Are those that try to convert you doing what is right?

Post Reply New Topic

Depends on how it is done. As long as the person is trying to let the person see what sins they are committing and tells them without an insult if they decline or just constantly threat them with hellfire, I see no problem. (I personally think the rewards of Heaven is already more than worth it.)

However, they shouldn't shove Jesus down their throat.

Both mentalities are toxic as described.

I think if a mindset offers comfort, be it religion or the lack of one... it's good. Anyone trying to change that, regardless of their opinions or motivations, is a scumbag. Consciously or unconsciously it's what they are.

Your either trying to tell someone there's no afterlife, or that they are going to hell. Either way, your only bringing harm to another to reinforce ones ego at the expense of another person. As if death was not scary enough, some narcissists decide to make people fear it worse.

Proselytizing atheists, are the same as those who go door to door harassing folks at home. Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses or what have you, are the same unwanted guests at a persons door. It's self indulgent mental masturbation, to satisfy their opinion at the expense of their listener...

Plus let's face it...both types are the bores at any gathering repeating the same conversations over and over.

I realize that many people think that debating politics and religion is bad manners. I think the big subjects are more interesting than sports and the weather. Actually, I think that those that have no interest in the big subjects , or engaging other viewpoints are the bores at any gathering.
I also think that for many saying that debating politics and religion is bad manners is only an excuse for not being able to defend their positions.

Last edited by wittgenstein on 28 Nov 2013, 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[X] Maybe.

Those who try to convert me had better have valid and truthful answers for all of my questions, or risk having me do my own research and determining my own answers.

Come to think of it ... I'll do it anyway ...

I would hate to be at a party with all those that voted "no"! Talk about a yawning festival! I guess we would all sit around talking about sports,the weather and other people's lives (Gee, did you hear that Bill just bought a new car). YAWN!

Repeat post.
WP said that my post did not instantiate, so I submitted again.

Peace of mind is highly over rated. Some of us prefer to be challenged. Sure,if someone is more interested in bliss than an exciting life devoted to a passionate search for the truth, I will let them be.

I also find it ironic that many of those that voted "no" are some of the most passionate debaters here at Wrong Planet!
It is also ironic that autisticmillionare in his last post characterized those that like intense debates as scum bags. Using ad hominums is more passion than reason. In other words he started a passionate debate with his proposition that one should not start passionate debates! .

Last edited by wittgenstein on 28 Nov 2013, 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

^ This.

In my teens and twenties I asked lots of (impertinent) questions of scientists, pastors, preachers, Jehovah's Witnesses etc and did lots of my own research and studied sciences at university. I reached the conclusion that evolution is a fact and that the biblical creation and Adman and Eve was mythology. In the thirty years since then I've seen nothing improve the arguments in favour of creationism or literal biblical interpretations regarding Adam and Eve, however I've see a mountain of facts and details build up regarding evolution such that it absolutely dwarfs creationism.

I think part of the problem is that many people either swallow what they were taught as kids within their culture or they don't really explore the facts. Time and time again I've seen people who believe strongly in creationism come to this site and start spouting anti-evolution comments that they've simply picked up off some creationist propaganda website but they have no real knowledge of what they are talking about... which quickly becomes very clear when they start to debate evolution / creationism.

Reading a book on social influence, I reckon it has something to do with the principle of commitment and consistency. Once you put your mind to something, and your world starts to revolve around it, it's very hard to change your mind about it.

I think Wittgenstein's namesake would have had a lot to say on this matter.

From the point of view of a believer who sincerely believes you have to be a believer to go to Heaven and otherwise you go to Hell (or similar), then yes, it is very much your moral obligation to convert others.

Practically, I think it is better manners to give people a teaser, and make them seek out the details. However, this is also morally wrong if you have certainty.

I would also echo Fnord and TallyMan- be prepared to give answers to all questions, with answers that make sense. If you know about Hell, be prepared to say "God isn't that nice". If you know the universe is young, be prepared to say "God misled you so it would look old so it wouldn't be easy to believe Genesis".

Whatever your beliefs are, I don't want them.

Suppose I believed that the earth is flat. I would seek out rather than avoid astronomers. And when they prove to me how I was wrong I would be grateful.
Conversely, if I believed that the earth is not flat and got into a debate with a flat-earther, I'd emerge from the debate with a better understanding of my position.

I believe that people should respect other people.

I believe that people should respect other people's beliefs.
Since you stated that you will reject my beliefs regardless of what they are, you must reject my belief that I stated above. Therefore, you must not respect other peoples beliefs.
Suppose, I believed that one should not respect other people's beliefs. Therefore, you must respect other people's beliefs!
Anyway, I know that you were speaking poetically rather than logically! Just having fun.