I notice that if you do a Google image search for Christian, you come up with tons of ludicrous and satirical pics of Christians (or "Xtrians" as Athiests online seem to call us). Yet if you do the same for Athiest, you really don't see that same from Christians/Xtrians?

It seems that Athiests, particularly those in the media, don't really argue. They make opening statements to draw you out, then make jokes about you and what you say-conveying the idea that your funny and therefore can't possibly be right. And they do this through a medium other then logical, rational debate. (I'm thinking of John Stewart/Steven Colbert/that guy who does "Family Guy").

What are the best technique you can think of for being prepared for this?

Ashes,

Though I often forget to practice what I preach, I do find that cynical and satirical comments are best left ignored. When I do respond, I usually just end up getting upset (to put it mildly), and that doesn't help anything.

That being said, it is fine and dandy to engage in thoughtful debate as long as their is a mutual respect between the two parties.

Quote: › That being said, it is fine and dandy to engage in thoughtful debate as long as their is a mutual respect between the two parties.

Completely agree.

Quote: › What are the best technique you can think of for being prepared for this?

I am an @theist, and I wonder why you would engage in a discussion with people you think are only out to make fun of you? And if you only realize half way that they are only in it to make fun of you, why not quit?

It is indeed true that there are @theists in the media that make fun of Christians and many other theists, but it is definitely also true that there are many Christians in the media that are rather mean about @theists, I even recall a certain president who said that @theists were neither citizens nor patriots.

Perhaps it is more difficult to make jokes about @theists, I don't know.

Quote: › Perhaps it is more difficult to make jokes about @theists, I don't know.

Possibly this is true Harrie I think I have only heard one atheist joke .
This when Rowan Atkinson is the devil sorting out new arrivals in hell (they apparently arrive in batches) After the thieves ,fornicators sodomists, those that watched Monty Pythons life of Brian (apparently God doesn't have a sense of humour) he says to the Atheists "Atheists over here" *** well timed pause*** he then says "You must feel a right bunch of charlies"

Quote: › Possibly this is true Harrie I think I have only heard one atheist joke . This when Rowan Atkinson is the devil sorting out new arrivals in hell (they apparently arrive in batches) After the thieves ,fornicators sodomists, those that watched Monty Pythons life of Brian (apparently God doesn't have a sense of humour) he says to the Atheists "Atheists over here" *** well timed pause*** he then says "You must feel a right bunch of charlies"

I can remember that! As an @theist I thought it was quite funny...


I did find some @theist jokes here.


To quote a few:

"What is the biggest problem for an atheist?

No one to talk to during an orgasm."


"How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

Two. One to actually change the bulb, and the other to videotape the job so fundamentalists won’t claim that god did it."


"A Christian, a Jew, and an atheist are standing in line to be executed during the French Revolution.

The christian is first, and he lays down on the guillotine. Before the executioner pulls the lever he shouts, "My god will save me!". The lever is pulled, and the blade swooshes down, stopping just short of his neck. The executioner, believing a miracle of god has occurred, figures he can't kill this man, as so sets him free.

The Jew lays down on the guillotine. Like the christian, he shouts, "My god will save me!". The lever is pulled, the blade falls, and once again it stops just short of his neck. The executioner, again, believes god is on this man's side, and lets him go.

Finally, the atheist lays down on the guillotine. He examines the guillotine, finds a rock in the gears, and says to the executioner, "Well here's your problem..."

The moral? There's a time and a place for skepticism."

Ashes,

I think I found your problem.

Quote: › I'm thinking of John Stewart/Steven Colbert/that guy who does "Family Guy"

None of these guys do serious rational debate. They all make fun of stuff.

If you seek rational and logical arguments, then you'll have to get away from the popular media (especially animated sitcoms and satirical news programs) and get into books or sites that engage in debate.

Put simply, you have been looking in the wrong places for that which you are seeking.

Why bother?

1 Corinthians 2:14 (New King James Version)
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (New International)
14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
1 Corinthians 2:14 (WE)
14The person who does not have the Spirit does not receive the blessings of the Spirit of God. He thinks they are foolish. He cannot understand them because only people who have the Spirit of God can test them.
1 Corinthians 2:14 (NIRV)

14 Some people don't have the Holy Spirit. They don't accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. Things like that are foolish to them. They can't understand them. In fact, such things can't be understood without the Spirit's help.

I could say that us Agnostics and Athiests have "special insights" that enable us to discern truths that appear mere foolishness to Christians and without these "special insights " that only Agnostics and Atheists have , Christians have trouble understanding some truths.But I won't say that because people with those kinds of attitudes are in my opinion and patronising and condescending.

Quote: › 14The person who does not have the Spirit does not receive the blessings of the Spirit of God. He thinks they are foolish. He cannot understand them because only people who have the Spirit of God can test them.

That is something I could never ever understand: atheists and many agnostics can't accept the existence of God as to them it does not work out; they therefor can't see the truth in it; it's rarely the case that they do not want to.
To these people God refuses the blessing of the spirit of God, He only gives that to people who already belief.
So without the Spirit of God, non-believers can not come to God as to them it makes no sense. They need the Spirit of God the most but do not receive it.

God deprives non-believers from the Holy Spirit and that way they all end up in hell.

Harrie wrote (View Post): › atheists and many agnostics can't accept the existence of God as to them it does not work out; they therefor can't see the truth in it; it's rarely the case that they do not want to.

So they keep telling themselves. Sorry but I don't buy it. The problem is half heartedness or having two minds. I've been there.

Quote: › So they keep telling themselves. Sorry but I don't buy it. The problem is half heartedness or having two minds. I've been there.

That makes a lot assumptions, and I believe we all know what that does. I, for one, cannot and will not assume the knowledge and motivations of others. For myself, I cannot accept the existence of God because it failed to make sense under scrutiny. Belief, therefore, was not a choice for me. I wanted to believe, but I simply could not maintain belief in something that failed to make sense.

I was not half-hearted in my desire to believe. That is why I sought, questioned, and researched so much. I did not have two minds on the issue. I doggedly pursued any avenue I thought might contain a sliver that could hold my faith together.

In the end, my ability to believe crumbled against the weight of the evidences against it. I simply could not believe anymore, much in the same way that children eventually give up their beliefs in Santa and the Easter Bunny when the stories fail to make sense under examination.

If you don't buy this, then the fault is on your end. I can only relate my personal experience. And quite frankly, I really don't care if you buy it or not. If you and others do, then I expect a cessation of attempts to "save" me. If you and others do not, then I expect a continuation of what I know to be a futile effort on your part.

Quote: › So they keep telling themselves. Sorry but I don't buy it. The problem is half heartedness or having two minds.

Who chooses out of free will to give up the idea of eternal existence for yourself and your loved ones? And you get eternal non-existence back. Does that make sense to you? What do non-believers gain by that?

I think I have told you the many reasons why I CAN'T, belief in God. I have also told you many times that I hope somebody could convince me using logic and facts instead of desperate hope based on fiction. To me a system MUST make sense to be able to belief in it, I refuse to make blind leaps of faith into systems that are not even coherent with themselves in their basics.

You 'don't buy' the sincere thoughts of a real human being as they conflict with your view on reality, but you do belief in the existence of a fictional being. Interesting. Good luck interpreting reality then.

Nator7821 wrote (View Post): › For myself, I cannot accept the existence of God because it failed to make sense under scrutiny.

Sure, not every atheist falls under that category, but what is it about God that does not make sense? There are many things we accept that do not make sense. That's life and this is the case throughout history, slowly with human discovery somethings that didn't make sense in the past now makes sense. However, I would argue that none of those new discoveries reject God. Discoveries tell us more and more about how God did things not less and less. In a sense, we should now know God all the more.

What are you scrutinizing that failed to make sense enough to reject God?

Harrie wrote (View Post): › I have also told you many times that I hope somebody could convince me using logic and facts

It's not just logic and facts that are involved here, there is a spiritual side that must come into play. You deny that component, you are unlikely to be convinced.

Harrie wrote (View Post): › instead of desperate hope based on fiction. To me a system MUST make sense to be able to belief in it,

The Bible is where we can get to know a lot about God. We use it as the basis of our understanding. Its not just a historical narrative but there is poetry and wisdom sayings as well. You want us to convince you with logic and facts, but at the same time you dismiss as fiction a central source of those facts. Why bother arguing? Now that is the logical conclusion.

Is it possible to have at least an unbiased starting point? Is it possible to make a new dish with fresh ingredients or has RC cooked too many things already inside your head?

Hmm... looks like I've been watching too much Masterchef on TV.