New Atheist Church?

[Jester]

Perhaps I only notice it more because I'm debating with them most of the time, but my experience has been that the Atheists on this site will often post to one another during a debate with me - in order to encourage one another in their position.

Obviously, the practice disheartens me, and I find it strange coming from a group which tends to claim that they base their views on pure reasoning, rather than things such as personal encouragement. My question, however, is how to respond.

I keep wanting to point out the contradiction (with claims that the atheist position is based in "evidence only") to those who do this, particularly those who have made a habit of it, but this feels neither civil nor productive. Such comments would be both personal and remarkably easily dismissed.
Remaining where I'm at, however, sometimes makes me feel as if I'm supporting something like an atheist church, where people can come to encourage one-another in their belief in God's non-existence.

So, assuming that I have no interest in leaving the site (because it's the case), are there any suggestions as to how to lovingly respond to this behavior - or should I simply get used to it?

[justifyothers]

Perhaps I only notice it more because I'm debating with them most of the time, but my experience has been that the Atheists on this site will often post to one another during a debate with me - in order to encourage one another in their position.

Obviously, the practice disheartens me, and I find it strange coming from a group which tends to claim that they base their views on pure reasoning, rather than things such as personal encouragement. My question, however, is how to respond.

I keep wanting to point out the contradiction (with claims that the atheist position is based in "evidence only") to those who do this, particularly those who have made a habit of it, but this feels neither civil nor productive. Such comments would be both personal and remarkably easily dismissed.
Remaining where I'm at, however, sometimes makes me feel as if I'm supporting something like an atheist church, where people can come to encourage one-another in their belief in God's non-existence.

So, assuming that I have no interest in leaving the site (because it's the case), are there any suggestions as to how to lovingly respond to this behavior - or should I simply get used to it?

Hi Jester.
I have long admired your thoughts and comments. And while I think you have been on this forum longer than I, you must know this....
It is human nature to look for camaraderie. But also, I think they gang up on you because you make such intelligent and rational comments

So, get used to it. And only become concerned when they don't pay attention to you.

[Jester]

Hi Jester.
I have long admired your thoughts and comments. And while I think you have been on this forum longer than I, you must know this....
It is human nature to look for camaraderie. But also, I think they gang up on you because you make such intelligent and rational comments

So, get used to it. And only become concerned when they don't pay attention to you.

Thanks for everything there. It really is encouraging to read.
And I suppose you're right about that last.

[otseng]

Perhaps I only notice it more because I'm debating with them most of the time, but my experience has been that the Atheists on this site will often post to one another during a debate with me - in order to encourage one another in their position.

Obviously, the practice disheartens me, and I find it strange coming from a group which tends to claim that they base their views on pure reasoning, rather than things such as personal encouragement. My question, however, is how to respond.

I just roll my eyes and ignore it.

[Jester]

I just roll my eyes and ignore it.

I've always had the impression that you're better at that than I am.

[olavisjo]

So, assuming that I have no interest in leaving the site (because it's the case), are there any suggestions as to how to lovingly respond to this behavior - or should I simply get used to it?

Get used to it. Debate is not physical conflict, but it is conflict and as such it takes a toll on the participants. It is just as hard on them, and that is why they feel it necessary to support each other.
And they do worry about you more than others. They don't debate members of the KKK or other such radical theists, they know these people are mentally deranged and they are probably right, but the rational theist is a serious problem, they figure "why will a rational person not listen to reason?"
People like Francis Collins know as much about evolutionary biology as anyone, so how does he still believe that Jesus is God, when other biologist find it so obvious that...

Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear -- and these are basically Darwin's views. There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That's the end of me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans, either.

If that was my world view, I would also have problems with people who see hope in this difficult world. And even imply that I am wrong and it is going to get much worse after I die.

The atheist does not understand (and we often forget) that if the Bible is true, then it is impossible for a man to find God, it is only when God finds the man that the man can come to a knowledge of God. And I believe that will only happen when the man wants to see the truth more than he wants to prove that what he knows is true.

Take heart, I know that your patience with them will one day produce fruit and God will reveal the truth to them.

[Slopeshoulder]

I find that they calm down and become not only tolerant but friendly and collaborative when confronted with non-biblicist "thinking theists" (their phrase) who take modernity seriously. I've found that atheists have been the most nice and welcoming to me. Some have become friends. I think it's butt-ignorance combined with arrogance that gets them riled, and i share that concern.
But, as I've posted elsewhere, they can be asked nicely to consider the differences between reason and rationalism, science and scientism, and logic and positivism. Most then do, and those that don't are sort of like fundamentalists themselves, usually wounded or pathological.

[Slopeshoulder]

The atheist does not understand (and we often forget) that if the Bible is true, then it is impossible for a man to find God, it is only when God finds the man that the man can come to a knowledge of God. And I believe that will only happen when the man wants to see the truth more than he wants to prove that what he knows is true.

My concern with this is that there seems to be an insidious calvinist election or barthian dimension to it. What is Rahner is right and grace is the "transendental exisitential," meaning it is already available to all at all times? In which case, atheists have it already. Perhaps, they are looking, with Tillich and Bonhoeffer for a religionless religion, or a god beyond God? Perhaps atheism is just a side effect of their otherwise often rather godly journey?
My other concern is that it might well be argued objectively in response to your last sentence that the same can be said about many christians: perhaps athiests deeply wish to know the truth and christians confuse faith with knowledge, as if God dropped by and filled them in.
No personal offense meant, but I sense a complacent arrogance in the version of christianity you express in these lines.