Posted on 09/16/2012 8:03:11 PM PDT by Thorliveshere
My brother and I have been going back and forth over the last few years, his atheism has really taken a sharp curve into aggravating territory. I got this message from him, and I'm trying to let my anger subside before I respond. I'm curious what you would say:
The only two things you should ever worry about getting married to each other are big government and big religion. While many are very vocally opposed to "redefining marriage" (even, though there are more than one definition of marriage if you bother to look in a dictionary) they don't realize that, in the process, they are redefining the word "liberty". Anyone who believes that big government is too intrusive on their personal lives, but also believes that using religion to dictate the liberty of others isn't intrusive, needs to look in a mirror... for there they will most definitely find the definition of "hypocrite".
I’ve got a brother who is an atheist and a big time liberal. He wasn’t like that until he joined the unions in his late twenties, then it was all down hill from there.
I’ve tried to counter some of his arguments in the past but he doesn’t listen. He’s become a drone to the left. What ever the union says is gospel to him and what ever his friends on the left say, he listens. Besides myself and my mother, the rest of the family doesn’t really get into politics or religion and really go with what ever is popular. It’s actually depressing at times.
As a practical matter, Atheism is going to eventually become an unworkable choice. As Islamists gain in numbers and acceptance, the choice will not be between Atheism and Religion. The choice is going to be between Christianity and Islam. The Islamists WILL FORCE everyone to accept their religion, and they will kill or imprison the ones who refuse. The only force which can oppose them is Christianity. (As has been the case for the last thousand years.)
Islamists care nothing about Atheist arguments. Their activities are based on what they believe, and facts won't get in their way at all. It is only a Christian culture that will tolerate Atheists. All other cultures in History punished them.
Your brother is going to have to eventually pick a side as a practical matter. That argument ought to appeal to someone who thinks they have a reasoned argument for Atheism.
Also watch this video. It woke me up to the problem. If he doesn't know about this, he needs to. If he needs more information, just look at rape statistics in Europe.
For practical minded people, Real world Experiments are better evidence than is theory.
Very well put. It is a point I am constantly making to Atheists. They rise up out of a sea of Christianity, and think their current moral opinions are independent of the Christian influence which molded and shaped them.
All the Atheists today have moral opinions heavily influenced by Christianity, but they are completely oblivious to this fact. Remove the Christian contamination from their moral perspective, and they will have the same moral convictions as Joseph Stalin. This experiment has been run numerous times. Atheism left to it's own devices is a recipe for mass murder.
“The only people Jesus directly confronted like you speak were the pharisees”
I don’t think so. The woman at the well comes to mind. The rich young ruler. Just off the top of my head.
Wishful thinking on your part.
Prayer is also an establishment of religion. The courts have consistently implicated these religious practices in establishment rulings.
The government cannot modify or confirm religious practices such as marriage. Such actions are civil rights violations.
Marriage is an establishment of religion. The state has no power to change it.
If there is amphibole going on it was changed more than 100 years ago. It’s hard to find an establishment ruling fitting your archaic description today.
I actually appreciate that reality. I see the first amendment as preserving our religious establishments. The government cannot modify them. It’s a dilemma because creating vast religion free zones would of course be hostile. Your post is good and arguably legit. This was not the French revolution. This is the American revolution and we like religious practices.
My argument is that "establishment of religion" meant something very different in 1787 than it does today. The only purpose of that clause is to prohibit a State Church. It was not designed nor intended to strip away pervasive Christian culture from our Government.
I will point out that several states had official state religions before during and after the Constitution was created. I think it wasn't until 1832 that the last state officially disbanded their state religion.
The establishment clause was created to avoid conflict between the individual states regarding religion. That the entire nation and government would be Christian was simply a given in that culture. Their use of the term "religion" in this context would be more accurately addressed by the use of the word "denomination" in it's place.
The US Constitution itself mentions Jesus Christ. Hard to disconnect Government from Christianity through a document that explicitly invokes Christ.
Atheism is fundamentally illogical. You cannot prove a negative. Therefore, you cannot prove the statement “God does not exist.”
Tell that to your pompous brother.
I think you have the history right.
I also don’t mind saying Christianity is the great hope of humanity.
It’s sad more people aren’t willing to publicly defend it.
He told the woman at the well that she would go to hell? The rich young ruler? You better go back and re read.... He came to both with compassion.
I totally and completely agree with everything he said. Don’t see a problem. :) I can’t blame a guy for wanting government out of his life - in EVERY way imaginable.
Love this!
I did not recommend that the response be “you’ll go to hell,”
See my post, to wit:
“Dear Bro,
The things you send me are in opposition to God’s Word.
Here is God’s word on the subject:
**Genesis account**
**Jesus’s comments on marriage**
You should not reject God’s word. There is still hope for you. Repent.
Love, Me”
He did confront the woman at the well with her sin, however, as he did the rich young ruler. Hell would be implied.
I did not recommend that the response be “you’ll go to hell,”
See my post, to wit:
“Dear Bro,
The things you send me are in opposition to God’s Word.
Here is God’s word on the subject:
**Genesis account**
**Jesus’s comments on marriage**
You should not reject God’s word. There is still hope for you. Repent.
Love, Me”
He did confront the woman at the well with her sin, however, as he did the rich young ruler. Hell would be implied.
Ok so where is the Good news? Our turning from sin is a response to the love of the relationship with have with God. We are not living on the way to the cross, we are supposed to live on the other side of the cross. Sin has been dealt with. Do we continue in sin? NO, but is our focus supposed to be the absolute avoidance at every cost, or living like new creations? With confidence that God loves us relentlessly. That He can not wait for us to connect with Him. He adores us, and we can never ever “be good enough” in our behavior to have him bestow His grace on us. He did it when we were at our worse. I am not preaching, but I am curious if you really know who God is at his core?
“Ok so where is the Good news?”
The good news, contained in my proposed sample letter to the atheist brother, would lie in the following portion:
“There is still hope for you. Repent.”
” but I am curious if you really know who God is at his core?”
I believe I do; not perfectly, but sincerely. I know He hates sin, and it is what separates us from Him. I know we must acknowledge we are sinners and repent of sin to obtain His forgiveness - putting our faith in Christ.
A man can’t repent of his sins if he doesn’t acknowledge them. Thus he remains lost. If my brother is sinning, I tell it to him.
“Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.” (Mathew 18:15-17, that is Jesus talking)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.