That man Dawkins

As ever, there is a problem defining terms. What do you mean by 'Militant Atheist' ? I found the definition I quoted on Urban Dictionary. I don't think it is pejorative. Just a definition of of a person who holds a particular set of beliefs and is is prepared to challenge those who disagree. Until we agree on what is meant by terms there will be disagreement and misunderstanding as people are arguing / discussing from a position which attributes ideas and points of view which are not necessarily held by those with whom they are having the conversation.

As I remarked on a previous thread, the study of Bultmann would be productive.

Nanaej - I don't think anybody was challenging Lilygran's right to hold any beliefs she wants. She started this thread. I don't know what she expects us to say - we don't share her beliefs and that is that. No doubt she doesn't share the beliefs of Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists. She is entitled to say she doesn't share those beliefs and nobody would accuse her of being militant.

lily I am not sure if you would class me to be militant but if someone challenges my beliefs and values I will stand up for them and put my point of view forward robustly. I think that is what you are doing too..do you consider yourself a militant Christian? If so I am a militant atheist

Jogging for Jesus or skatin' for Satan.

Lilygran, what does 'flying the flag for the faith' mean? I still don't see what you are trying to achieve. You start a discussion and then get personal when people put their own point of view. I object to being called 'militant' - it is a very pejorative term. Nobody has made any personal comments about you or your right to hold your beliefs.

Wasn't it Mark Twain who said "Faith is believing what you know ain't so"?

Just putting a different point of view, flying the flag for faith, that's all.

Lilygran - what are you hoping to achieve? Do you think you are going to convert any of us? We just don't believe what you believe. We don't object to your believing anything you like - do you object to our not believing?

And the same goes for religious people too. So it really isn't nice to talk about militancy when it's just normal people talking.

Just had a look at my email and there was one from the Scout Association called "Shouting about Scouting". Here's their definition of what that means: We have a great opportunity for young people to let MPs know how brilliant Scouting is and what it's done for them.

I reckon that's what prominent atheists like Dawkins do – lets people know in the best way he can how brilliant atheism is and what it's done for him.

I like that.

I think we all have faith in human life, lily. It's having faith in gods that some of us find strange and difficult. Human life very evidently exists. The same cannot be said for gods.

Oh, Greatnan, I'm not sure where anyone got the idea that I've been hurt by anything anyone has said on this thread! My comments about tiny criticism were a response the the shock horror reaction to me using the term "militant atheist". It would be stirring - and also quite cynical - if I didn't truly believe in the existence of God and the importance of faith - all the major faiths - in human life. I think it's worth arguing for.

Isn't that what we call stirring? You can hardly engage in that and then get all hurt when people join in.

I posted the original comment because I expected a robust and lively debate. Which it is. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, of course I don't. It is quite interesting to toss a stone into a pool and see where the ripples travel to.

Just 500 yards from my house is a Church of Latter Day Saints which provides hospitality for lots of overseas visitors, particularly Utah. Most mornings, I drive past small groups of well-dressed young men who are out and about to spread the Mormon word and evangelise to my neighbourhood. They can often be quite pushy. When I first moved here, I was being door-stepped every week until I said no more, and although I don't have a sign at my door, they seem to have me on a list, and will now only look at my front door and move on. I wouldn't call them militant, but they are flippin' persistent. I don't come anywhere near broadcasting my humanist atheist views to people who might be offended, should I behave like this.

Why is this sort of behaviour not called militant, yet engaging in a debate about religion on a forum is, if atheist views are explained, but are not being imposed?

Hello...my name is soop and I'm a decent-living atheist. I shall not go to heaven or hell when I die. I make my own heaven and hell whilst I'm alive, after which, I shall return to the sea, from which I came - and that's absolutely fine and dandy with me.

I know you didn't bow and scrape, anno, and that you wouldn't. That phrase wasn't directed at you, or at anyone in particular. It was a general, open question. As for one's beliefs being hard to hold onto anywhere, all that suggests to me is that they're not worth holding onto.

Before I inally lost my faith, I defined myself as a New Testament Christian which is more or less what Jesus was. He told his disciples that he brought them a new commandment - 'that you love one another'. This would supersede and encompass the ten commandments. Too many so-called Bible Christians - fundamentalists, especially in the USA - believe every word of the Old Testament which is why they are so supportive of Israel.
Once, on a flight from Hong Kong, I found myself beside a young man with an open Bible. it wasn't long before he asked me if I believed in god. I said I didn't and he asked why. We had a very amicable discussion, the gist of which was that I said I had grown up and decided that I didn't need to believe in a god to live my life in an ethical manner, but that I agreed that Jesus had given us a pretty good ethical code. We agreed to differ. No, Bags, I didn't 'bow and scrape and pretend to agree'. Maybe I was lucky in that he wasn't specially 'militant'! Poor lad was a cop with the Met and I bet it's hard to hold on to your beliefs in that company.

Can you not be a Christian Humanist? I am also a humanist, although I haven't belonged to a group for some time, but I am also glad to declare myself an atheist.
Lilygran - I don't understand why it is fine for believers to criticise atheism but not for atheists to criticise religions. Nobody on this site has ever made a personal attack on another member on account of their religious beliefs. We attack those aspects of religion which are pernicious and hurtful to others.
Please do not adopt the pose of a martyr - if you want to join in debates on religion surely you must accept that some of us are very sincere in our hatred of certain religious practices. We respect the right of all people to believe in anything they like so long as they do not try to impose those beliefs on others. I am sure you respect my right to criticise religious practices - NOT individual believers.

So how are atheists wishing to speak up for atheism supposed to behave when a militant Christian confronts them? Are we supposed to bow and scrape and pretend to agree? Come on, lily, you didn't really expect no-one to argue with your opening post.

Learning a lot from this thread.

I call myself a humanist atheist, if anyone wants to know.

anno, please don't confuse Stalinism with secular atheism. That would be as bad as confusing it with secular humanism, which I don't think you'd like at all. Quite rightly. Neither would I.

Yes, I'll vote for that, anno. I endorse and support everything in that statement.

I prefer to describe myself as a 'Humanist' because it is more specific than 'Atheist' which, to some, may smack of the worst excesses of Soviet repression. If those who feel this way would like a definition of Humanism, the following web site is probably the most complete as it defines Humanism is positive terms rather than a purely negative definition of Atheism. In other words, Humanists are atheists (or agnostics) but Atheists are not necessarily Humanists.

www.iheu.org/adamdecl.htm