This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultCreative
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

How do we engage believers?

Skeptics face a quandary: When we declare that supernatural dogmas are false fairy tales, believers who devote their lives to those dogmas may feel bitterly insulted. This makes it difficult for well-meaning freethinkers and well-meaning churchgoers to hold open, sincere, friendly discussions.

How can we make dialogue possible?

It’s glaringly clear that some believers are outraged when their faith is challenged. Why do believers react so strongly? Bertrand Russell wrote that it’s because they realize, subconsciously, that their supernatural beliefs are senseless, so they cannot tolerate any challenge.

In the face of all this, it’s difficult for sincere doubters to talk with sincere believers without causing bad feelings. How do we handle pious neighbors, friends and family members? Here’s the wrong way:

One day, two flashy-looking evangelists came into my newspaper office. I tried to tweak them lightheartedly, but within minutes, we all were screaming at each other, purple-faced. It was awful.

Is there a better way? I really can’t tell a churchgoer “I respect your right to worship supernatural beings” because I actually don’t respect it.

Here’s the only workable approach I know. Be polite. Stay calm. Be reasonable. Ask questions designed to make the believer see flaws in his or her faith. For example:

Q: Exodus 31:13 decrees: “Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.” What about all the police, firefighters, paramedics, hospital staff and others who work on Sunday? Should the bible be complied with?

Q: Deuteronomy 22 commands that brides who aren’t virgins shall be taken to their fathers’ doorsteps and stoned to death. Should Christians obey this?

Q: Leviticus 20:13 mandates that gay males “shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Should the bible be submitted to in this instance?

Q: The Holy Book advises how to buy and sell slaves. Leviticus 25:44 says: “Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are around you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.” Exodus 21:7 gives rules to follow when “a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant.” Should the bible be followed in this regard?

And, of course, the clincher:

Q: Why does a merciful God let children die of horrible diseases, doing nothing while parents pray desperately? And why does He let tsunamis, twisters and the like kill multitudes? And why did He create foxes to rip rabbits apart, cobras to kill children, etc.?

Maybe polite questioning is the best course in dealing with religious believers who surround you. If that doesn’t work, we can just smile to ourselves and avoid debates.

This column has been adapted from a July 8, 2019, piece written for Daylight Atheism.

James A. Haught, syndicated by PeaceVoice, was the longtime editor at the Charleston Gazette and has been the editor emeritus since 2015. He has won two dozen national newswriting awards and is author of 12 books and 150 magazine essays. He also is a senior editor of Free Inquiry magazine and was writer-in-residence for the United Coalition of Reason.
I'm not a believer and was raised atheist. For me, it's not just "doubt". I am certain that consciousness and intelligence can only arise out of physically living and material beings, and that "spirit" cannot exist independently of a living body.

My answers to your questions:
Q1. In Jewish faith, there are acceptable exceptions to the law of observing the Sabbath:
a. if work is required to save a life,
b. if the business or service is performed by non-Jews. In this instance, some Orthodox Jews have a standing practice of selling their business to a Christian or Muslim just before sundown on Friday and buying it back again on Monday morning. Similarly in the Middle East, some Christians sell on Saturday afternoon and some Muslims on Thursdays, both buying back on the morning after their respective days of rest. The beauty of this is that it allows people of the Book to live together in mutual trust, cooperation and peace - largely sharing similar values in most matters (the role of women being the exception).

Q2. on Deuteronomy 22. Christians consider that if a law of the OT stands in contradiction to Jesus' "golden rule" to "love one another as thyself" then Jesus' new rule is the one to follow. They still accept Moses' golden rule "do unto others as you would have done unto you' because it doesn't conflict with Jesus' teaching - although the latter is better worded.
The problems with these two.
a. Not everyone loves themselves. In fact, people raised with trauma often hate themselves and do not know how to love. In the case of narcissism, a perverse form overweening self "love" cuts the person off from any feeling of empathy for others.
b. What each person wants or needs for themselves can often be very different. It's preferable to ask rather than assume.

Q3. Leviticus 20:13. Same: Jesus commandment to "love one another as thyself" is taken to replace all others because he is seen by Christians as the messiah who prophesied to correct the problems with the old order.

Q4. Leviticus 25:44. Same. Love for all living beings shows that slavery (denial of personal freedom and responsibility) is not and cannot be loving.
One can track the start of slavery in the OT (Genesis 9:20–27, KJV) to the moment when Noah decrees that his grandson Canaan (for the sin of his son Ham in seeing him naked and exposing it to his brothers) and all his future progeny shall henceforth become the slaves of the two "good" brothers, Shem and Japheth and all their descendents. An atheist could ask a believer, "why did God not condemn Noah for creating slavery?" Why must Jesus, be a descendent of the patriarch who invented such an inhumane custom and why does God condone it by not stopping it?

This last example and many like it (such as the expulsion from Paradise, the felling of the Tower of Babel, the destruction of Sodom and Gormorrah, etc) comes closer to one of the most critical questions.
If god is omnipotent, omnipresent, omnipotent and good, how could he permit evil and suffering?
The logical answer has to be that such a being does not and could not exist.

But belief is not about logic or fact.
The reality is that believers are expected to believe for the sake of belief itself.
The story of Eden shows that god expects obedience to belief for its own sake.
In reality, belief has psychological and social hooks.
Its real purpose is to unit large numbers of people into a nation with common values and a willingness to submit to the authority of a ruler (god and government ('give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's). It worked quite well to unite the nomadic Aramaic and Bedouin tribes of the Middle East in ancient times.
Nowadays, with people of differing faiths migrating across the planet in their millions, faith often creates more conflict than harmony.

We need tolerance and politeness to live in harmony with one another.
So long as a person's faith benefits them and their family and causes no harm to others, I see no reason not to let believers practice in peace.
Whodunnit · M
I find it's best to just leave them to it. Nothing I say will change their minds, and nothing they say will change mine.

I do allow myself a little eyeroll though 😏
Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M
Or, just use the old sayings:

" If you can't say nothing nice don't say anything at all.".

"Never argue with an idiot. People listening in might not be able to tell the difference."

Personally I can't say that there is no God but my opinion is that it's not some anthropomorphic version as written in the Bible. More likely it's an Electric field formed in a dream and it's just curious about life. In any case, it's likely not what we've been taught.
HikingMan · 51-55, M
I once let Jehovah's Witnesses into my home on the condition that I would listen to their words if I could have the same time to ask questions.
Being versed in their history already and the circumstances of their founding I patiently waited and listened carefully to what they said for almost 20 minutes.

I was polite in my queries.
They left after my second question....

It is what it is
Being a skeptic doesn't necessitate promoting skepticism.

Cultivate curiosity - genuine interest in all others.
When asking questions, check first to see if they enjoy being asked about themselves.
It is interesting to know why people believe what they do. And to know the specifics of their brand of belief and values.
Most believers were taught their beliefs before they reached four years old and then had it reinforced throughout childhood in their families and communities. We are social beings so it is natural for most to want to fit in.
Aiming for understanding is always preferable to trying to bash someone over the head with "I'm right and you're wrong."

If you're lucky, you'll occasionally meet someone who is just as curious about you as you are about them. See how it feels when this happens. It's rare and wonderful - especially if they want to go deep and do it without trying to change the way you think.
Repete · 61-69, M
People are going to believe what they want or need to believe. It’s hard if not impossible to change their or your mind so let them believe . That’s not saying that you can’t say your opinion but let it stop at that if they don’t want to agree.

The best way to engage a believer is on one knee, engagement comes before the marriage because it’s easier to break an engagement than a marriage if you find you totally disagree with each other. This is my opinion. 🙃
why are you trying to engage believers?
Philth · 46-50, M
This sounds a bit like trying to rationalise with...
Climate change deniers
Ordinary people who think that Trump represents their interests
People who think it's OK to keep freeroaming cats
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@jshm2 People are more pleased if you believe in something magic based rather than nothing. Even if it's not theirs.
As long as they don’t try to impose their beliefs on secular society, I have no problem with them.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Well, this is two barrelled.
Believers and agnostics come in two flavours: open and shut.
The open WILL discuss theoretical concepts . The shut ones wont , they are too set into their beliefs.

The art is to see which one you are dealing with.

And to realise , you cant argue with feelings. Logic, or quotes wont change feelings.

We each believe what we believe for personal reasons. Trying to prove another persons belief is ...well....very personal .
In fact , it can almost sr seem like a personal attack.

If you want to get along, talk about something else .

What we each spirtually believe doesn't have to fuck up a friendship.
gol979 · 41-45, M
Ahhhh. The zealotish athiests. Irony unbound 😉
I don’t engage them. Neither of us are changing the other’s mind at this point. Best to live and let live.

 
Post Comment