Dealing with Atheists?

[Plato34]

Put it back on them, in love of course.
The next time they say how can God always exist and have no begining. Ask them this: If their is no God then that means the basic building blocks of all life, plant and animal, such as proteins and amino acids would have had to always exist. Where did they come from and how could they have never had a begining??? They couldn’t God had to create them. If we all came from a singeled celled organism why would it develope an eye?

Stepping outside of tiny little Earth, how do you know aliens didn’t bring life forms with eyes to Earth? How do you know it was God? How do you know organisms with eyes haven’t always existed, growing in intelligence until they can create another organism with eyes and send it off to another planet on which this organism will continue the cycle? Evolution and God aren’t the only explanations. You can’t prove one either way and so there is no reason for faith removing the ability for certainty. I personally think it would be awesome if aliens invented us. Maybe they’ll come back. Maybe they are what we consider a “god.” You never know.

 

[PatThompson]

BobCatholic provides a good example of how not to be, as well:

There are two types of Atheists.

1. Atheist fundamentalists and 2) those who just don’t want to practice any religion…

Like I said, know your stuff. Calling an Atheist a fundamentalist is laughable. We hear the word ‘fundamentalist’ as a negative term on the TV all the time, but it is a dangerous word for a religious person to bring up, as by definition, an Atheist rejects dogma over reason, and if you go on the offensive you’re opening yourself up to all sorts of questions about the consistency of the Bible, proof of what the church teaches, etc… From Wikipedia: Fundamentalism refers to a belief in, and strict adherence to a set of basic principles. Atheists consider their basic-principles to be things like gravity, mathematics, biology, and evolution.

The second thing BobCatholic draws attention to is dismissing millions of people into two broad categories. It is obvious to see why you’re not getting to any truth that way.

 

[CWBetts]

“Preach the Gospel always, and only when necessary use words.”

People want to see an authentic life. People want to see someone who lives up to their morals and in the end is happier for having done it. My advice would be to love love and love some more. People eventually start to see the connection.

As atheists believe in no God, no afterlife then there really is no point to their generosity. I know someone is going to quote me saying “WHAT DO YOU MEAN!?!?! There are no nice atheists?!?!” So I’m going to get this over with right now. There are nice atheists. I have met and befriended many of them myself. But, my question to you is, who is the atheist equivalent of Mother Theresa? Atheists can be nice, they can love selflessly, but only to a point. I know many religious people have that point as well, but all of the people who don’t have "that point’ where they stop being selfless, are religious.

It will take a good deal of time for your own life to convince your friends that God makes you a better person and that it is possible to live a full, authentic life.

They do not cry “we hate you” they cry “don’t tell me, show me.”

Thank you for the beautiful post. It makes me ralize how short I do really fall. Food for thought beofre my next confession.

 

[Plato34]

But, my question to you is, who is the atheist equivalent of Mother Theresa? "

Mother Theresa was a fabulous woman no offense, but she is simply well known. Her being well known doesn’t make her greater than less well known people. Am I wrong? The church publicized her. I’m sure in the billions of people who have not believed in a god over the centuries there has been at least one who equals or surpasses Mother Theresa’s graciousness. You just don’t know about them. I bet they have given up their lives in complete selflessness and in even greater selflessness because no one was there to glorify them. You can’t say you know all of human history. You can’t possibly back up that claim.

 

[matahari]

Mother Theresa was a fabulous woman no offense, but she is simply well known. Her being well known doesn’t make her greater than less well known people. Am I wrong? The church publicized her. I’m sure in the billions of people who have not believed in a god over the centuries there has been at least one who equals or surpasses Mother Theresa’s graciousness. You just don’t know about them. I bet they have given up their lives in complete selflessness and in even greater selflessness because no one was there to glorify them. You can’t say you know all of human history. You can’t possibly back up that claim.

---

       It is  LOVE   that moves the  sun and the other stars .                    

                           Dante

 

[Holly3278]

2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."58

2124 The name “atheism” covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man’s hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60

2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."62

2126 Atheism is often based on a false conception of human autonomy, exaggerated to the point of refusing any dependence on God.63 Yet, "to acknowledge God is in no way to oppose the dignity of man, since such dignity is grounded and brought to perfection in God. . . . "64 "For the Church knows full well that her message is in harmony with the most secret desires of the human heart."65

58 GS 19 § 1.
59 GS 20 § 2.
60 GS 20 § 2.
61 Cf. Rom 1:18.
62 GS 19 § 3.
63 Cf. GS 20 § 1.
64 GS 21 § 3.
65 GS 21 § 7.

 

[CWBetts]

Mother Theresa was a fabulous woman no offense, but she is simply well known. Her being well known doesn’t make her greater than less well known people. Am I wrong? The church publicized her. I’m sure in the billions of people who have not believed in a god over the centuries there has been at least one who equals or surpasses Mother Theresa’s graciousness. You just don’t know about them. I bet they have given up their lives in complete selflessness and in even greater selflessness because no one was there to glorify them. You can’t say you know all of human history. You can’t possibly back up that claim.

The only problem here is that Atheists are inherently selfish. Blessed Mother Theresa is one of many examples of the selflessness of Christianity. Atheists have essentially made themselves into their own god, and as such see themselves as the final authority on all things. My challege to you is to produce evidence.

 

[AdriannaJean]

Mother Theresa was a fabulous woman no offense, but she is simply well known. Her being well known doesn’t make her greater than less well known people. Am I wrong? The church publicized her. I’m sure in the billions of people who have not believed in a god over the centuries there has been at least one who equals or surpasses Mother Theresa’s graciousness. You just don’t know about them. I bet they have given up their lives in complete selflessness and in even greater selflessness because no one was there to glorify them. You can’t say you know all of human history. You can’t possibly back up that claim.

There have been many people who gave up their lives to the service of others in the name of God and Mother Theresa is one of them and a famous one at that. No, I don’t claim to know all of human history, but obviously you cannot answer my question so it still stands. Atheism is selfish by nature if there is no God then there is no real reason to be good. Now if there were loads of completely selfless atheists, don’t you think we would all have heard of one of them by now? And the church didn’t publicize Mother Theresa, she didn’t need it. People flocked to her from all over India because of how Holy she was, people of all different faiths. Of course the media picked that up. She didn’t need any help from Rome.

 

[PatThompson]

The only problem here is that Atheists are inherently selfish.

Which is more ‘selfish’? Doing good for someone:

• Expecting no reward in return
• Expecting it will help you get to easy street in heaven?

Any atheist worth his or her salt will have that question easily at hand. How would you recommend our OP respond?

Atheists have essentially made themselves into their own god, and as such see themselves as the final authority on all things.

Huh? I guess you mean they’ve replaced the mysterious powers we’ve equated with gods over the years, with scientific knowledge. We used to think the sun was carried around the earth on a god’s back, science replaced that god with knowledge. We used to be taught that gods used disease to punished people who didn’t follow the religious-leaders teachings. Now (most) people understand illness through science’s eyes, and it is much harder for religious-leaders to use this fear as power over people. As science gets closer and closer to actually creating true life, another power of gods is replaced with science.

Is this what you mean? Or are you somehow trying to accuse Atheists as being dogmatic?

 

[CWBetts]

Which is more ‘selfish’? Doing good for someone:

• Expecting no reward in return
• Expecting it will help you get to easy street in heaven?

Any atheist worth his or her salt will have that question easily at hand. How would you recommend our OP respond?

Huh? I guess you mean they’ve replaced the mysterious powers we’ve equated with gods over the years, with scientific knowledge. We used to think the sun was carried around the earth on a god’s back, science replaced that god with knowledge. We used to be taught that gods used disease to punished people who didn’t follow the religious-leaders teachings. Now (most) people understand illness through science’s eyes, and it is much harder for religious-leaders to use this fear as power over people. As science gets closer and closer to actually creating true life, another power of gods is replaced with science.

Is this what you mean? Or are you somehow trying to accuse Atheists as being dogmatic?

As a general rule, atheists are consumed with proving there is no God. It is not enough for them to say “I do not believe” They must take the attitude of “I do not believe, and therefore since I cannot possibly be wrong, no one can believe” The resort to calling belivers “delusional” and whatnot. They refuse to accept that there are some questions science can never answer. When I say they “make themselves a god” I am saying that they believe themselves to be omnicient. And before you accuse the church of being “anti-science” (a typical misrepresentation by atheists) thank the Church for genetics, astronomy, biology, and the other traditional sciences. Thank the Church for the University system. Thank the Church for the Scientific method. Science will never be able to replicate the creative act of God, who created life ex nihilo. I will be impressed when scince can create matter. And to answer your last question: yes, atheists are very dogmatic.

 

[PatThompson]

CWBetts, I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one, you didn’t answer half my question (about which reason for doing good is more ‘noble’), and your experience with Agnostics is very different than mine, not to mention your definition of dogma!

 

[PatThompson]

Who is the atheist equivalent of Mother Theresa?

Take your pick… Baba Amte is probably a good comparison for his “work-oriented rehabilitation of Indian leprosy patients and other handicapped outcasts”. (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Amte)

 

[CWBetts]

Take your pick… Baba Amte is probably a good comparison for his “work-oriented rehabilitation of Indian leprosy patients and other handicapped outcasts”. (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Amte)

provide a RELIABLE source

 

[Plato34]

yeah…pow pow go pat… but wikipedia is 97% correct. have you ever tried to edit a page falsely on wikipedia. It gets corrected in a matter of minutes sometimes. No wikipedia is reliable it just isn’t very siteable. O and speaking of humanity in unbelievers what about the good samaritan story in the bible told by… I think it was Jesus. Didn’t the rabbi and such just walk on by.

 

[PatThompson]

CWBetts, I’ll cry uncle! Boring, boring, boring. I think I understand now where your view of Atheists comes from…

Hopefully others will find the link interesting, though.

 

[jaspercat2007]

Pat Thompson says:
Which is more ‘selfish’? Doing good for someone:
Expecting no reward in return
Expecting it will help you get to easy street in heaven?

My response to this is:

Which is more selfish?

Doing good for someone not at all (which is what most people do in our selfish world)-both atheists and many so-called Catholics and Christians?
or
Doing good for others for the happiness it gives one inside, the chance to interact with others on a human level and the hope that it may lead to heaven?

Most people get so caught up in their day-to-day existence that they don’t take any time to do volunteer work or go out of their way to help others. I’m certainly not perfect-I could do a lot more to help others and I’m basically a lazy person.

The fact that the work is being done for the hope of going to heaven, does not make the work itself “bad.” Helping others is always “good.”

 

[Peter167]

The best way to reach anyone is to gain their respect.

If they respect you, they’ll be open to what you say.

How do you earn their respect?

1. 
   ]Go to Mass every Sunday. ** This doesn’t actually make atheists respect you, but it is the best way to make sure they know you’re a Christian without verbally harassing and annoying them to pieces
   *]Do good works, but don’t flaunt them.
   *]Be humble*. Don’t act like you have all the answers
   *]**Have all the answers. **Educate yourself. Don’t be caught with your pants down. Just remember point 3.
   
   Be the proof that there is a Christ

 

[BobCatholic]

Like I said, know your stuff. Calling an Atheist a fundamentalist is laughable. We hear the word ‘fundamentalist’ as a negative term on the TV all the time, but it is a dangerous word for a religious person to bring up, as by definition, an Atheist rejects dogma over reason, and if you go on the offensive you’re opening yourself up to all sorts of questions about the consistency of the Bible, proof of what the church teaches, etc… From Wikipedia: Fundamentalism refers to a belief in, and strict adherence to a set of basic principles. Atheists consider their basic-principles to be things like gravity, mathematics, biology, and evolution.

If “Atheist fundamentalist” is not a good term, what do you call someone who not only not believes in God but wishes to convert you to their religion of Atheism by bashing your faith left and right.

The second thing BobCatholic draws attention to is dismissing millions of people into two broad categories.

Well, how many categories are there of atheism? I’m listening…

 

[BobCatholic]

Actually, many (most? all?) atheists admit that they can’t know for 100% certainty that there absolutely is no God. Every atheist from Richard Dawkins to Sam Harris has admitted that, and prefer to phrase the “belief” of atheism as a “lack of” rather than a belief that there “is not” - or say that they live under the assumption that God does not exist

I think that’s a cop out on their part. If there is a “lack of belief” then why the heck are they pushing hard to impose this “lack of belief” on others through every media they can get their hands on?

Why the evangelization?

I don’t believe in Buddhism, I’m not going around to Buddhist temples and stealing their holy objects to make fun of them. I don’t believe in Islam, I’m not going into mosques stealing korans to treat it as a piece of garbage.

Actually, you could have all the knowledge of the Universe and still you could not disprove the existence of an omnipotent, invisible creator any more than you could disprove the existence of the invisible, silent cat living in my room. But it’s not arrogant to say and live under the assumption that “there is no cat” anymore than it is to say “there is no god,” given the lack of evidence, even when you know that there is, in fact, no way to completely disprove either.

This is logically contradictory.

If you had all the knowledge in the universe, then you’d know that God exists without having any faith whatsoever. And if I had all the knowledge in the universe, I’d know you don’t have a silent, invisible cat living in your room

 

[PJM]

So tell me how do you deal with atheists? I mean I have alot of atheist friends and I just feel like im the only true catholic teenager that I know.

How do ou deal with problems with atheists and other religions?

NEVER ARGUE!

In fact don’t even debate unless you feel qualified to do so.

Here is the best advice.

You may well be [that is how you lead and live you’re faith, you’re life] the only bible these poor soils are ever going to “read.”

“They will know we are Catholics by our love.” And By complete Obedience to everything the Church teaches. get real friendly with you’re bible, especially the NT>

Love and prayers,