Dealing with atheists/materalists

[Guest guest]

Skeptics abound these days and can be found all over the web. I visit a lot of spiritual forums and have noticed there are many militant atheist crusaders who prowl these spiritual forums trying to convince spiritualists that they are foolish for believing in anything spiritual. On one forum that has practically been taken over by atheist crusaders, I have seen some of these atheists convince influentual young teens to become atheists. This makes me sad.

 

An often challenge that athiests throw at spiritualists is: if there is something spiritual, prove it. Otherwise you are a fool for believing in ancient superstitions which can't be proven or tested by science.

 

What words of wisdom do you say when an atheist/materalist says this to you? In my experience, quoting some scripture is not the best option here, as then you just look like a religious parrot who fits their stereotype. What enlightening words from your heart do you recommend one give to an atheist who is trying to convince you spirituality is all bunk? I know we can't open their eyes.. but I feel something needs to be said, especially on these forums, where the atheist crusaders are gaining young converts with their cunning arguments.

[theist]

 

An often challenge that athiests throw at spiritualists is: if there is something spiritual, prove it.

 

I understand what you are saying. I have often encountered them aslo. They have the same mentality of religious fanatics.

 

I avoid speaking to ardent hard core atheists. If I run across a more gentle atheist I try to convince him that he is really an agnostic, one who doesn't know and knows he doesn't know. If he accepts this then we can go further but otherwise not. An agnostic is honest and therefore there is some innocence of spirit.

 

We have been taught that we should approach the innocent and neglect the atheist.

 

In terms of the above question when an atheist insists there is no God and demands that I show prove of God to him I simply ask him to show me proof there is no God.

 

Because he cannot prove there is no God his challenge to me is countered by my challenge to him. They rely on keeping pressure on the theists by such tactics. Turn the tables by demanding proof for his position. This will usually silence him and maybe make him think. If he then acknowledges he is really an agnostic and becomes a little open then we can go a little farther. Otherwise it's best to exit contact with such a person.

 

He is desiring to be an enemy of God consciousness and Supersoul is fullfiling his request to be a disbeliever so if we try to force him to change his mind we are really working against the power of Supersoul. Free will has to be respected and that includes the will to remain in ignorance.

 

We have been told that Krsna means all-attractive. An open or innocent person can be attracted. So to protect those others you should present attractive realizations of God that will draw them to more firmly remain or become theist.

 

This is where Krsna consciousness leaves all other religions behind in that we can answer the questions that others can only say "well I don't know but we must have faith..." to.

 

IOW's you have knowledge to share. Share it only with those who are interested and ignore the atheist. Fighting with them is useless and entangling. They spit venom and you pour nectar and let others choose which they find more attractive.

 

The results are Krsna's. Do your best and He is pleased with your efforts to draw others unto Him.

 

The Intelligent Design arguments are very persuasive. I am not scientically minded but if I were i would often use that approach to sway others to the idea of a Supreme Being.

 

Hare Krsna

[Erik]

Hey,

 

nice subject...

 

I read in the Sri Isopanisad in the introduction that if someone asks proof of that God exists or asks : "show me God"..then Prabhupada says : "But have you got the eyes to see God, if you cannot see your own hands when the lights are turned out, then what power do you have to see God ?...."

 

This is just so cool, ain't it ? Prabhupaad kicks butt !!!

 

I was recently in Rotterdam and saw my very atheist brother after a few months...

He recommended me to read the book of Marquise the Sade, he said that because of that book he became a convinced atheist, so i didn't read the book offcourse, i have no interest in such books.

 

So when i stepped into his shop we had a brief talk and then i asked him a question and i thought that i could nail him with this one...

 

I asked him to show me the remnants of the mind when we die, if he could show me that, then i would be convinced that the mind is also gross material and cannot be taken with you after physical death.

I really thought i was smart:D .

 

Then he replied that there is no mind at all, because the mind is made out of chemicals in the brain and after death there is absolutely nothing, even no emptyness.....

 

So i looked to the ground, thinking how to counteract this one, but i couldn't and i even thought by myself like...ahhh, never mind.....

 

Yeah, it is difficult to talk to atheists about the existance of God.

 

Erik.

[meez]

There is a story that comes to mind when I think of situations like this and people that question you or your beliefs, but aren't willing to really listen and understand where your beliefs come from. Here it is:

 

Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.

Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.

The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"

"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"

[theist]

That's a nice lesson. When one approaches a spiritual master he should not go with the idea of sharing some intellectual conversation as an equal. It is not a tea party to relax and discuss this and that as if the spiritual master is just a part of our social network.

 

Submissive inquiry or having an empty cup within is the key. Otherwise we should not bother the spiritual master and waste his time. We can hear his lectures and read his books and approach in that way.

 

The atheist would view such talk as this as sheer foolishness. The light and the darkness are never manifest at the same time in the same place. They can't associate with each other. Same with the theist and the atheist. Respect from a distance.

[shvu]

It depends on the forum. If it is a spiritual forum existing to bring theists together as a community for discussion on theistic topics, then atheists should be kept out with a clear message in Red colored, size 20 arial font. They do not belong there.

 

On the other hand if the moderators think atheism has a place in their forums (apparently some moderators do), then this kind of thing is inevitable. The basic point is theism is founded on faith and atheism is founded on lack of faith. There really is no common ground for arguments. In my experience, I have seen that some people prefer reasoning over faith and are more comfortable being agnosts or atheists. Others prefer faith over reasoning and are more comfortable being theists.

 

The fact is, the world has more theists than atheists. Faith is a personal/emotional thing and it is really not something that can be cultivated through logic and reasoning. Hence logical arguments with atheists are a waste of time for both parties.

 

Cheers

[brajeshwara das]

 

It depends on the forum. If it is a spiritual forum existing to bring theists together as a community for discussion on theistic topics, then atheists should be kept out with a clear message in Red colored, size 20 arial font. They do not belong there.

 

On the other hand if the moderators think atheism has a place in their forums (apparently some moderators do), then this kind of thing is inevitable. The basic point is theism is founded on faith and atheism is founded on lack of faith. There really is no common ground for arguments. In my experience, I have seen that some people prefer reasoning over faith and are more comfortable being agnosts or atheists. Others prefer faith over reasoning and are more comfortable being theists.

 

The fact is, the world has more theists than atheists. Faith is a personal/emotional thing and it is really not something that can be cultivated through logic and reasoning. Hence logical arguments with atheists are a waste of time for both parties.

 

Cheers

I personally feel that an atheist has faith that God does not exist. Some sort of faith is there, they are making a leap into the unknown and most atheists would likely acknowledge they are taking some sort of risk on faith, no matter how certain they are.

[shvu]

 

I personally feel that an atheist has faith that God does not exist. Some sort of faith is there, they are making a leap into the unknown and most atheists would likely acknowledge they are taking some sort of risk on faith, no matter how certain they are.

To use my favorite example, it is like Santa Claus. Do you feel like you are having faith that Santa does not exist? Or a square circle?

 

To use another example, you say there exists a green colored elephant in Iowa that can sing and dance, but you cannot prove its existence. In response, I say based on our knowledge of the anatomy of elephants, it is impossible for an elephant to have green pigmented skin or to have a voice box and since you cannot offer evidence to substantiate your claim, I am inclined to dismiss it as false. Show me concrete evidence and I will accept your claim as true. It is a case of Occam's razor - if you have a conflict between 2 options, then the one which requires lesser assumptions is the correct one. This can change in future if we acquire more relevant information, but until then this is the correct choice. For example, the earth was flat until it became a globe a few centuries ago.

 

In the above case, it is easy to define what constitutes acceptable evidence. Check if the elephant is naturally green (no paint) and hear it sing and ensure there is no audio device stuck its body somewhere. If yes, then your claim was true. In the case of God, it is impossible to even define a set of acceptable evidence. How then can we enter into a logical argument? That is my point. it is totally a matter of faith and the absence of this faith is atheism.

 

Cheers

[brajeshwara das]

 

To use my favorite example, it is like Santa Claus. Do you feel like you are having faith that Santa does not exist? Or a square circle?

 

To use another example, you say there exists a green colored elephant in Iowa that can sing and dance, but you cannot prove its existence. In response, I say based on our knowledge of the anatomy of elephants, it is impossible for an elephant to have green pigmented skin or to have a voice box and since you cannot offer evidence to substantiate your claim, I am inclined to dismiss it as false. Show me concrete evidence and I will accept your claim as true.

 

In the above case, it is easy to define what constitutes acceptable evidence. Check if the elephant is naturally green (no paint) and hear it sing and ensure there is no audio device stuck its body somewhere. If yes, then your claim was true.

 

In the case of God, it is impossible to even define a set of acceptable evidence. How then can we enter into a logical argument? That is my point. it is totally a matter of faith and the absence of this faith is atheism.

 

Cheers

 

But the evidence that God does not exist is also non-existent and based in faith. Just two polar opposites.

[theist]

 

But the evidence that God does not exist is also non-existent and based in faith. Just two polar opposites.

 

Exactly braj. They have no evidence to present that God does not exist so they only have a blind faith in Gods non-existence.

 

The theist sees proof of God everywhere in everything. He sees a flower blooming and he marvels at God's handwork even in this world.

 

But this is not equal to the atheist seeing the same flower and not seeing God and therefore denying His existence. The Lord confirms His presence within the spiritual heart of the theist. That can't be shown as proof to an atheist of course but the theist does have a confirmation that the atheist does not.

[gHari]

Material opulence tends to puff people up - the beautiful, the rich and powerful, and of course the intelligent atheists. Their mind is the be-all and end-all.

 

We must have compassion. Simply point out that the finite cannot grasp the infinite, the bucket of synapses in the brain cannot contain the unlimited. The heart is the organ capable of realizing religious truth.

 

They will want to juggle words. Avoid that fruitless game. Not even a saint can realize God with words.

[Avinash]

Some may not like what I am going to write here. But, seriously, why do you think it is important to try to convince atheists of your position?

You are saying that atheists call theists as fools for believing in God. But then theists also call atheists various negative words for not believing in God. If you are not discussing any spiritual thing with an atheist and then he starts bashing your beliefs, then it is correct on your part to argue with him why you think you are right. But, other wise, there is no point going to an atheist yourself and saying that he is wrong.

Likewise, if you are an atheist and some theist tells you that you are wrong for not believing in God, then fine, argue with him. But, when he is not saying anything, then keep your beliefs/non-beliefs to yourself.

 

Any discussion can proceed only if there is some common ground on which both parties agree. To give an example, I have seen here many theists discussing spiritual matter and they quote Prabhupada. The common ground is that they may disagree on many things, but they do agree that Prabhupada was right.

 

Let us consider a scenario. One person believes that Prabhupada is always right. For another, just because Prabhupada said something, it does not mean it is correct and for him his own guru is always right. The first person will keep on quoting Prabhupada and the second will keep on quoting his guru. Will this discussion really progress?

 

When it comes to spiritual matters, can you think of a common ground on which both theists and atheists will agree?

[brajeshwara das]

 

When it comes to spiritual matters, can you think of a common ground on which both theists and atheists will agree?

 

Sure, the miracle of life. We of course believe the life we see in the material world is a reflection of life in the spiritual world, but most atheists I have known also see the material life as a wonder to be deeply appreciated, respected, protected, and understood. So for me that is the bridge. So the discussion becomes where does consciousness come from, what is consciousness, what are the odds that this is all just random? Without going to specifics of my faith that are transcendental and unexplainable (God is a little blue boy) that would be mocked outright from a non-believer, I rather take the position to let them explain what life is, how we got here, what is the mind, what is consciousness. They may start to see the answers beyond some empty void.

 

I don't argue with atheists, I say it is a matter of faith, if they don't have it then all I can do is wish them to be good open-hearted people, and from there they may find some faith in God if they stay open to the possibility. But most atheists are probably not really atheists as much as anti-religious from bad experiences with overenthusiastic or corrupt theists. The last thing I want is to be another bad experience that keeps them from developing a relationship with Him.