Is Atheism to Theism conversion really possible?

[jmars]

I am a former Christian turned atheist and I believe it would be highly improbable that I would ever go back. It is hard for me as well as many staunch atheists to believe it possible or at least probable that very many atheists have converted to Christianity. While many born-agains claim to have previously been atheists, it is, in my opinion, probably because they mostly didn't think about it before. The lack of belief through ignorance is not the same of lack of belief based on evidentiary logic as is the case with me and most atheists who call themselves atheist.

Some christians love to make the claim that "many atheists have converted to Christianity" while unable to name any themselves, so I am curious if any of you have converted from atheism to Christianity, what compelled you to do so, and what were your specific beliefs or non-beliefs before your conversion.

[McCulloch]

I am a former Christian turned atheist and I believe it would be highly improbable that I would ever go back.

You probably need to identify what you mean by "Christian." Belief? Faith? Born into it? etc???

I was raised a Christian. I went to church 3 times a week. I played on my worship team. I went on missions trips. I starred in many church plays about the Christmas story and the Resurrection. I prayed, read the bible everyday. I truly believed with all my heart that Jesus Christ was my Lord and Savior. Do I qualify? Was I not a "true" Christian and that is why I became an atheist in your opinion?

Piffle! If you were a True Christian™ then you would have experienced the Holy Spirit in your life. If you had that experience, that personal relationship, that indwelling, you could not possibly ever deny that it was real. Therefore, in spite of all appearances and in spite of your claim that you really believed, God was not real in your life. But that can change. If you just ask, truly believing for God to come into your life, he will. That's a promise from God in his Holy Word and God cannot lie. So, why don't you kneel with me and pray for the Holy Spirit to dwell within you? Yes, don't wait, do it now. God is waiting.

...


Don't you feel the Holy Spirit in your soul? No? Neither do I. I guess you really did not believe. Or maybe God does not like us.

[jmars]

What would evidence of a conversion be? A mission trip? A church play? Prayer and a Bible?

I am talking about the evidence that one was a hardcore atheist not whether they are a true Christian now. I believe I did use the word "staunch" in my OP if you'd like to re-read it. You seem to use my description in a mocking tone in your last post and I will point out that I was including those examples in response to your questioning my ideas of "Christian" "faith" etc. It is often the opinion of Christians that atheists were never "truly" Christians if they claimed to no longer believe (As McColloch so humorously demonstrated ). I guess you can draw parallels between that and what I am asking now.

I have that opinion based on observation and what I know of both atheism and Christianity.

If what you know is correct, then OK

By definition, I don't need to be "correct" to have an opinion. It would certainly seem that Christians don't need to be. I think that my experience with both the atheist community and the Christian community put me in a unique position to come to certain conclusions about both.

It is interesting to note that I just said I don't think I was "compelled" and then you ask this.

I was saying that what I meant by "compelled" was what "DREW" you to christianity. Why not Buddhism or Islam, for instance?

I used to never believe in Jesus as Lord, never prayed or read the Bible, never went to church or church plays or missions. Does that qualify?

Clever, really. And my answer is yes and no. Yes in the sense that Atheists generally do not do those things and it is the non-belief in God that makes one an atheist. But no in the sense that I was being specific to atheists who arrived at their non-belief through critical thinking, not through lack of thinking. Do I have to spell it out? I don't know what kind of point you are trying to make. How about you state it outright rather than parroting something I said in response to your questioning of my idea of what a "Christian" is?

I'm not questioning whether or not you are a Christian. I am questioning whether you were an Atheist before in the sense that I am -- through calculated deduction from the evidence. For one to go from atheist to Christian, one has to be open to the idea that there is a God in the first place, no? I don't find it common for someone who has thought it out carefully for years and years to all of a sudden think, "Hey, why not?" Whereas I do find it possible for someone who never considered the existence of God to do so. They are now considering it and it sound right to them. Do you see the difference?

[twobitsmedia]

I am talking about the evidence that one was a hardcore atheist not whether they are a true Christian now.

Now 'hardcore?" Are there degrees of atheism? Are there some athiests who really aren't atheist? And if a person is not a true Christian, that would make them not one, right?

I believe I did use the word "staunch" in my OP if you'd like to re-read it. You seem to use my description in a mocking tone in your last post and I will point out that I was including those examples in response to your questioning my ideas of "Christian" "faith" etc.

"Staunch" is there, But, how does one be an unloyal and undedicated atheist?

I have that opinion based on observation and what I know of both atheism and Christianity.

If what you know is correct, then OK

By definition, I don't need to be "correct" to have an opinion.

But you claimed you made your opinion based on observation and what you know. What you saw and know are not enough?

It would certainly seem that Christians don't need to be.

Is that an opinion based out of observation and what you know?

I think that my experience with both the atheist community and the Christian community put me in a unique position to come to certain conclusions about both.

Now your opinion is certain?

It is interesting to note that I just said I don't think I was "compelled" and then you ask this.

I was saying that what I meant by "compelled" was what "DREW" you to christianity. Why not Buddhism or Islam, for instance?

Nothing they offer for information makes sense to me.

I used to never believe in Jesus as Lord, never prayed or read the Bible, never went to church or church plays or missions. Does that qualify?

Clever, really. And my answer is yes and no. Yes in the sense that Atheists generally do not do those things and it is the non-belief in God that makes one an atheist. But no in the sense that I was being specific to atheists who arrived at their non-belief through critical thinking, not through lack of thinking. Do I have to spell it out? I don't know what kind of point you are trying to make. How about you state it outright rather than parroting something I said in response to your questioning of my idea of what a "Christian" is?

You seem to be unclear as to what a Christian is and yet want to make a judgment about what they aren't. Which was why I asked in the first place. So is the only real atheist one who arrived at it by thoughtfully ruling out the aitithesis?

I'm not questioning whether or not you are a Christian. I am questioning whether you were an Atheist before in the sense that I am -- through calculated deduction from the evidence.

You calculated that God was not, so you became an atheist...is there another way?

For one to go from atheist to Christian, one has to be open to the idea that there is a God in the first place, no?

One has to BECOME open to it.

I don't find it common for someone who has thought it out carefully for years and years to all of a sudden think, "Hey, why not?"

Whereas I do find it possible for someone who never considered the existence of God to do so.

But there would have to be a reason for it.

They are now considering it and it sound right to them.

and it "sounds right?" It could for some, but it should take a bit more consideration.

[jmars]

Quote:

By definition, I don't need to be "correct" to have an opinion.
But you claimed you made your opinion based on observation and what you know. What you saw and know are not enough?

Quote:

It would certainly seem that Christians don't need to be.
Is that an opinion based out of observation and what you know?

Quote:

I think that my experience with both the atheist community and the Christian community put me in a unique position to come to certain conclusions about both.
Now your opinion is certain?

None of this made any sense to me. Sorry. My opinion is always been certain and yes, based on my observations and knowledge of both schools of thought. Why are we arguing symantics?

There are no degrees to atheism as a non-belief (I believe I said that) but there are degrees as to how strongly they apply their non-belief to their lives and there are DIFFERENT WAYS TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION OF ATHEISM, which is what I am saying. And when did I say there are undedicated and unloyal atheists. Nice straw man.

You seem to be unclear as to what a Christian is and yet want to make a judgment about what they aren't. Which was why I asked in the first place. So is the only real atheist one who arrived at it by thoughtfully ruling out the aitithesis?

How am I unclear seeing as I used to be one. Enlighten me. If you didn't catch one, I was being sarcastic when I said "Going to church 3 times a week..." All I said in my OP was that I used to be a Christian. Then you questioned my idea of what "Christian" "Faith" etc means, which suggests that you think I wasn't a real Christian. I never said anyone wasn't a "real" atheist (straw man), only that there were atheists who arrived at their conclusions in different ways. Should I say it again?

You calculated that God was not, so you became an atheist...is there another way?

Okay I will say it again. Yes! There are those who never really considered the idea of a God or no God i.e. never really thought much about it, but when asked what religion they were would say "atheist". Because that is the only term for some one who subscribes to no faith and doesn't have a reason to believe in a God.

[OnceConvinced]

Less than is purported by Christians. I'm not denying that some have. This is the point of this topic. I want to hear from the ones who have. Possibly to change my opinion if there is enough evidence of it. I would have to say that less than 1% of hard atheists have ever converted to Christianity if you want a number.

What would evidence of a conversion be? A mission trip? A church play? Prayer and a Bible?

I would think that works would be a natural desire if one was a true Christian. The fact that jmars did these things would suggest to me that he was "born again" and that he was a true Christian. Sure, that may not be the case, but I am more likely to believe a persons claim he was a Christian by what they do. Actions speak louder than words. To me someone that pew sits and does nothing in the church, but claims to be a Christian is less likely to be one than someone who gets involved in ministry.

[twobitsmedia]

Quote:

By definition, I don't need to be "correct" to have an opinion.
But you claimed you made your opinion based on observation and what you know. What you saw and know are not enough?

Quote:

It would certainly seem that Christians don't need to be.
Is that an opinion based out of observation and what you know?

Quote:

I think that my experience with both the atheist community and the Christian community put me in a unique position to come to certain conclusions about both.
Now your opinion is certain?

None of this made any sense to me. Sorry. My opinion is always been certain and yes, based on my observations and knowledge of both schools of thought. Why are we arguing symantics?

Because you said: By definition, I don't need to be "correct" to have an opinion. But also say: My opinion is always been certain


So which is it??? You have a certian opinion that does not have to be correct?

There are no degrees to atheism as a non-belief (I believe I said that) but there are degrees as to how strongly they apply their non-belief to their lives and there are DIFFERENT WAYS TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION OF ATHEISM, which is what I am saying. And when did I say there are undedicated and unloyal atheists. Nice straw man.

Then we agree an atheist is an atheist is an atheist....There's not really one who is staunch or unstaunch....

You seem to be unclear as to what a Christian is and yet want to make a judgment about what they aren't. Which was why I asked in the first place. So is the only real atheist one who arrived at it by thoughtfully ruling out the aitithesis?

How am I unclear seeing as I used to be one. Enlighten me. If you didn't catch one, I was being sarcastic when I said "Going to church 3 times a week..."

Well, now it is "scarcasm." So how do I know that this comment is not sacrasm?

All I said in my OP was that I used to be a Christian. Then you questioned my idea of what "Christian" "Faith" etc means, which suggests that you think I wasn't a real Christian.

Well, if you are paranoid, you have a point. I just asked for your definition. Which you gave and now claim it was sarcasm. So, then, answer my original question: How are you defining Christian?

there were atheists who arrived at their conclusions in different ways.

And I agree, Then, what is your point??

You calculated that God was not, so you became an atheist...is there another way?

Okay I will say it again. Yes! There are those who never really considered the idea of a God or no God i.e. never really thought much about it, but when asked what religion they were would say "atheist". Because that is the only term for some one who subscribes to no faith and doesn't have a reason to believe in a God.

"There are those" as compared to what? Another kind of atheist? Maybe degrees of atheism: " There are no degrees to atheism as a non-belief (I believe I said that) but there are degrees as to how strongly they apply their non-belief to their lives and there are DIFFERENT WAYS TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION OF ATHEISM."

So, just how does one apply non-belief to ones life? (strongly and weakly?). And what exactly are they applying?

[theleftone]

The lack of belief through ignorance is not the same of lack of belief based on evidentiary logic as is the case with me and most atheists who call themselves atheist..

There is more to belief (or lack of belief) formation than intellect.

[jmars]

You have a certian opinion that does not have to be correct?

An opinion is something personal to each person. I have an opinon that I feel is correct, but that does not have to be correct to you.

Here is how I saw the previous conversation in a nutshell:

Me: I am a Christian

You: Define Christian (which I took as, "you saying you are a Christian is not enough and I need further evidence or a definition")

Me: I listed "acts" by which would prove possibly how serious I was about my Christianity in a sarcastic way, in response to my belief that you were questioning my Christianity since I feel that many other Christians judge a person's "Christianness" as whether they went to church every week or just twice a year, for example. And then I added "I truly believed in Jesus Christ" as my definition.

You: took is as me actually thinking those things made me a Christian, other than the Jesus Part and you were mistaken.

So, just how does one apply non-belief to ones life? (strongly and weakly?). And what exactly are they applying?

Maybe someone who gets angry when someone tries to teach ID in schools or put a cross up on a government lawn or fights for the rights of homosexuals to get married and reads lots of Dawkins, Harris, and Dennett vs someone who doesn't care about any of that stuff, but still doesn't believe in God. I'm sure you could agree that there are "luke warm" Christians and "Strong Christians". There are those that believe but don't go to church and those that go to church like 3 times a week. I find it would be harder to "convert" the latter type of Christians to Atheism vs the former.

I can see this debate is not going to get anywhere based on what I have recently read in the "Religious Experiences" thread. You are devoid of logic. Good day, sir.

[twobitsmedia]

I can see this debate is not going to get anywhere based on what I have recently read in the "Religious Experiences" thread. You are devoid of logic. Good day, sir.

Wow, another atheist declares himself unable to reason and calls it logical. I am seeing a pattern here...

[jmars]

I can see this debate is not going to get anywhere based on what I have recently read in the "Religious Experiences" thread. You are devoid of logic. Good day, sir.

Wow, another atheist declares himself unable to reason and calls it logical. I am seeing a pattern here...

Ha! I declare no such thing. I declare that I am unable to reason with someone who is incapable of it as is evident by your many other posts. I am seeing a pattern that you are incapable of honest debate. For example, symantically picking apart someone's sentences and demanding a definition for something that should be obvious is not debate. From what I've seen, most others here would agree. Maybe you should pick up a book every once in a while. You should start with a dictionary.