What are the philosophical strengths and weaknesses of the Christian plan to convert atheists into agnostics because they are under the impression tha...

What are the philosophical strengths and weaknesses of the Christian plan to convert atheists into agnostics because they are under the impression that agnostics won’t resist Christianity?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >because they are under the impression that agnostics won’t resist Christianity?
    They don't, nor any other religion for that matter. If a theocratic takeover of the government were to happen, they'd be the atheists who would just keep their heads down and their mouths shut and go through the motions for the sake of a peaceful existence.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      And what is your basis for this belief? Doesn’t seem like there is much difference at all in rebellious attitudes between secular sub-groups in response to religious tyranny.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Doesn’t seem like there is much difference at all in rebellious attitudes between secular sub-groups in response to religious tyranny.
        Because we live in secular times that grant atheists protection for their "rebelliousness", but if an actual religious war were to break out the vast, vast majority of atheists would shut right up. They believe this life is all there is after all, very few of them are actually willing to waste it making a point.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          This might actually be true. Atheism is spread by words, christianity is spread by swords. Christianity can't compete with atheism without employing threats of violence.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Christianity can't compete with atheism without employing threats of violence.
            Correction: state violence. Christianity spreads through state violence and requires state violence to support it. Christians on their own are not willing to actually commit violence in the name of their religion, they will only do so with government backing.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Atheism is spread by words, christianity is spread by swords.
            This is objetively false, Christians have always been more than willing to use speech and persuasion to gain converts, Christianity has been spread by both words and swords, it's only in the modern secular age that religious conflicts have been seen as inherently illegitimate, so they've had to resort to words now.
            >Christianity can't compete with atheism without employing threats of violence.
            Atheist regimes have been historically just as willing to bypass persuasion and go straight to violence to spread atheism and erase religion once they gained the ability to and have enough power to defeat religious opponents.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >speech and persuasion
            *lies and threats

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You know that rhetoric has nothing to with truth, right? Someone can be completely wrong and still make his ideas appealing.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Telling on yourself. Not a level of honesty seen here often, congrats

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Pretty funny to try and bash the courage of atheists when you outright admit we live in secular times but didn’t used to.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Pretty funny to try and bash the courage of atheists
            Excuse me, what? I never bashed anyone, you seem to feel attacked for no reason, atheists choosing to keep quiet when faced with religious rule that would use violence against them is a perfectly reasonable course of action based on their own worldview.
            >when you outright admit we live in secular times but didn’t used to.
            You seem to be under the impression that at some point in the past atheists bravely rose in open conflict against religious regimes and won, no such thing happened. The rise of our current secular age was a much more complex affair, one that Christians themselves much contributed themselves, either directly or indirectly, there are many, many reasons why secularism emerged in the Christian West and not, say, the Islamic world.

            In any case, even today atheists are the global minority, religious people still vastly outnumber you, if you were to start an oper war against religion, you'd lose. And the funny thing is that religious people don't even necessarily have to win, all they have to do is demonstrate that they are willing to use violence, that alone is enough to make a lot of atheists soften their tone our even outright stop speaking, look at what Islamic violence has accoplished, it has effectively caused the West to self-censor lest they offend Muslims, if Christians awoke from their lethargy and did the same, as they once were set to do, atheists would have no chance.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Excuse me, what? I never bashed anyone, you seem to feel attacked for no reason, atheists choosing to keep quiet when faced with religious rule that would use violence against them is a perfectly reasonable course of action based on their own worldview.
            That’s an insult to atheists, and you go on in this post to further insult them. Violence was not needed. Ideas and words and exchange of information have dealt a death blow to Christianity in the west. It is now an increasingly fringe identity, and the proportion of people who truly take it seriously beyond nominal are clearly a shrinking minority. Atheists have enacted violence against Christian societies they lived in btw, and were victorious.
            I much prefer the ideas and information side as its effective and violent force should not be used when other methods are available.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >That’s an insult to atheists, and you go on in this post to further insult them.
            You speak for all atheists? I said what I said because I've spoken with atheist acquitances that have told me that's what they'd do if they were faced with a theocratic takeover: play pretend and keep their heads down. It's fine if you feel offended, but don't speak for others.
            >Ideas and words and exchange of information have dealt a death blow to Christianity in the west.
            I disagree, I subscribe to Alec Ryrie's analysis that the rise of western atheism has much more to do with anger, disillussionment, and axiety. A corrupt priest will to much more to damage Christianity than a hundred atheist speakers.
            >It is now an increasingly fringe identity, and the proportion of people who truly take it seriously beyond nominal are clearly a shrinking minority.
            I disagree, on both statements, Christianity has never been a fringe idenitity, and what people mean by "taking it seriously" is too vague to properly measure it, to some people "Christian" just means being a person concerned with moral behavior.
            >Atheists have enacted violence against Christian societies they lived in btw, and were victorious.
            Such as?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Im an agnostic I just know an insult when I see one.
            >disagree, I subscribe to Alec Ryrie's analysis that the rise of western atheism has much more to do with anger, disillussionment, and axiety
            He’s clergy obviously his explanation is that people aren’t Christian because there’s something wrong with them.
            Christianity is becoming fringe in the west btw, you know very well most self identified Christians do not put in effort to be like Jesus. Most of you don’t either.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Well most agnostics would still tell you that the stories about some flying rabbi are bullshit, so take that as you will.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That comment sounds unhinged but by definition an agnostic is more open to believe in God than an atheist

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Although I see why you might think that I’m much further from Christianity now as an agnostic than I was as an atheist. Never been more confident that Christianity is false. Agnosticism can just be in relation to a general non-religious god. These definitions are sort of murky and frankly I don’t think they hold much insight or utility.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    99.9% of atheists are already agnostics
    Like most Christian LARPing, they can't see the fact that their religion's place in the sun was won through fierceness of conviction and blood in the sand, not the inherent truth of their beliefs. Babies don't get born spouting Jesus' name. Schizophrenia has taken over the Church and the ruthless pragmatism of the old days is long gone.

    In short, all they're really doing is prodding people toward generic unorganized 'spirituality' which can't be refuted logically like the days of yore because nothing can be in the age of the Internet and the resultant mass dissemination of viewpoints and knowledge.

    There's a reason why it's dying out everywhere except the turd world. Modern Christians are either incompetent, ineffective tyrants or completely delusional. Everyone willing to turn away from atheism's just picking and choosing their own beliefs and most of the time it ends up having nothing to do with Christianity.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    As a Christian, that sounds kinda unhinged. I prefer people being agnostic mostly because I've found they're a lot less likely to harangue me about my religious beliefs.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >unsure of their own shadow
    but the atheistic worldview is founded on the solipsistic principle that objective truth doesn't exist and there is no qualitative way of affirming reality is even real

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *