Should Atheists Evangelize?

[Stone Island]

Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra
Trans. Walter Kaufman

Quote:

2.

Zarathustra came down from the mountains alone, meeting no one. Eventually he entered a forest, and there suddenly stood before him an old man, who had left his hermitage to dig for roots. And the old man spoke to Zarathustra:

"This wanderer is no stranger to me! Many years ago he passed this way; Zarathustra he was called, but he has changed. Then you carried your ashes into the mountains: will you now carry your fire into the valleys? Do you not fear to be punished for arson?

"Yes, I recognize Zarathustra. His eyes are clear now, no longer does he sneer with loathing. Just see how he dances along!

"How changed Zarathustra is! Zarathustra has become a child, an awakened one. What do you plan to do in the land of the sleepers? You have been floating in a sea of solitude, and the sea has borne you up. At long last, are you ready for dry land? Are you ready to drag yourself ashore?"

Zarathustra answered: "I love mankind."

"Why," said the saint, "did I go into the forest and the desert? Was it not because I loved mankind far too well? Now I love God! Mankind I do not love; mankind is a thing too imperfect for me. Love of mankind would be fatal to me."

Zarathustra answered: "Did I speak of love? I am bringing a gift for mankind."

"Give them nothing!" said the saint. "Take rather part of their load, and carry it along for them – that will be most agreeable to them, if only it be agreeable to you. If, however, you want to give them something, give no more than alms, and let them beg for that!"

"No," replied Zarathustra, "I will give no alms. I am not poor enough for that."

The saint laughed at Zarathustra, and spoke: "Then see to it that they accept your treasures! They are mistrustful of hermits, and do not believe that we come to give. The fall of our footsteps rings hollow through their streets. And what if at at night, when they are sleeping in their beds, they hear a man walking abroad long before sunrise? Will they not ask themselves: 'Where goes the thief?'

"Go not to mankind, but stay in the forest! Go rather even to the animals! Do you not want to be like me – a bear among bears, a bird among birds?"

"And what does the saint do in the forest?" asked Zarathustra.

The saint answered: "I compose hymns and I sing them; and in making hymns I laugh and I weep and I hum: thus do I praise God. By singing, weeping, laughing, and humming I praise the God who is my God. So, do you bring us a gift?"

When Zarathustra had heard these words, he bowed to the saint and said: "What could I have to give to you? I should leave now lest I take something away from you!" – And thus they parted, the old man and Zarathustra, laughing like two schoolboys.

But when Zarathustra was alone, he spoke to his heart: "Could it be possible? This old saint in the forest has not yet heard the news, that God is dead!"

Should the atheist evangelize?

[Gate2501]

Originally Posted by Stone Island

Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra
Trans. Walter Kaufman


Should the atheist evangelize?

I am curious, do you actually have an opinion on this?

Also...

Can atheists be good citizens? ( Sorry I couldn't resist )

[JoeEllison]

Originally Posted by Gate2501

I am curious, do you actually have an opinion on this?

Also...

Can atheists be good citizens? ( Sorry I couldn't resist )

He has an opinion... he hates atheists. He is also afraid to admit his bigotry.

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by Stone Island

Should the atheist evangelize?

Yes.

Now what do you think?

[godless dave]

I don't think we should evangelize crazy old men living in forests. The people we should evangelize are the people who let their daughter die of treatable diabetes, and the people who fly planes into skyscrapers, the people who put known child molesters in positions of authority over children, and the people who preach bigotry against gays. More importantly, we should evangelize the people who give the latter people money and unconditional respect.

[linusrichard]

If I thought it would do more good than harm, I might say yes.

[X]

Why would an atheist want to preach the gospel to people and convert them to Christianity?
(dictionary definition of evangelize)


Unless you are asking if atheists should go around preaching atheism and converting people to our godless evil ways.

Personally, I'm fairly open about the fact that I'm atheist. But that certainly doesn't mean I go around telling every person I see wearing a crucifix that they are wrong.
Unless the conversation turns to such subjects, you're not likely even to hear me mention it.

Do I see the need to actively try to de-Christianize people?
No.

Should atheists try to actively de-Christianize people?
No.

That does not mean, however, that if somebody is harming themselves or someone else as a result of religious ideologies, that I will remain silent. I won't be trying to make people atheists, but I will try to point out flaws in their reasoning to try to get them to see the harm they cause.

[godless dave]

Yeah, I don't support aggressive evangelism. I would never go door to door telling strangers about the benefits of atheism, nor would I leave atheist literature on the table for my waiter. That would be darn rude, and counterproductive because of its rudeness.

Nothing wrong with a bumper sticker though.

[Btodd]

It just depends on the situation.

And I'm less likely to promote the idea that there is no God than I am to merely ask questions.

If anything, I like to evangelize skepticism.

[Wolfman]

1) I think that atheists should present their beliefs to others, explain the reasons for them, etc. So if by "evangelize" you mean "share or explain your beliefs to others", they I'd say "yes". But I would also hold that anyone else should be able to do the same thing. Then let people choose for themselves what they think is right.

2) I do not think that atheists should use fear, intimidation, or other such tactics -- tactics that are regularly used by Christian evangelists. ie. "If you don't accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, you will spend eternity suffering in the pits of Hell". Atheists should appeal to rational argument and debate, not to emotional appeals and fear tactics.

3) As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think the basic idea of "atheists" doing anything as a group is ludicrous. The Raelians (a cult based on belief in aliens) are completely atheist, and actively evangelize for their cult. However, their beliefs have nothing whatsoever in common with my own...when you talk about "atheists", do you mean "all atheists", or a specific sub-class?

[JoeEllison]

I don't think Stone Island understands what he posted, or is claver enough to catch the meaning of it.

[Kopji]

*ding dong*
(sound of door slowly creaking open) hello?
Hi! We're from the local atheist group and...
slam

*ding dong*
bark bark bark bark
(door opens a crack)
WHAT?
Did you hear about the time when God died?
I'm already a Christian
No no, we're not Christian we...
slam

*ding dong*
Hello
free chocolate?
what's the catch?
Nietzsche

gesundheit

No no, that was not a sneeze. He was a philosopher
Never heard of him
He said God is dead and that we killed him
Say, this is really good chocolate
may we come in?
sure

Nice Elk
thank you
fine collection of rifles
I'm a firm believer in the 2nd amendment
.
.
is that blood?
.
.
you say he killed God?
.
.
that IS blood.

[MG1962]

Originally Posted by JoeEllison

I don't think Stone Island understands what he posted, or is claver enough to catch the meaning of it.

Says the person who thinks a koala is a bear

[linusrichard]

Originally Posted by [X]

Why would an atheist want to preach the gospel to people and convert them to Christianity?
(dictionary definition of evangelize)

Maybe if we do it in a real sarcastic voice?

[KingMerv00]

It would be a pretty short sermon:

"I say verily unto you that God does not exist...uh...Go in peace?"

Let's see, a thread started by Stone Island with a question in the title.

Do I dare?

[Rufo]

Originally Posted by linusrichard

Maybe if we do it in a real sarcastic voice?

*ding dong*
Yes?
*sigh* Hello, we're here to tell you about Jesus Christ.
Who?
A cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father, who can make you live forever if you telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
*slam*

(Yes, it's copied from elsewhere)

No offense, Christians, I know that's not right... Well, seriously, though - no, I don't think atheists should spread their beliefs in an evangelizing manner. Many whine when theists do it to them, so they should lead by example. Besides, atheists don't believe something terrible will necessarily happen if you are not an atheist, or even that it will make your life better - they just are.

Myself, I'm an agnostic fence-sitter, so evangelizing for me would be like going to someone's house and say "I don't know who to vote for this year! You shouldn't know either!"

[Francesca R]

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

It would be a pretty short sermon:

"I say verily unto you that God does not exist...uh...Go in peace?"

This website does a pretty good job: The official God FAQ

[Ocelot]

I don't need to go door to door to discuss my faith with christians. They knock on my door and I happily discuss it for hours. In fact yesterday i think I got through to a Jehovah's Witness he took some book recomendations away and seemed geniuinely interested in finding out about the origins of the bible and his faith from a historical perspective.

[Moochie]

Originally Posted by Stone Island

Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra
Trans. Walter Kaufman


Should the atheist evangelize?

I loathe anyone getting into my face about anything, be it encyclopedias, vacuum cleaners, or some god flapdoodle. So, no, I don't think atheists or anyone else should evangelize. As a matter of fact, I think they should all stfu.

M.

[Georg]

Originally Posted by Stone Island

Should the atheist evangelize?

Some people do:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by JoeEllison

I don't think Stone Island understands what he posted, or is claver enough to catch the meaning of it.

Should or should not, Harris and Dawkins evangelize, after a fashion, by publicly speaking and writing a variety of critiques of religious practice and belief. In doing so, they are promoting their position, which is atheistic, and humanist, in nature.

Stone has asked us

"Should the horse run out of the barn"

long after said equine has been chasing mares around the pasture, the barn door having been jimmied open.

He might well have asked: "Should DR have gone golfing in Tuesday" on Wednesday. I already did it. There is no should about it.

EDIT: how does one get "claver" out of "clever" on a standard keyboard? Different row, pinkie finger rather than middle finger.

Hypothesis: you were being very polite, and trying not to give Stone your middle finger. How gentlemanly.

DR

[KingMerv00]

Originally Posted by Francesca R

This website does a pretty good job: The official God FAQ

Heh.

I am amazed that Stone thinks that atheists have a gospel to preach. I suppose we could go around and encourage other people to not believe in god but that isn't "doctrine". A great many of us are happy to leave people be so long as they are happy and don't harm others. Still others believe that religion is good for people.

Stone, should atheists evangelize?

(Yea, I did it. I'm weak and I've ruined the thread now. Sorry.)

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

1) I think that atheists should present their beliefs to others, explain the reasons for them, etc. So if by "evangelize" you mean "share or explain your beliefs to others", they I'd say "yes". But I would also hold that anyone else should be able to do the same thing. Then let people choose for themselves what they think is right.

2) I do not think that atheists should use fear, intimidation, or other such tactics -- tactics that are regularly used by Christian evangelists. ie. "If you don't accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, you will spend eternity suffering in the pits of Hell". Atheists should appeal to rational argument and debate, not to emotional appeals and fear tactics.

3) As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think the basic idea of "atheists" doing anything as a group is ludicrous. The Raelians (a cult based on belief in aliens) are completely atheist, and actively evangelize for their cult. However, their beliefs have nothing whatsoever in common with my own...when you talk about "atheists", do you mean "all atheists", or a specific sub-class?

I agree completely.

[Hokulele]

Now I am confused. Judging by the passage Stone quoted in the OP, should we take away the message that atheists love mankind, theists do not love mankind, and no one should ever evangelize? How does one get from this message to the question in the title of this thread?

Not that I disagree with 1/3rd of this message . . .

[Frozenwolf150]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Originally Posted by Wolfman

1) I think that atheists should present their beliefs to others, explain the reasons for them, etc. So if by "evangelize" you mean "share or explain your beliefs to others", they I'd say "yes". But I would also hold that anyone else should be able to do the same thing. Then let people choose for themselves what they think is right.

2) I do not think that atheists should use fear, intimidation, or other such tactics -- tactics that are regularly used by Christian evangelists. ie. "If you don't accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, you will spend eternity suffering in the pits of Hell". Atheists should appeal to rational argument and debate, not to emotional appeals and fear tactics.

3) As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think the basic idea of "atheists" doing anything as a group is ludicrous. The Raelians (a cult based on belief in aliens) are completely atheist, and actively evangelize for their cult. However, their beliefs have nothing whatsoever in common with my own...when you talk about "atheists", do you mean "all atheists", or a specific sub-class?

I agree completely.

Seconded. Atheists should be free to openly discuss their stance, to speak publicly about it, or to write about it, just as everyone else should be. If asked about their beliefs, atheists may share them and explain the logic behind them. But to go out and preach it into people's faces, to go door to door like theists do, or to try and deconvert people is crossing the line. Most atheists here approached atheism by choice, through a process of skepticism and reason, therefore other people should be allowed the same freedom of choice.

I'd say let them come to me, and I'll be nothing but honest with them. Or let them discover atheism independently. Not everyone is suited to be an atheist. The last thing I'd want is to have fundamentalist theists forcibly deconverted overnight, because even without God, they'd still need something to worship / idolize.

[SirPhilip]

Originally Posted by Gate2501

Can atheists be good citizens? ( Sorry I couldn't resist )

You mean agnostics. Actual atheists reject magical thinking including the inherent value of life of other people.

[ImaginalDisc]

I think John Safran encapsulates my attitude on the subject.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,32...ns,John-Safran

Mildly NSFW on the basis of one off color word.

[thaiboxerken]

I didn't come to atheism by choice. After seeing how stupid the belief in a god is, I had no choice.

[MG1962]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

I think John Safran encapsulates my attitude on the subject.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,32...ns,John-Safran

Mildly NSFW on the basis of one off color word.

I am suprised Richard would talk to Safron, after all he was filmed having demon forced out of him by an evangelist in the US

[godless dave]

Forcible deconversion wouldn't even work. Atheism has to be a conclusion you reach yourself.

[tuc0]

Atheists shouldn't evangelize, they should mock.

[Marquis de Carabas]

I want to be the first atheist televangelist, mostly because I am jealous of Benny Hinn's hair.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally Posted by tuc0

Atheists shouldn't evangelize, they should mock.

Yeah, because telling people how stupid they are is such an effective tactic.

[JoeEllison]

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

Yeah, because telling people how stupid they are is such an effective tactic.

Works every time.

[brodski]

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

Yeah, because telling people how stupid they are is such an effective tactic.

But if atheists used effective tactics, that would be tantamount to evangelising...

[ravdin]

I don't think we have an obligation. But there's no reason that Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchens shouldn't evangelize.

[joobz]

The Autos de Fe,
from the wikipedia article on the Spanish Inquisition^WP

Quote:

If the sentence was condemnatory, this implied that the condemned had to participate in the ceremony of an auto de fe, that solemnized his return to the Church (in most cases), or punishment as an impenitent heretic. The autos de fe could be private (auto particular) or public (auto publico or auto general).
Although initially the public autos did not have any special solemnity nor sought a large attendance of spectators, with time they became solemn ceremonies, celebrated with large public crowds, amidst a festive atmosphere. The auto de fe eventually became a baroque spectacle, with staging meticulously calculated to cause the greatest effect among the spectators.
The autos were conducted in a large public space (in the largest plaza of the city, frequently), generally on holidays. The rituals related to the auto began the previous night (the "procession of the Green Cross") and lasted the whole day sometimes. The auto de fe frequently was taken to the canvas by painters: one of the better known examples is the painting by Francesco Rizzi held by the Prado Museum in Madrid and which represents the auto celebrated in the Plaza Mayor of Madrid on June 30, 1680. The last public auto de fe took place in 1691.
The auto de fe involved: a Catholic Mass; prayer; a public procession of those found guilty; and a reading of their sentences (Peters 1988: 93-94). They took place in public squares or esplanades and lasted several hours: ecclesiastical and civil authorities attended.[2] Artistic representations of the auto de fe usually depict torture and the burning at the stake. However, this type of activity never took place during an auto de fe, which was in essence a religious act. Torture was not administered after a trial concluded, and executions were always held after and separate from the auto de fe (Kamen 1997: 192-213), though in the minds and experiences of observers and those undergoing the confession and execution, the separation of the two might be experienced as merely a technicality.
The first recorded auto de fe was held in Paris in 1242, under Louis IX (Stavans 2005:xxxiv) The first Spanish auto de fe took place in Seville, Spain, in 1481; six of the men and women that participated in this first religious ritual were later executed. The Inquisition enjoyed limited power in Portugal, having been established in 1536 and officially lasting until 1821, although its influence was much weakened with the government of the Marquis of Pombal, in the second half of the 18th century. Autos de fe also took place in Mexico, Brazil and Peru: contemporary historians of the Conquistadors such as Bernal Díaz del Castillo record them. They also occurred in the Portuguese colony of Goa, India, following the establishment of Inquisition there in 1562-1563.

Should the theist evangelize?

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by brodski

But if atheists used effective tactics, that would be tantamount to evangelising...

And it would be rather immoral. Effective tactics that christianity used to spread their religion were disgusting and inhumane.

Stone, should atheists evangelize?

[brodski]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

Stone, should atheists evangelize?

I think that all good citizens, and only good citizens, should evangelize.

[Charlie Monoxide]

Christian evangelists offer love, friendship, answers to tough questions, and more importantly, everlasting life.

What do atheists/agnostics offer to the potential convertee? I mean other than an appreciation for the natural beauty and mystery of life, the search for honest truth, and a mind uncluttered by superstitions and myths.

Charlie (most importantly, no tithing) Monoxide