Is It Immoral to Try to Convert an Atheist?

[CynthiaCypher]

It's important to fight over belief, if we care anything about the world.

And I am sure that many with on crusades and died on many a battlefield thinking the exact same thing.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

And I am sure that many with on crusades and died on many a battlefield thinking the exact same thing.

I'm sure many of them thought the same thing. Some probably fought for booty, but lots of them probably fought to impose their culture/religion over the other one.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

I'm sure many all of them thought the same thing. Some probably fought for booty, but lots of them probably fought to impose their culture/religion over the other one.

And that my friend is one of the reasons why I think the very idea of trying to impose your way of thinking on another is immoral. Because when we fail to convince, we often resort to force.

 

[Thief]

I have been thinking about this. And in my view it is.

I think atheist serve a purpose and that atheism serves a function in our world. I don't see any condemnation to any who are atheist because of that.

I believe atheism is necessary to get get those who are theist out of their narrow reality tunnels. That the questions atheist pose to theist are needed to get theist to question their beliefs.

That being so, I believe that my concept of God deemed them necessary, and that they hold no threat to me because after all they are just human beings like me who think differently than me.

God gave them their nature, just as God as graced me with my nature, God in her providence has granted them the gift and blessing of unbelief, of questioning and testing. So to me it is like steel sharpening steel. I was graced with the gifts of gnosis, faith and grace. Does that make me superior? Or do their gifts make them superior?

I believe that atheism is God's will, just as much as I believe that faith is God's will.

If God wills that one creature should be a fish and another should be a bird, who are we to say that we should convert all fishes into birds or all birds into fishes. Each serves a purpose. So is it try to circumvent what is the expressed will of God is immoral?

Nay ( excuse me if I interrupt a line of conversation)

It is written....do not cast your pearls before swine.
It is written....the wheat shall be gathered with the tares....the grain shifted and the tares thrown to fire.

So forth and so on.....

Unlike the lesser creatures of this earth we have the will to choose what we believe.
That many fail to find belief is not God's fault.

God gave Man dominion.
That includes his beliefs.

As we stand before heaven, we are able to go on.....or we are left where we fell.

That a nonbeliever will stand ground and make denial.....doesn't mean he is doing God's will.
On the contrary.....he is likely doing the will of the Adversary.
The strongest follower of the Adversary does not believe is God.
Neither does he believe in the Devil.

He simply does not believe.

I suspect....without belief....you cannot carry on in the next life.
Ironically, as the atheist would say there is no afterlife......for him it will be so.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

And that my friend is one of the reasons why I think the very idea of trying to impose your way of thinking on another is immoral. Because when we fail to convince, we often resort to force.

OK, I just disagree. I think it's fine to argue for truth. If anything, it may lessen the need to fight physically. When we argue, we're forced to see the other side's position.

 

[LuisDantas]

And I am sure that many with on crusades and died on many a battlefield thinking the exact same thing.

Indeed. And yet another impressible number ruined their lives by taking the exact opposite stance. They may not have died exactly, but it would perhaps be best if they did.

Things are not really that black-and-white when it comes to beliefs.

 

[crossfire]

I'd be curious if you want to give me a snapshot of the rocky road.

Start a thread on it.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Start a thread on it.

Too lazy.

 

[crossfire]

Too lazy.

Not worth my trouble, then.

 

[yoda89]

I have been thinking about this. And in my view it is.

I think atheist serve a purpose and that atheism serves a function in our world. I don't see any condemnation to any who are atheist because of that.

I believe atheism is necessary to get get those who are theist out of their narrow reality tunnels. That the questions atheist pose to theist are needed to get theist to question their beliefs.

That being so, I believe that my concept of God deemed them necessary, and that they hold no threat to me because after all they are just human beings like me who think differently than me.

God gave them their nature, just as God as graced me with my nature, God in her providence has granted them the gift and blessing of unbelief, of questioning and testing. So to me it is like steel sharpening steel. I was graced with the gifts of gnosis, faith and grace. Does that make me superior? Or do their gifts make them superior?

I believe that atheism is God's will, just as much as I believe that faith is God's will.

If God wills that one creature should be a fish and another should be a bird, who are we to say that we should convert all fishes into birds or all birds into fishes. Each serves a purpose. So is it try to circumvent what is the expressed will of God is immoral?

How ironic I also view you as a pencil sharpener. It is also amazing how well you seem to know what a God wishes. To presume to know the will of a God/s and to think is all powerful is to compare yourself to an all knowing being. Its like fragile bacteria trying to understand what humans do. If you believe it makes you superior to give attributes that you cannot have knowledge then go ahead. Not to mention such attributes given would cause you to not understand a God.

You say that it is important to fight over belief. Yet you also claim that is not right to impose belief. Care to explain the difference or does that not fit into your equation.?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

How ironic I also view you as a pencil sharpener. It is also amazing how well you seem to know what a God wishes. To presume to know the will of a God/s and to think is all powerful is to compare yourself to an all knowing being. Its like fragile bacteria trying to understand what humans do. If you believe it makes you superior to give attributes that you cannot have knowledge then go ahead. Not to mention such attributes given would cause you to not understand a God.

You say that it is important to fight over belief. Yet you also claim that is not right to impose belief. Care to explain the difference or does that not fit into your equation.?

No. Nein. Nyet.

 

[work in progress]

Ultimately, I don't see anything wrong or immoral about trying to convert anyone to whatever beliefs you are trying to promote...whether it's converting atheists, deconverting theists, or trying to convert adherents to another religion to...whatever religion you are trying to sell.

From my pov, the OP seems to be trying to point out that there are likely basic differences between how atheists and theists see the world, and I think there is also...likely it has something to do with whether someone relies mainly on their intuitions to try to understand the world, or is a skeptic, and relying on reasoning through different concepts towards the best answer.

If you're intuitive, you will probably fall back on feelings like someone or something must have made this world; while, if you are a skeptic, you will likely find one supernatural answer after another vanish into thin air, when you apply some scrutiny to them. So, if there are any atheists who are converted to one religion or another, maybe they don't really belong in the atheist camp in the first place!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Ok, I think I should clarify myself.

I believe that to interfere with the will of another is contrary to the Law of Love. It is a form of domination to want to change the will of another over to they way you happen to think things should be. Love does not dominate, neither does it try to exert undue influence over others.

If you really think that this is true, why are you trying to interfere with the will of people who think that evangelism is a good idea?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

If you really think that this is true, why are you trying to interfere with the will of people who think that evangelism is a good idea?

If you read the thread you would see that I have already addressed that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you read the thread you would see that I have already addressed that.

Are you talking about this exchange?

You say that it is important to fight over belief. Yet you also claim that is not right to impose belief. Care to explain the difference or does that not fit into your equation.?

No. Nein. Nyet.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Are you talking about this exchange?

There is a whole lot more exchanges between me and others in this thread than that non-exchange.

 

[arcanum]

Well I think they do serve a purpose by breaking up the stranglehold of organized religion anyways, which is just a means of power and control over people's minds and wallets. Is it immoral to try and convert an atheist to theism? No, just as it's not immoral for an atheist to theism. We are all entitled to cognitive freedom imo.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There is a whole lot more exchanges between me and others in this thread than that non-exchange.

Care to give a specific post number?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Care to give a specific post number?

Read the thread.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Read the thread.

I did.

Care to give a post number?