|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 25-10-2009 6:47, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> An interesting aside to this discussion:
>
>
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2009/10/when-anyone-is-watching.html
>
>
> Premise - Believers that argue for the value of the story, but not the
> literal truth of it, yet get terribly offended by anyone saying, "its
> made up", basically actually think like this: "We don't really believe
> anything that you have demonstrated to be absurd...while anyone is
> watching." Greta herself admits this is how she thought about some
> things, like Tarot, depending on if she was talking to other believers,
> or someone that didn't, before she finally gave up any belief in it at all.
You should also consider the reverse: why do atheists get upset if
someone comes up to them and bluntly states that God does exist?
I think an important factor is that believing in God is not an
independent factor. It is connected to every other believe and
conviction one may have. I couldn't care less if the president of the US
did believe in a god or not if it weren't for the fact that it
influences his decisions. When I know that he doesn't care for nature,
because his religion teaches that man was independently created to rule
the world. Or that he was taught that those in power are there because
God wants them there and that they are therefore justified in getting
even more rich at the expense of others. Then it becomes very relevant
indeed. (I know that strangely at precisely these points there are other
Christian churches that preach precisely the opposite)
What is often included in any religious or atheist packet is that
believers are one group. In essence, if an atheist goes to a believer
and say that he/she got the facts wrong, the atheist is at the same time
implying that he/she is not really a true human. They may not mean it
that way and even vigorously deny it, but that is the effect of the remark.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |