My most recent posts have hit Evangelical Christianity pretty hard. While I certainly believe that my observations were warranted by the facts (and my criticism was fair), I don't want to let their atheist counterparts off the hook!
First, I'd like to underscore the fact that many atheists (just like their Christian counterparts) are not evangelicals. Nevertheless, it is safe to say that there are a large number of atheists who could justly be characterized as evangelicals (e.g. John Loftus of "Debunking Christianity").
Of course, we're speaking of atheists who are "marked by militant or crusading zeal." (www.merriam-webster.com) Moreover, I'm not the first person to make this observation. The "Urban Dictionary" has an entry for "Evangelical Atheist." Under the entry, we read: "see asshole, An evangelical atheist is one who not only believes there is no god or other supreme being, but is obsessed with convincing everyone around them to become an atheist too, usually through hard line intolerance (the kind they accuse other religions of)." (www.urbandictionary.com)
Like their Christian counterparts, these folks can be very hateful and obnoxious (and do it with a smile). In fact, one notices several similarities between the two groups when we take a closer look.
The Evangelical Atheist seems to believe: 1. My way of interpreting the available evidence is the only legitimate way to do so. 2. I'm smarter, more rational and more logical than those theists. 3. I'm right, and they're wrong. 4. It's my duty to challenge and/or denigrate theists. 5. It's my mission to convert others to "The Truth."
I've noticed too that evangelical atheism has been particularly attractive to some of the former followers of Herbert Armstrong. I guess it's a way for some of them to maintain their unique status as one of the enlightened (one of those who is not deceived). In short, they get to maintain their superiority over the ignorant, unquestioning masses. After all, it feels good to believe that my understanding is superior to yours. Moreover, ridicule and scorn are considered appropriate because the other side is ignorant and wrong!
Hmmm, evangelicalism isn't any more attractive in atheists than it is in theists - is it?
Of course your definition of "God" is the Hebrew Yahweh.
ReplyDeleteHow do you, as a devotee of a splitoff of Yahwism (Christianity) reconcile it with Evolution?
Your characterization of my views is not representative of what I actually believe. I believe that the YHWH of the Hebrews was/is a manifestation of God. I don't think that YHWH defines or fully comprehends the Supreme Being. I have written extensively on my belief in evolution, and my thoughts on the Genesis account of creation. However, for the sake of clarity (and in the spirit of attempting to answer your questions), I don't feel that it's necessary to "reconcile" the biblical account of creation with the theory of evolution. In my opinion, the theory of evolution is the most sensible explanation of the diversity of life on this planet. Nevertheless, the theory doesn't address the issue of whether or not there is a Supreme Being, or what role that entity may have played in creating life or initiating or guiding the process of evolution.
ReplyDeleteYou think the [awful] religion of your background culture is the right one. That makes you a VERY LAZY truthseeker.
ReplyDeleteReligion, for the most part, is a man-made construct; and I don't belong to any denomination/organization. I'm a Christian in the generic sense - I accept Jesus as the Messiah and my Savior (and attempt to follow the teachings and examples attributed to him by his followers). Hmmm, I'm "very lazy" because I've reached different conclusions than you? Your diligence seems to be indicative of intolerance and arrogance.
ReplyDelete