What do I have to do to convince you religious people to become Atheists?

Question

I really think the only thing that will change peoples' religious beliefs is time. As time goes by, people will gradually come to accept that science is the only way to knowledge about the world. Feelings and hearsay don't hold up.

Some have said things like "Why do you care what we believe". One guy is even an atheist and said that I shouldn't try to convert people away from their religion. Religion causes a lot of conflict. There is no way for the many different religions to work together in this world. Muslims hate Jews and Christians. Christians like the Jews, but don't like the Muslims. Jews like Christians and hate Muslims. You can't tell me that the middle east problems aren't because of different religious beliefs. If the Jews were Muslims or the Muslims Jews, they'd all get along, period. Nearly every war that has been fought has a basis in differnt religious beliefs. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have very compelling views on the subject. Search for them on Youtube if you want to learn why religion is bad for the world.

Answer 1

weve already had 2000 years buddy is that not time? what will it take for you to beleive.

Answer 2

why force your beliefs upon another? why try to convince another god is not real is it because inside you find yourself warring with your soul. i feel an emptiness and a void which science or theropy can not explain. Torn between the lie and the truth and hiding away as a child. Pushing this belief that god does not exist because of the conviction which plagues you every lonely and miserable night. Its the still small voice which you hear but deny every time telling you to come back, to come back home my child you have suffered enough and nothing in this cold dark world can satify, nothing else can fill the void. Jesus is calling, i am knocking on the door of your heart, don't keep me outside least the knocking stop. Don't wait until the knocking stops

Answer 3

Hum... How about some of the feelings an heresy that has passed for science? How long did doctors themselves promote cigarettes until it was 'proven' to cause cancer? Yet there still are people who smoke that live longer than most doctors. Being involved with science and biology most of my life, I find that 'science' these days can almost be worse than those missionaries who show up at my door. And now it's all over the TV and showing up on every corner, drug dealers who shout about the newest 'miracle' of science - with disclaimers longer than a python.

I think the true sin in all of it is greed. Science is the method which broke the hold of religious monopolies only to replace them with bigger and scarier monstrosities.

I was an atheist and still believe in the pure 'scientific method' for observing the world in which we live. From pure observation, I have concluded for myself that I am more than flesh and bone. Many of the skills I have can not yet be defined by science. Many of the skills I have are defined quite nicely by spiritual people I have known and read about. (Very few of these are christian.) So, after thirty five years of my own study (remember, the first scientists studied on their own, in laboratories they made themselves) I have concluded that there are gods and goddesses, angels and ascended masters. I'm still looking into creation, but my conclusion so far is similar to single cell division, but on an energy level -no 'matter.'

So, as my time went by I didn't find anything to support your hypothesis. The true scientist, one pure of heart and noble, always reevaluates his work when presented with even a shred of doubt. Are you willing to test your conclusion?

Answer 4

How can you be dogmatic about the NON-existence of God? Isn't atheism an inherent contradiction?

-------------------------------
...First, even if the theist could not muster good arguments for God’s existence, atheism still would not be shown to be true. The outspoken atheist Kai Nielsen recognizes this: "To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false....All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists."

Second, the "presumption of atheism" demonstrates a rigging of the rules of philosophical debate in order to play into the hands of the atheist, who himself makes a truth claim. Alvin Plantinga correctly argues that the atheist does not treat the statements "God exists" and "God does not exist" in the same manner. The atheist assumes that if one has no evidence for God’s existence, then one is obligated to believe that God does not exist — whether or not one has evidence against God’s existence. What the atheist fails to see is that atheism is just as much a claim to know something ("God does not exist") as theism ("God exists"). Therefore, the atheist’s denial of God’s existence needs just as much substantiation as does the theist’s claim; the atheist must give plausible reasons for rejecting God’s existence.

Third, in the absence of evidence for God’s existence, agnosticism, not atheism, is the logical presumption. Even if arguments for God’s existence do not persuade, atheism should not be presumed because atheism is not neutral; pure agnosticism is. Atheism is justified only if there is sufficient evidence against God’s existence.

Fourth, to place belief in Santa Claus or mermaids and belief in God on the same level is mistaken. The issue is not that we have no good evidence for these mythical entities; rather, we have strong evidence that they do not exist. Absence of evidence is not at all the same as evidence of absence, which some atheists fail to see.

Moreover, the theist can muster credible reasons for belief in God. For example, one can argue that the contingency of the universe — in light of Big Bang cosmology, the expanding universe, and the second law of thermodynamics (which implies that the universe has been "wound up" and will eventually die a heat death) — demonstrates that the cosmos has not always been here. It could not have popped into existence uncaused, out of absolutely nothing, because we know that whatever begins to exist has a cause. A powerful First Cause like the God of theism plausibly answers the question of the universe’s origin. Also, the fine-tunedness of the universe — with complexly balanced conditions that seem tailored for life — points to the existence of an intelligent Designer.

The existence of objective morality provides further evidence for belief in God. If widow-burning or genocide is really wrong and not just cultural, then it is difficult to account for this universally binding morality, with its sense of "oughtness," on strictly naturalistic terms. (Most people can be convinced that the difference between Adolf Hitler and Mother Teresa is not simply cultural.) These and other reasons demonstrate that the believer is being quite rational — not presumptuous — in embracing belief in God.

-----------------------
...Frank Morrison, a British lawyer of the 1930s, undertook an expedition to collect circumstantial evidence to disprove the resurrection. Such evidence, of course, is admissible in all courts of law in civilised countries to prove or disprove events of which there are no living eyewitnesses. When he analysed the evidence, he reached a stunning conclusion: The resurrection had actually taken place! Morrison presented his case in his book, "Who Moved the Stone?"

Another factor worth considering is the character of the disciples. They were eleven cowardly men who shut themselves in a room after the crucifixion because they were afraid. Yet what galvanized them into action so that within their own lifetime, much of the thenknown world could hear the message of Christ? Some of them paid for this message with their lives. Would they have done so if the resurrection were a hoax?...

Answer 5

Science is not the only way to knowledge of the world. In fact science itself operates on the belief that the universe runs on rules that are rational and discoverable. That is an act of faith which cannot be proven; it is just taken for granted.
Some of the most important things in life cannot be known by science: love being one of them. Science can measure body temperatures, hormones, etc. but it cannot measure love.

Answer 6

The Bible is a Divine Revelation. In the Bible we find out what God wants mankind to know about Himself and His plan.
The Bible is the only written revelation of God to man.
No one has ever successfully refuted the Bible. Many mock the Bible but avoid challenging it point by point. No one who has done in-depth research, honestly examining the evidence for the Bible's inspiration and truthfulness, has been able to disprove the Bible.
History records many who set out to disprove the Bible, who instead became believers.
The Bible writers came from many walks of life, including kings, peasants, philosophers, fishermen, herdsmen, poets, statesmen, scholars, soldiers, priests, prophets, a tax collector, a tentmaking rabbi, and a Gentile doctor.

The Bible was written in three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

The writings contained in the Bible belong to a great variety of literary types including history, law, poetry, educational discourses, parables, biography, personal correspondence, and prophecy.

Books written by men have no unity of thought on even one subject. Some of them invariably disagree with others. But there is perfect unity between the books of the Bible -- which speak of hundreds of subjects in many fields. There is no contradiction among them.
Who but God could produce such a book?
what is it that you have to offer that is comparative to this?

Answer 7

What do I have to do to convince you religious people to become Atheists?

There is NOTHING you can do. I would die before doing so because my LORD died for me.

How do you tell someone that has been blind all of their life what a sunset looks like? How do you tell someone that has never heard how sweet it is to hear your child say "I love you Mommy or daddy" Both have to be experienced...but once it was you would not want to give either up again.

The JOY and PEACE of knowing the LORD has to be experienced...try it...you WILL like it...

read the link below

Answer 8

You'd have better luck convincing an alcoholic to quit drinking than change a religious persons conviction... even if it is false.

Answer 9

That is just silly, there are many great scientists in history and in the present age. There just isn't any conflict, unless one is an atheist and wants to interject one.

Answer 10

many Christians believe science and faith are not mutually exclusive. i started out as an atheist and became a Christian, and i feel my decision was as much intellectual as emotional, and not at all based on "hearsay"...

to each his own, right?
why do you care if we religious people become atheists?

Answer 11

OK, if their are only two lines, and one says 'Science' and the other says 'God'...
I'll be in the 'Science' line with ya. But I'll have the Earth Mother & Father Sky in my pocket!

Blessed Be... ; )