On 1/19/2014 12:52 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 18:09:14 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Yeah, got one of those calling everyone else fools and claiming that
>> they just don't "see the truth", and quoting Ray Comfort, and AIG, etc.,
>> while never coming up with anything other than Bible quotes to support
>> his claims of the infallibility of the Bible, and the truth of god, over
>> here:
>>
>> http://yearwithoutgod.com/2014/01/02/am-i-doing-it-wrong
>>
>> What started out as a fairly sane discussion about someone "trying out"
>> atheism, and his comment on people telling him that doing so was a bit..
>> odd, if nor absurd, has turned into nothing but a back and forth between
>> a few ex-believers, and a full blown creationist. Unfortunately, I
>> decided to get involved as well, and.. haven't quite gotten around to
>> getting so completely fed up as to nuke the email updates for the
>> discussion, and let the rest just go at him.
>
> I think this guy is very misunderstood - I've been following him since
> about day 2 of his experiment, but my initial read (born out by his later
> posts) is that he didn't decide on January 1 to flip a switch - that the
> possibility of the universe not having a "god" is something that has been
> weighing on him for years, and he's decided to take the next step and
> stop acting like a Christian, but to start acting in a way that's
> consistent with what he's thinking.
>
Yes, the article writer certainly seems to be in that particular 
category. The guy I am talking about above is one of the clowns in the 
comment thread. But, there has definitely been a few people coming 
along, and, in connection with the original article, trying to tell some 
of the rest of us off for recommending books, as though, in fact, he 
really is someone who is just doing it as a lark, and we are trying to 
"convert him", or something.

My own recommendation was one a read recently about an ex-evangelicals 
similar journey from desperately trying to find sense, and some sort of 
real morality and purpose, in the whole "Bible Thumper" circuit, to 
finally concluding that it was all hollow, pointless, and a waste of time.

> He's been very generous, both in terms of his openness about his process
> and thinking, and also with the organizations he contracted to who
> decided that his "experiment," while interesting, was incompatible with
> teaching the courses he was teaching.  He's been generous because those
> organizations and employers are "faith-based," so he doesn't bear them
> ill will for discriminating against him - but I'm sure that experience
> has registered as perhaps a sample of the sort of discrimination that
> "out" atheists experience.
>
Yes, the author of the book I mention was fairly generous with most of 
the people he fell out with, over time, as well. They are stuck in a way 
of thinking that just can't allow for someone who doesn't fit, but for 
the most part don't intend any sort of malice.

I am not sure I could be quite so generous, but then, I am coming at it 
from the other direction, and whether or not you cause harm has very 
little to do, quite often, with whether or not it was "intended", and.. 
there is so much damage done, in the name of religion being "right", and 
other ideas being "wrong", that it really does, sometimes, matter far 
more that they *are* wrong, than whether or not they are nice about 
being so, nor is it so easy to forgive (since the later, to some extent, 
implies also leaving them to their folly, along with the consequence to 
bystanders).

> But kudos to the family and friends he has who are supporting him as
> well.  In that respect, he's had it easier than many.
>
Definitely.

> Jim
>


-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message