Do you believe God participates in our daily lives?

[albeto.]

This is when people start to get annoyed with you, albeto. You're picking apart my words to such an extent as you are injecting false meaning and twisting the meaning from where I meant it.

 

People get annoyed with me for lots of reasons. Perhaps you're annoyed with me because I can't pick up on what you mean, but can only address what you say. It's the only communication we have online. If you think I've twisted what you've said, let me know where and I'll reconsider. :)

[AlmiraGulch]

:)

 

I never once said I possess any certain qualities. I will be the first to admit I am one of the most messed up, filthy, self-absorbed people to have ever lived. I am engaging in a debate with albeto that atheists display the Christ-like qualities listed to the same extent Christians (across the board) do. I stand by my comments.

 

Of course you stand by your comments.  I'm glad you admit your shortcomings.  Perhaps you should consider not broadcasting them and waving them as your banner of pride. 

 

And if you think the anger I'm directly at you proves your point, you're wrong.  I'm no different in the quickness of my anger toward people who are unkind and harsh and rude and judgmental and self-righteous now than I was during the time that I felt most connected to Christ.   

[albeto.]

One is left wondering just how many "real" Christians there are. It's certainly a convenient distinction.

 

That fully depends upon who you ask.

 

;)

[I.Dup.]

And if you think the anger I'm directly at you proves your point, you're wrong.

 

I do think that, yes. You are clearly very angry at me, but you're just proving my point.

[I.Dup.]

dp

[I.Dup.]

People get annoyed with me for lots of reasons. Perhaps you're annoyed with me because I can't pick up on what you mean, but can only address what you say. It's the only communication we have online. If you think I've twisted what you've said, let me know where and I'll reconsider. :)

 

I don't have time to go back and comb through our posts. I ascribe the meaning behind posts that they express at face value. I don't have the time to pick apart posts and go through all the nuances of meaning behind each of the words chosen.

 

But with the "no true Scotsman" accusation, I was not meaning to define or point out who is true or not true. I could never know that, but we ARE to be judged on our behavior. For all I know, I'm not a true Christian since I struggle with these things. The road is narrow, a tree is judged by its fruits, and all of that.

[I.Dup.]

Atheists are too lazy to do the work of bettering themselves ?!

 

I never said that. At all.

[nmoira]

I do think that, yes. You are clearly very angry at me, but you're just proving my point.

 

You think it is unreasonable for a person to react with anger when you've just told them that you think they can aspire to no better than "a basic sense of human decency" because it is "almost impossible" to "develop these qualities apart from God"? I laughed (heard all this before), but that's me. Ha, ha... made you angry so I've proved my point? Is that it?

 

Then later you say it's harder (ETA and hard work in general) for non theists to develop these qualities. OK, so are atheists inherently lazy in that it's "almost impossible" for them to put the work in, or is it something else? You can't have it both ways. Given your later confession, I wonder if maybe you're really an atheist in denial, if you're having trouble developing these qualities yourself?  :tongue_smilie:

[nmoira]

I never said that. At all.

 

You kinda did. See me last post.

[unsinkable]

OK, so I read more, and basically, Idup, you're baiting.

Atheists are too lazy to do the work of bettering themselves ?!

 

Oh well, I think we're up to two possible acceptable atheists in the world, so that's a start :)

 

I'm going to retreat to the atheist cubby house and discuss - hmm, what did we talk about yesterday - pie and football. Yep, that's right - normal people! Surprise! :)

Special atheist pie and special atheist football that cannot be mentioned on the chat board?

[albeto.]

I don't have time to go back and comb through our posts.

You accuse me of twisting your words but won't show me how or where? Am I expected to just believe you?

 

I don't know what you want.

 

I ascribe the meaning behind posts that they express at face value. I don't have the time to pick apart posts and go through all the nuances of meaning behind each of the words chosen.

No one is suggesting you go through all the nuances of meaning behind each word chosen in past posts. I'm suggesting you read objectively, not emotionally, and not with prejudice . Your prejudice against atheists is noted, but not founded. When I try to point that out you become vague, short tempered, and a bit hostile.

 

By the way, what does this do with your argument about Christians being naturally more patient and kind than atheists? Will you think about it and modify your beliefs, or brush it off and maintain your prejudice because it's familiar, it makes sense, it's easy to spot examples that corroborate it?

 

Sincere questions.

 

But with the "no true Scotsman" accusation, I was not meaning to define or point out who is true or not true. I could never know that, but we ARE to be judged on our behavior. For all I know, I'm not a true Christian since I struggle with these things. The road is narrow, a tree is judged by its fruits, and all of that.

None of this changes the reality of the logical fallacy you imposed into your argument. I rejected that fallacy and explained why. For this you are frustrated? So I'm frustrating because I expose the weakness in one's argument? I hope you understand this doesn't reflect anything about my opinion of you as a person, it just reflects my reaction to the argument you are supporting. Does that make sense? Imagine if I came over to your house for Thanksgiving Dinner and brought a salad with beets in it. Like any good and decent human, you would of course grab that salad and bring it the far corner of the basement lest anyone be negatively affected by Satan's little toys, but I assume you and I would go on to enjoy each other's company once that was out of the way. :)

[albeto.]

Special atheist pie and special atheist football that cannot be mentioned on the chat board?

 

Recipes with babies are very private.

 

I do hope you understand.

 

:)

[nmoira]

imagine if I came over to your house for Thanksgiving Dinner and brought a salad with beets in it. Like any good and decent human, you would of course grab that salad and bring it the far corner of the basement lest anyone be negatively affected by Satan's little toys, but I assume you and I would go on to enjoy each other's company once that was out of the way. :)

 

That is indeed proper protocol for any and all foodstuffs containing beets.

[LibraryLover]

Oh well, I think we're up to two possible acceptable atheists in the world, so that's a start :)

 

I'm going to retreat to the atheist cubby house and discuss - hmm, what did we talk about yesterday - pie and football. Yep, that's right - normal people! Surprise! :)

 

Only two...so far. Where is this cubby house?

[nmoira]

David Attenborough is agnostic. Does that count for three? :D

[I.Dup.]

You accuse me of twisting your words but won't show me how or where? Am I expected to just believe you?

 

I don't know what you want.

 

No one is suggesting you go through all the nuances of meaning behind each word chosen in past posts. I'm suggesting you read objectively, not emotionally, and not with prejudice . Your prejudice against atheists is noted, but not founded. When I try to point that out you become vague, short tempered, and a bit hostile.

 

By the way, what does this do with your argument about Christians being naturally more patient and kind than atheists? Will you think about it and modify your beliefs, or brush it off and maintain your prejudice because it's familiar, it makes sense, it's easy to spot examples that corroborate it?

 

Sincere questions.

 

None of this changes the reality of the logical fallacy you imposed into your argument. I rejected that fallacy and explained why. For this you are frustrated? So I'm frustrating because I expose the weakness in one's argument? I hope you understand this doesn't reflect anything about my opinion of you as a person, it just reflects my reaction to the argument you are supporting. Does that make sense? Imagine if I came over to your house for Thanksgiving Dinner and brought a salad with beets in it. Like any good and decent human, you would of course grab that salad and bring it the far corner of the basement lest anyone be negatively affected by Satan's little toys, but I assume you and I would go on to enjoy each other's company once that was out of the way. :)

 

I'm frustrated that people keep telling me I said things that I didn't say. I'm truly sorry I even posted. I feel sufficiently ashamed and intimidated now, so I will slink away now. Happy? :)

 

And Sadie, I appreciate you being willing to talk with me after I have offended you.

[Mrs Mungo]

You think it is unreasonable for a person to react with anger when you've just told them that you think they can aspire to no better than "a basic sense of human decency" because it is "almost impossible" to "develop these qualities apart from God"? I laughed (heard all this before), but that's me. Ha, ha... made you angry so I've proved my point? Is that it?

Can I just interject something that I have perceived? Christians believe that these qualities stem from God, no matter in whom you find them. Kurt Vonnegut Jr was a renown atheist who was very fond of quoting the beatitudes because they represent some of the best *ideas* of Christianity. Atheists may not believe these things start with God, but Christians inevitably do. Christians believe those good and lovely qualities come from God, even if the person who has those qualities does not believe in God. I think it was more something like that that I.Dup was *trying* to say? Maybe? She can correct me, if I'm wrong.

[unsinkable]

??? I'm sorry, I don't understand.

You said it was just ordinary conversations. I just wondered why it happened in a social group for atheists.

[MFG]

Special atheist pie and special atheist football that cannot be mentioned on the chat board?

I imagine atheist pie is especially decadent. Those angry, selfish types keep it all to themselves.

[nmoira]

Can I just interject something that I have perceived? Christians believe that these qualities stem from God, no matter in whom you find them. Kurt Vonnegut Jr was a renown atheist who was very fond of quoting the beatitudes because they represent some of the best *ideas* of Christianity. Atheists may not believe these things start with God, but Christians inevitably do. Christians believe those good and lovely qualities come from God, even if the person who has those qualities does not believe in God. I think it was more something like that that I.Dup was *trying* to say? Maybe? She can correct me, if I'm wrong.

 

This did occur to me (and it's not a premise one can argue with either way... except to simply agree or disagree), except for her insistence that it was "almost impossible" for atheists to develop the listed characteristics. 

[nmoira]

I imagine atheist pie is especially decadent. Those angry, selfish types keep it all to themselves.

 

I don't make pie, I make clafoutis. And I share. Maybe I'm not a good atheist. :D

[Mrs Mungo]

You said it was just ordinary conversations. I just wondered why it happened in a social group for atheists.

Exclusion and snobbery come in all forms? ;) (just kidding!)

 

Obviously, many people have social groups on the board (and off of the board) where they discuss all kinds of topics in smaller, more intimate groups. There's nothing wrong with that.

[I.Dup.]

This did occur to me (and it's not a premise one can argue with either way... except to simply agree or disagree), except for her insistence that it was "almost impossible" for atheists to develop the listed characteristics. 

 

that's also not what I said. Again. It's amazing how just twisting one or two words can create hysteria and meaning that wasn't meant to be there.

[nmoira]

You said it was just ordinary conversations. I just wondered why it happened in a social group for atheists.

 

Do you never have conversations just amongst friends? Or are all you social interactions on the Chat board?

[nmoira]

that's also not what I said. Again. It's amazing how just twisting one or two words can create hysteria and meaning that wasn't meant to be there.

 

As I see it, you did, with the qualification that this was your belief  and based on your experience. Please go back and show me where I'm misunderstanding you, because I'm not seeing it.

[Laura Corin]

I hate to name names AND I don't claim to know what she does in private AND it isn't to the exclusion of many other wonderful atheist ladies, but....

 

*cough* Laura Corin *cough*

 

p.s. I am really torn about posting this. If anybody thinks it is rude to talk about her "behind her back", please let me know and I will delete.

 

I'm touched, Tracy.  Yes, I'm an atheist.  I have said things on these forums that fell short of my own standards, but I do try.

 

I have only skimmed the thread.  I initially saw the title and knew what my answer was, but didn't think it would add much to the thread.

 

I think - as we discussed in the 'Ask an atheist' thread - that those who feel that atheists are all angry, bitter..... have met anti-theists, rather than atheists.  Honestly, I really can't see why I should get angry about people believing in stuff that I don't.  Some people go and watch football; I like to garden.  What's to be angry about?  And I can appreciate an uplifting church service, a sublime Bach Cantata or a good passage of the KJV.  Why wouldn't I?  Why would it make me angry?

 

L

[unsinkable]

Exclusion and snobbery come in all forms? ;) (just kidding!)

 

Obviously, many people have social groups on the board (and off of the board) where they discuss all kinds of topics in smaller, more intimate groups. There's nothing wrong with that.

Where did I imply there was something wrong with that? By you including that, it puts my question in a bad light.

 

I was asking "why?" not "is it wrong?"

[unsinkable]

Do you never have conversations just amongst friends? Or are all you social interactions on the Chat board?

So you don't have an answer.

[unsinkable]

Don't you talk about all sorts of things in a group of friends who have a common interest ?

So no answer?

[I.Dup.]

unsinkable, your message box is full.

[Mrs Mungo]

This did occur to me (and it's not a premise one can argue with either way... except to simply agree or disagree), except for her insistence that it was "almost impossible" for atheists to develop the listed characteristics.

(sorry to talk about you out loud here, I.Dup)

 

It is striking me as something she is having to actively think through "out loud."

 

I do think (and it's fine if people disagree with me) it's easier for people to develop good qualities when they have a strong spiritual and ethical sense of the importance of those good qualities. I think Humanism (as one example) is a system of deeply held beliefs that can foster those good qualities, even though it leaves out God. I think there are other spiritual and ethical systems that foster those qualities.

 

I think that is more along the lines of what she was *attempting* to express, but she started out striking a bad note.

 

I also believe that there are some Christian denominations that actually seem to stomp those good qualities out of people, which is something I find baffling.

[Cricket]

One underlying assumption I always see in these debates is that the only "truth" that is true is that which can be determined through the scientific method, which, of course, is a statement that can never be proven through the scientific method.

 

Do me a favor. Look up "No True Scotsman fallacy" and why it's faulty logic and of no value in an intellectual argument. Then tell me who gets to define what a "Real Christian" is. :)

Maybe someone can explain this to me but I fail to see how the "No True Scotsman fallacy" applies to matters of religion. Followers of religion are acknowledging certain beliefs to be true. By definition, if someone fails to uphold those beliefs or fail to bring their life in line with those beliefs, they are not really followers, are they? Can I go around calling myself a Democrat if in every election I vote for a Republican candidate? Can I call myself a Muslim if I practice Hinduism or fail to follow Islam's teachings? Do I really get to call myself a Christian if I continually fail to live in accordance with my beliefs? It's interesting that Scripture has some harsh words to say about those who are in the church but refuse to give up immoral ways. It makes no sense to compare a nationality to a belief system that an adult claims to believe and follow. Wouldn't you wonder about the sanity of someone who says they believe in the law of gravity and continually jumps of roofs in an attempt to fly? Eventually you are going to come to the conclusion that they don't really believe in gravity, aren't you? What am I missing?

[Laura Corin]

 

I do think (and it's fine if people disagree with me) it's easier for people to develop good qualities when they have a strong spiritual and ethical sense of the importance of those good qualities. I think Humanism (as one example) is a system of deeply held beliefs that can foster those good qualities, even though it leaves out God. I think there are other spiritual and ethical systems that foster those qualities.

 

 

I definitely think that virtue needs to be taught, but an awful lot can be boiled down to The Golden Rule.  It was roughly what I was taught and what I have taught my sons.  I don't think that my atheist ethical education was very different from Husband's Southern Baptist one.

 

L

[nmoira]

So you don't have an answer.

 

To what?

 

It's curious to me that you can't envision a scenario in which a thread spontaneously turns to pie.  [i have have greater trouble with football, but not if I pretend it's hockey for the sake of argument.]  Surely in your time online and in the real world you've noticed topic shifts, sometimes unexpected?

[I.Dup.]

As I see it, you did, with the qualification that this was your belief  and based on your experience. Please go back and show me where I'm misunderstanding you, because I'm not seeing it.

 

if you had quoted my actual post, you would have seen that is not what I said. You keep repeating I said "atheists are too lazy" or "it is impossible for atheists to do any good" or something along those lines, when that is nonsense and not what I said at all. nak

[Cricket]

I think - as we discussed in the 'Ask an atheist' thread - that those who feel that atheists are all angry, bitter..... have met anti-theists, rather than atheists. Honestly, I really can't see why I should get angry about people believing in stuff that I don't. Some people go and watch football; I like to garden. What's to be angry about? And I can appreciate an uplifting church service, a sublime Bach Cantata or a good passage of the KJV. Why wouldn't I? Why would it make me angry?

 

L

This has been my experience too.

[Mrs Mungo]

I definitely think that virtue needs to be taught, but an awful lot can be boiled down to The Golden Rule.  It was roughly what I was taught and what I have taught my sons.  I don't think that my atheist ethical education was very different from Husband's Southern Baptist one.

 

L

And I don't disagree with you, which is what I was trying to say. I think all sorts of people (including some who claim the title of Christian) do not value or pass on certain virtues that The Bible holds in high regard. I think those virtues are important and can be held and passed on by anyone with a strong sense of ethics. I'm sorry, if I'm phrasing it poorly. This is a pretty touchy, complicated subject, and this format is not the best form of communication for it.

[ScoutTN]

absolutely

[LibraryLover]

I actually thought unsinkable was joking around.

 

This thread gave me a headache.

[Aelwydd]

I have not seen this at all. The specific qualities mentioned were: (less anger, less fear, more tenderness, more trust, less judgment of others,)

 

I cannot think of 1 atheist I have ever interacted with or seen online who I would describe as having anything close to the qualities above. Maybe I would feel differently if I had, but if anything, this confirms for me that developing these qualities apart from God is almost impossible. Is it possible to have a basic sense of human decency apart from believing in God? Yes, for the reasons others mentioned. But to be kind, gentle, tender, not angry, not judgmental? I've never seen that.

 

I.Dup., I'm coming into the discussion late, so I hope it's ok to jump in here.  For the record, I guess I would described myself as a conflicted Deist.  It seems there may be evidence for a creator because of the order of creation.  However, as much as there is order, there seems to be more disorder and chaos present.  And as others have pointed out, I really do not see any correlation between those who devoutly practice their religion and increased "success" stories in terms of answered prayers.  Rain may fall equally on the just and the unjust, but if that's the case, I really do not see the purpose of prayer.  It's an exercise in futility, because it is entirely random.  There is no connection between how hard you prayer, how firmly you believe, or how intently you study the precepts of your faith, and how likely your prayer will be answered. 

 

My faith began a slow decline when I was in a traditional Anglican parish.  I languished emotionally and intellectually in a place where my entire worth was tied up in my feminity.  In a patriarchal church like that, it means my role was basically to have babies, sit quietly, pray quietly, and support my husband and other men who led the church. 

 

The point of this is that those qualities you mentioned: absence of anger, fear, judgment, and exhibiting tenderness, trust, etc.?  I think those qualities are going to be more prevalent among some Christian groups, because they basically ensure compliance and submission to the leadership.

 

Atheists are by no means a monolithic group, anymore than Christians are.  But, just as certain groups of Christians may have a stronger emphasis on submission and enduring the suffering that goes along with accepting such a worldview, there are cohorts among atheists that seemingly emphasize certain traits.

 

So, whereas you might see meekness and acceptance of hiearchy among Christians, in atheist groups, you might see a kind of unapologetic self-reliance, self-respect, and not just the willingness, but the belief that it is one's duty to question authority.  Many believe it is demeaning to the dignity of humanity to submit oneself to the vagaries of religious hiearchy, and to surrender one's own judgment into the hands of others. This is a worldview that is going to produce somewhat different set of "desirable qualities" than one that emphasizes the innate inadequacies of a person, and the need for outside direction. 

 

It's not that atheists don't have qualities such as kindness and gentleness--it's that they may exhibit these characteristics differently. Albeto has always shown a great deal of forebearance on these boards, even though she has been attacked in various ways and often treated with disdain and even contempt here.  I'm not atheist, but the way she has been treated only confirms my own suspicion that there is a definite expiration date on the "fruits of the spirit."

 

The sum of my thoughts being, whatever rule of behavior Christians and atheists hold to, they tend to emphasize different "higher" ideals, and so the way they are perceived is affected by that.

[nmoira]

if you had quoted my actual post, you would have seen that is not what I said. You keep repeating I said "atheists are too lazy" or "it is impossible for atheists to do any good" or something along those lines, when that is nonsense and not what I said at all. nak

 

No, I'm specifically asking for clarification of your statements, because those were my first thoughts when I read your words. I'm being up front with my assumptions based on what I read and giving you a chance to tell me what you really meant if I am wrong.

[AlmiraGulch]

nm

Edited November 27, 2013 by Moderator
Really? Lose the snark.

[albeto.]

I'm frustrated that people keep telling me I said things that I didn't say. I'm truly sorry I even posted.

I'm not telling you said things you didn't say. I'm quoting what you said and responding with my own comments and questions.

 

:huh: 

 

I feel sufficiently ashamed and intimidated now, so I will slink away now. Happy? :)

Not at all. Why would you expect I be happy? I was only following our own conversation and I didn't think I said anything that would lead you to feel that way. If you'd like to show me where, I'll see what I meant, and if it comes across as intimidating or shaming, I'll apologize. I don't believe the accusations you're making against me just because you made them. I need something more concrete than that. I hope you can understand that.

 

 

[albeto.]

You said it was just ordinary conversations. I just wondered why it happened in a social group for atheists.

 

unsinkable, your message box is full.

 

Because chatting through message boxes is not as much fun!

 

:laugh:

[AlmiraGulch]

OK, so I read more, and basically, Idup, you're baiting.

Atheists are too lazy to do the work of bettering themselves ?!

 

Oh well, I think we're up to two possible acceptable atheists in the world, so that's a start :)

 

I'm going to retreat to the atheist cubby house and discuss - hmm, what did we talk about yesterday - pie and football. Yep, that's right - normal people! Surprise! :)

Mmmmmm....pie.

[Mrs Mungo]

And as others have pointed out, I really do not see any correlation between those who devoutly practice their religion and increased "success" stories in terms of answered prayers.  Rain may fall equally on the just and the unjust, but if that's the case, I really do not see the purpose of prayer.  It's an exercise in futility, because it is entirely random.  There is no connection between how hard you prayer, how firmly you believe, or how intently you study the precepts of your faith, and how likely your prayer will be answered.

I am going to try to say something about what I believe about prayer, but I've never tried to put it into words before. It's probably sort of nebulous and may not make sense to you, but since *this* is actually on topic with the OP, I would like to say something about it.

 

I don't believe that prayer gets anyone what they want (or even needs, maybe) like some kind of cosmic vending machine. I believe that prayer functions to remind the religious that all things stem from God. It is to remind us to be grateful and humble before God. It is sort of in direct contrast with the type of things you hear from Dave Ramsey who believes there is a magic formula for wealth and even good luck.

[I.Dup.]

Rebekah and Laura, thank you for your posts. That does help me understand a lot.

 

 

Perhaps your experiences with people you meet, in real life or on the internet, are in direct response to your own crappy behavior.

 

Possibly. I don't have too many negative one-on-one encounters, and ironically, those often happen with fundamentalist Christians. They really seem to dislike me. :)

 

 

No, I'm specifically asking for clarification of your statements, because those were my first thoughts when I read your words. I'm being up front with my assumptions based on what I read and giving you a chance to tell me what you really meant if I am wrong.

 

 

What I said is:

 

 

I have not seen this at all. The specific qualities mentioned were: (less anger, less fear, more tenderness, more trust, less judgment of others,)

 

I cannot think of 1 atheist I have ever interacted with or seen online who I would describe as having anything close to the qualities above. Maybe I would feel differently if I had, but if anything, this confirms for me that developing these qualities apart from God is almost impossible. Is it possible to have a basic sense of human decency apart from believing in God? Yes, for the reasons others mentioned. But to be kind, gentle, tender, not angry, not judgmental? I've never seen that.

 

Kindness: the quality of being friendly, generous, and considerate.

 

Tenderness: gentleness and kindness.

 

[albeto.]

One underlying assumption I always see in these debates is that the only "truth" that is true is that which can be determined through the scientific method, which, of course, is a statement that can never be proven through the scientific method.

Although I can't recall any comment that refers to the only "truth" that is true is that which can be determined through the scientific method, this is a good point.

 

Maybe someone can explain this to me but I fail to see how the "No True Scotsman fallacy" applies to matters of religion. Followers of religion are acknowledging certain beliefs to be true. By definition, if someone fails to uphold those beliefs or fail to bring their life in line with those beliefs, they are not really followers, are they? Can I go around calling myself a Democrat if in every election I vote for a Republican candidate? Can I call myself a Muslim if I practice Hinduism or fail to follow Islam's teachings? Do I really get to call myself a Christian if I continually fail to live in accordance with my beliefs? It's interesting that Scripture has some harsh words to say about those who are in the church but refuse to give up immoral ways. It makes no sense to compare a nationality to a belief system that an adult claims to believe and follow. Wouldn't you wonder about the sanity of someone who says they believe in the law of gravity and continually jumps of roofs in an attempt to fly? Eventually you are going to come to the conclusion that they don't really believe in gravity, aren't you? What am I missing?

 

Because there does not exist an objective source of what it means to be a "Real Christian," every Christian has their own idea of what it means. When each Christian uses their own subjective opinion as the measure of what it means to follow the Real Faith, the logical fallacy applies. This is what I.Dup. did upthread, which is why I referred to it. 

[nmoira]

What I said is:

 

 

 

Kindness: the quality of being friendly, generous, and considerate.

 

Tenderness: gentleness and kindness.

 

I don't understand your clarification. The qualities listed were not under contention, no?

 

I have not seen this at all. The specific qualities mentioned were: (less anger, less fear, more tenderness, more trust, less judgment of others,)

 

I cannot think of 1 atheist I have ever interacted with or seen online who I would describe as having anything close to the qualities above. Maybe I would feel differently if I had, but if anything, this confirms for me that developing these qualities apart from God is almost impossible. Is it possible to have a basic sense of human decency apart from believing in God? Yes, for the reasons others mentioned. But to be kind, gentle, tender, not angry, not judgmental? I've never seen that.

 

And the bolded for me confirms that you are not talking about qualities bestowed by a god into the world, but rather an active belief.

 

I still don't see where I'm misinterpreting you.

[Aelwydd]

I am going to try to say something about what I believe about prayer, but I've never tried to put it into words before. It's probably sort of nebulous and may not make sense to you, but since *this* is actually on topic with the OP, I would like to say something about it.

 

I don't believe that prayer gets anyone what they want (or even needs, maybe) like some kind of cosmic vending machine. I believe that prayer functions to remind the religious that all things stem from God. It is to remind us to be grateful and humble before God. It is sort of in direct contrast with the type of things you hear from Dave Ramsey who believes there is a magic formula for wealth and even good luck.

 

 

I don't view prayer as setting up a cosmic vending machine.  I simply expect that as Christ repeatedly states in the gospels that prayer would be answered, that there should be a positive connection between one's status as a practicing believer, and response from God.  Whether that response corresponded with more "yes's" or more "no's" than with the non-believer's situation, doesn't matter to me--just that there IS some correlation.

 

The fact that the negative (non-responses) and positive responses seem to be exactly the same whether one believes or not is what I find unsupportable. 

 

IOW, when I believed, and believed devoutly, and prayed, and how I am ambivalent now represents a huge difference in my prayer habits, and beliefs.  Yet, my "responses" whether they appear to be a "yes" or a "no" are really no different.  I haven't noticed a huge difference either way.  When I prayed to be a better person, and for a while I'd be more conscious of my behavior. Sometimes I think about that now, and will "pray" that I do a better job, and do the same. But, I'm basically still the same person.  Prayer hasn't changed me, and my prayers haven't changed anyone else for either good or bad, in my experience.