Atheists on belief threads. Why?

[DioneTheDiabolist]

While there are sometimes interesting threads where atheists and believers discuss and debate religion, it seems to me that increasingly atheists only come onto threads here to poopoo or disrespect the beliefs of others.

Am I right about this and if not then what is the reasoning behind the posts where atheists call the beliefs of others rubbish etc?

I wouldn't pick another branch of Christianity because each one has it's issues and parts that I couldn't or wouldn't subscribe to.

Organised religion just doesn't do it for me as much as for others.

That's why I've been banging on so much about their being a difference between having issues with a religion and having issues with those who believe in god.

I've been raised catholic. It has it's positives, for me. But the negatives are huge and it's just not for me. Maybe, in the future, I'll look into other faiths. For now I'm happy to say that I believe in god and his greatness but I think there are massive faults within the religions man has built throughout the ages.

I can only speak for myself though. My mother despairs of me!

"Leaving a denomination can be agonising, because it isn't simply a consumer decision but involves deep commitments of the intellect and the emotions."

On one level, I can see where you're coming from with that, but on another (as a product of a very Protestant upbringing!) - surely a church is just people? Flawed and mistaken in the normal human way? And actually your 'deep commitment' shouldn't be to the church, but to God?

I suppose what I'm trying to say, is your relationship with your concept of God should be what it is - you should let that find its natural level - and then you should find a church to fit your spirituality. Rather than it going the other way around and ending up a bad fit for you. (when I say 'you', I mean 'one' here, not addressing it to anyone in particular!)

waltermitty, I'd think that the vast majority of atheists would have no problem with someone who quietly believes in a personal god. It's just, once organised religion comes into it, and we start going down the, 'you can't go to that school/watch that film/abolish that ancient law' road, then us atheists start getting all prickly and militant. And sarcastic.

DH would describe himself as CofE, but the god he believes in is such a wooly liberal non-interventionist, that his 'Christianity' is barely distinguishable from my 'atheism' and we generally seem to rub along quite nicely.

DH would describe himself as CofE, but the god he believes in is such a wooly liberal non-interventionist, that his 'Christianity' is barely distinguishable from my 'atheism' and we generally seem to rub along quite nicely.

This is exactly like atheist DH and I!

Boulevard, when you suggest that 'you should find a church to fit your spirituality rather than the other way around', that is what I would think of as reducing it to a consumer decision. Of course, I can simply walk into any church and join in with what's going on -- and it's good to do that. We can all learn from doing new things.

But the real growth, the real spiritual development, comes from sticking with one thing and working on the difficult bits. I'd say it was a bit like serial monogamy vs marriage. Serial monogamy is all very well, if what you want is novelty and variety, and if your solution to all difficulties is to change partners. Marriage can be very unhappy, and I would bet that even in the most successful marriage, there are times of boredom, and dissatisfaction, and deep unhappiness. There can come times when staying in a marriage is intolerable. But marriage can also be the source of some of the deepest human relationships we can have. (By the way, when I say marriage, I mean a committed, exclusive relationship between two people.)

The analogy isn't perfect. But while it is fine for people to believe in God as a private matter, for Christians an essential part of our belief is that we come together for the sacrament of the Eucharist, the sacred meal that joins us into one body that is what the church is. And it may well be that for many of us, the meal we share is more important than the things that the Church says that we disagree with and goodness knows, I have never met a Christian who didn't have some disagreements with the church of which s/he was a member.

It has been wonderful reading all the comments on here today, in fact it has quite stopped me getting any work done!

Very well said niminypiminy.

I have certainly moved church when I felt it was right to do so and stayed even though I did not agree with all beliefs in a particular church, because I felt it was right to do so.

But moving denomination is not just a matter or picking another group. For example Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe Jesus is God and do not consider themselves Christians. There are quite a few groups around the edges of mainstream Christianity where people would not usually consider joining and vice versa, but certainly among mainstream protestant denominations there can be quite a bit of ebb and flow.

Being part of a church is about being part of a body of people, and it is actually quite painful sometimes to leave. Sometimes people feel it is right to stay. Which is why people stay even when they sometimes disagree with things because they feel it is right to do so. If all the women who wanted to be ordained had simply moved to the Methodists or Baptists from the C of E in the 80s I do wonder if we would have women ordained in the C of E now. And likes wise as we wait for women bishops to come in, if all those aspiring women bishops became Methodists then I do wonder if we would ever have women bishops.

I am aware that some are offended by 'negative' terms used to describe religion, and I can certainly see why. I am not offended generally though, it just seems odd to refer to God as someone's imaginarily friend, when clearly this is so far from the reality for most people of faith! And faith isa part of the lives of all kinds of people in all kinds of situations, like falling in love with someone when you don't know how it will all work out!

And I can totally understand why atheists are sometimes offended by Christians and people of faith, and why they feel so saddened by some of the things that do affect people's lives.

I think it does call for some tolerance, so it is always nice to see that being given, I know for my part there seem to be discussion threads on here where people give their views etc but there are also other times when people ask a very specific question about a specific religion or denomination or situation and then someone pops up and says something really out of place in that it is nothing to do with the thing mentioned and is simply (in my humble opinion) ?slagging off? religion in general! So to me it is a bit like someone popping onto cookery thread and answering a question about a Victoria sponge with some info on global warming!

Oh, Ninnypinny I was referring to your earlier post and just cross posted with you and totally agree with you again! Spooky! I must go off to bed. Been reading this thread off and on all day!

I think the issue of which denomination is interesting . I say this as a Catholic who openly disagrees with some of what the church hierarchy believe. For me the key issue is the core of what I view to be my Christianity with a Catholic basis.

The core of this belief is, I believe, expressed in the creed through which I can state my beliefs without reservation. I appreciate that the creed, or a version of it, is common to many Christian churches so this is the root belief of my Christianity.

I think the thing that roots me in the Catholic faith is my belief in the holy eucharist which I do see as becoming the body and blood of Jesus in more than a symbolic way. This is hugely important to me personally and is why I remain a Catholic rather than heading for the C of E or methodism etc even though some of their outward beliefs may accord more.

The next bit will sound bonkers to anyone without faith but I have asked the question, through prayer, why I am called to be, not only a Christian, but also a Catholic and I genuinely believe that I got the answer back that the RC church needs women like me who are prepared to openly practise their faith but also to be clear about which parts of the church need to move forward and for the church to concentrate on key messages of love and caring for people rather than endless arguments over marriage, homosexuality etc etc.

I like niminy's analogy of a marriage. I love my husband deeply but some of his habits irritate me and some of his friends piss me right off but that doesn't affect the core of our marriage based on love.

To answer the exam question: atheists on faith threads doesn't overly bother me personally as I feel that I can extract what I need to and leave others to their own opinions. It's interesting to see how others view things generally. I think some posters across the whole of Mumsnet do like to express themselves in particularly strident ways and I think this must be upsetting for those seeking support but, hopefully, there are enough there expressing support for the posters to outweigh this.

Shutting up now and doing to make a cup of tea!

what i find odd is that religious people will want people who don't believe to be tolerant of their religions. But are not concerned with the bigotry of these same religions and don't seem to want to stamp it out but let it continue and accept that some parts of their religions will just have to be like that.

like in this marriage analogy i couldn't put up with a dh who was loving and caring but was also a bigot, he may be a loving father but why would I want him to instill in my children his bigotry ways, which is what he would do if I were to marry and have children with him.

Well I can't speak for others but I don't just accept that the church cannot move forward and change but I remain part of it because I can continue to express my views and remain part of it.

The way I see it my faith is like a marriage and I am comfortable with my personal relationship with God. The church is like a wider family and friends. I can't agree with them all, some of them I completely disagree with, this can include the most senior members but it doesn't stop me loving my husband or being a part of the family. I just have to be honest about what I believe and trying to live my life according to my conscience as best I can and hopefully influencing others by example and discussion. I won't do that by leaving the family.

I can appreciate that leaving your particular gang/tribe can be distressing, and the analogy with marriage is quite a good one. Particularly as heteromonogamy is as much a social construct as religion is, and many people live happily without engaging in it (or in either, for that matter). So if you (generic 'you') married a man who was lovely in some ways but awful in others, there would probably come a point at which you couldn't stay with him any longer - whether that would be the point at which he beat you, abused the DC, robbed a bank or voted Tory would depend on a variety of factors. Leaving one marriage might mean you later entered into another, but it might also mean that you decided to stay single and wondered why you'd ever been so hung up on sticking to heteromonogamy. Those of you who are loyal to particular sects with acknowledged nasty sides may find that you have a quit point somewhere: again whether that leads you to abandon the whole silly business, or to have another go with a new 'partner' would remain to be seen.

Another analogy might be political groups: some people who had been longterm members of the SWP recently walked out due to the organisation's condoning of rape and sexual assault; some of them might give up activisim altogether, others join different groups, but all of them would have had to make that decision as to whether they could continue trying to change the bad stuff about the organisation from the inside, or whether it was time to cut loose.

I find the denomination thing interesting. For example, I know, both in real life and on here,people who say they are Roman Catholics, but when you say "but what about......" they say "oh, I don't agree with/believe in that bit" It would be possible to say, and I'm sure people are going to, that that is none of my business, and faith is a personal matter. The problem is though, that the Catholic Church has huge power in the world, and some of that power is very damaging. People who choose to disregard the bits they don't like while still identifying themselves as Catholics are endorsing and supporting the control the Church has over others. An individual can decide personally to use contraception, or have an abortion, for example, but doing so whie continuing to support the Catholic Church denies other women the same choices.

Also, niminy, the fact that you think your brand of guff is true doesn't make it so. Nor does it actually matter what you believe, that's your business. Other people only object when you start impinging on their lives with your mythologies.

With all due respect, SGB, the fact that you think it is guff doesn't make it so either.

It's your truth, niminy and SGB's guff.

Which is fine, so long as it has no impact on anyone's lives except yours. The trouble is that religion has a massive impact on the lives of others whether they want it to or not.

Ginger - the problem with your analogy is that every christian in your church and the wider world claims to be married to the same person, yet this same person is telling different people different things. WHY? Why would you do that? Why would you say to spouse A 'I support such and such' then turn around to spouse B and say 'that thing that spouse A supports really upsets me'.

you can express your views but how long will you be ignored?

Certainly if a husband in the marriage analogy was violent or bad in some way then I would leave but the analogy asserts that my husband is perfect (just like my real life one ahem.). Its the wider family which is flawed. As I said above my core beliefs remain firmly Christian and Catholic. There seems to be, sometimes, an emphasis on beliefs which are not core (the church doesn't always help itself in this regard either).

Seeker I hear what you are saying about supporting the church but I choose to remain within it because I believe that gives me most influence. I agree it's a balance but for me personally the positives of remaining within the church far outweigh the negatives and I have a genuine belief th
at my faith has called me to remain in the
church.

The church is also full of ordinary, practising Christians who are full of love and compassion and my life is enriched every day by my faith.

"The church is also full of ordinary, practising Christians who are full of love and compassion and my life is enriched every day by my faith."

Absolutely. But the hierarchy is so hideous. How is it possible to ignore that?

Well the hierarchy isn't completely hideous to me. It is flawed and I believe it needs to change but not everything about it is 'hideous'.

Also the church isn't only the hierarchy hideous, flawed, perfect or otherwise.

Wrt to the original question, I am pleased that here on MN there can be discussions between people of completely polarised opinions. I choose to hang out here, rather than a more niche Christian website, precisely because I appreciate this side of it, and find the debate invigorating and challenging. Discussions I have had here with atheists have been some of the most helpful to me in terms of my faith that I can think of - they keep me reading, keep me engaging, keep me real, I think.

I guess there's a tipping point when it comes to threads such as prayer threads, and when it comes to personal attack. I've very rarely seen personal attack on these threads. Attack on faith, yes, but that's very different. I can quite happily cope with any spaghetti monster rhetoric you care to throw in my direction, but would find it upsetting if the attack was against me personally. I can think of only one time this has happened, and Mn deleted it rather quickly iirc. I think somebody called me a thick bigot. OK, well.

So, I'll happily carry on in such discussions. While the teapot analogy et al can become somewhat jaded, I'm sure my arguments become equally so to those of no faith. It's whether we can carry on talking to each other in mutual respect of persons, if not ideas, that is the main question to me.

If not, I tend to bow out.

I have the same problem as the one seeker expressed yesterday - that the best way to explain what atheism is is, indeed, to compare god with other things which are equally unbelievable. And this means using comparisons like The Teapot, the Pink Unicorn, and, yes, Zeus and Thor and all that lot, and "imaginary friend". It really is that unreal - it really is that unlikely. We don't necessarily say these things to be provocative or rhetorical. I think it is important to say these things, no matter how spiky they may appear - otherwise the argument can become portrayed as a falsely simplistic dichotomy (you either "believe in God", because you "understand" or "have a relationship" with god, or you "don't believe in God", because you don't "understand" or have this "relationship").

It's also very hard to avoid what can become a tit-for-tat exchange of "your saying it's real doesn't make it so", versus "your saying it's guff doesn't make it so." This is another false dichotomy. There is the small matter of evidence, which is on the side of the unbelievers, and of scepticism being the default setting. Believers don't like this, but it is the only standpoint with philosophical integrity. If someone tells you something is true, do you just accept it on trust? Of course not. You ask for evidence.

There have been terrible, corrupt, morally bankrupt parliamentarians. Does that mean that parliament is itself a terrible, corrupt, morally bankrupt institution? Does it mean (and this is a close analogy with what people are saying about religion) that democracy is a terrible, corrupt, morally bankrupt idea?

And wrt denominations - interesting topic. I've always thought I sit quite lightly to 'belonging to a denomination'- I enjoy visiting churches of all flavours except ultra conservative and get a lot out of the differing emphases. However, saying that, I'm quite a C of E at heart, depending on the individual church, of course. I think niminy has put it very well. We need to weigh up our own church in terms of how it does things. There will always be difficulties in any church, as in any institution. I think that we need to be willing to engage with any problems, to change from within, if you like - to challenge unhealthy practise and to uphold the good.

"Well the hierarchy isn't completely hideous to me. It is flawed and I believe it needs to change but not everything about it is 'hideous'.

Also the church isn't only the hierarchy hideous, flawed, perfect or otherwise."

Of course it isn't- lift the lid on any major institution and you'll discover it's rotten to the core. But the church is, as far as I know, the only one that claimed to be the moral arbiter of society. And which surely should, shouldn't it? have higher standards than Tesco.

Which bits of the hierarchy aren't hideous, by the way?