052_attacking-christians.pdf

There are a great many religions in the world, so why is that — at least in the United States — atheists seem to attack Christians more than any other religious group? Do atheists have a particular bias against Christianity?

In general, atheists do not think that Christianity deserves more or less scrutiny than any other religion. But in the U.S., there are a number of reasons that Christianity often gets more atheist attention.

A great many atheists were not born atheists, but rather came to atheism as their philosophy developed. Because a large number of atheists are former Christians, they have significant familiarity with Christianity, and it is natural for them to use Christian beliefs as examples in discussion. Because these people had the experience of putting aside Christian beliefs, they may also be much more familiar with arguments against Christianity than they are with arguments against other religions.

In some cases, atheists who are former Christians lost their religion for personal reasons that left them angry at their former church. Such atheists may speak against Christians in particular in the same way that a man who went through a bitter divorce might speak against all woman, even though he’s really just mad at one woman in particular.

The U.S. also has an abundance of Christians who actively attempt to convert others to Christianity. An atheist is almost never approached by Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, pagans, etc., on a mission of conversion. Because the atheist is more frequently confronted by Christians, the atheist naturally develops more responses to Christian arguments.

Christians and Christian groups also tend to be very high profile. They frequently appear in the news arguing that laws should be passed for religious reasons, claiming that they are under attack by atheists or scientists, and thanking Jesus for various blessings. If Christianity is the religion that atheists are confronted by the most, it is natural for them to think first of Christianity when the topic of religion arises.

There are also a number of Christian groups that are either small but very vocal or that have religious practices that atheists may find particularly incomprehensible, ridiculous, or cultish. These include young-earth creationists, Biblical literalists, snake handlers, Christians who reject modern medicine, and some closed-community Christian groups. Even many Christians agree that some of these people are poor examples of Christianity, and some atheists single them out for ridicule because, frankly, they’re easy targets.

So, in a nutshell, atheists in general don’t have a particular goal of attacking Christianity. If another religion were more prominent in the United States, or if Christians did not so often try to make their religion the focus of current issues and discussions, odds are that atheists wouldn’t have much reason to speak about it.

There is no way one can truly have clear thought if one’s mind is muddled and confused with the lies, promises, scare tactics, and all the other associated bullshit, of any religion, myth or superstition.

I have never felt so free as when i finally threw off the childhood brainwashing regarding god and chrisianity. T hat is horrible stuff to pound into a child’s brain.

There is no god, no demons, no heaven nor hell. The “saints” and “prophets” were and are delusional idiots, hungry for power and control over other people.

I understand where you are coming from, but I would not take these statements so far.

We all have a certain amount of BS in our minds, and part of being a thoughtful, intelligent being is learning to work around these mistaken impressions and preconceived notions. I agree that religion — or any dogmatic system of belief — can make unbiased clear thinking very difficult, but that does not mean that there are no religious people who think clearly.

I also think that your characterization of all so-called saints and prophets as power-hungry, delusional idiots is uncharitable at best. It is certainly possible for someone to be convinced that they have been contacted by the divine without their being stupid, delusional, or out for personal gain. They can simply be incorrect or struggling to deal with perceptions that they are not capable of understanding.

I hasten to add that I don’t believe all religious leaders are simply incorrect. I think it is highly likely that certain individuals are/were knowingly lying to their followers.

IT IS ME AGAIN ….

HEY THE HATE SECTION IS VERY FUNNY, BUT SCARY AT THE SAME TIME ….. THERE ARE SO MANY SOMBIES IN THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD! Oh I forgot to tell you that the next time you go to the beach, give me a call … I am from Mexico, so I have a house in Acapulco (ADIOS AMIGO)…

Wow, I finally found someone like me! hahahaha jajajajaja I do not what to say ….. oh drink beer, at the beach … ciao!

ANY RELIGION IS DOOMED AND THEY KNOW THAT!

Well, not quite like you — I live near the beach, but I don’t drink beer. Sorry!

I hate all religions. I was born in Iran and spent 27 years in there. When I was student of Medicine in Tehran University, I always preached Atheism. I am specialized in “Anti-Islam !! The stupid, pedophile, and epileptic Muhammad copied Christianity and Judaism and created his own damn religion. I also went to church for one whole year and have read the bible for 2 times. I am also familiar with Mormon (I ve got their book [translation to Farsi!!] and read it). They are all the same.

I immigrated to Canada, only because I couldn t stand religious people (Muslims). I hated their every action. I hated their religious comments.

I wish you luck!

It sounds like you have had very bad experiences with religious people, and you have my sympathy.

Although I am an atheist, I don’t hate religion in general any more than I hate any other belief that I consider incorrect. I certainly do see some forms of religion and religious practice as eminently hateable, though. These include any religions that preach hate or intolerance. I also can certainly think of a number of specific religious leaders that are worth hating — particularly those who are hypocrites or are using religious thinking to control others for their own gain. And then there are religious individuals who use religion like a club to attack those they disagree with — also eminently hateable.

But among all this there are some individuals with sincere, rationally arrived at, religious beliefs who try to live good lives and make the world a better place. Although I think that their philosophy is ultimately incorrect, I do not hate them or their beliefs. Too bad that not all religious people are like that.

wow, thank you very much for taking the time to comment on what i wrote. you are right i do not believe in any kind of deity but i consider myself connected to all life and all matter, my research into quantum physics has sparked my idea that the oneness in the universe is what most people pass off as the feeling of god. and now through quantum physics and astronomy and other forms of sciene, many of the mysteries in the universe are quickly being solved all in one human lifetime(isn’t it amazing how much our technology has grown in the last 100 years? i’m always astonished by the amount of information people are presented with on a daily basis and i think it must be substantially more than the average person living in the 1800s). this overload of information can be a good thing or it can be a horrifying thing. it can either lead one to expand his own mind and gain a better understanding of the world around him or it can drive that person over the limits of his minds ability to comprehend, and this is what i believe to be the cause in the dramatic rise in mental health problems in the last 20-30 years. and i think there are two possible endings to this age of information, either we will evolve to be able to accept more information and have a revolution of the mind which will cause the real “enlightenment” age or we will slowly degenerate because we will be so overloaded with mental health problems, fear, and an inability to comprehend the world. there, of course, could be some middle ground and i believe its entirely possible that a new species of humans could come from this and the homo sapien could go the way of the neanderthal, in fact, if history is any guide, i find this to be the most likely theory.

your statement about “deciding” to believe or not believe brings up some very interesting ideas. first of all, most religions view agnostics, athiests and the like to choose this path. i feel as if i had no control of choosing one way or the other and i understand your point very well. people are presented with different ideas, situations and experiences in their life and you can only make a rational decision about the world based on your own observations of the world. someone who doesn’t believe in a god has been presented evidence that contradicts the “belief” in a god or more often than not they have NOT been presented evidence that confirms the existence of a god or gods. in fact the most ironic thing to me about religion is how such a great majority of the world believes in the existence of a god yet none of them have been presented with any substantian evidence that one exists. and the fact that there are thousands of different religions and sub-religions only goes to show how hypocritical the belief in a god is. there is a quote from one of my favorite movies (what the bleep do we know?) and it goes something like this (i know i’m going to butcher it) “How can one little carbon based life-form in the backwaters of the milky way galaxy believe that he can sin against an all-mighty god?… the height of human arrogance are those that create god in their own image” this is something that i feel deeply and it really makes me want to spread this knowledge through all society. wouldn’t people live happier, more fulfilling lives if they weren’t in constant fear of god and sin. i understand that this country was built on a freedom of religion (although the christian right is trying to change that), but i feel like i am constantly bombarded with people trying to convince me to be a christian. how many tv channels play evangelical propaghanda 24/7? i know i have at least 4 such channels, and not one channel is dedicated to any other religion or athiesm for that matter. or how about radio stations, there are at least 3 that i can tune into at any time at my house and all of them are christian. i also use to work at a fine dining really upscale french restaurant as a chef and every sunday night a catholic priest would come in and eat a 5 course meal and get silly off scotch, his bill would average between $150-$300 depending on how much scotch he drank or if he ordered a nice bottle of wine, he doesn’t get paid by the state and he doesn’t have a part time job, all of this money would come out of the hat that gets passed around at each service he held, now i made pretty good money there working around 50 hard hours a week but i couldn’t afford to spend that much money every week on one meal so exactly how much money do these glorified beggars actually make? and why does christianity have so much financial backing?

well in conclusion i wish there were an organization that could promote athiesm the way christianity is promoted but i don’t really see something like that happening but we do have some good news, in america, all forms of christianity are declining in popularity while agnostic and athiesm are growing so there is some hope for my “mind revolution” after all. i am totally fine with you publishing anything that i wrote to you and thanks for your insightful comments.
matt

I think that one of the major problems with the “information overload” you talk about is that people are not used to having to separate truth from fiction from partial truth on such a regular basis. We are much more accustomed to learning in sound bites. This is why, for example, quantum physics is used so often by people who are promoting the supernatural — it’s weird, it’s not intuitive, and it can be described in ways that sound mystical (and I’m not saying that this is what you are doing, by the way).

You’re right that religions tend to speak in terms of atheists choosing atheism, rejecting God, or turning their back on the church. For some atheists, this is exactly what they do, but they are not all atheists and, in fact, they are generally not the most intellectually rigorous atheists.

You talk about people not having substantial evidence that God exists. Many religious people would disagree with you. Some believe that the world around us has significant evidence of design. Others have a strong feeling that God exists (as you mention). They consider these significant evidence (although we could quibble about whether it’s “substantial”).

I disagree with the quote that it is the height of arrogance to create God in humanity’s image. I think it’s natural to imagine a deity as having human qualities, and I think that most people who are trying to imagine what they would do if they were God would imagine themselves creating creatures that look like them (just as we imagine scientists making robots that look like people, even though that’s not necessarily practical).

Would people live happier, better lives if they were not in fear of God and sin? That’s going to vary from person to person. There are enough religious people who don’t seem to fear the wrath of God at all that I wonder if it would make much of a difference. I think that much more than just religious thought would have to change to make significant progress.

Let me comment on your story about the Catholic priest. The priests and ministers I know don’t make a lot of money. Priests in particular often don’t own their own homes, and to my knowledge they get no retirement benefits. Some priests, because they live in a rectory, may have more disposable cash than an average person with their income, but they aren’t exactly living “high on the hog.” I don’t know how the priest you spoke of afforded such expensive meals every week, but I doubt it’s because he’s got an exorbitant salary (and I welcome comments from any of my readers who know more about this than I do).

I agree that it would be great if there were a big organization that promoted atheism. There are a number of organizations, but none that have Catholic-church-style size or resources. I think part of the problem is that atheists tend to be less organized and less vocal in their beliefs than religious people. I’m hoping that my blog is doing a little bit to help correct that.

Keep up the good work. Educate these god fearing freaks, help pave the way for us rationalists. {A better term for athiest, becouse it’s at the very least irrational to believe the almighty. Maybe thiest will be less afraid of this term.} People need to grow up let go of the fairy tales, face reality. They are the ones who are scared, afraid that nothing happens when they die and pray they make it to heaven. The point of life is to live. Not live to die. Ridiculous. Wake up People Look Around You.

I agree with you that there is likely no God, but I think we differ on some important aspects of the subject. I wouldn’t ever use the word “freaks” to refer to religious people in general — it’s pointlessly pejorative. I also prefer atheist to rationalist, because there are plenty of irrational atheists, and there are actually some very rational theists.

I also think it’s rather insulting to say that religious people need to “grow up.” Some people are emotionally or mentally unable to change beliefs that they were brought up with, and I can’t look down on them for that. Other people are sincerely convinced that God exists, and such people are, at worst, incorrect.

My, My, My. All the foul mouthed people who “Call” themselves “Christian” and criticize you?? It once again shows ME(who was once a very strong Christian) that religion is a big farce. I’ve been trying long and hard to avoid this conclusion, but my studies in science, world religions and anthropology have convinced me otherwise. The intolerance of many of the ‘religions’ and the obvious comments from so called religious people is an example of this, not to mention Islam! For those whose comments are so childish, only shows their lack of intelligence, and the very thing religion does. – cause division. Why can’t they tolerate other’s beliefs?

I applaud you for sharing your beliefs in a non-judgemental way and am curious how you came about to being an athiest.

I don’t know if I’d call all religion a farce, in the sense that there are some very intelligent religious people, and in the sense that there are many religions which were probably not created for the sole purpose of deceit.

That said, there seem to be far, far too many people who profess to religions and systems of morality that they don’t really practice. You don’t see nearly enough “turning the other cheek” from supposed Christians, for example. I honestly think the world would be a better place if everyone had well-considered beliefs and we all agreed that those childish people you mention should just be ignored until they went away.

This is great. thanks!Finally a site that defines atheism, and what i’m supposed to be. I agree with the other guy, though. Sky- god (i’m gonna smite you if you don’t worship me) worshipers are stupid.

I’m going to keep saying this until the day I die — you can’t judge someone as stupid because of their belief unless you know their reasons for the belief. For example, Whitley Strieber believes in visitors from other planets, and while I think he’s wrong, his reason for belief is that he remembers personal encounters with aliens. I think an intelligent person can believe in aliens for that reason, even though another intelligent person would not.

Also, just to get right down to it, I’m not going to call my grandmother stupid because she’s Catholic. The woman has been Catholic for 80+ years, and no amount of convincing would remove her core feeling of conviction. It’s effectively beyond her power to change and intelligence has nothing to do with it.

You also need to remember that there are perfectly intelligent people who are theists because they have not yet encountered facts that change their minds. When a person stops being a “sky-god believing” theist and starts being an atheist, do they suddenly become intelligent? No. They were intelligent while they were theists. It’s possible to be both intelligent and wrong, and from an atheist perspective, an intelligent theist is, at most, wrong.

Finally, there are plenty of theists who think that atheists are stupid. Do you really want to give such statements a hint of validity by making similar statements yourself? I don’t think so.

I have been reading some of the writings on your site and on your blog and I would first like to congratulate you on a job well done.

I would however like to take exception with the oft-stated sentiment that religious people aren’t unintelligent. In the context of their beliefs in a sky-god, they are most certainly, in every sense of the word, unintelligent. They may not be unintelligent in everyday life, but in this case they are. By way of analogy, Let’s take a look at Hugo. Hugo paints, plays several musical instruments, sculpts, writes, and does origami–all with a high degree of skill. But Hugo can’t sing. He has a terrible voice. When he sings in the shower, the locals speak in whispers of the chupacabra. Would anyone refer to Hugo as untalented? Certainly not. But if I want to take singing lessons, would you recommend I go see Hugo? Again, certainly not. Because in the context of singing, he IS untalented. And if, when discussing the art of singing with Hugo we go out of our way to praise his skill, aren’t we being both insincere and condescending?

Every human has some degree of intelligence. Sometimes we make use of that intelligence and sometimes we let others tell us what to think. Religion is letting others tell us what to think. If you show me someone who lets every conceivable facet of his life be dictated to him, and I will say that that person has NO intelligence–none that he makes use of anyway.

When someone says that, for them empirical proof can be found in a 2000-year-old book that has been losing battles over “truth”, both scientific and social, since the day it was written, I think that we can say that in the context of religion, they ARE unintelligent. They are not using the tools necessary for intelligent thought. They are letting the views of others become their own without any critical evaluation as to the truth of those views. And that is most certainly not intelligent.

There are unintelligent theists, just as there are unintelligent atheists. However, I do not think theism is a sufficient condition for labeling someone as unintelligent.

Although I understand your argument, I think it is based on a number of assumptions, some of which are not true. Not all theists slavishly follow the instructions of their church or believe that every word in the Bible is true. Many are quite critical of what their religion teaches and have investigated their beliefs in detail. Some people are religious because, after considering the alternatives, they honestly believe that religion is the most likely alternative.

To step back in history a bit, let’s look at Thomas Jefferson (one of my heroes, by the way). He was a theist, if only barely, because he could not conceive of a universe coming into existence without a deity. He believed that Jesus existed, but didn’t believe in those parts of the Bible that involved magic, hence his putting together The Jefferson Bible. We certainly have more scientific information today than Jefferson did, but I wouldn’t call him unintelligent for reaching the conclusions he reached, and I wouldn’t call someone today who reached the same conclusions unintelligent because they do not think science’s explanations for the origin of the universe are sufficient.

Continuing with this, we must recognize that people have different levels of necessary proof. I’m personally very skeptical about the supernatural and think that all natural explanations must be ruled out before supernatural ones are considered. Others think supernatural explanations are more likely. I think they’re wrong but I can’t prove it (as a general case), so I can’t say that their conclusions drawn from these lower levels of need for evidence are wrong unless I can demonstrate that they have reached an incorrect conclusion (which, in the case of believing God exists, I can’t).

As for the Bible, there are copious arguments for its historicity. For example, there is an argument that the New Testament is likely reliable because it recounts both negative and positive aspects of the early church. I disagree with these arguments (in general), but they are good enough that I wouldn’t say that someone who is convinced by them is unintelligent. At most, they are merely wrong, and one can be both intelligent and wrong.

Finally, as a general rule I assume that everyone is intelligent. That way I am less likely to dismiss the ideas of others because I consider my beliefs to be superior to theirs. I’m not saying that this is what you are doing, but it might be something to keep in mind.