[soc.religion.christian] passive evangelization of "atheists"

ELEE6CK@jane.uh.edu (10/31/89)

I have a few questions, naive as they may be:

Isn't atheism essentially simply the act of being contrary,
i.e. the *worship* of the ungod?

examples:

The Marxist "deification" of Marx, Lenin, et al., is it
simply trading the One True Lord (Jesus Christ) for Marx, Lenin
et al.?

The Objectivist "deification" of Ayn Rand and of reason,
ditto the same question.

Would appreciate some good informed opinions(perhaps from
theologians or ex-members of the above cults), as I feel the Holy Spirit
is sending me these people so that I may evangelize (or at least inform)
them about the True Love that comes from God.


Yours in Christ,

H. Augustine Flores   [.sig '... For great is the Lord, and greatly to be
			praised.... Hallelujah!] 

[Well, that's certainly not the *definition* of atheism.  Atheism is
simply believing that there is no god.  I agree with you that some
atheist movements have suspicious similarities to religion, complete
with a sort of replacement god.  But I don't think it is fair to say
that this is true of all atheists.  --clh]

ELEE6CK%JANE@uhvax1.uh.edu (11/10/89)

Path: jane!elee6ck
From: ELEE6CK@jane.uh.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: passive evangelization of "atheists"
Message-ID: <4635@jane.uh.edu>
Date: 30 Oct 89 19:32:32 CDT
Organization: University of Houston
Lines: 26

I have a few questions, naive as they may be:

Isn't atheism essentially simply the act of being contrary,
i.e. the *worship* of the ungod?

examples:

The Marxist "deification" of Marx, Lenin, et al., is it
simply trading the One True Lord (Jesus Christ) for Marx, Lenin
et al.?

The Objectivist "deification" of Ayn Rand and of reason,
ditto the same question.

Would appreciate some good informed opinions(perhaps from
theologians or ex-members of the above cults), as I feel the Holy Spirit
is sending me these people so that I may evangelize (or at least inform)
them about the True Love that comes from God.


Yours in Christ,

H. Augustine Flores   [.sig '... For great is the Lord, and greatly to be
			praised.... Hallelujah!] 

[Well, that's certainly not the *definition* of atheism.  Atheism is
simply believing that there is no god.  I agree with you that some
atheist movements have suspicious similarities to religion, complete
with a sort of replacement god.  But I don't think it is fair to say
that this is true of all atheists.  --clh]

ejh@sei.cmu.edu (11/14/89)

In article <Nov.10.02.25.26.1989.11304@athos.rutgers.edu> ELEE6CK%JANE@uhvax1.uh.edu writes:

>I have a few questions, naive as they may be:
>Isn't atheism essentially simply the act of being contrary,
>i.e. the *worship* of the ungod?

no. atheism, by definition, is the lack of belief in god, not belief in some
ungod.

>examples: The Marxist "deification" of Marx, Lenin, et al., is it
>simply trading the One True Lord (Jesus Christ) for Marx, Lenin et al.?
>The Objectivist "deification" of Ayn Rand and of reason,
>ditto the same question.

you seem to equate philosophies with religions. while religions are founded
to try to address philosophical questions/problems, that does not mean that
all philosophical systems are religions. while there may be fanatical
objectivists, i don't think they worship reason in the same sense that you
worship god. you don't worship the principles espoused by god, do you?

also, while many religions have a god or gods, you do not address those that
do not. one could argue whether these latter are indeed religions, instead
of just philosophies, but then you'd have to come up with a definition of
'religion' with which not everyone agrees. i personally feel there is a fine
line, the exact location of which i haven't found yet, between philosophy
and religion. it's pretty clear to me that buddhism, which posits no god
to be worshipped (correct me if i'm wrong), yet has the notion of a higher
plane and higher personage(s) that are not quite in the realm of our notions
of physical reality, is a religion. objectivism offers no such things, neither
do materialism, rationalism, etc.; these i consider just plain philosophies.
this does not mean that i will be able to tell whether the next philosophy
that comes along will fall so clearly on one side or the other.

>Would appreciate some good informed opinions(perhaps from
>theologians or ex-members of the above cults), as I feel the Holy Spirit
>is sending me these people so that I may evangelize (or at least inform)
>them about the True Love that comes from God.

i have no problem with your doing what you feel is right, but you won't get
very far by calling them members of cults, at least to their faces.

on a last note: one of john galt's major peeves was with incompetent
government and its officials legislating initiative right out of human
nature, which caused him to adopt a stand-on-your-own-two-feet attitude. i
see no reason why a christian could not adopt this attitude; i know many
that do. do you really think they are at odds with each other?

erik

BVAUGHAN@pucc.princeton.edu (Barbara Vaughan) (11/15/89)

In article <Nov.13.11.54.34.1989.4941@athos.rutgers.edu>, ejh@sei.cmu.edu writes
>In article <Nov.10.02.25.26.1989.11304@athos.rutgers.edu> ELEE6CK%JANE@uhvax1.u
>>I have a few questions, naive as they may be:
>>Isn't atheism essentially simply the act of being contrary,
>>i.e. the *worship* of the ungod?
>no. atheism, by definition, is the lack of belief in god...

 I think this is incorrect.  Atheism is the BELIEF that there is NO
God.  Your definition could equally well describe someone who is totally
indifferent to the existence or nonexistence of God.  In fact, I think
very few nonbelievers could be described as atheists. Most of the
nonbelievers I know don't know and don't care whether there is a God.
I'm not sure that such people can even be called agnostic.

Barbara Vaughan