Debating With Militant Atheists

[Aragon]

I'm sure most of us have had the experience of getting into conversations with fairly militant atheists. Sometimes I get the impression that a few are more interested in rhetoric than actually searching for the truth. Last week I spoke to the founder of my university's atheist club, and after speaking for over half an hour he told me he hadn't read one work of Christian apologetics in 10 years. He didn't even know what the 5 ways were. I gave him a book recommendation (The Last Superstition by Edward Feser) but he said he didn't need to read it because he already knew that religious belief was stupid, and reading any apologetical work would only confirm that opinion.

Speaking with these people can be really frustrating, but I feel like I'm failing our evangelical duty if I take the easier way out and fob them off. Do you think it is worth spending time and energy on these people, or should I just pray for them and focus on sharing my faith with people who want to approach the issues objectively?

Edited August 14, 2012 by Aragon

[Tally Marx]

If they are willing to engage you, then by all means engage them. I've had quite a few debates with militant atheists who were willing to listen, and the outcome was surprising.

But if they would rather laugh than think, then let them laugh. It takes a certain grace for them to be able to listen to what you have to say; much more to convert. You cannot give grace. Go instead to the Guy Who can. That is not necessarily the "easy way out". It takes humility to walk away and, besides, there are many penances you can do for your atheist friends. And it is certainly not failing your evangelical duty. Evangelization had nothing to do with hearing yourself talk, and everything to do with teaching others. If others don't listen, then evangelization is impossible.

[Jaime]

I like to compare all the people who were willing to be martyred for religion vs none of the people who would be martyred for atheism

[Anomaly]

[quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344954044' post='2467496']
I like to compare all the people who were willing to be martyred for religion vs none of the people who would be martyred for atheism
[/quote]Fanaticism on either end of the spectrum doesn't make it true.
I identify as atheist, but I would sacrifice my life for my wife, children, family, friends. I have been in situations that I've risked my safety for a stranger. As you well know, people have different depths of understanding and commitment to what we think we believe.

I'm annoyed at militant 'anything' that refuse to consider a different perspective or challenge their own understanding.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Aragon' timestamp='1344932139' post='2467444']Do you think it is worth spending time and energy on these people, [/quote]

i've been reading Chesterton's biography of St. Thomas Aquinas, and he says:

At the top of his fury, Thomas Aquinas understands, what so many defenders of orthodoxy will not understand. It is no good to tell an atheist that he is an atheist; or to charge a denier of immortality with the infamy of denying it; or to imagine that one can force an opponent to admit he is wrong, by proving that he is wrong on somebody else's principles, but not on his own. After the great example of St. Thomas, the principle stands, or ought always to have stood established; [b]that we must either not argue with a man at all, or we must argue on his grounds and not ours. We may do other things [i]instead[/i] of arguing, according to our views of what actions are morally permissible; but if we argue we must argue 'on the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves.'[/b] This is the common sense in a saying attributed to a friend of St. Thomas, the great St. Louis, King of France, which shallow people quote as a sample of fanaticism; the sense of which is, that I must either argue with an infidel as a real philosopher can argue, or else 'thrust a sword through his body as far as it will go.' A real philosopher (even of the opposite school) will be the first to agree that St. Louis was entirely philosophical.

[Papist]

Yes. Get to know him. Talk to him. Ask him questions in order to understand how and why he believes what he believes. Don't make it a debate/argument, but rather make it a conversation of getting to know each other. Pray the Holy Spirit gives you the opportunity and words to say.

Also, be prepared to give explanation for the reason for your hope.

[Papist]

[color=#282828][font='Segoe UI', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]“Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” - C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity, p. 32 [/font][/color]

[Jaime]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1344956470' post='2467509']
Fanaticism on either end of the spectrum doesn't make it true.
I identify as atheist, but I would sacrifice my life for my wife, children, family, friends. I have been in situations that I've risked my safety for a stranger. As you well know, people have different depths of understanding and commitment to what we think we believe.

I'm annoyed at militant 'anything' that refuse to consider a different perspective or challenge their own understanding.
[/quote]

I could not disagree more. It was the blood of the martyrs that stopped people in their tracks and seriously consider that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. When people are willing to be tortured and killed and still not renounce their belief has had a profound effect on others around them. Their spilled blood caused conversions that numbered in millions.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344968091' post='2467583']
I could not disagree more. It was the blood of the martyrs that stopped people in their tracks and seriously consider that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. When people are willing to be tortured and killed and still not renounce their belief has had a profound effect on others around them. Their spilled blood caused conversions that numbered in millions.
[/quote]Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and many other people have been martyred for their beliefs. There are also geo-politcal factors involved as well. I do not denigrate anyone's commitment to a belief. Some belief structures are more accomodating then others.
There have been many non-Catholic Christians that have died for their beliefs. It's inaccurate to validate 'truth' by the number of martyrs. It is an relative guage of commitment and ability of those in power to effect persecution.

[Slappo]

The Martyrs converted millions not because of their willingness to die, but because of their willingness to love to the point of death. It was their love for God that inspired conversion, not mere loss of life.

Some are willing to be tortured and killed without renouncing belief out of sheer stubborness. That does not win souls. Love wins souls.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Slappo' timestamp='1344976425' post='2467612']
The Martyrs converted millions not because of their willingness to die, but because of their willingness to love to the point of death. It was their love for God that inspired conversion, not mere loss of life.

Some are willing to be tortured and killed without renouncing belief out of sheer stubborness. That does not win souls. Love wins souls.
[/quote]
That's very true and I agree, but I think what 'Anomaly' is saying is that people will do that for all kinds of reasons. People will continue with extreme sports out of love for it knowing that it will kill them in a possibly horrendous way. Some will do it for the wrong reasons like the dreaded Islamist terrorists. What we really need to see is the statistics. I have a hunch that many more people will/have martyred themselves for Christianity than any other reason, even taking into account 'Anomaly's' power to effect persecution.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1344969593' post='2467594']
Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and many other people have been martyred for their beliefs.
[/quote]
Those beliefs have some common ground with Christianity and could be considered Christianity in another form.

[i]The principal beliefs of Sikhi are faith in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheguru"]Waheguru[/url]—represented by the phrase [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ik_Onkar"]ik ōaṅkār[/url], meaning [b]one God[/b], along with a praxis in which the Sikh is enjoined to engage in social reform through the[b] pursuit of justice for all human beings[/b][/i]

[Socrates]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1344986388' post='2467656']
Those beliefs have some common ground with Christianity and[i] could be considered Christianity in another form.[/i]
[/quote]
No they could not.

While non-Christians can come to some truths by natural reason (such as belief in one God), there is much in the teachings of such religions that is incompatible with the Christian Faith.

Christianity is not just a philosophy of doing good or simple monotheism, but is specifically belief in Jesus Christ as Lord, God, and Savior, and all that was taught by Him and His Church.

Religious indifferentism has been clearly condemned by the Church.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1344988795' post='2467670']
No they could not.

While non-Christians can come to some truths by natural reason (such as belief in one God), there is much in the teachings of such religions that is incompatible with the Christian Faith.

Christianity is not just a philosophy of doing good or simple monotheism, but is specifically belief in Jesus Christ as Lord, God, and Savior, and all that was taught by Him and His Church.

Religious indifferentism has been clearly condemned by the Church.
[/quote]
Yes I'm sure Catholics, myself included, would balk at martyring themselves for those religions and consider them faulty. But what I was alluding to was that the faithful of those religions will feel just as strongly for their beliefs as Catholics do for theirs. Because you believe you're right and are prepared to give your life for it, doesn't necessarily mean you are right. Which is what I think Anomaly is saying and what I'm inclined to agree with. I think you are complicating the credentials for salvation.[i] Love your God and your neighbor...[/i]! Anomaly has stated that he would give his life for his family and friends in which case the[u] possibility [/u]of salvation is his.

[Aragon]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1344992259' post='2467695']
Yes I'm sure Catholics, myself included, would balk at martyring themselves for those religions and consider them faulty. But what I was alluding to was that the faithful of those religions will feel just as strongly for their beliefs as Catholics do for theirs. Because you believe you're right and are prepared to give your life for it, doesn't necessarily mean you are right. Which is what I think Anomaly is saying and what I'm inclined to agree with. I think you are complicating the credentials for salvation.[i] Love your God and your neighbor...[/i]! Anomaly has stated that he would give his life for his family and friends in which case the[u] possibility [/u]of salvation is his.
[/quote]

The "credentials for salvation" are simple: membership in the Catholic Church and dying in a state of grace. Membership in the Catholic Church is ordinarily by water baptism and the ordinary means of acquiring and maintaining a state of grace are the Catholic sacraments. In extraordinary circumstances, for those who through no fault of their own do not know the Truth, they might be united to the Church [i]in voto - [/i]by baptism of desire.

God is merciful, and I think it is likely your run of the mill non-Catholic isn't wilfully obstinate in their disbelief, but that's up to God to decide not us. As far as we know the ordinary and normative means of salvation is the Catholic Church - and we do a discredit and injustice to non-Catholics when we give them the impression that they're fine and dandy as they are.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Aragon