Discussing Communication and Conflict Issues for Atheists Married to Christians

Templar

Athol_Kay said:

Templar said:

I can tell you that religions do change their views over time. There have been a number of large councils through the last 2000 years at which such things are debated, discussed and defined. Even outside of these, the great thinkers of the ages have swayed how certain things with major impact are thought of. The just war theory being just one of them.

Do you realize you're making the case that religious change doesn't require God, only human rationality debating, discussing and defining.

What's the point of divine revelation if it's then subject to committees?  

That's not really what I am saying, at all. The councils weren't over things like, does God exist. They were often to correct heresy (heresy was often misinterpretation or flawed understanding of the deeper mysteries - the human and divine nature of Jesus, etc).

Jesus didn't leave a manual that described every single human interaction one would encounter, nor did He leave a manual that explained every finest detail of who He is and how He wishes us to follow him. The golden rule is obviously open to interpretation disagreements. That's the point of getting the best minds together to discuss. It's not that the councils get together and then say make hugely radical changes. Typically, they true the course rather than completely changing. Cultural impacts often cause religious beliefs to wander a bit. The councils were often calling people back to the path.

The way I consider religion is that it is the human expression of the divine - meaning basically, we were given an example and basic instructions and now we are trying to live them. As people, we are not perfect. That is why our attempts at living our religious lives are flawed. Much like @Mandrill said at the end, there.

ETA: I also believe that the Holy Spirit does influence the councils.

JellyBean

@JemStone‌ said: "Just because you have knowledge I don't have, or vice versa, doesn't make either side more or less superior. Just because I can speak french and you can speak german doesn't mean I'm better than you or you better than me. It just means we are in different places with our knowledge. "

You use the word knowledge here but the proper word you need is faith.

Your comparison of religious faith to fluency in a foreign language is flawed. I may not speak Japanese, but I could apply myself and learn it over time. To suggest that I don't have religious faith because I just haven't gained enough information or understanding is deeply insulting.

I'm not an atheist because I lack information or facts or knowledge. I'm an atheist because I reject religious faith.

_io

JellyBean said:

@JemStone‌ said: "Just because you have knowledge I don't have, or vice versa, doesn't make either side more or less superior. Just because I can speak french and you can speak german doesn't mean I'm better than you or you better than me. It just means we are in different places with our knowledge. "

You use the word knowledge here but the proper word you need is faith.

Your comparison of religious faith to fluency in a foreign language is flawed. I may not speak Japanese, but I could apply myself and learn it over time. To suggest that I don't have religious faith because I just haven't gained enough information or understanding is deeply insulting.

I'm not an atheist because I lack information or facts or knowledge. I'm an atheist because I reject religious faith.

But why would you be deeply insulted? So, he thinks there is something else you're missing. You disagree. I'm not deeply insulted that a large number of atheists think I'm stupid. I'm not deeply insulted that a large number of Christians think I'm a heretic for not believing God is a trinity. I'm not insulted that a large number of Muslims think I'm an infidel. I accept that all those people think they know better than me and have knowledge I'm missing. And vice versa.

You think you know better than him. If you didn't, you wouldn't be an atheist; you'd be whatever he is.

Edited to change all my feminine pronouns to masculine. @JemStone‌, your cute little orange slices always trip me up.

JellyBean

@_io you have misrepresented my position. I don't believe I "know better."

The reason @JemStone's position is troubling is because he argues that atheists are atheists because they are ignorant. "Just because I can speak french doesn't mean I'm better than you. It just means we are in different places with our knowledge. ". What different places? That you have knowledge that I don't have? I don't care to argue faith with people. Faith is not about knowledge or facts or science. Faith is about belief and emotion.

I don't call believers ignorant for having faith (although sadly some atheists do). Don't call me ignorant for having rejected faith.

Listen up, atheists. Believers are not ignorant or stupid -- they just believe differently.

Listen up, believers. Atheists are not ignorant or stupid -- they just believe differently.

JemStone

JellyBean said:

@_io you have misrepresented my position. I don't believe I "know better."

The reason @JemStone's position is troubling is because he argues that atheists are atheists because they are ignorant. "Just because I can speak french doesn't mean I'm better than you. It just means we are in different places with our knowledge. ". What different places? That you have knowledge that I don't have? I don't care to argue faith with people. Faith is not about knowledge or facts or science. Faith is about belief and emotion.

I don't call believers ignorant for having faith (although sadly some atheists do). Don't call me ignorant for having rejected faith.

Listen up, atheists. Believers are not ignorant or stupid -- they just believe differently.

Listen up, believers. Atheists are not ignorant or stupid -- they just believe differently.

I didn't call anyone ignorant or stupid on either side.  I guess you could argue I inferred ignorance, but I'd never use that word -- it's a loaded word and has no place in the conversation I want, primarily because it's loaded with meaning that isn't in what I am saying.

@jellybean why does it threaten you when I say I have knowledge as opposed to faith?  I don't know all things.  I don't know most things.  But I do know some things.  I can't prove or disprove any of my experiences to you, nor will I attempt to.

@_io I've changed my avatar temporarily, I'll see if I can do better.  I rather liked the orange slices but they are undeniably... not masculine when combined with my username.  

JellyBean

"@jellybean why does it threaten you when I say I have knowledge as opposed to faith? I don't know all things. I don't know most things. But I do know some things. I can't prove or disprove any of my experiences to you, nor will I attempt to."

Again with the misrepresentation. I am not threatened by your claim to have knowledge instead of faith, and I never said anything to suggest such a thing.

You don't get to have it both ways. You can't on one hand say you don't want to use the word "ignorance," then in your very next sentence you imply that you have something that qualifies as knowledge rather than faith. If you have knowledge (instead of faith) that I don't share, then by that definition I am ignorant.

It seems like you are attempting to say, "I'm not saying you're ignorant, I'm just saying I know something you don't know."

Anyway, I don't want to debate this anymore, and I will read but not respond to any further comments on this. I'm going to go read a book by Heinlein, the One True Author, then go to bed.

Believers and atheists, we can all join in songs of happiness that Fred Phelps has shuffled off this mortal coil.

Elaine

Britguy68 said:

I don't believe @mongrel is trying to convince her of his beliefs (or in this case non-belief). All he did was point out the logical inconsistency of free-will vs pre-ordained, and rather than try and defend/explain this inconsistency she took it as a personal insult.

It certainly may not be his intent to convince her or insult her, but I think his obvious attitude of disdain would say exactly that.  People get put on the defensive because of how something is said, not just because of what was said.

Elaine

Britguy68 said:

JemStone said:

As a christian I don't feel disdain for atheists.  I do sometimes feel sad that they don't know what I know. 

You see now I could take that statement as incredibly patronising....you are somehow superior to me because "I don't know what you do".

...but I won't ;-)

I don't understand why this is patronizing to say she is sad?  She didn't say she felt sorry for you or indicate you weren't capable of understanding something, she just stated it personally makes her sad.  Why the jump to her being superior or patronizing?

Britguy68

Elaine said:

I don't understand why this is patronizing to say she is sad?  She didn't say she felt sorry for you or indicate you weren't capable of understanding something, she just stated it personally makes her sad.  Why the jump to her being superior or patronizing?

Because that once sentence encompasses at least 3 different derogatory implications to a non believer like myself  :-

1) That the default position is she's right and I'm wrong, Her god exists....without qualification. All because she's knows something I don't.

2) That I'm an ignorant atheist, I simply lack the relevant knowledge that will suddenly make me believe in her god.

3) That's she's sad because I lack this knowledge, i.e. Presumably she's sad because she thinks I'm somehow not happy or not fulfilled with my life as an atheist due to this lack of knowledge/belief.

As an atheist I don't feel disdain for believers.  I do sometimes feel sad that religious folks don't know what I know....;-)

Elaine

Britguy68 said:

Elaine said:

I don't understand why this is patronizing to say she is sad?  She didn't say she felt sorry for you or indicate you weren't capable of understanding something, she just stated it personally makes her sad.  Why the jump to her being superior or patronizing?

Because that once sentence encompasses at least 3 different derogatory implications to a non believer like myself  :-

1) That the default position is she's right and I'm wrong, Her god exists....without qualification. All because she's knows something I don't.

2) That I'm an ignorant atheist, I simply lack the relevant knowledge that will suddenly make me believe in her god.

3) That's she's sad because I lack this knowledge, i.e. Presumably she's sad because she thinks I'm somehow not happy or not fulfilled with my life as an atheist due to this lack of knowledge/belief.

As an atheist I don't feel disdain for believers.  I do sometimes feel sad that religious folks don't know what I know....;-)

Let's just kill the mystery. 

@JemStone ; when you stated:

As a christian I don't feel disdain for atheists.  I do sometimes feel sad that they don't know what I know.  I expect the sentiment is reflected back to me in a few people I know who are atheists.

Since you explicitly stated you expect atheists reflected the sentiment, I personally do not believe you indicated any of the things @Britguy68 is claiming you meant.  Did you in fact mean the 3 points brought up by him?  I figure you would know what you meant for certain... 

Britguy68

In predict the answer will be a negative, but thats how at least 2 of us non believers interpreted that loaded sentence

"As an atheist I don't feel disdain for believers. I do sometimes feel sad that religious folks don't know what I know....;-)"......

hmmmm? You're right, Doesn't sound patronising at all...;-)

mrsozzy

It makes no sense to feel "sad" for someone who is being their true self. To do so is to impose your reality upon them.

It's a little like a white person feeling "sad" for someone who is black.

JemStone

For the record...

I am a man. With a beard. :P

@jellybean You're right, I assumed you felt threatened because of the way you responded. I jumped to conclusions--my bad for assuming on that front. I appreciate that you were trying to correct me. I used the word knowledge and that example specifically. I fully believe in all areas all people have different levels of knowledge. I mean no insult by saying it and I'm sorry to hear that expressing that I have knowledge is insulting to you. You are exactly right that I'm trying to not use the word ignorant -- in my experience it has very negative connotations. In addition to that I don't know what you know. Maybe you could know what I know and still think the same way. I don't believe that you would, but it doesn't really matter what I believe does it?  You don't seem to believe that I know anything that would change your mind.  Fair enough, I made the assumption that it was a possibility.

@britguy68 As for what I meant on the whole sad thing... When I say that I am sad, I am sad in the way that I would be sad if a friend was invited to an event but did not show up. It doesn't matter the reason they didn't show, I still miss them, they still miss out on the event.  It's in the direction of compassion, not self-righteousness.  I am disappointed that what I thought was an interesting addition to the conversation was so controversial.  I mean well even if I apparently do sound like a prick.  

I certainly don't say that to be all superior and high and mighty or to make some judgy statement here. If you reread my original post I hope that comes through in context -- I spent a paragraph at the top trying to reframe things in an attempt to curtail misunderstandings like this.  Feeling a little irony at the moment.

mrsozzy

@JemStone‌, I understand what you are trying to say with the "sad that you couldn't come to the event" analogy. However, spirituality or lack thereof is often an integral part of one's identity. The "sad" can sound like pity, and no one wants pity for an important part of their identity.

_io

mrsozzy said:

@JemStone‌, I understand what you are trying to say with the "sad that you couldn't come to the event" analogy. However, spirituality or lack thereof is often an integral part of one's identity. The "sad" can sound like pity, and no one wants pity for an important part of their identity.

I guess this is where I am being dense. Let's change the subject from atheism/religion to MBTI personality typing. Less loaded subject. I am an ISTP. It's a very live and let live personality type, but even so, sometimes I look at the other types and feel bad they have to deal with so much emotional angst, or have a hard time dealing with others because their precise analytical thinking process is hard for most others to relate to, or they are so scheduled they miss out on so much impromptu fun. I don't look down on them. I just see things differently from them.

I know that the SJs sometimes think I'm irresponsible, and the NTs sometimes think I'm simple, and the NFs sometimes think I'm shallow. And I don't care, because I know they are coming at it from a different viewpoint. They really do know things I don't. I am ignorant of their thinking processes. I might intellectually understand where they are coming from, but I don't really feel it like they do. And I don't need to because I have my own way of looking at the world that I am fine with.

If sometimes they feel sad for me because I'm missing out on a particular non-ISTP insight or joy, it's no skin off my nose.

mrsozzy

I guess I don't think about different personality types that much. I may have a hard time understanding some of them, but I can't say I've ever felt sad for them. If they're happy, I'm happy. To me, being sad for them would be a complete waste of my time. Just different approaches I guess.

It's like a heterosexual telling a homosexual, "I'm sad that you're not heterosexual; you're missing out on something I enjoy. Well, the gay person isn't sad at all, that's his or her identity, and they're very happy with it. So for me, being sad for them is just wasted energy. And I wouldn't blame the gay person for feeling a bit insulted for such "sadness."

It doesn't feel like compassion at all to me. Compassion is when you sympathize with someone who is in a bad situation or is unhappy. Most atheists are quite happy with their atheism, and view it as a positive force in their lives. So what others think is compassion is actually pity for something a religious person doesn't understand.

_io

mrsozzy said:

I guess I don't think about different personality types that much. I may have a hard time understanding some of them, but I can't say I've ever felt sad for them. If they're happy, I'm happy. To me, being sad for them would be a complete waste of my time. Just different approaches I guess. It's like a heterosexual telling a homosexual, "I'm sad that you're not heterosexual; you're missing out on something I enjoy. Well, the gay person isn't sad at all, that's his or her identity, and they're very happy with it. So for me, being sad for them is just wasted energy. And I wouldn't blame the gay person for feeling a bit insulted for such "sadness." It doesn't feel like compassion at all to me. Compassion is when you sympathize with someone who is in a bad situation or is unhappy. Most atheists are quite happy with their atheism, and view it as a positive force in their lives. So what others think is compassion is actually pity for something a religious person doesn't understand.

But in my mind, so what? We won't ever be able to change someone else. We can only change how we feel. As Spock one said, "You can not offend me. I can only allow myself to become offended." That might be a paraphrase.

mrsozzy

_io said:

mrsozzy said:

I guess I don't think about different personality types that much. I may have a hard time understanding some of them, but I can't say I've ever felt sad for them. If they're happy, I'm happy. To me, being sad for them would be a complete waste of my time. Just different approaches I guess.

It's like a heterosexual telling a homosexual, "I'm sad that you're not heterosexual; you're missing out on something I enjoy. Well, the gay person isn't sad at all, that's his or her identity, and they're very happy with it. So for me, being sad for them is just wasted energy. And I wouldn't blame the gay person for feeling a bit insulted for such "sadness."

It doesn't feel like compassion at all to me. Compassion is when you sympathize with someone who is in a bad situation or is unhappy. Most atheists are quite happy with their atheism, and view it as a positive force in their lives. So what others think is compassion is actually pity for something a religious person doesn't understand.

But in my mind, so what? We won't ever be able to change someone else. We can only change how we feel. As Spock one said, "You can not offend me. I can only allow myself to become offended." That might be a paraphrase.

I wouldn't try to change the other person. But I also wouldn't lie to myself and say that hearing the pity is pleasant for me. It's not. If this was a friend or aquaintance saying these things, I would simply distance myself from the person. If it was a family member, I would enforce appropriate boundaries in terms of topics discussed.

JemStone

mrsozzy said:

@JemStone‌, I understand what you are trying to say with the "sad that you couldn't come to the event" analogy. However, spirituality or lack thereof is often an integral part of one's identity. The "sad" can sound like pity, and no one wants pity for an important part of their identity.

It's not pity, but I can respect that it's been taken that way.  I'd put it closer to disappointment mingled with regret than anything.  But I'm not sure its exactly any of those things.

It's a pretty dead horse at this point.  

mrsozzy

JemStone said:

mrsozzy said:

@JemStone‌, I understand what you are trying to say with the "sad that you couldn't come to the event" analogy. However, spirituality or lack thereof is often an integral part of one's identity. The "sad" can sound like pity, and no one wants pity for an important part of their identity.

It's not pity, but I can respect that it's been taken that way.  I'd put it closer to disappointment mingled with regret than anything.  But I'm not sure its exactly any of those things.

It's a pretty dead horse at this point.  

It's fine; it's not a big deal. I dont spend a lot of time worrying about what others think of me or what they believe. But there are some atheists who would feel the same regret and disappointment at your religious beliefs. I am not one of them, as long as everyone plays nice and doesn't try to force any beliefs on anyone else.