beliefs.

As the geologist of faith Dr. Kurt Wise said (paraphrased), "If all the evidence in the universe pointed toward an old earth, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a young Earth creationist, because that is what Holy scripture teaches me."

There you have it, straight from the horse's mouth.

 

[qwe]

many have tried. all have failed totally and completely.

 

[L2R]

real friends don't let friends try to save friends from eternal damnation!

 

[DeMiZe-420-]

i swear the next fuck that trys to convert me is going to have an up close and personal meeting with their "god"

been happening my whole life, people find out im atheist "well...that....thats just sad... why dont you come to church with us? Jesus is your savior, he died for you!" I dont give a fuck what he did, i didnt ask him too

 

[qwe]

i've gone to friends'/families' churches (from the crazy flailing about on the floor type stuff, to boring catholic type stuff, to 3 hour long black people church, and i grew up as united methodist)

it's a sad sight

 

[Shrooms00087]

Hey this is where Rach has been! I love this guy, each post he has written; seems as if it was engraved in stone tablets..

Honestly in most religions the goal is to convert, assimilate, and dominate. Fanciful stories, capricious dictators soon follow. With the exception of a handful. I absolutely love these arguments between the religious person seeing you as a "Seeker of the divine" and you as...Logical. As though it were written in law, they immediately start to get offended when they see their answers coming up short. They either get too defensive for any real debate to further, or they simply just say, "WELL ITS A BELIEF" exclaiming it loudly (in my experience).

 

[BrutalRollar]

My friends don't believe in religon, just like me. But I had have those dudes that walk around talking about god and shit come to my door. First thing I do when they come, is slam the door on them

 

[SececaRD]

I stormed out of the apartment and went somewhere else. I just don't see why an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-loving God would send a good dude like me to hell.?

The problem is your not good nor am I or anyone on this site. All of us have broken all of the 10 commandments. Therefore God being Holy and Just demands payment for every sin commited both yours and mine, a payment we cant pay ourselves.

The Debt has been paid by His Son Jesus Christ, Now will you beleive thats the question?????

 

[Jabberwocky]

^Petty demands from a petty tyrant. If somehow that conception of God is true I'll tell the primitive oaf to fuck off and go to hell. Fortunately I don't think a blood thirsty atonement demanding God is true. A sick egomaniac like that wouldn't be able to play occasional cosmic peek-a-boo with humanity.

I probably already mentioned that 'in your face' evangelists have been enjoyable for me at times because I feel free to let loose on them as I do with Amway salesmen or anyone else that tries every means at their disposal to make their sale.

 

[SececaRD]

Eternitys too long...

If theres no God, Which I beleive there is one with all my heart. But if there is no god what did I lose in this lifetime???

But what if there is a God, And I didnt beleive there was one, and I had to spend eternity in hell cause I failed to bleive in a God??? Wouldnt that suck???

"Eternitys too long to be wrong"