Many Christians have visited this blog to share the love of Jesus with me. Their comments are always welcome here as the discussion would be boring if everyone agreed with me.
With that said, virtually every Christian ends their discussion here the same way … with a giant ad hominem. Their compassionate remarks turn to judgmental comments rather than answering the questions posed in the post. Their comments degrade to an immature statement equating to, “you’re stupid and my dad could beat up your dad.” Or explaining how my lack of faith makes my arguments irrelevant thus fulfilling biblical prophesy as a “scoffer”.
They avoid the questions and topics being discussed because there are no rational answers to justify the absurdities of Christian theology. Unjustly attacking my character and accusing me of being ignorant distracts from the various topics at hand. Occasionally a Christian admits they have blind faith in the impossible. At least they’re honest.
It is senseless to attack my character while completely ignoring the points of my posts. By first pretending to be compassionate and loving, only to later insult me makes you little more than a hypocrite. It adds nothing to the discussion and completely undermines your attempt at evangelization.
I always make it a priority to be respectful in my comments. It’s not a personal attack; I just disagree with your religious beliefs. My disagreeing with you does not make me your enemy … just less superstitious.
Tags: Ad hominem, Attack, Bible, Christian, God, Hypocrisy, Hypocrite, Irrational, Jesus, Love, Personal
January 23, 2010 at 4:06 am |
When you were a christian, didn’t you see the non-believers as the enemy? I think many of them really think they can help you find your way out of the deep pit they think you have fallen into. When they see that they aren’t getting you to fall for their messages, they feel embarrassed and most people I know attack the one that causes that embarrassment.
January 23, 2010 at 5:02 am |
You scoffer!
It’s funny and sometimes sad when people adopt cult-like behavior without knowing it. “See, the prophets said that in the end times there would be those who didn’t believe!” Might as well state that the sky is blue, there have always been and always will be those who do not believe. Sigh.
January 23, 2010 at 7:52 am |
Great writing here. I enjoyed reading this article. I hope you can keep up the good work.
January 23, 2010 at 9:39 am |
This was a good one. I know exactly what you mean about the ad hominem nature of many responses from Christians. In fairness, I have encountered some on my blog who adopt an “agree to disagree” stance, but the majority do seem to exhibit the pattern you describe. It is almost as if they’ll be nice until they realize you aren’t going to be converted, and then things get nasty.
January 23, 2010 at 9:39 am |
This, my friends, both believers and non-believers, is why you do NOT cast stones upon anyone.
“Free” will has consequences, and so, unfortunately, does doing the right thing.
January 24, 2010 at 8:32 am |
Your blog is thought-provoking, interesting, and certainly challenging to someone who tries to be a follower of Jesus like me. I particularly like your conflicting bible teaching of the week, which sometimes makes me laugh, sometimes makes me sigh; sometimes you have a good point, sometimes you don’t.
However, what I don’t like are many of the comments you receive. Of course you are deliberatey provocative, but the cultural context of christianity in the US baffles people like me from tHe UK, and some comments you receive epitomize that. Jesus tended to answer questions with questions, not with the aggressive condemnation for which US evangelicals are (unfortunately) renowned.
Thank you for helping me think. Kevin (London, UK)
January 24, 2010 at 10:54 am |
I appreciate that you recognize the problem of condemnation where it isn’t due. You have to understand that sometimes it does get frustrating when you’re expecting religion to give straight answers.
All religion tends to answer in the form of a question; to be implicitly told to come to our own conclusions is already annoying enough.
Imagine how it must be when, after some soul-searching, you get your answer, but when you tell your answer to religion who instructed you to find out for yourself in the first place…. your answer not only isn’t accepted, but is sometimes downright treated with sarcasm, or even hostility.
January 26, 2010 at 9:11 am |
Passing Chicken, I understand the frustration. It’s the classic parents conundrum – you want your children to think for themselves, as long as they think the same as you…
With ‘religion’, if we don’t adhere to the ‘ramming down throats’ school of thought, and want people to think for themselves, then we can be guilty of not listening to the answers. It means we have to acknowledge that none of us can be 100% sure of anything, but some of us choose to act as if we are, because being permanently stuck on the fence leads only to pain in the nether regions.
I am not 100% sure. I am mostly sure. As long as all of us think, that is a start. That is my conclusion, and it will be unsatisfactory to many.
January 25, 2010 at 1:16 am |
theBEattitude wrote:
“virtually every Christian ends their discussion here the same way … with a giant ad hominem”
Well in some ways you’re lucky.
In many discussions of which I’ve been a part over the years, when I introduce a Christian pov the FIRST thing I encounter is a giant ad hom.
lol
I think what both groups should strive to do is address the POV of the other.
A good example is one from a previous post where I wrote:
“I, however, dont agree that equating human life with the cockroach is particularly moral.
In fact, I will say it plainly. It’s immoral.
And a bit irrational as well.
Any position which would put one’s own survival and that of his family at stake for the sake of a bug is not rational, IMHO.”
Here I’ve used some strong language, referring to the position as ‘immoral and a bit irrational.’
The distinction between designating the position as irrational versus designating the person themselves as irrational is an important one; and one that is not always understood.
Anyone willing to discuss their philosophy of life, their religion, etc should be prepared to have their POV challenged and understand that a critique of their POV is not the same as an attack on their person.
January 25, 2010 at 9:13 am |
I have no problem with a person telling me my position is irrational. But in cases like your comment above, I would have the same to say to you. Irrational comments accusing me of being irrational don’t hold much water.
The problem comes in when I’m judged in the context of primitive texts. I’m evil and/or lost because I ask challenging questions about a collection of ancient texts. My opinion is automatically false, evil and irrational because the Bible is “divinely inspired.” If the Bible was truly inspired by a god, it wouldn’t be so conflicting and poorly written.
You at least attempt to discuss the topics at hand. But most Christians simply tell me that I’m wrong, with no backing to why I’m wrong. They then tell me how I hate an imaginary god and I’m fulfilling prophesy of hate for God. And of course, in they end with the holier than thou, “I’ll be praying for you.” Which translates to, “I have faith in an invisible god and you don’t, thus your comments are false. So there.”
January 25, 2010 at 9:52 am |
“The problem comes in when I’m judged in the context of primitive texts.”
I don’t think I even mentioned scripture when I demolished your POV on this subject.
Just a guess on my part, but I think even the majority of atheists would say that they value human life above that of other animals, and they believe that our legal and cultural frameworks are correct in holding the same values.
Your position was that it was absurd to ‘devalue’ animal life (and apparently plant life as well) as compared with human, was it not?
“I always laugh at religion’s propensity to devalue all other lifeforms on earth because we have higher functioning brains.” –theBEattitude
Now you may backpedal away from your initially stated position but that is where this particular discussion began.
But I’d be interested WHY you think my position upholding the practice of valuing human life above animal is ‘irrational’. Dont just say that it is, tell me why you think so.
Go ahead and give a rational explanation, if you can, of why you think human life should not be valued higher.
For the record, I’ve already said WHY I think human life should be valued higher. Without even referencing scripture, it’s a simple matter of self preservation, protection of family and indeed of the human family. You’d think that any evolutionist would even agree with that.
Hope you’re having a fine morning, my friend.
Not to spoil it for you , but I have prayed for you. lol Perhaps if you come around to my POV concerning the value of human life, that might be considered an answer to prayer. uh oh.
January 25, 2010 at 10:19 am
This may be viewed as wrong of me, but I have to be honest, I value all life as highly as I can.
I feel just as much sympathy for a starving child as I do for a starving dog or cat. While that may be wrong in other peoples POV, in my humble opinion it is perfectly justified. In my experience an animal is a hell of a lot more kind and grateful for love and help than most people I have met.
I deplore cruelty in all forms, to animals and humans. I do not agree that we are so much better than other life forms simply because we are smarter. You can pray for me all you want, but that POV will never change.
I do my best to not kill anything. I hate spiders and cockroaches, but when I am able to, I capture them and release them outside as I cannot bring myself to kill them, they have just as much right to live as anything else.
So yes, there is at least one other atheist here that agrees with Be’s statement.
January 25, 2010 at 10:29 am
Your comment is irrational because you cherry pick and intentionally misinterpret comments to justify your points. It is asinine to accuse me of valuing a bug more than my children. My comment is about devaluing other life-forms on earth. Not about equating their value to my own.
The Bible claims we are a special creation and everything else on earth is disposable. All other creatures were created simply for our amusement and for us to “rule over” as Genesis puts it. I value my family for the same reasons you do, animal instinct of self preservation and protection of those close to me.
You believe humans go to heaven and every other creature dies and disappears. We share 98% of the same DNA as a chimpanzee, but we are precious to God and they are disposable creatures. This is the arrogance I speak of. Not only does God look just like us, he loves us more than everything else and has an eternal paradise waiting for us. Sucks to be a chimp.
If I was going to invent a god, I’d likely make him love me more than everything else too.
January 25, 2010 at 11:46 am |
theBEattitude wrote:
“Your comment is irrational because you cherry pick and intentionally misinterpret comments to justify your points. It is asinine to accuse me of valuing a bug more than my children.”
Actually that is a misinterpretation of my comments.
What I said was :
“The alternative I suppose, is to treat humans, fish, snails and cockroaches all equally.”
and
“Treating humans as equal to bugs isn’t an improvement in morality”
and
“I, however, dont agree that equating human life with the cockroach is particularly moral.”
Nowhere did I say you valued bugs MORE THAN your children, but that you appeared to value them EQUALLY since you objected to DEVALUING ‘all other lifeforms’.
So which is it really?
Are you, as I earlier suspected, going to backpedal away from your objection to ‘devaluing all other lifeforms’, or will you defend the apparent EQUAL value that you implied?
Please clarify your new position so that it will be plain to everyone whether you’ve changed it, or not.
If you value human life above bugs, then you do by definition devalue non-human lifeforms to a lower place than humans, isn’t that so?
Let’s see if my prayer is answered or not.
January 25, 2010 at 12:04 pm |
Joe White wrote:
So Joe, you didn’t make the following comment?:
Or if you’ve forgotten, you can read it here:
http://thebeattitude.com/2010/01/10/the-bible-is-inerrant-and-tells-you-where-not-to-buy-groceries/#comment-10073
I never implied EQUAL value for all life-forms. Only that Christian theology devalues the existence of all creatures on this earth. The Bible proclaims that humans are eternally precious to God and everything else is disposable. You can continue to twist my words, but this tired conversation is over.
January 25, 2010 at 12:37 pm |
theBEattitude wrote:
“So Joe, you didn’t make the following comment?”
Yes, I did. And if you value human life EQUALLY with that of a bug, then you put human life at great risk for the sake of elevating that bug to the same level.
My question for you any others who want to say that human life should not be valued higher is this:
In a situation where your actions will cause either a human or a bug to lose it’s life, are you going to flip a coin?
theBEattitude wrote:
“You can continue to twist my words”
No one has twisted your words. Perhaps the problem is that you posted before you thought.
theBEattitude wrote:
“I never implied EQUAL value for all life-forms. Only that Christian theology devalues the existence of all creatures on this earth.”
Here again we have a post that apparently has appeared without thinking through the content.
Either you value human life above all other life………or you don’t. You can’t have it both ways.
If you did not mean to imply equal value for all lifeforms, then some life is valued higher than others.
Your original statement was not that: “Christian theology devalues the existence of ALL creatures” (emphasis mine)
but rather : “I always laugh at religion’s propensity to devalue ALL OTHER lifeforms” (emphasis mine)
theBEattitude wrote:
“but this tired conversation is over.”
You should have quit before you got started.
You would do well just to admit you spoke without thinking through what you were actually saying, and move on from there.
January 25, 2010 at 3:32 pm |
I’ll put it simply so you don’t miss it:
Christians:
Humans = Precious mammals offered the gift of eternal life
Everything else = Disposable creatures unworthy of eternal life
I never claimed all creatures held equal value. Only that Christian theology arrogantly devalues all non-human life.
January 25, 2010 at 3:50 pm |
theBEattitude wrote:
“I never claimed all creatures held equal value. Only that Christian theology arrogantly devalues all non-human life.”
If you are not saying that all creatures are of equal value, then why are you not guilty of the same ‘arrogance’ for valuing some (humans presumably) higher than others?
January 25, 2010 at 2:12 pm |
Hi BE,
I am an avid follower of your blog, though I don’t believe I’ve ever commented before. I check here nearly once a day and eagerly await new posts.
Sometimes it is easy to feel like an outcast, or for some reason ‘evil’ (which is silly seeing as I don’t really believe in evil in the religious sense) for just truly not believe in religions at all. I’m only recently getting comfortable saying I’m atheist, and I still often slide back into the ‘well really I’m agnostic’ safety zone.
Your blog makes me feel less alone, and reminds me that I should be proud for living my life rationally.
The comments you receive at times highlight the difficulty of professing atheism. Ironic that those who claim to be “christians” act so un-christ like.
I hope you don’t allow the bitterness and insecurities of others dampen your drive to continue posting. I’m sure I am just one of many who look to your blog for encouragement and a sense of unity.
Thank you!
January 25, 2010 at 3:13 pm |
You’re welcome. I’m glad you’ve enjoyed reading the blog. And your comments are more than welcome here.
I don’t get too caught up on labeling what I don’t believe in. It is impossible to disprove a divine creator of our universe. So I don’t spend too much time trying to disprove the existence of it/they/he/she.
The purpose of this blog is to discuss the flawed versions of god created by men. Whether there is a god or not, I think it is time we all honestly admit we can do much better than worshiping gods invented by primitive men.
I wouldn’t call myself Agnostic, as I don’t believe their is a god and creator of all things. Certainly not a deity that cares about me personally. But I’m honest enough to admit we still have a lot to learn about our existence. I guess that makes me a “soft atheist.”
I hope to post topics to discuss more frequently than I have in the past several weeks. I’ve recently launched my own business and there aren’t enough hours in the day. Thanks again.
January 25, 2010 at 2:33 pm |
Chelsea wrote:
“I don’t really believe in evil in the religious sense”
Glad to hear that you’ve been lurking. It’s been my experience that BE is a welcoming host for those that enjoy discussion.
Don’t mistake vigorous debate for unchristian behavior. There is nothing unchristlike in publicly calling someone out for intellectual inconsistency.
I would be very interested to hear your view of ‘evil’.
If ‘good and evil’ are purely the opinion of the individual, or the collective opinion of a given society, then you’ve got some real problems when the opinion of others (individually or collectively) would permit things like theft, rape, murder, etc.
January 25, 2010 at 2:49 pm |
I enjoy vigorous debate and definitely wouldn’t put any negative connotation on it. It’s the *personal* attacks that I see as being ‘unchrist’ like. The ad hominem arguments as BE put it.
When I say evil in the religious sense I mean the belief that there is such thing as sin that would then relegate you to spend eternity in a less preferable location.
More to the point of what I think you’re getting at – no I do not believe in any standard set by a higher power that defines what is good and what is evil. I don’t ultimately think it matters to break up actions, beliefs, etc into one or the other as they are just words. While clearly things like rape and murder are morally and ethically objectionable, I do not believe there is a supreme being that will hold people accountable for having committed those acts. Yes I realize the possible negative implications of that.
February 9, 2010 at 2:52 pm |
When I pretend to be a fundie I love to tell people that Christ committed suicide.
I say no, seriously, he could have avoided being killed because he ahd magic powers.. so he deliberately allowed himself to be killed.. so he committed suicide.
He also committed murder because as god the fater he sent his son to be killed…
so that usually gets them riled up.
February 13, 2010 at 4:24 am |
I woudln’t say Christ commited suicide. If I take away his divineness and the fact that he walked from his tomb, I see a guy who wouldn’t give up his beliefs under pressure, knew exactly what would happen, had a plan to prove his detractors wrong… but was summarily betrayed by one of his best friends, and then abandoned by his dad.
Christ fully expected to be protected, despite the circumstances, I think. It’s par for the course for revolutionaries.