Last week I posted about coming out about my atheism to my very conservative christian family on my FaceBook page. Other than one statement, things had been quiet on the home front. Then this morning my husband got THE phone call from his dear mother. Mom-in-law is a sweetheart and the primary reason we have not been more open about our non-religious stance.
I scathed by untouched and my husband took the brunt of the conversation. The first thing out of mom-in-law’s mouth was, “Do you believe Jesus is the son of god and that he died on the cross for our sins.” Hubby skirted the question and talked to mom-in-law for quite a while. He made some excellent points to her on why those who are religious should not be dogmatic about their stance (ie. christianity is the only way to god), but she returned to the same question over and over again.
In her eyes, if Hubby believed in Jesus, then he was saved. In the end, Hubby finally said, “Sure, Mom.” I know, no fireworks today. But what does it really matter? If she wants to believe he is saved, fine. Let her live and die in peace. Meanwhile, we continue to be atheists.
hyü-mən 
20 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 28, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Dan
Keep in mind that frantic questioning is her (our) realization that, IF, big if, Christianity is truth then you will be headed for a terrible place called hell. That is a mere warning from us, not a threat.
The Bible describes Hell as unquenchable fire,(Mark 9:43) outer darkness,(Matthew 22:13) a furnace of fire and a place where people wail and gnash their teeth,(Matthew 13:42) and a lake of fire.(Revelation 20:15) where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched,(Mark 9:48) and where people are in agony in flames.(Luke 16:24)
Perhaps the most terrifying passage in the Bible describing hell says that men will “drink the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night.” (Revelation 14:10-11)
According to the Bible if you have made the wrong choice then you will burn in agonizing pain for eternity. Are you absolutely sure you have truth on your side?
We tell you this not to bug you but because we love you. “If sinners be damned, at least let them leap to Hell over our bodies. If they will perish, let them perish with our arms about their knees. Let no one go there unwarned and unprayed for.” C.H. Spurgeon
Why because we love you. (tinyurl.com/WelcomeIloveyou)
We can be hopeful for you and your family right?
September 28, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Matt
*yawn* Long winded appeal to Pascal’s Wager.
And, as I’m sure as everyone else here will already know, Pascal’s Wager holds absolutely no weight.
September 28, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Dan
First it has nothing to do with Pascal’s wager, but it goes beyond that. I would rather live a life knowing there is a God, and die to find out there isn’t one. (I would still be glad I attempted to conduct myself in a righteous manner.) Then to live a life knowing there is no God, only to find out I was horribly wrong.
September 29, 2009 at 9:05 am
hyumen
And I’d rather live a life where I am not pretending to believe in an invisible god who never shows himself – even to his believers – and does not intervene in the injustices of the world.
September 29, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Matt
What you said is exactly Pascal’s Wager:
eg, “According to the Bible if you have made the wrong choice then you will burn in agonizing pain for eternity. Are you absolutely sure you have truth on your side?”
That’s Pascal’s Wager in a nutshell – a piece of truly lazy thinking which fails utterly as any sort of argument for numerous reasons.
“I would rather live a life knowing there is a God, and die to find out there isn’t one.”
So you’re happy to live your life based on a delusion? Fascinating. A really rather feeble basis for a life philosophy, it has to be said, and certainly not grounds to try to argue the case for the existence of said deity to anyone else.
“Then to live a life knowing there is no God, only to find out I was horribly wrong.”
To be intellectually honest, you would therefore have to do that with every deity that humanity has worshipped throughout the centuries … of which there are several thousand. If you wanted to be really thorough, you’d also have to do the same for any deity for which there is any possibility for it’s existence.
September 29, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Dan
Matt,
“To be intellectually honest, you would therefore have to do that with every deity that humanity has worshipped(sic) throughout the centuries … of which there are several thousand.”
Actually what I would have to do, as I did, is sift through the evidence and choose the true one, as I did.
To do what you suggest, btw, would be violating the 2nd Commandment. Nice try in using logic, better luck next time. If you were intellectually honest you would admit to having a conscience without a clue as to how it even got there. Need help? (Romans 2:15)
September 29, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Matt
You’re not terribly good at this, are you?
And there is absolutely nothing out there which makes the christian deity any more believable than various other deities also widely available.
A commandment which is only valid if you already follow the christian god. I love the smell of circular logic in the morning.
I suggest you actually look up the rather hefty amount of research done in exactly that area (neuroscience is a fascinating area). Please, don’t try to comment on an area you then demonstrate you are completely ignorant of.
And also don’t try to use the bible to try to support your arguments.
1) It only works if the person you’re speaking to subscribes to said text. In this arena, that’s extremely unlikely at best.
2) It’s circular logic since the bible can only be true if god exists and god can only exist if the bible is true.
September 30, 2009 at 12:45 am
Dan
Do you really think that your conscience can be understood with neuroscience?
“If there is no God, then all that exists is time and chance acting on matter. If this is true then the difference between your thoughts and mine correspond to the difference between shaking up a bottle of Mountain Dew and a bottle of Dr. Pepper. You simply fizz atheistically and I fizz theistically. This means that you do not hold to atheism because it is true , but rather because of a series of chemical reactions… … Morality, tragedy, and sorrow are equally evanescent. They are all empty sensations created by the chemical reactions of the brain, in turn created by too much pizza the night before. If there is no God, then all abstractions are chemical epiphenomena, like swamp gas over fetid water. This means that we have no reason for assigning truth and falsity to the chemical fizz we call reasoning or right and wrong to the irrational reaction we call morality. If no God, mankind is a set of bi-pedal carbon units of mostly water. And nothing else.” ~ Douglas Wilson
“And also don’t try to use the bible to try to support your arguments.”
Why because you do not like truth? Wait I can’t wait to hear this…
“1) It only works if the person you’re speaking to subscribes to said text.”
O’rly? So if someone just “claims” something is not valid then that renders said evidence inadmissible? (*snicker)
Wait, wait, are you using Oj’s defense? “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” Bwahahahhahaha Dude, the difference here is that it fits!!
“I know you have my finger prints all over that knife Judge, but I reject that evidence”. “bailiff, let this man go, he got us again” Bwahahahhaha
You crack me up dude. Nice logic.
It doesn’t matter what we believe, what matters is the truth. I can certainly claim I don’t believe in gravity but if I jump out a window I will see that I violated the Law of gravitational force, and will suffer the consequences. Same with God’s Laws (Ten Commandments), if violated then you will indeed suffer the consequences for breaking the Laws. (Rev 21:8 “…and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone”)
Are you a Law breaker? I digress, what matters is truth.
“2) It’s circular logic since the bible can only be true if god exists and god can only exist if the bible is true.”
Please, don’t try to comment on an area you then demonstrate you are completely ignorant of.
* (1) The writings in question are true on all specific points we can verify. (With arguments in each case.)
* (2, from 1) Hence, we have good reason to assume that they are completely truthful throughout.
* (3) The writings describe many events that demonstrate the existence of God.
* (4, from 2 and 3) Hence, these descriptions must be truthful, so God must exist. (It actually suffices for just one of them to be truthful.)
* (5) If the writings had been authored by man, they would not have been true on all of these points. (With arguments in each of these cases.)
* (6, from 1 and 5) Hence, they must have been authored by someone other than man.
* (7, from 2 and 5) Hence, we have good reason to assume the existence of someone who, unlike man, is completely truthful, and who authored these writings.
* (8, from 7) This someone is God.
What we see here is not an instance of circular reasoning, but two different arguments, only partly deductive, for the existence of an all-knowing higher being who wrote the writings in question.
Even so it (begging the question) is formally logical, and in fact logically valid – that is, the conclusion does follow from the premise – they are tautological.
You’re cute. Thanks for the smiles
September 28, 2009 at 12:25 pm
morsec0de
“According to the Bible if you have made the wrong choice then you will burn in agonizing pain for eternity. Are you absolutely sure you have truth on your side?”
Does it strike you that the kind of being who would create such a place is not exactly the kind of being most people would even like, let alone worship.
I can’t speak for the bloggers, but I am as sure as I am of anything that truth is on the side of atheism.
September 28, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Dan
“Does it strike you that the kind of being who would create such a place is not exactly the kind of being most people would even like, let alone worship.”
You mean a prison for criminals? No I am sure the prisoners here on earth do not like where they are and wish to get out. But they are criminals never the less.
God does things that are just and righteous for righteousness sake because that is His nature. To let criminals go free would be unjust.
“but I am as sure as I am of anything that truth is on the side of atheism.”
O’rly? Please provide evidence for such a claim.
You see our very rationality requires laws so things can be distinguished, classified, organized, and explained. Rational comprehension and explanation demand principles of order and unity in order to relate truths and events to one another.
On that note, the very fact that you are discussing and debating this matter proves the existence of God, for rationality can’t be accounted for in your worldview, rationality itself has no foundation.
Hopefully you agree that Laws of Logic, Mathematics, Science, are immaterial; Universal; Unchanging.
Proof requires logic. One must be able to account for the absolutes, or the proof ends in an infinite regress of ‘and how do you know that?’
So let me ask you, how do you account for the universal, abstract, invariant laws of logic, on what basis do you proceed with the assumption that they will not change, and how is it possible to know anything for certain according to YOUR worldview?
September 28, 2009 at 1:45 pm
morsec0de
“You mean a prison for criminals?”
No. I mean a judge sentencing people to death for jaywalking. As you said in your original post, these people are being sent to burn for eternity because they don’t believe.
And then, what of the people in heaven? Because certainly it would not be heaven for me if I knew billions of people were being burned and tortured for eternity, despite any things they may have done.
“O’rly? Please provide evidence for such a claim.”
My evidence is the fact that there is no good evidence for the existence of a god or the supernatural.
The same reason I don’t believe in leprechauns or the Loch Ness monster.
“for rationality can’t be accounted for in your worldview, rationality itself has no foundation.”
Certainly it does. It has been developed by humanity, in concert with long observation and testing of reality.
“Hopefully you agree that Laws”
The laws, no. The laws are creations of human minds. What those laws represent in reality are apparent, and apparently unchanging, as far as we can tell. But I see no reason that fact implies a deity of any kind.
“Proof requires logic.”
Who is talking about proof? Not me. I speak of evidence.
“on what basis do you proceed with the assumption that they will not change”
I don’t.
I look at the evidence. The evidence has indicated (for one simple example) that a rock is a rock, and a rock is not not a rock. The evidence shows that as long as we have been able to know this has always been the case. So we operate as if it continues to be the case until some evidence arrives that suggests otherwise.
“and how is it possible to know anything for certain according to YOUR worldview?”
Absolutely certain? It probably isn’t possible. But I don’t much care about absolutes, as I understand I’m not omnipotent.
AS I said, I keep looking at evidence. If the evidence changes, I change my point of view. There is such a thing as provisionally certain.
I am as certain as I am of anything that when I drop a pencil, it will fall to the floor. But for all i know, the next time I drop the pencil it will float. Yet all the accumulated evidence has so far pointed to the pencil dropping. So I can say I am provisionally certain that the pencil will drop, until such time as no evidence presents itself.
That is exactly how certain I am that your particular god, or gods in general, don’t exist.
And I’m fine with that.
September 28, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Dan
“No. I mean a judge sentencing people to death for jaywalking.”
An infinite punishment for an infinite crime.
When you lie to someone(sin by breaking the 9th Commandment) you are not lying to that person but to God Himself. Lying is a spiritual event. It’s not merely a physical action. Lying is an offense against God. When His creations lie, He is ashamed of His creation and simply separates Himself.
If I lie to a child, I’ll get away with it.
If I lie to my wife, I’ll be sleeping on the couch.
If I lie to a police officer, I’m obstructing justice and I’ll go to jail.
If I lie to a judge, it’s called perjury, and I’ll go to prison.
If I lie to the government, it can be called treason, and the punishment might be death.
So how much more egregious is a lie to God?
All I can do rationally is plead with you to do the right thing. Seek Jesus Repent and Trust in Him.
And then, what of the people in heaven? Because certainly it would not be heaven for me if I knew billions of people were being burned and tortured for eternity, despite any things they may have done.
Valid point and I would agree if it were not for my faith in God to do the right thing. (Revelation 21:4)
We cannot possibly make finite decisions about things outside of space/time. Our intellect cannot grasp the majesty of God. He promises to make things right. I, for one, believe Him.
My evidence is the fact that there is no good evidence for the existence of a god or the supernatural.
1. The very concept of ‘evidence’ presupposes God, so arguing over evidence is an exercise in futility.
2. Your claim that ‘there is no such evidence’ is a claim to universal knowledge, a very attribute of the God you apparently deny exists.
Fair enough, God certainly wants us to weigh the evidence presented. He does not want to have blind faith in everything but believe in Him from the evidence. Now the evidence that is already out there you reject, and that is because of your presuppositions. Your presuppositions will not allow you to examine without bias the evidence that I present to you for God’s existence.
Your presupposition is that there is no God; therefore, no matter what I might present to you to show His existence, you must interpret it in a manner consistent with your presupposition: namely, that there is no God. If I were to have a video tape of God coming down from heaven, you’d say it was a special effect. If I had a thousand eye-witnesses saying they saw Him, you’d say it was mass-hysteria. If I had Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in the New Testament, you’d say they were forged, dated incorrectly, or not real prophecies. So, I cannot prove anything to you since your presupposition won’t allow it. It is limited.
Your presupposition cannot allow you to rightly determine God’s existence from evidence — providing that there were factual proofs of His existence. Don’t you see? If I DID have incontrovertible proof, your presupposition would force you to interpret the facts consistently with your presupposition and you would not be able to see the proof.
I saw a cartoon that fits this point.
“The laws, no. The laws are creations of human minds.”
Like a friend of mine said “Denying logic, includes denying the law of non-contradiction. If the law of non-contradiction does not necessarily apply, then by denying logic, you are actually affirming logic, since contradictions are allowed.”
“What those laws represent in reality are apparent, and apparently unchanging, as far as we can tell. But I see no reason that fact implies a deity of any kind.”
Alright, please give us an example of how that is done without logic. What is your basis for presupposing that ‘your senses (at least roughly) give you an accurate description of reality?’
To be clear, I have never said that people do not proceed with the assumption that their senses are reliable. The difference is, I have a basis for assuming their reliability (God’s revelation to us), whereas you do not.
“But I don’t much care about absolutes, as I understand I’m not omnipotent.”
Do you at least admit that it is possible that an omniscient, omnipotent being could reveal some things to us, such that we can be certain of them?
September 29, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Dan
“What those laws represent in reality are apparent, and apparently unchanging, as far as we can tell. “
I read something last night that fit this conversation. From Dr. Greg Bahnsen
How do we know assuredly that the universe is in fact uniform?
“We are wanting the laws of the universe to be such that we can understand them, but there is no reason offered as to why the universe should be like this.” (Paul Davies, The Edge of Infinity)
If I set out to argue the uniformity of the universe because I can predict cause and effect, am I not presupposing the uniformity and validity of my experience? Cause and effect is accurate reflection of what really happens?
You presuppose uniformity. “Consequently the principles of uniformity is not scientific law but an act of faith which undergirds scientific law. This, adherence to the principle of uniformity-though absolutely essential to science and scientific method- is an intrinsically religious commitment.”
For you, as the non-Christian cosmology, chance involves randomness and unpredictability. The non-Christan worldview requires faith in miracles, yet without a reason for those miracles. Life arises from non-life. Intelligence from non-intelligence. Morality from that which is a-moral. These are faith claims for explaining our world and how it came to be.
The uniformity of nature is perfectly compatible, however, with the Christian worldview. The absolute, all-creating, sovereignly-governing God reveals to us in Scripture that we can count on regularities in the natural world. (Ephesians 1:11, Colossians 1:16-17, Hebrews 1:3)
**from Dr. Greg Bahnsen, Pushing the Antithesis
September 28, 2009 at 1:41 pm
hyumen
Dan,
I am no more sure of the fact of the existence of god than I am of the non-existence of god. The TRUTH is that you cannot know anymore than I can. We can surmise and conjecture till we are blue in the face and still reach no conclusion. That atheism has science on it’s side sways this argument dramatically.
Do not think I come by my atheism lightly. I was born and raised in the church. I was a minister and a missionary. I know scripture inside out and upside down. Yet still I choose this path. With eyes wide open and a light heart.
I do not believe in hell. I do not believe in the god of christianity. If there is some force out there, it does not look like christianity’s god or islam’s god. Of this, yes, I am absolutely sure.
September 28, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Dan
Hyumen,
”
Dan,
I am no more sure of the fact of the existence of god than I am of the non-existence of god. “
I appreciate the honesty.
“The TRUTH is that you cannot know anymore than I can. “
Oops, you went too far. How do you know this? Is this merely a bare assertion? Do you hold all the fact of the universe to make such a claim?
Let me give you an analogy.
A mother tells a child not to touch that hot Iron and the kid listens and believes his Mom. As soon as the Mom leaves the room the child touches the Hot Iron and gets burned. He just went from a belief the Iron ‘was’ hot to an experience that the Iron ‘is’ hot with 100% assurance. No one can come and tell him otherwise because his experience tells him different. He is 100% certain the Iron is hot and he has the burn to prove it.
Well I have felt the Hot Iron of God’s hand on me and cannot be persuaded otherwise because I have an experience that removed ALL doubt, I am 100% certain there is a God.
On the flip an atheist cannot say they have 100% certainty based on a non experience, it is based on a belief still. They have a belief based on lack of said experience, but they remain uncertain (lack of assurance).
“Do not think I come by my atheism lightly. I was born and raised in the church.”
I think we both can agree there is no such thing as an ex-Christian and Christians do not fall away. Sadly, you were merely a false convert, like I was for so many years. I will pray for you.
September 28, 2009 at 11:17 pm
hyumen
Dan,
A false convert? Christians tell themselves all sorts of silly things like this to justify the fact that when people are exposed to enough information, there is no other logical choice but to stop believing in gods.
You go ahead and believe I was a false convert – a false who took her two young children into a strange land to preach the gospel. Who pioneered and pastored a church with her husband (who is also an atheist now…suppose he was a false convert too). I absolutely believed there was a god and now I know how ridiculous that was.
September 29, 2009 at 12:03 am
Dan
Silly Christians?
Have you even studied the ‘Parable of the Sower’ and what it means? (Mark 4:3-13)
“a false who took her two young children into a strange land to preach the gospel.”
Matthew 7:21-23 “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
The Bible calls you a false convert, not Christians.
When will you understand that you can have assurance of your Salvation?
Albertus Pieters in his book, Divine Lord and Savior, tells of a believer who was not well-educated, but who had a deep assurance of his salvation. Everyone called him, “Old Pete.” One day, while talking with Dr. Pieters, he said, “If God should take me to the very mouth of Hell, and say to me, ‘In you go, Pete; here’s where you belong,’ I would say to Him, ‘That’s true, Lord, I do belong there. But if you make me go to Hell, Your dear Son, Jesus Christ, must go with me! He and I are now one, and we cannot be separated anymore.'”
September 29, 2009 at 7:10 am
hyumen
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
Oh, if any god does exist, she would definitely know who I am.
October 20, 2009 at 6:24 pm
stephy
I’m sorry Christians treat you this way. Your beliefs are completely valid because they are informed by your experience, no matter what they say. xo
October 20, 2009 at 6:28 pm
stephy
PS – I am almost crying at the lack of compassion shown to you here. Hang in there.