How do I tell my friends I don't want to do the Alpha course?

[BumperliciousVsTheDailyHate]

Some lovely friends of mine have just asked me and DH if we want to do the Alpha Course. I'm not completely adverse to it but I don't particularly want to at the moment for several reasons:

1. I work 9 hour days, and by the time I get done with dinner and putting 2 yo DD to bed I get about 2 hours before having to go bed, the last thing I want to do is go and be sociable, articulate and thoughtful
2. I'm an atheist, though I was into religion and church until I was a teen then got completely put off it after my mum dragged me a along to a born-again Christian church.
3. We couldn't get a babysitter, though I could go on my own, I just really don't want to
4. I don't think it would make me change how I feel, I don't want it to change how I feel, I am perfectly happy as an atheist. I think it would be a waste of time.

Can anyone help me let my friends down in a nice way, that doesn't belittle the way they feel. We have discussed religion, and they know how I feel. They are very strong in their beliefs and very up front about them, though not in a pressurising way. They are really lovely and I don't want to offend them but to be honest I struggle to muster up the energy to make conversation with my husband at the moment. But I need a better reason than 'I can't be bothered'. I'm not adverse to the Alpha Course per se, I have seen very good reviews on it, but it smacks a little of brain washing to me.

What do I say?

I'm a Christian and I know where you and your friend's are coming from!

I am so exhausted most evenings I usually don't want to do anything either!

They won't be offended if you say atm you are just totally exhausted and you're not sure about it.

On the positive side- you get a meal at the alpha course meetings, you get to ask all your controversial questions, you might meet some like minded people, make friends and enjoy a bit of time out just doing something different.

Disclaimer- not trying to persuade you- I just know that although I never want to go to these things I actually end up really enjoying the social aspect and discussion when I'm there!

But, thatsnotmymonster, it's not really about having a meal and a friendly chat, is it? You can join a book group for that. Or sign up for philosophy evening classes.

It's a bit presumptious to assume that atheists might have "controversial quesions" to ask Christians. Why should they/we? That's assuming they haven't already thought about these things or read about them or talked about them elsewhere. Far from true for most of the more card-carrying atheists.

I have done an Alpha course, though never finished it because of something happening at the time.

They are not all evangelical, IIRC they were started by the church of England. They are supposed to be an introduction into what Christianity is about with no pressure. But they are run by the individual church and it's members so it will vary what you get, my courses weren't like that, I went with someone who wasn't a Christian and he didn't feel pressurised, he did enjoy it.

sorry, i should explain, I'm not talking about evangelical christianity, I'm talking about the special techniques used on some of these programs

Fennel, there was a New Statesman article by AN Wilson about going from studying to be a priest to atheism and back to religion again.

www.newstatesman.com/religion/2009/04/conversion-experience-atheism

TBH I read it and didn't recognise the atheism he described very well...plus there are a few factual errors in there for good measure.

(In the same issue there was a really interesting article on deism and theism

www.newstatesman.com/religion/2009/04/god-flew-deism-world-atheist )

I don't think most hardline atheists are vulnerable, but that the very hardline, won't-hear-of-another-viewpoint type can be. Being very rigid and defensive about your views can be a sign of being insecure and needing a dogma to cling to, and that type of person can be seduced by cult-type things IMO.

I'm as atheist as they come but for me, a part of that is being inherently also agnostic. As a true rationalist I have to admit that there are things I can't know, and I cannot know for certain that there isn't a god. But religious people generally do "know" that they are right and as such a religion-based course isn't really a place for a genuine discussion, IYSWIM.

If people are happy about being an atheist, then I really don't see any point in them going to an Alpha course, or anything else intended to tell them about a religion. If you have an interest, it might be a place to try, but it's definitely not "neutral".

Just say no. I'm a Christian but I wouldn't push anyone to go who hadn't actually shown the sort of interest that made me feel they wanted to consider the possibility.

As to whether "atheists" are more or less susceptible to religious conversion by these types of groups, I doubt it. But I imagine there are plenty of people of all shades of belief or disbelief who are susceptible to being persuaded by anyone who is strongly convinced of something.

Even Dawkins has an agnostic streak to him
In that he doesn't categorically know there's no God. I've never met an atheist who claims to have proof there isn't??

But when you look at the underhanded techniques used by the Scientologists to recruit candidates I do agree to a certain extent that some people are susceptible ...

The whole thing about the Alpha course is that ultimately it is to convert the unbeliever/doubter to a christian view point and that excludes the course from being anything but open minded ...

Aplha course also doesn't finish when the course does - it usually dissolves into a home group and further Christian study ...

If you don't want to - do a Nancy and just say NO!!

The intention behind the Alpha course is definitely evangelical - the aim is to evangelise people and for them to become Christians.

You can be an evangelical Anglican. Easily. I was brought up in that context, my parents are evangelical Anglicans, very keen on Alpha courses.

I agree there's the occasional high-profile atheist turning to religion. I think Ladyofthebathtub puts that well, most atheists aren't as vehement as Richard Dawkins etc, they will allow an element of agnosticism, the acceptance that of course we can't know for absolutely sure there is no such thing as a God or some sort of extra-natural being.

that doesn't mean we think there might be a god, and spend our nights wondering about it or feeling some sort of hole in our psyches.

I'd love to hear from someone who was a totally convinced atheist and became a full-on Christian. I've heard of it happening but I've never actually spoken to one.

Fennel
Dawkins does admit that
It would be illogical not to

I'd really like to take bets with all the people who predict Richard Dawkins will someday be converted - methinks its just another delusion .

Yes, it's there in B&W in The God Delusion. Sliding scale of 1-7 - he puts himself at a 6. You can't "know" there is a god, just as you can't "know" there is no Pink Unicorn or Celestial Teapot. It's just very, very unlikely and not a thing an intelligent person need entertain themselves very much with.

know there is NO god sorry

ok, yes, I wasn't meaning to be rude about Dawkins, I am quite a fan in fact, but I know he does go further in his views and how he argues them than most atheists. So I would see him at the end of the atheist spectrum. and as you both say, even Dawkins isn't so dogmatic he insists that his worldview has to be the right one, just that it's the best fit of the currently available evidence. Which I'd agree with.

Richard Dawkins isn't nearly as vehement as he's made out to be. I was quite suprised by his mildness on some of his TV programs.

I've said that before on here, Grimma. It's amazing how many people just don't believe it! He gives his detractors every opportunity to put their view, then quietly and efficiently refutes it with evidence.

I do sometimes find that he goes on and on against what you might call a straw man argument. He puts SO much effort into arguing against creationism, and while that might be an issue in the US, actually most UK Christians are not creationists, so I think he's getting distracted there, in a UK context he'd be better off arguing against what UK Christians believe, not setting up this idea of creationists and then arguing against it.

I think he'd make his point better if he were a bit more realistic about what religious people do think rather than making quite inaccurate and I suspect exaggerated assumptions about this.

I did very much like the God Delusion.

UQD, I think bloss on MN is what you are looking for - an ex atheist turned Christian.

Haven't seen her about for a while though?

yy but he is a hero to American atheists - I wonder if he is bowing to market forces a bit there? (re arguing against creationism).

actually it is possible to prove logically that the Christian God does not exist

premises:
God made everything
God is wholly good
Evil exists

conclusion : God is impossible and it is possible to say
that a logically impossible thing does not exist

what does he say about

the essence of faith is that you can't prove it

so evidence doesn't come into it one way or the other: neither empirical (eg architectural remains of the walls of Jericho) nor logical (eg see above)

in fact, if you rely on either empirical or logical evidence then de facto you do not have faith

therefore it is imperative that to have faith one must discount all logical and empirical evidence

ie faith is justified by the very fact that you can prove that God does not exist

(nb i accept the irony of using logical argument to argue that logical argument does not count -- or is this indeed the fatal flaw)

I hate the Alpha courses. They drain every gram of politics out of Christ's message. They are obsessed with no sex before marriage and other red herrings [it came out of the Holy Trinity Brompton which is a hooray henry evangelical dating agency really]

But I wouldn't accept any of those 3 premises. and I wouldn't even try to prove that something like God didn't exist. You don't need to prove that to think that it's vanishingly unlikely that there is a God in the sense that Christianity or the other big religions mean.

Yes I know Fennel, you're not a Christian, but when you're putting together an argument about the Christian God, you take characteristics of the Christian God and put them to the test.

The Christian God is supposed to have made everything, the Christian God is supposed to be wholly good.

I'm surprised and interested that you don't think evil exists, and that you might think for example that unanaesthetized organ removal from small children is wholly good.

Perhaps rephrase: there are things in this world, that a wholly good God is supposed to have made in its entirety which are not wholly good.

If God made everything, he made the things that are not wholly good. Therefore he is not wholly good.

If God is wholly good, he did not make everything in the world.

It's self contradictory.