Would you say that atheists that converted to a religion were never "true atheists"?

Question

You know, kind of like how there are "true christians" and those that aren't.

Who decides these matters?

Answer 1

someone could at one time in their life believe no gods exist, and then at some point change their mind... why not?

you know someone who doesnt believe in the fantasy of gods doesnt have much use for a world like athiest.

by definition, the word was coined by believers who needed to label those who didnt.

besides i plan on beating the system, i'll just repent and accept on my deathbed, that way, in the unlikely event that there is an afterlife, i'll be set. hey, its your rules!


i think the best answer is this:
"A "true Christian" lives what they believe (as opposed to being a hypocrite)
A "true atheist" - if there is such a thing - merely believes what atheists as a group believe.. that God does not exist."

where do i sign up for the Athiest group? Do they pass around a collection plate to take fellow athiest's money? How do they brainwash Athiest kids into believing nothing?

note: there is no athiest cult getting together, figuring out what we're gunna say when someone asks a tough question about our beliefs. thats something religious people would have to do, after all, what one man could defend such absurd claims?
nope, they need a group from which they can cast their stones.

Athiesm really should be called; 'hire scientists, do experiments, look for results.'
Christianity could be called; 'believe this cause i say so.'

Answer 2

This is not straight forward.
There can be a case of No True Scotsman if someones just says that a christian or muslim or just a deist was never an atheist, REGARDLESS of his testimony. However there is a pattern of apologetics claiming to be atheists in the past but the issue is how they describe their atheist past that raises doubts.
An example is Lee Strobel, his writings show open distain and outright propaganda against being atheist, he mischaracterises being an atheist as someone who just wants to sin, do drugs and rebel against god.
These statements are pure lies, and come from a biblical narrative, so his saying he was an atheist does not make much sense. It is not a fallacy to question such claims when there are valid reasons to justify doubt.
There are atheists that genuinely become some sort of believers in some higher power. They show a history of actual intellectual understanding of the stance (A. Flew for instance). Something changes their mind, and they stop being an atheist.
The key point is that they should still remember what it was like to be an atheist and recall it fairly accurately from the viewpoint of when they were atheist.
It would be like a ex-christian saying he used to offer blood sacrifices to his holy trinity Mary, Joseph and Jesus every Tuesday. Genuine doubt is warrented.
In my view some public ex-atheist apologetics are either outright lying or exaggerating to please their new followers. There is a strange street cred when claiming to have been an atheist.
In reality it could mean the person was one of the following:
1. Raised in a not particularly religious family and became more religious later. (not atheism)
2. Never put any thought into the subject so held no firm views for a period of time, this can simply mean he/she lapsed in active faith but still believed in it. Not praying or going to church is not atheism.
3. Suffered a tragedy or life crisis and got angry with god, resulting in stopping practicing the faith for a time, until they reconciled for whatever reason. (atheists do not hate god in that manner).
4. Peer pressure to suppress religious activity, then they either got new friends or matured enough to go there own way. (claims about parties and drinking and sleeping around is not atheism)

I don't have an issue with any atheist becoming a theist, as long as they represent their past fairly, and I have heard some that do. That does not mean I think their reasons are good for changing, they generally are pretty poor or I would be a theist on hearing them.

Answer 3

I don't think ANY atheists believe that you can't "leave" atheism. Utterly ridiculous! Atheism is not a religion but merely a concept . A perfectly logical one I might add. Additionally, the idea of someone?? deciding these matters is not really a relevant question. Decides for who? To be honest , I think its great you're at least thinking about atheism. The problem is that you're looking at it from a religion-centric point of view. To truly understand the concept, you've got to leave the dogma behind and start thinking in an original and personal way. For a good book on atheism try, The God Delusion by Richard Hawkins.

Answer 4

NO, I wouldn't. If they became Christians, we would say they'd been born again, from darkness to light. It's possible for hard-core atheists to be born again when they hear & receive the Truth. The Word of God (the Bible) is the standard by which a person's actions are measured. Christians will say someone isn't a true Christian if his/her behavior doesn't line up with the Word or doesn't line up with who/what they claim to be. It is judging, I admit, but the Bible says to judge with righteous judgement--the Bible also says that "you will know them by their fruits", in other words, their actions should line up with their claims. A "true Christian" is one who is born again & following the teachings of Jesus Christ. Some people think they are Christians because they attend a particular church or because they were born into a christian family, but becoming a Christian is an individual choice. Only God knows what is truly in a person's heart and for that reason, I try to avoid saying that someone is not a "true Christian".

Answer 5

Well,many atheists here claimed to be true Christians before they became atheists. So,I don't see why an atheist could not have been a true atheist before he/she found evidence to the contrary,evidence I might add that had to have been pretty convincing for them to convert. It is not as impossible as atheists seem to think. All it takes is an open mind and heart.

Answer 6

I was as a teen a dedicated athiest; I mellowed; I explored spirituality, but I fully concede spirituality is an entirely subjective matter that can never be objectively proven. Omagine if you grew up among people who believed that (or at least acted like) Star Wars was real; they were unnaturalliy into it (like some SW fans seem to be)... and all other movie fans seemed just as fanatic (Trekkies, etc). The logical option in such a climate is to assume all film leads to such geeky behavior (I can say that; I'm a geek). But once one realizes one can appreciate film but understand the difference between film and reality, one realizes there are lots of worthwhile genres and films out there that do not expect you to dress up and go to fan conventions.

This entirely parallels my approach to spirituality. Call me what you will.

Answer 7

Deciding would have to be on a case by case basis. I would say that I was a true christian but now I'm an atheist.

Answer 8

an atheist would happily convert to religion if just one person could give them definitive proof that a god exists- however due to the absence of this proof the only conclusion that can be reached is that if any atheist converts to a religion they have been brainwashed

Answer 9

A "true Christian" lives what they believe (as opposed to being a hypocrite)

A "true atheist" - if there is such a thing - merely believes what atheists as a group believe.. that God does not exist.

Answer 10

Its theologically necessary (in some people's minds) that Christians MUST remain Christian forever... otherwise it throws a logical wrench into things.

Reversing the logic - saying that atheists are only true atheists if they take it to the grave... has no foundation (and is quite silly really)