Question for Athiests & Christians or Christians & Athiests....Is it better to understand or to be understood?

Question

Please explain your answers. It seems there is much misunderstanding as most are trying to be understood.

I see that some of you did not understand my question apparently. I simply asked if you think it is more important to be understood, or is it more important to understand others.

Oops. Atheists...........i didn't use spell check. Hey i didn't want anyone arguing over who I gave first billing to so I gave first billing to both. Should count for a diffuse credit anyways.

Answer 1

On Y!A, the baiting that goes on between Atheists and Christians is endless. This I have come to understand, accept, and sometimes embrace. There is deliberate mischief between these two groups, and often it is simply that no one likes to be told that they are wrong.

It seems to be more a matter of respect rather than understanding.

Atheists really don't want to hear that they are going to be punished, or that they are evil. They find it insulting. They believe that religion causes more evil, conflict, and war in the world than they do.

Christians detest having their beliefs ridiculed as "fairy tales". They feel scorned and belittled. It's upsetting to them to have their intelligence mocked because of their faith.

Are some Atheists just lazy and brutish and just want to sleep in on Sunday? Yes. Do some Christians use scripture to bully and to further their own personal agenda with little or no thought for their fellow man? Yes.

And are there those out there that live good lives, help others, give to charity, care for the world, work hard and are peace loving, educated citizens of the world? Yes. Not just Christian. Not just Atheist.

From all walks of life.

So, my answer to your question is both understanding and being understood is beneficial to us all.

Answer 2

Both understanding and being understood are equally important, especially in this case.
Ignorance is a two way street and if you're travelling on it the wrong way, it can be tragic to both parties...meaning that if you misunderstand someone, you're likely to react in an misunderstanding way...which the other party will not understand and attempt to once again make themselves understood and ect.
Basically, failing to understand someone will more often than not make yourself misunderstood as you won't have all your facts straight ( <--this doesn't mean understanding is better, as it goes for both parties simultaneously). Understanding and being understood are not without each other in such a matter of Atheists & Christians.
Excellent question, by the way.

Answer 3

I think in general, whether atheists or Christian, if you are strong in your beliefs, you really don't care much about what other people think about how you believe. On the other hand, I have a thirst for knowledge about many things and want to understand those things inside and out and not just know some encyclopedia version of the concept. I am not saying that everyone is like that, as we are certainly all individuals, but it could be a way of explain a majority.

Answer 4

I would far rather understand than be understood. I'm misunderstood by most people any way, and it doesn't concern me, because those are the people I choose not to associate with more than absolutely necessary. However, my craving to understand my environments is somewhat insatiable.

Of course, this seeking of understanding was a major factor in my becoming an atheist, as it was brutally obvious that religion's version of answers was mere fairy tale tempered by social control mechanisms.

Answer 5

It's better to be understood. That way, the conversation doesn't leave with the other person, who is trying to understand, left all alone and up to their own wits to decipher what the other person said.

Being understood is a two-way street, it means allowing room for questions, for clarifications, for restatements, rephrasings and reframings of the conversation and it's context.

Therefore, there would be no room for misinterpretations because no one would be left with their own biases and everyone would have fully understood what was being said.

Answer 6

To understand you need an open mind, which in most cases are acquired by tragedy and exposure to many different views.

To be understood, you need to be simple. There will always be a few who will understand you but if you want everyone to understand you, ya must be at face value.


It is better to understand then to be understood.

Answer 7

I'm an agnostic. I hope it's ok for me to answer this.

It is better to understand and let understanding guide your actions. Understanding makes it easier to make yourself understood. The most important tool of the teacher is knowing which parts of something the student isn't getting.

Then too, it's sometimes better to let people misunderstand you. The best way to lie is to tell the exact truth and let people reach the wrong conclusion on their own.

Answer 8

Understand because frankly, I don't care if i'm understood as long as I understand myself. If I'm able to understand, i'm likely to agree, and if not, then I'll still not care whether or not they understand. It is a close one though, but i'd have to say understand.

Answer 9

i'm unsure I thoroughly comprehend the question. there's a reason that the Bible says there are wages for sin. it relatively is a distant places money, of varieties. We run up a debt of sin, and then we are actually unable to pay it off. think of if the fee of a sandwich have been $a million,000,000. you will possibly promptly be in such debt which you will possibly in no way, even in a life-time of working, have the skill to pay your debts. in actuality, the greater you will possibly paintings, the greater you will possibly eat, and the greater your debt might upward push. you will possibly in no way be out from under that crushing debt. Justice demands the debt to be paid; it would be unjust to easily push aside the debt. Jesus -- who does not have any debt -- steps in and could pay your debt on your behalf. Now you're unfastened from that crushing debt for reliable. think of approximately it from God's perspective. permit's say you have a canines who is going exterior and gets muddy. Will you presently permit the muddy canines into the abode to smash the carpet and the fixtures? Or will you first bathe the canines and make him sparkling till now you permit him in? what is going to you do if the canines growls at you and runs away once you attempt to furnish him a bathtub? Do you come to a determination that properly, if he does not want the tub, this is advantageous, i'm going to easily enable him to smash my abode? the implications of your sinning on earth and the punishments you get from mothers and fathers, instructors, bosses, etc. have honestly no longer something to do with the penalty for sin. in simple terms because you get grounded by your mothers and fathers does not recommend which you're absolved from the sin -- and additionally you're actually not. Your mothers and fathers punish you to perfect your habit; yet you have no longer sinned against your mothers and fathers. you have sinned against God. And that debt for sin ought to be paid. Jesus pronounced hell lower back and lower back. every time he pronounced it as though it have been a genuine place. what's greater, while Jesus tells a parable, scripture consistently denotes that it relatively is a parable. while Jesus pronounced the guy that fluctuate into in hell and needed God to deliver somebody to warn his relatives and asked for a drop of water on his tongue (undergo in strategies that tale?) there is honestly NO indication that the tale is a parable. to disclaim that hell exists then, or to reject the belief of hell as a genuine place of punishment and separation is to declare that Jesus substitute into no longer telling the actuality.

Answer 10

It's better to spell it "atheist" as that's the correct spelling.

If you want to understand the other fella, you have to think in terms of "what does he mean when he says this."