Why are R&S theists different from the norm?

[chakka35]

I have waffled on this site for many years but don’t bother any more. It seems that everything has been said many times: the reasons why religious belief is irrational; the lack of historical back-up to the Jesus story, and so on. naomi (unlike me) has studied the Koran and has had perceptive things to say about that.
But the response from the theists has never risen above the constant repetition of the same fixed, unexplained, unjustified dogma.

So it would be tempting to assume that all theists are like programmed automata, constantly repeating their mantras and completely unable to reason for themselves.

And that’s the curious thing: they’re not. Away from AB R&S I correspond (yes, using envelopes and stamps, would you believe?) with many theists, professional and amateur – bishops, clergymen, religious authors, everyday believers – and with the exception of one Archbishop (who is plainly mad) all are able and willing to discuss and debate, and even concede points when they see the logic. They do not try to convert me to religion and I would not be so impertinent as to press my atheism on them.

So why this difference? Why so many reasonable theists out there when all we get on R&S are mindless bigots like ... no, I won’t name them; we all know who they are.

Any ideas anyone?

[mibn2cweus]

The waters tend to get muddy pretty fast when you have a variety of different points of view all converging in one place. One thing I've learned from my participation here is that very often atheists come to their convictions for a variety of different reasons and often have opposing and sometimes conflicting views on other subjects, not to the exclusion of what an atheist is.

[naomi24]

It would appear that the people you're talking to (and those that I talk to) have a genuine interest in theology as a subject. I'd guess that most of the religious here on AB are just repeating what someone else, who left out the nasty bits (apart from the vital bit about eternal punishment of course), has taught them.

[Elderman]

Firstly, if you are referring to me, I object to being called a mindless bigot. I am open to any reasonable question. But as the majority of you on here are atheists, I don’t get any logical or reasonable answers, hence my (to you) illogical and mindless responses. I am not out to convert. I have explained time and time again that a convert has to do it of his own free will and not under duress.
Centuries ago in an effort to convert pagans, there was an unscriptural blending of Christian beliefs with pagan ones, for example Christmas. The church chose a date that coincided with the most important pagan festival. And what of Christmas customs? The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics admits that most Christmas customs “are not genuine Christian customs, but heathen customs which have been absorbed or tolerated by the Church.” It was apparently felt that simply giving these customs a Christian facade would Christianize those who took part in them.
My beliefs do not include any pagan or heathen customs and the organization I belong to does not accept any of the so called religious dogmas, traditions or ceremonies.

[naomi24]

There you go, Chakka. That ^^ answered your question. Bet you're glad you asked! ;o)

[sandyRoe]

I may be a bigot, but I'm certainly not mindless.

[Zabadak]

Being (as I would like to think) a reasonable theist who has occasionally risen to the bait here, I think there are two basic issues.
Firstly, the term "reasonable theist" appears to be an oxymoron to the majority of habitual contributors, so the "discussion" rarely rises above the Python's argument sketch (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-572
077907195969915
for those who have forgotten).
Secondly, there seems to be a strong tendency to assume that all theists "must" believe certain things - if you're in one of the Judeo-Christian traditions, you must accept that the Dawsonesque stereotype of the murderous Hebraic deity is what you believe, that all religion is a matter of mind control of the pathetic masses for the benefit of the priestly class, that all who don't believe will suffer eternal punishment, that given half a chance we "religionists" would enthusiastically re-establish the Inquisition and so on and so on. Check the posts,over a period of time, see how rapidly they are channelled down the same old track. For a while, I quite enjoyed it, though frequently accused of "moving the goalposts" if I tried approaching an issue from another point of view. After a while, it ceased to become fun, and since I'm quite sure that the main protagonists can take care of their own souls and I feel no great urge to interfere, the pleasure of it evaporated.
No offence intended to any of the regulars. May your god go with you.

[Ankou]

Why are R&S theists different from the norm?

perhaps because in your personal exchanges with represnetative individuals they .......... "do not try to convert me to religion and I would not be so impertinent as to press my atheism on them" whereas on ab it is somewhat different.

in both directions.

[keyplus90]

Naomi has studied Koran. Has she? Any way studying is one thing and learning after you have studied another. I will leave that aside.

What about you? Have you managed to stop your local pharmacy from selling homeopathic medicine? Or still working to come to terms that other people may not look at things the same way you do?

[jno]

atheists on AB say the same things over and over; why should theists be different? This section is the home to sterile debate.

Bad luck not finding any mad archbishops on here to refute, though.

[mibn2cweus]

^ Obviously a rhetorical question. ^

[boxtops]

> as the majority of you on here are atheists

what a hugely sweeping statement. Just because people don't agree with one apparently rigid and repeated version of Christianity doesn't mean that the rest of us are atheists - we could well be Buddhists or Rastafarians for all you know, people are free to disagree and don't have to state if they follow a different faith. Or is it that if someone's not overtly Christian, you just bundle them up as disbelievers anyway, for convenience?

[sith123]

because here you try to have a discussion, some preach, i do not, of course, on here its different as you cant see the person or actually talk to them, so you try different approaches of communication. in real life i and probably many others dont worry about discussions. on here there is a religious thread, so therefore i discuss.

[jomifl]

Boxtops ...most buddhists are atheists as it happens :-)

[boxtops]

sorry jomifl, not a very good example - I'll let you choose another :-)

[jomifl]

well how about pastafarians ? :-)

[Gavmacp]

I am confused if you do not believe why is it so important to you to convert people that have a belief.
Why is proving something that in two thousand years no one has been able to prove or disprove. Why waste your energy on something that you have no interest in! Why is it so important to you?

[seadogg]

I can never understand where the agnostics are in all this. Maybe "I just don't know" isn't much of a debating point. Maybe some don't care either. Yet most people I know are agnostics.

[seadogg]

Think you may have answered my query Gavmacp lol