Listening to Young Atheists: Lessons for a Stronger Christianity

[cbayer]

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/

When a Christian foundation interviewed college nonbelievers about how and why they left religion, surprising themes emerged.
LARRY ALEX TAUNTONJUN 6 2013, 8:07 AM ET


Left, the pastor George Whitefield; right, the philosopher David Hume (Wikimedia Commons)

"Church became all about ceremony, handholding, and kumbaya," Phil said with a look of disgust. "I missed my old youth pastor. He actually knew the Bible."

I have known a lot of atheists. The late Christopher Hitchens was a friend with whom I debated, road tripped, and even had a lengthy private Bible study. I have moderated Richard Dawkins and, on occasion, clashed with him. And I have listened for hours to the (often unsettling) arguments of Peter Singer and a whole host of others like him. These men are some of the public faces of the so-called "New Atheism," and when Christians think about the subject -- if they think about it at all -- it is this sort of atheist who comes to mind: men whose unbelief is, as Dawkins once proudly put it, "militant." But Phil, the atheist college student who had come to my office to share his story, was of an altogether different sort.

Phil was in my office as part of a project that began last year. Over the course of my career, I have met many students like Phil. It has been my privilege to address college students all over the world, usually as one defending the Christian worldview. These events typically attract large numbers of atheists. I like that. I find talking to people who disagree with me much more stimulating than those gatherings that feel a bit too much like a political party convention, and the exchanges with these students are mostly thoughtful and respectful. At some point, I like to ask them a sincere question:

What led you to become an atheist?

Given that the New Atheism fashions itself as a movement that is ruthlessly scientific, it should come as no surprise that those answering my question usually attribute the decision to the purely rational and objective: one invokes his understanding of science; another says it was her exploration of the claims of this or that religion; and still others will say that religious beliefs are illogical, and so on. To hear them tell it, the choice was made from a philosophically neutral position that was void of emotion.

more at link

[Politicalboi]

1. Believers just don't want to believe

That THEY make some of us not want to be a lemming like them. And like me, I was dragged to church EVERY Sunday. I would rather play baseball with the boys, or climb trees. I looked at church as punishment in a sense. I wasn't abused at home, but my mother made us go to church till we were 18. We had our own pedophile there, father Michael Whimpy was his name.

Just leave us alone, and know that not all of us are as gullible as you are.

[Trajan]

2. Much whistling past the graveyard in this ...

I guess 'New Atheism' is a term that allows atheists to get bunched up into a pile ...

"Ahh ... those 'New Atheists' sure are ruthless militants ! .. aren't they ?" ...

Yep .... Ruthless militant - devoid of emotion .... That's me alright .... Just two dark black eyes, heartlessly gazing upon the world with a desire to be ruthlessly militant ....

Sheeesh .... No WONDER christians want to burn us at the stake .... we are fucking AWFUL !

[cbayer]

7. The article is pretty much exactly the opposite of what you are saying here.

[Trajan]

14. Terms like "ruthless" ... "void of emotion" .. are touchstones

They create an immediate image or tone. surrounding the subject with doubt, an air of negativity that identifies the subjects with doom, darkness, and danger ...

While the arc of the entire article might be reasonable, the language used to get there is needlessly dark and ominous ... typical depictions of atheists as angry and devoid of morality ... it is quite normal for theists to use these memes when they define atheism, and it is not to cast their opponents in a favorable light ...

[cbayer]

15. That wasn't my takeaway, but I hear what you are saying.

I thought his descriptions were generally thoughtful and kind. Many atheists with whom I have had conversations, including many here, do describe how they got to atheism as rational, logical, devoid of emotional overlay and strictly scientific. In using these terms, he is describing people that are "determinedly irreligious".

The author uses those terms to describe how people discovered their atheism but also uses words like "smart", "likable", "serious minded", "idealist" and "sincere".

I guess I think this guy deserves credit for taking the time to really listen to young atheists, to re-evaluate his own preconceived notions and to make a sincere attempt to understand.

Atheists are not the opponents of theists, unless one sees this as a team sport.

[Fumesucker]

18. Do you read much in GD? Because Democrat versus Republican is very much team sport to some

Unfortunately everything in America seem to come down to a team sport ethic at some point, business, education, politics, why would religion and atheism be any different?

[cbayer]

19. Democrat vs Republican is indeed a team sport, as it should be

on a site such as this.

OTOH, divisiveness has been used very effectively by the right to weaken the left.

We should not let that happen here. We have more in common than we do differences.

Those that wish to pursue a theist vs. atheist agenda do more harm than good, imo.

And the republicans love to see it happen.

[Fumesucker]

21. With only two substantive parties in the US it's impossible to have a real Democratic team

Our society fractures along far more lines than just one, it's the very nature of a two party system to be bad at creating a real team feeling in its participants.

The tent is too big for everyone under it to feel a connection to everyone else.

Some of the people I'm supposed to be teammates with give me the serious creeps and that includes a good many of the supposed leaders.

[cbayer]

22. I don't disagree with what you say, but I am still determined to

not let us be divided when possible.

Divisions along religious lines serves no purpose at all. Theists, atheists and all those in between should be able to work in harmony.

Those that strive to make it a team sport where one side wins and one side loses have no place here, imo. You don't have to feel connected to everyone, but seeing comrades as enemies is a problem.

[Fumesucker]

23. There's three prolific posters that I'm still ticked off with since the inauguration

Condescending and arrogant lectures that treat an audience of adults like wayward children do not make for a feeling of mutual respect.

And I know that happens on all sides at times, I wince when it's someone I tend to think of as more an ally than not.

For some of us the ubiquity of religion and religious expression in the USA just gets old, particularly the more tacky and obviously hypocritical parts of it. Not a big thing but a consistent low level irritant rather like advertising on commercial channels.

I was talking to someone a couple of days ago I set up an MP3 player for last year and now they cannot stand to listen to the radio, the commercials and DJs drive them nuts where they never really noticed them before the MP3 player with no commercials. The person was leaving for a long trip in the car this morning and had borked their MP3 player, turns out we could load a thumb drive with music and stick it directly in the FM transmitter they use in their car so they took their entire music collection, got a big hug and thank you for that one, serious brownie points.

A year with no commercials made this person highly allergic to them, similarly it's the non religious who often end up noticing religion more than those who are still immersed in it.

[pinto]

3. Great article. Skeptics, agnostics, atheists and the nones ought to be embraced in the church views

I think it's bigger than the simplistic evolution v creation debates. Or the larger church / state issue (which I need to add as a disclaimer, I am bluntly in favor of separation).

The point of the article, imo, is the real day-to-day play of the variety of opinion. The emotional aspects of them all. And the possibility of recognizing the commonality even given the divergence of them all.

Thanks for the post.

[Leontius]

5. The thing that caused me to walk away from Christianity was the lack of fire and passion in

many of the people in church, Christ and his words just didn't seem to mean anything anymore. The same thing, the passion and fire of belief, lead me back and even now that I don't have the most vigorous and active religious life it keeps me engaged in study and growth.

[cbayer]

8. You are welcome.

I also liked the article and agree that we often have more in common than we do differences.

It's how you live your life and how you express your beliefs or lack of beliefs, not the beliefs themselves.

[rvt1000rr]

4. Some have always thought belief nonsense.

"What led you to become an atheist?"
Nothing. I was raised in a religious (Baptist) household and never believed. Ever. There was no conversion or an "aha!" moment. I simply have never believed in any gods.
For some reason, believers can't wrap their heads around that.

[cbayer]

9. Many feel as you do and many believers accept that as true for those individuals.

[Dawson Leery]

6. Many in the Christian and Islam communities (the two worse religions in that require

evangelizing) do not understand that we do NOT desire to be held to anachronistic dogma's from the Iron age.
We have learned much since then.

http://www.americanhumanist.org/Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_III

[edhopper]

10. So a personal experience lead many to question their faith

they then went on to think for themselves and investigate and found their was a lot of logical and rational reasons for them to not believe in God.

The author tries very hard to say that they are just mad at their church or God. He doesn't want to consider that once free of the restrictions of faith, critical thinking often leads to the understanding that their is no God.

[cbayer]

11. I don't think the author says that at all.

He seems to take their experiences seriously and approaches them with a great deal of respect.

I'm not sure we read the same article.

[edhopper]

16. Yes and he sees that experience as the reason for their atheism

I believe we have gone over the "all people's beliefs are equal, and atheists are no different" territory quite recently.

Seems to me he wants to elevate emotion as the prime driver for atheism, thereby negating the logical arguments for disbelief in God.

[cbayer]

17. He sees that as the reason for some people's atheism.

He took the time to listen and listen sincerely. He drew some general conclusions, but nothing definitive, as far as I can tell.

Do you disagree that emotion can be a driver for atheism? He certainly does not disregard the logical arguments, but merely states that it is often more complex than that.

Overall, I think he has done a great thing here. One of the problems atheists confront is that many believers do not take the time to sincerely listen to them. He did.

[skepticscott]

20. Emotion can be a driver

For people to become disenchanted with their church or with organized religion in general, and to break off association with them. That's not the same as being an atheist, but the author seems to be trying to imply that it is.

[Gore1FL]

24. Emotion did not play a role in me becoming an atheist.

Emotion may have caused me to step back and re-examine a belief system I once took for granted as true. It did not change the outcome of the re-examination. That distinction is important.

I don't believe in God because there is no evidence that there is one. Knowing that, it is easy to dismiss religion, because they compound the no evidence of God with unswerving dogma concerning it.

There is one fundamental reason someone is an atheist that is true for all atheists. We simply don't believe there is a God. All that it would take to convince us otherwise would be evidence the size of a mustard seed.

[cbayer]

25. I think your path is shared by many.

As I don't think there will ever be the evidence you speak of, it makes no difference to me whether there is a god (gods) or not.

I also feel pretty unemotional about it, but I do honor both those that believe and those that don't. As long as they don't use those positions to restrict the rights of others.

[Gore1FL]

26. Generally speaking, I don't care what people believe. It's when I am brought into it that I care.

When I am told I am hell bound, when I am told I am at fault for tragedies, when I am told that the Bible trumps science, etc. is when I get going.

I've also been know to get riled up when people spam about it on facebook; the Jesus snuff pictures are the worst.

[edhopper]

28. It seems to me

that he was trying to psychoanalyze them.
Asking how could people possibly reject God, must be an emotional response.

[LostOne4Ever]

12. Emotion

As the author saw, there is a perception that most of us reject theism out of cold logic alone. However, many of us have emotional reasons as well as logical reasons.

I completely reject the deity in the bible. I view his actions as cruel and full of malice. The inconsistencies of the bible, and the statements it makes that are at odds with science only reinforce my belief that not only does he not exist, but if he did I would oppose him.

I spent a short while as a Deist. I eventually came to doubt in that god's existence seeing the atrocities that occur in our world. How could a god, even an indifferent god, not step in and do something? Was a god like that even worth believing in? He/She did not care if i believed in him/her or not. He/she would not interfere no matter how horrible things got, and existence still end the moment we die.

The Question of theodicy/Epicurus eventually overcame me.

So both logic and emotion were parts of my rejection of theism.

Atheists particularly fascinate me. Perhaps it's because I consider their philosophy -- if the absence of belief may be called a philosophy -- historically naive and potentially dangerous.

<snip>

could see no obvious connection between her father's death and her unbelief. Was it because she loved her abusive father -- abused children often do love their parents -- and she was angry with God for his death?

I hope the author realizes that many atheists feel the same way about his "philosophy." Further, as he was shown in that one interview, he should not be so fast in assuming we are ANGRY at a being we don't believe in.

I have no emotion to the god of Deism, and my anger toward the religions of Judism, Islam, Christianity or any other organized religion is only for when they convinces good people to go against their conscience.

Gay Marriage being the epitome of this. Two gay people who love each other hurts no body and letting them get married would make everyone happier. But people oppose it or think its sinful because some crappy book compiled ~2000 years ago that makes claims that can't stand the test of time said so?

When religions encourage people to do good then I have nothing but praise for those beliefs. In fact, I have a special place in my heart for those believers who use their beliefs to help others and actively reject the parts of their religions that encourage hate as corruptions or as flat out falsehoods.

But I will not forgive religions insist on keeping teachings that encourage hate. They are the problem.

[cbayer]

13. Great response.

It explains very well why and who you are in terms of religious.

You also support tolerance and even high regard for the good aspects of religion, while clearly articulating the obvious harms.

Well done.

[Notafraidtoo]

27. I think organized religion will continue to die slowly

In the western world as long as they stay political and ignore Jesus,of course focusing on Jesus and love wont give you any power or fulfill any ambition so the future holds a lot more atheist and agnostics,But what do i know i am just a happy atheist.

[Zoeisright]

29. I'm an atheist because

there is absolutely no evidence for belief in gods. Notice I did not say proof: I said evidence.

And there is absolutely none.