Brother Mario

[Joshpantera 3,005]

5 hours ago, freshstart said:

Not to belabor the point, but I think Weezer raises a good question and I'm not really clear on the answer.  I totally get that the main purpose of this website is to support exchristians, but when the occasional Christian visits - particularly in certain forums like the Lions Den, what is the point of arguing our beliefs (or lack of beliefs) if not to change a Christian's mind or at the very least - give them something to think about (without telling people what they should or shouldn't do)?  Isn't that what we did when "witnessing" as Christians? 

 

Totally understandable. 

 

TABA and I are in agreement. Most of the time we're making posts with the lurking readers in mind. And that's how a lot of the "encouraging" newbies and struggling people are being helped along and assisted. The christians will likely not change their minds, and we know that. We aren't really trying to change their minds.

 

We are using them as examples for other people reading who may learn something from the exchange. And we know that it works. Many members here have messaged myself and others thanking us for particular exchanges that we were involved in with christians. And how it helped them understand something or see something that they hadn't previously realized. 

 

It's not impossible that these exchanges may also get into some christians mind and cause them to think about it for a while. But that's more or less secondary to using them as examples of how many ways discourse can play out. We'll challenge them to provide factual evidence. We push them to meet the burden of proof of their own arguments and claims. When they fail, it demonstrates something. They are professing strength and superiority. But here they are failing when challenged. What gives? Are they not as powerful and authoritative as they led on??

 

We're provoking self thinking processes. And freethinking in general. Letting people decide for themselves what they may or may not believe based on evaluating the discourse and evidences (or lack thereof) provided. As opposed to dictating to people what they MUST believe or else. Which is the way of religious proselytizing...