Evening all.
When I made the choice to deconvert (thanks, by the way, to Microsoft for not acknowledging that as a real word) from Christianity, I did so as a through and through skeptic. I've said in my introductory post a long time ago about how 9/11 shaped my understanding of reality, and I actually have purged the word 'believe' from my vocabulary outside of academic discussion. If you couldn't prove your point, I had no reason to point to it. A lot of people here who grew up in secular homes might find this disturbing and/or confounding, but I entered into atheism in the same vein. What proofs did atheists have that God didn't exist? Everything about my cultural paradigm up until that point was painted with a theistic, if not blatantly Christian, brush, so this argument needed to be pretty darned convincing.
Like any person who hears someone wholeheartedly proclaim that 'jet fuel can't melt steel beams', 'we never landed on the moon', or 'Trump never said that', one needs to have supporting evidence and arguments that either back up their counterpoint, or debunk the claimant's argument at the get-go. Running on a similar vein to my other sources of skepticism, I looked towards the theme of this debate article: Christian Apologetics. The concept of apologetics (I've now returned those lost brownie points back to Microsoft for not acknowledging that as a real word, either) is that people do not, on some level or another, understand the will of God, and that arguments and clarifications are necessary for someone to truly grasp the meaning of scripture. One of the first, and historically most famous apologists was Thomas Aquinas and the Summa Theologica he produced. Modern ones such as Ken Ham, William Lane Craig and Ray Comfort have come forward in modern times, and some of each of their theories I used to try to create a rebuttal against the 'positive claims' that atheism made against my theological concepts.
As you probably guessed, it didn't go over so well for my faith. Once I learned about the basic counterapologetics to the Argument from Design, Pascal's Wager, the Euthyphro Dilemma, and the Epicurean Paradox, I realized that belief was untenable and unreasonable. It did, however, give me a depth of knowledge into the concepts that keep a lot of mildly doubtful believers glued to their pews.
The reason I'm bringing all of this up is that a lot of people who were raised secular or who had a much swifter deconversion can't understand why people think a lot of the unfounded bunk that they do. As such, I'm offering this thread as a sort of window into the minds of the faithful from a former believer. Think of me in this thread as an...angel's advocate. Ask questions you have about belief and beliefs, and I'll give you the best answers that I've researched. Bear in mind that my former belief system was strictly Christian, but I did delve into both Protestant-leaning as well as Catholic apologetics, so I'll be able to answer either style, as well as the broader questions that matter around faith.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Let me ask you this question: when you were a believer; why did you think atheists existed? Like for example did you think they just didn't know enough about god/Jesus/whatever? I realize you might have gone through enough internal changes that you can't even express what you thought at the time (like how I can't explain why I did certain things when I was young).
Actually I had a fairly consistent internal concept of atheists and what they were. Strange as it sounds, I didn't believe they existed. Oh, I was very certain that there were people who called themselves atheists, and I'm sure there were people who said publicly that they did not have a relationship with god. I also knew there were people who thought that lizard people ruled the government and the like. I also knew that bad things happened to a lot of people, and that had a habit of testing someone's faith. Some people experienced bad times and got past them with the help of god and some others...didn't. I saw atheists as people just having an argument with their creator. Some people drop ties with their families when they get upset, and it made sense that some people might be so out of whack as to be mad at their spiritual father.
In other words, there were no atheists, just people having a prolongedly bad day.
You have several things fundamentally wrong. The onus of proof is on the believer NOT the atheist. We didn't make up a god so we aren't responsible to disprove said god. Also "secular" doesn't in any way shape or form equal or mean atheist.
Please keep in mind throughout this thread that this is all being said in the past tense, and understand that if a theistic person had a full and comprehensive grasp on logic and fallacies, they likely wouldn't be a theist.
What is a "through and through" skeptic? Is that your claim that you still need to be convinced there is a god?
And, to deconvert you first have to convert from something, to something else, and then back again. If you mean converted to atheism from a theism, I'm with you. I suppose this refers to your title "Counterapologetics"?
Also, as mykcob4 points out, I do not need to stand on any proving ground to be who I am. I have no back story to protect or defend. If I become a harbinger of atheism it isn't because I'm making a case for it. It's because an apologist has taken up with me of his own free choosing, prompted by his own internal struggle with doubt, essentially demanding from me a rationale he hopes to use in polemic support of his own back story. Kinda dumb. He'll be waiting a ling time for an answer because I'm simply not one to be bothered with embracing a fruitless exchange.
One man's(or women's) fruitless exchange is anothers great joy. One whom enjoys debating any topic will appreciate such an interaction.
I think people are misconstruing the purpose of this thread. This isn't an attempt to justify or reconvert anybody. This is for likeminded people to myself who didn't grow up in a religious background to get a look into the mindset of what makes a theist's logical processes tick.
Yeah, I think my question might have mislead some people. I was just trying to see if you could explain how you were thinking at the time you were a theist so I could get a small window into that world, not trying to criticize.
--------------------
Tzeentch - "Actually I had a fairly consistent internal concept of atheists and what they were. Strange as it sounds, I didn't believe they existed."
That does not sound that strange to me at all, as I've seen somewhat similar behaviour. It is one of the reasons I don't argue about the definition of the word atheist, as often times it seems the goal of the argument it to constraint the definition so tightly as to make it impossible for anyone to meet the requirements (to make it so narrow no one could be an atheist).
I would just add that deconvert and atheism are theological terms. As a non-believer, I rarely need them.
Their prevalence and familiarity can create contexts where it is simpler to use them than avoid them. For instance, this site is called Atheist Republic. I wouldn't have chosen it as some people may infer that we all call ourselves atheists, (including me). I have to use it and don't deny that in theological terms I probably am an atheist. I don't care if I'm atheist or not. From my viewpoint I am not superstitious, so I suppose I'm an afairyist, awitchyist, aSantaist, etc.
And I didn't 'deconvert' from any 'belief', I simply grew up and stopped believing unsubstantiated and superstitious claptrap.
I don't have a 'belief system', though I might be perceived by others to have one. I don't follow a belief system or ideology, I only have reasons for believing what I do believe.
The speed control feature on upholstery sewing machines is fantastic. I can adjust the sewing speed according to the fabric type and my comfort level, ensuring precise stitching every time. learn this here now
This is an amazing and informative article that covers so much ground. gorilla tag