What I Learned about Atheists from God’s Not Dead

BRACEToday the movie God’s Not Dead comes out on DVD, and thousands of church leaders will dutifully run out to purchase their copies to show to their churches sometime in the coming weeks.  They will enthusiastically watch it and gush about how wonderful the film is and how beautifully it captures their faith.  Because movies like this will provide the only depiction of atheism most evangelical Christians have ever seen, these stories are powerful for them.  They reinforce all the stereotypes their preachers have passed on to them, and by the end of the movie they will cry and cheer and obey the movie’s instructions to text “God’s Not Dead” to everyone they know.  If there’s one thing religion does well, it’s teach people to do as they’re told en masse.

There’s so much I could say about suffering through this glorified youth group skit turned feature length film.  Much has already been said by friends of mine and I could add far too much more myself.  It’s like the gift that keeps on giving (just like heartburn).  Even during my Christian days I’m certain I would have been nauseated by this terrible movie’s wooden dialogue, forced drama, and two-dimensional characters.  Even its original inspiration is beyond pathetic:  This story idea began as a variation of a couple of (now infamous) chain emails about a brave young college student who argued with his atheistic professor about the existence of God (“and that young man was ALBERT EINSTEIN”).  I’m going to resist the urge to quibble over the content of the debate itself so that I can stick to only two topics:  What I learned about atheists by watching this movie and what I think is the greatest iniquity committed by this pandering cinematic train wreck which, incidentally, sold out four weekends in a row in my hometown.  Unfortunately, people I love will view me through the lens of this movie, which makes responding to its portrayal of atheists a personal matter for me.  I’m not just lettin’ this one go.

Atheists Are Such a Pitiful, Miserable Bunch

God’s Not Dead portrays three or four primary atheist characters:  The pompous bombastic university professor (surrounded by a supportive gang of snickering atheist colleagues), a self-absorbed businessman, his snarky, condescending journalist girlfriend, and a stern Chinese father of an exchange student.  Observing their behavior, I learn the following:

1. Atheist professors are predatory, and they are out to convert everyone into ideological clones of themselves.  Clearly the concept of people committed to “freethought” and “liberal arts” is utterly foreign to the writers of this flick.  Ironically, while no secular university I’ve ever heard of would hesitate to fire a professor who demands a signed renunciation of religion from his students, I have heard of Christian schools which demand written statements of belief from both their students and faculty.  In real life only one of these two cultures threatens people with everlasting torment for not believing the right things, and it’s not the group being caricatured in the movie.

2. Atheists are selfish, self-absorbed, greedy jerks.  Dean Cain’s ambitious acquisitions shark is cold-hearted and callous to everyone he knows including his girlfriend, his sister, and even his own aging mother.  He won’t lift a finger for anyone who won’t first offer him something in return, and when his girlfriend discloses that she is dying of cancer, he brushes her off as an inconvenience.  His behavior is as despicable as the professor’s and clearly he has no heart at all.

3. Atheists are cocky, self-sure, and totally enamored with their own superiority.  Professor Radisson openly mocks the brave young Christian hero to his face in front of the class and in front of his colleagues.  But he doesn’t just do it to the poor freshman kid; he also mocks his own girlfriend (Do atheists marry at all in this alternate reality?) to her face at a dinner party while his atheist cohorts sip merlot and laugh condescendingly at her.  Truly cringeworthy.

4. Atheists will openly threaten you, bow up, get in your face, stare you down, and even chase you down a hallway and grab you to force you to listen to their angry diatribes because your faith makes them so angry!

5. Atheists are clearly incapable of love.  If you’re hurting or sick they’ll abandon you.  They cannot be inconvenienced with other people’s problems because as we learned in #2, they are only interested in themselves and what they can get from you.

6. Atheists lack ethical boundaries, so they’ll date students against virtually every university’s rules and then later remind them that the reason they liked them in the first place was just because they were hot (see #5).

7. They disbelieve in God because something bad happened to them.  See, since everyone is supposed to subscribe specifically to Abrahamic monotheism by factory default, the only reason anyone could wind up thinking there is no God is because of personal trauma and disillusionment leaving them damaged and spiteful.  And really, deep down they don’t disbelieve in God at all, but rather…

kevin-sorbo8. Atheists are angry at God.  You can just hear it in all of their voices.  They’re all so constantly angry (unless they’ve got an alcoholic beverage in their hands).  They only say they disbelieve but what do they know?  Poor deluded empty soulless people!  They only think they don’t believe but in reality they’re just angry at a God they really know exists.  Never mind if they say they don’t believe.  You know better than they do.  Bless their cold, empty deluded hearts.

9. Atheists are miserable because they believe life is meaningless.  There’s no point to life and nothing is of lasting value beyond their own lives, so you might as well just do what you wanna do and who cares about anyone else?  Even as I type this I can hear the voices of at least a dozen friends and family members who have sincerely asked me how I can have any meaning to my life or reason to get up in the morning because they can’t understand how I could have any.  This movie totally validates that for them.

10. Atheists have no basis for morality.  The brave young hero explained this for us toward the very end.  If there’s no God, then there can’t be any good reason to follow rules or be honest or do anything moral.  Come to think of it, it’s a wonder these atheists aren’t all murderers.

Just as an added bonus, I also learned from this movie that Muslims beat their children while Christians show everyone endless patience, kindness, understanding, and empathy (excepting only the young hero’s shallow girlfriend who inexplicably dumps him for being heroic I guess).  I also learned that if a car won’t start you can get it to run by praying for it, provided that you believe hard enough that your prayer will be answered.  Furthermore, I learned that most difficult life decisions can be solved with a Bible citation.

Perhaps above all what we learn from God’s Not Dead is that college is a threatening place.  It’s a scary place where the bad guys are the educators.  Just let that sink in for a minute.  Just like in that notoriously fabricated chain email, academia is a threatening place where you go to have your beliefs attacked by evil professors who want to force you to give up your cherished beliefs.  Surely that is a healthy approach to higher learning which will help advance our common endeavors as a society, right?

The Chief Failure of This Film

In the end the central injustice of this movie is its failure to fairly represent a class of people whom Christians purport to love.  But it’s not loving people well to misrepresent them this badly.  This movie caricatures, dehumanizes, and depersonalizes people like me, portraying us in the worst possible light.  How could I not find this movie disgustingly offensive?  Every single atheist in this film is a spineless, uncaring jerk.  This is how you love someone like me?  You made atheists the bad guys!  And not even complex bad guys.  You made us two-dimensional cartoon villains who rub our hands together menacingly, tweaking our pencil-thin moustaches above our sinister grins.  Children should be afraid to come near us.  Employers should think twice before hiring us. And clearly women should steer clear of dating us because obviously we lack hearts.

This is not love.  You cannot love people while ignoring everything they tell you about themselves.  You are not loving people when you refuse to listen to their stories.  You are not loving them well when you decide before hearing them that you already know all that you need to know about them, overruling their own self-descriptions and self-identifications because you are convinced you know better than they do what’s going on inside of them.  When you continually speak of people in terms to which they cannot agree, you are not showing them respect or validating them as real people.  This movie represents a grievous failure to love people like me.  If you watch this and then beg me to go watch it as well, it tells me that in some way you accept its presentation of what I am like even though I’m telling you it’s not accurate.  If you say you are to be known by how you love, then this should upset you.  The words may be there, but the thing your words promise is not.

So if you are a Christian and if you are able to make it through this film without cringing at the stereotypes and misrepresentations it presents, I cannot imagine you will be able to see me for who I really am or relate to me in any way that is based in reality.  If you harbor such a grotesquely caricatured straw man picture of what I’m like, then I dare say you won’t be able to hear a word I’m saying.  If this movie doesn’t irritate you the way I know it would have irritated me when I was a Christian, you need to spend some time getting to know real flesh-and-blood non-believers.  I’ll wager you wouldn’t ordinarily have much motivation to do that (except in order to engage us in debate).  But someone you love may be an atheist, and I’m trying to warn you that as long as this movie doesn’t make you nauseous for all its misrepresentations and clichés, you aren’t gonna love your loved one well.  You’re going to need some real conversations in which you ask some sincere questions and let your loved one tell you about themselves and their own thought processes without trying to cram what they say into a pre-conceived doctrinal grid.  Is loving them worth that to you?  Are you secure enough in your faith to even have such a conversation with someone like me?

A pastor once invited me into his church in order to interview me in front of his whole congregation for the Interview an Atheist at Church project.  I felt like it was a great conversation.  A portion of that talk can be found below.  It made the rounds a little over a year ago, and if you haven’t seen it before, please give it a look.  I gave this talk nearly a year before the movie came out and I could swear it’s almost as if they took each thing I said not to do and put that on their to-do list in the film.  At any rate, here’s the short version of that talk.


 

One more detail I must add. [***Spoiler Alert***] I originally titled this article “God’s Not Dead, but the Atheist Sure Is!”  Because in the end they kill off the atheist.  Are you kidding me?  Could you be any more transparent in your wish fulfillment?  In the end, most of the atheists see that the Christians are really the ones who are right, and they convert. But it takes getting hit by a car for the antagonist to see the error of his ways.  He prays the obligatory prayer that Evangelical theology teaches is required for salvation as he lay there in a pool of his own blood.  And as he’s choking out his last breath, the preacher who miraculously showed up at just the right moment to lead him in this prayer (but not a moment earlier so that he could have maybe prevented his getting hit) smiles and says:

It’s alright.  In a few minutes you’re gonna know more about God than I do.

I’d like to say that comforted the poor dying former atheist (or was he even that, really?) but it was hard to make that out between the gurgling sounds and pained expressions.  But judging by the swell of music this was supposed to be a kind of happy ending.  I know they’ll say it’s because now his soul is safe in death, but I can’t help but think of the joke the dog tells in the movie UP:

A squirrel walks up to a tree and says, “I forgot to store acorns for the winter and now I am dead.” Ha! It is funny because the squirrel gets dead!

This ending is happy because the atheist gets dead.  He “gets saved,” of course, although not in any sense that’s measurable.  And the atheist girl who gets cancer “gets saved” as well, although not from the cancer.  Even the Muslim girl “gets saved” although her dad still won’t look at her because of his religion.  But now all of these people think correctly about a narrow field of topics, so they’re approved.  Happy ending.  Now go text everybody.

 

"I suffered the same fear years ago when I thought deeper on what means nonexistence, ..."

How Do You Deal with Your ..."
""not all things can be explained through science" as the saying goes for thousands of ..."

Do People Become Atheists Because They ..."
"I've never attempted to hide my Atheism. If anyone asks me what I believe, I'll ..."

FAQ: Should I “Come Out” as ..."
"“They lied to us, folks. [They] talk as if they know everything there is to ..."

An Atheist’s Take on the “Spirituality” ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://www.atheistrev.com/ vjack

    The film sounds like an effective vehicle for reinforcing anti-atheist bigotry. I’d guess that wasn’t accidental. I imagine it will be quite popular here in Mississippi.

  • Deanjay1961

    This movie will backfire on them in the long run…and we’ll still have their FB comments about how great a movie it is.

  • Lynn Kitty Frey

    I need to see about watching this film, now…

    …mostly so that if I hear people talking about it, I’ll know exactly what I’m dealing with.

  • Jim Jones

    “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” was better written.

    Or apparently Henry Ford thought so.

  • Eric Peterson, MSOD

    I think any film with such a blatantly naked agenda would suffer from wooden dialogue and two-dimensional characterizations. The best art is created by those who are struggling with a question, not those who think they have the answer. I’m an atheist myself, but I’m fairly certain that a film dedicated to exposing the intellectual superiority of secular people, that treated all believers like hypocritical morons just to make a point, would be equally awful.

  • Deanjay1961

    When I was a Christian, I wouldn’t have been too happy about how it makes Christians look, either.

  • TheSquirrel

    “The best art is created by those who are struggling with a question, not those who think they have the answer.”
    That is a lovely way to put it! Thank you ^_^

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    I don’t trust people who think they have all the answers. I trust people a lot more when they’re willing to explore the questions.

  • Jessica Stoyko

    I wondered why I got one of those messages about a month ago. Didn’t even recognize the number. Creepers.

  • Samantha

    Might I suggest the hashtag of #HeJustWentToLiveOnAFarmUpstate

  • wil9000

    One of the hardest things to get across to evangelicals who are trying to “save” me, is that there is a huge difference between their belief that I don’t believe “in God”, and my belief that there is no god to believe in in the first place, so I can’t hate god, or be angry at god in the first place. May you have better luck than I have had.

  • Swoozy LemNhed

    I’m so afraid to “come out” in the small Georgia town I live in…my boss told me God spoke to him and told him to hire me…I shudder to think what would happen if I told them I was not a Christian, or believer in God…lol

  • Max Supernova

    I’d save that for the day you quit. “Looks like God’s been messing with you a bit.”

  • wtfwjtd

    Sounds like this tune from the 5 Man Electrical Band applies in your situation:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYsBDmqJfjQ

  • bananafaced

    I haven’t seen the film and I have NO wish to see it. From your description it sounds as if most of the really despicable Atheists are ‘men’. Atheist women should have equal time, right? And, if you are really, truly Christian, this film might be so ‘anti Atheist’, emotionally speaking since it doesn’t sound like the film gives any factual basis for its story line, that you (a good Christian) would never want to be in the presence of an Atheist for fear of getting ‘Atheist cooties’. That’s how silly it sounds. Looks like my original thoughts about this film were spot on. BTW, what’s Superman (Dean Cain) doing in this film? When I talked to him at Starbucks in Lancaster, CA he didn’t seem like the overtly religious type.

  • Deanjay1961

    A movie with Superman and Hercules should have been awesome, eh?

  • wtfwjtd

    Yes, it should have been, but in a good way. Ah, life’s full of disappointments…

  • Brian

    Superman vs. The Elite has Samson in it. That’s almost Hercules.

  • MorlockSlayer

    I’ll never be able to watch Kevin Sorbo or Dean Cain in anything again without thinking about this movie. Not that I ever thought either of them were any good in anything they’ve ever done. It’s nothing more than christian propaganda and they owe us all an apology, which is something they’ll never understand.

  • Razor

    Dean Cain is a right-wing asshole, so no surprise he’s in this. As for Sorbo, I’m just gonna hope he missed a royalty check for Hercules.

  • David Andrew Kearney

    That’s interesting, because I remember him from Broken Hearts Club, which was a gay-themed movie from back in 2000. I wonder what happened — or if he just needed a paycheck at the time.

  • Brian

    He was in Soul Surfer, too, reading a bible at the bedside of the surfer girl. This might just be his thing now. Or else he’s the biggest star that will take their offers.

  • http://www.panoramaphotographer.com/ thatkeith

    A good, well-considered article, and a *very* well-stated set of points in that video. Eloquently, calmly and kindly handled. Thank you!

  • http://www.detroitrugby.org DarkHorseSki

    I love these movies because it really shows just how un-Christian the Christians are, even if they are too religiously befuddled to understand it.

  • Swoozy LemNhed

    I love how you point out a professor (and just about anyone) can be fired for forcing someone to sign something renouncing religion, while people are getting fired all the time of they don’t sign something demanding they believe in the magic unicorn…

  • Al Willig

    I’m not sure why, but I’ve never gotten an ounce of crap when I’ve told people I’m an atheist; perhaps because most of those people already know me. I guess I wasn’t even aware that there was such bigotry towards us until just recently, but I suppose that makes sense.

  • Razor

    Atheists are, statistically, the most hated group in America. Rapists have higher approval ratings. Because we live in the stupid country.

  • Al Willig

    Well, then I must be doing a LOT of other things right…or people are afraid of me.

  • TheSquirrel

    Certainly they don’t want you to put a satan curse on them or eat their babies…

  • Al Willig

    I don’t believe in Satan and I’m a vegetarian.

  • TheSquirrel

    …It was a joke…

  • Al Willig

    yep, right back atcha…as if someone who wasn’t a vegetarian would eat babies.

  • TheSquirrel

    Lol Now I’m picturing a vegetarian eatting a cabbage patch kid!

  • Al Willig

    Now THAT’S funny. Perhaps you could put Satan horns on the vegetarian…that’s me.

  • TheSquirrel

    Oh man I’ve gotten laughter tears on my keyboard I’m laughing so hard!

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    Satan horns on a baby would be even funnier :-)

  • Al Willig

    …or on the cabbage patch kid…

  • Cafeeine

    America is a big place and statistics do not apply equally everywhere.

  • Mike Bennett

    We should be very wary of the kind of dehumanisation of the “other” and reinforcing of grotesque stereotypes, which you and others have described are in this film. Historically whenever people have done this, it hasn’t ended well.

  • WingsThree

    I just have to hope that most Christians will see this garbage for what it is. The reviews I’ve seen elsewhere thoroughly trash it.

  • Margie

    One positive that can happen for some believers, anyway, might be what happens when young people do go to scary places like a university and meet people who turn out to be with, say, the Secular Student Alliance–in other words, they meet real live non-believers and find out that their church and family have lied to them about these people. Then they wonder what else they’re been led to believe that’s that wrong.

  • StealthGaytheist

    Some do, but others see the varied perspectives and challenges to their opinions as persecution.

  • Ro

    This is why movies about ourselves and other’s lives are important, especially as a parent. We need to open up the discussion to talk about life and differences, and being confident in our what we believe without belittling or being accusatory or insulting to others who believe differently. If we, or especially our children, never see anything different from what we believe, it becomes very difficult, maybe impossible, to refute other beliefs politely but confidently.

  • Guest

    I agree with this article and the attitude/beliefs that Christians have about atheists. I myself am a Christian, but I am not deluded by the brainwashing that goes on within the church. I have atheist friends…friends that I love and they love me back. I pray for them when they are sick or in distress, but that isn’t the only thing I do which is where I also part from a vast majority of the church. I haven’t seen the movie but I’ve lived it for the last 42 years that I’ve been a member of the church and this author is right in that churches do tend to put atheists in to these categories. Where I differ from your average Christian is that I tend to follow the teachings of Christ – the words he actually said not the interpretations given by others. My political views follow His instruction which puts me at odds with 95% of the current church population. I try to love the very people that the church condemns and only acknowledges when the “convert”. It’s not my job to change them…my job is to love them. I just wanted all of you to know that not all Christians buy in to what this movie is selling. It’s meant to make Christians feel good about their faith and strengthen it I suppose but to me it sounds shallow. I buy into Christ and what I believe he did for me and what he says to do for others and above all else it’s to love (which does not includes judging) the ones that the church of his day (and ours) said were the unloveable.
    .

  • Susan Elise Walker

    Absolutely agree with you 100%! I am a Christian too but not like many of them. I try not to judge, correct myself (when I find myself not giving the benefit of the doubt/jumping to conclusions), live an honest life, love everyone, find the best in others, care for those who need it most and are sometimes the hardest to love, and respect others’ rights to have their own beliefs. Some of the most caring, compassionate, giving people I’ve known have been atheists or agnostics. Some of the most hateful, judgmental people I’ve known have been Christians–especially those who wear it on their sleeves, so to speak. My goal in life, just like that of many Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., is to be KIND. To love. To be peaceful. Isn’t THAT what should matter in life? Why are so many Christians convinced that they have it all figured out?

  • Evie

    Lol. You aren’t judgemental? Yet go on to judge other Christians and speak pridefully of yourself. Got it all figured out, haven’t you?

  • Kafka0622

    Why are you so very bitter?

  • TheSquirrel

    Hypocrisy does tend to taste a bit bitter. One reason I can’t stomach Christianity.

  • Susan Elise Walker

    I didn’t say I was perfect; I said my GOAL is to be kind, to love, to be peaceful. I am a work in progress, as I would hope is the same for many Christians, Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists–mankind in general. Also, I didn’t ask why “ALL” Christians are convinced they have it figured out–I said “so many.” I have heard some of the nastiest, most hateful, judgmental, and closed-minded remarks from so-called Christians. I get tired of them attempting to shove their beliefs down non-believers throats. (I love God! My love for Jesus is beyond words. But, for me, if you tell me you’re an Atheist, I respect that and leave it alone. I know my preaching isn’t going to change you; if anything, it’s likely to turn you off from Christianity. I will still love you, think just as highly of you,)

    I have personally seen an entire congregation treat my physically and mentally ill (yet polite, friendly, non-violent, compassionate) brother as if he had Bubonic Plague–at a CHURCH FUNCTION. (The same guy who gives up a good portion of his very limited social security income to third world charities, Toys for Tots, you name it. Yet an entire church of Christians could not treat him as if he existed…unless it was to look him up and down and scowl because he didn’t look like them.) On the other hand, the only thing I have heard and seen from my Atheist friends is acceptance, and open-mindedness towards others (homosexuals, other races, homeless, the mentally ill, etc.). I know many, many Christians who live as Christ intended, and those are the ones who make me incredibly proud and reinforce my beliefs. They’re the ones I aspire to be the most like. The ones who make me sick are those who jump to conclusions, assume the worst, judge everyone whose beliefs are not in line with theirs, and yet still think they automatically have a 1st Class ticket into Heaven because they show up at church every Sunday. So yeah, kindness, compassion, love, consideration, generosity, open-mindedness? I may not be all of those things 100% of the time, but I do my best every, single day. So yeah, as a matter of fact, I do think I have it all figured out. As the Dalai Lama so eloquently said, “I don’t have a religion. My religion is kindness.”

  • grumpy_otter

    This atheist thanks you for your open mind! I have often said that if all Christians really followed the words attributed to Jesus, the world would be a great place!

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    “Where I differ from your average Christian is that I tend to follow the teachings of Christ”

    I love that sentence.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Spot on. (For other commenters, I’m the woman who confronted her own professor in college, an incident mentioned in this piece.) One of the things that really messed with my head was meeting real live non-Christians in college, especially atheists. My ex-husband had a huge burden for them, so I got to know quite a few. They weren’t like how my church taught about them at all. Before that indoctrination could take hold, I already knew that atheists were just like anybody else–with morals, reason to live, everything. In a way that made deconverting so much easier; I didn’t have quite so much worry about “OMG I’M ABOUT TO LOSE ALL MY MORALITY” that I know some ex-Christians face. It’s hard to revile and hate people you actually know.

    But the weird thing is, I don’t remember any particular, singling-out demonization of atheists. They might have been reviled and hated, but not with particular ardor. This was the 80s and 90s, and we were a lot more worried about the groups we viewed as the major threats against our way of life: Wicca and Satanism. Now atheism is viewed as the big boogeyman threatening Christianity, so it gets the full attention of the Christian marketing machine. That’s why the show-boatiest Christians now claim ex-atheist backgrounds; back in my day, those same folks would have been claiming to have been Wiccan Satanist high priests. (Yes, yes, I know.)

  • grumpy_otter

    Great insight! I remember the 70s, too, and you are so right that “atheist” hardly seemed like a thing then. The evils of D & D were far more prevalent!

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Oh my gosh I wish I still had the anti-D&D tracts my mom brought home from work one day. A co-worker had given them to her and it just panicked her that her little baby girl might be involved with anything they described. Obviously, I wasn’t participating in orgies or murdering anybody or at any risk of schizophrenia as a result of losing my ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality (yes yes, I know), but she was still pretty spooked. She made me and my sister watch Mazes and Monsters and the discussion panel that followed it on TV. It was one of the most excruciating memories I have as a kid. And yes, most of the showboating Christians I heard included D&D as part of their pre-conversion sins.

    Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!

  • wtfwjtd

    Ouija boards! Don’t forget Ouija boards! At least in the area I grew up in, these were more dangerous to leave lying around children than loaded firearms. You are absolutely right, in that era the only atheist that we knew of was that nasty woman that (gasp) got prayer taken out of schools. It was the Satanist high priests that were the real evil, as atheists were mostly just a thought experiment, nobody was really an atheist, they just said so ’cause they were secretly angry with god.

    Ah, good times…that robbed me of most of my childhood.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    I didn’t know anybody who wasn’t Christian till college. When I began deconverting toward the end of my college years, I was the only one I’d ever heard of who’d left the religion. I felt so alone. Now we’re a lot luckier–ex-Christians have entire websites, there’s social media, and there are many people in most communities who publicly identify as atheist and/or ex-Christian.

    Ouija boards were sooooo spooky and scary! I had a weird experience with one myself as a kid–found one in the forest amid some animal bones in the bole of a tree and brought it home with my sister and we played with it a bit, and my dad (who had a bit of a temper problem in the same way that fundagelicals have a bit of a hypocrisy problem) totally freaked out, threw this utter bender, and told us to throw it out. We took it back to the forest and buried it. When we returned, he was totally fine, drinking beer and watching TV, and claimed he didn’t even remember his freakout at us an hour earlier. My sister and I were so totally weirded out by this incident. PROOF, I TELLS YA!

  • Dave Kennington

    Great Article!

  • http://jehoshuathebook.com Garrett Glass

    This movie was more like a cartoon, with its exaggerated characters and simplistic dialogue. In fact, the basic plot is taken from a cartoon – a Chick Tract from 2002. You can save yourself some time, spend three minutes reading this Chick Tract, and you can give a pass on the movie altogether.

    http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

  • Razor

    Let’s not insult cartoons by comparing it to this hateful propaganda.

  • StealthGaytheist

    “He won’t lift a finger for anyone who won’t first offer him something in return, and when his girlfriend discloses that she is dying of cancer, he brushes her off as an inconvenience. ”

    IIRC, Pat Robertson had a caller whose wife had been diagnosed with cancer. Robertson told the man to divorce his wife and get on with his life.

  • http://xakana.wix.com/hs-kallinger Heather Kallinger
  • StealthGaytheist

    Ah, thank you.

  • Taylor Daniel

    I’m thankful for this post. I am an evangelical living in Memphis, TN and growing up in this culture my whole life. I am also a Jazz musician and I think one thing this post correctly points to (without explicitly mentioning it) is the crisis of poor quality art produced by many Christians in the US today. It is often driven more by marketing easy answers to people whose chief concern is lifestyle rather than truthful discussion, as opposed to welling up as overflow from the message of the Gospel. I have many atheist/agnostic friends, gay friends, etc. It’s important for Christians to realize it is not their responsibility to save anyone, that is God’s place. We are called (freed up really) to love people in our lives, through actions, being there, and honest discussion. We don’t need caricatures, we need dialogue. And we should be free to admit, since we are saved by grace outside of ourselves, that atheists can be wiser and better people than us in many aspects. It’s never been about performance! Bless you, brother.

  • grumpy_otter

    Thanks for the thoughtful post! As an atheist who has far too often heard “Why are you angry at God?” it is nice to know there are believers like you out there who are interested in a conversation, not conversion.

  • Mike

    Unfortunately, the majority of Christians view atheists either as non-persons or as some sort of religious conquest. Regardless, I appreciate your post. Keep up the good work :D

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    I just want to thank you for saying what you said Taylor.

    It’s becoming harder and harder to find Christians who are genuine in seriously engaging non-believers in dialogue about religious topics. When I come accross a blog like this populated by the kinds of Christians whose posts I read (shaking my head) before getting to yours, I figure I need to pause and remind people like yourself that your approach is as appreciated as it is rare.

  • Taylor Daniel

    Thank you for bothering to say that! I’ve been blessed to grow up in the church my whole life. But, since it is an institution made up of sinful people, I often find myself recovering from aspects of it as well. Obviously, I believe Christianity so I believe it is right and others are wrong when they dissent from it. But anyone truly paying attention to the Bible sees that it is God’s story/God’s salvation/ God’s actions/etc. and he/she is incalculably small in the grand scheme of things. This, when properly heeded, is meant to (and does) bring humility. So, when I see Christian people needing to caricature and demean others superficially, I really think its a failure to understand the Gospel on their parts, not an over-zealousness for it. So I apologize for many in the church who may have demeaned and dismissed you. It is because they were scared and Jesus never would have done it. But my preaching is over, do you have a blog or anything I can read? I’d enjoy hearing your perspective. Thanks again!

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    It sounds like you and I would get along well. I had rather your same approach, and general “misgivings” with the way Christians popularly present themselves (today) when I was a Christian. As you probably know, it’s hard to get other Christians to acknowledge the validity of those misgivings, and (take it from me) it’s even harder to get them to do so when it’s an atheist who has them.

    It can feel like one is either the only person in the world who doesn’t understand the gospel message, or the only person in the world who does. It’s a lonely place to be in either case.

    I post as “Stepper” on answerbag.com which makes up the bulk of my online presence as a participant in the religious conversation. My recent interaction here:

    http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/14640169

    …offers my backstory, and gives a pretty good summary of what I believe and what values I hold, and is written in such a way as to be (if I succeeded) accessible to a Christian audience.

    I’m new to patheos, and even newer to Neil’s blog. I hope you stick around, and I’d love to have your perspective on many of the topics I imagine he’ll explore.

  • gusbovona

    “We don’t need caricatures, we need dialogue.”

    Look at how much cultural and political talk is caricature, and you might despair, but don’t let despair keep you from honest dialogue.

  • Ro

    Most movies are based on exaggeration of some sort: violence, sex, crime, beauty, disability, religion. At what point did we start believing they portrayed reality? The ones I notice most are about adoption and foster care (especially kids’ movies) as they pertain most to my own family. In fact, they are often fodder for humor (“We’ll put you up for adoption if you keep this up.” How does that threat make my adopted children feel?) I think debating movies for the sake of learning from each other, and introspection is awesome! But it makes no sense to attack them because they misportray an event/belief/fill-in-the-blank. If all movies were based solely on truth you would see the entertainment industry plummet. I’ve seen God’s Not Dead and also immediately thought atheism was mis-represented. Talked to my kids, who also watched it, about it also. And this is why it’s important, it gave us cause for conversation and debate, and questions to ask of ourselves. In this case, how far would WE go to stand up for what we believe in?

  • Dominic

    Lol, I’m not atheist, but I follow no religion. All I have to say is there are assholes everywhere, no matter what belief they have. I choose to keep an open mind. Atheists just don’t believe in god for many reasons, not just because they’re mad at god. Everyone is different. But to be honest, a lot of Christians have it so in their head that if they follow the bible then you’ll get a free ticket into heaven. Now do you think god wants you to do those things because he says to? I would think not, I choose to do good simply because I like it and I like letting people know there’s people who care. I don’t let some book tell me how to live my life. I get along with everyone despite their religion. Who are you to judge what someone else believes in? You have no idea what they went through, but honestly you’re letting your religion turn you into a stuck up close minded asshole.

  • Matt G

    For the record, to not believe in God because you are mad at him is blatantly nonsensical and would require superhuman levels of denial. Remember that the burden of proof lies with the believer. Look up Russell’s Teapot.

  • Dominic

    If your god is really the way the bible says… he is shaking his head at this article. It is sad to see such ignorance, and so much hate towards a group simply because you watched a movie.

  • Dominic

    Perhaps having religion crammed down your throat by people who did awful things to you would make you more open to the fact that it’s all bull shit.

  • http://rosarygirl1962.blogspot.com/ Ellie Ravinsky

    Fantastic article, I’m passing it on.

  • XaurreauX

    They’re so insecure about their “truth” that they have to lie to protect it.

  • Winking Corn

    One thing that interested me was just how unBiblical the guy’s girlfriend is. She dumps him because she has his whole life planned out for him, and his failing this one class will ruin that. Or something like that. However, her proper position was to be supportive of him, and follow his lead, and how he’s supposed to be the spiritual head, and all that other jazz. Granted, you could make the argument that this is only after marriage, but it’s not a good sign that she’s the one being the decider. I’m sure that this is a subtle jab at modern women who think they deserve the same rights and ability to make decisions despite what the Bible says.

  • Heretic (apostate of FSM)

    This movie is naked, malicious, and disgusting propaganda. If you walked away from this one in agreement with the venomous lies which it spewed out, then you don’t deserve the privilege of living in any free society!

  • Guest

    Wait, what? Are you saying people who enjoyed this movie should be locked up? Surely that’s going a bit far? Steady on, chap!

  • Heretic (apostate of FSM)

    Better them than me! These bullshit artists are quickly getting so bad, that they would have been coveted propaganda consultants for Hitler or Stalin.

  • Anthony Edwards

    As an anti-theist, I don’t think that people who are theistic always do bad things because of their belief system, and I think that people are good or bad regardless of their belief, but I also think that beliefs (including nationalistic ones) make people excusable for their actions.

    You’re an eloquent speaker and thanks for that.

  • Guest

    This movie sounds hilarious; can’t wait to see it!

  • Dave Widener

    I was just going to let this pass. But, the more that I thought about it. The more I realized that I couldn’t. Let me start by asking a question. Should I even try looking for your diatribes on the malicious characterizations of Christians, in the movies? I doubt that I would find even one. Yet, those characterizations are ubiquitous. Your selective outrage is pathetic. Grow up, stop whining, and understand that mischaracterizations happen all of the time, in Hollywood. Next, understand the nature of movie making. Characters are written in an over-the-top manner to make a point. Although some of the instances, in this movie, are exaggerated. I found the overall attitude, of the atheist, to be consistent with atheists that I know. And yes, I am still friends with them. I do love them. Finally, your point on Dean Cain’s character is moot. I don’t remember him labeling himself as atheist. He may have shown a dislike for his mother’s beliefs. But, that doesn’t make him an atheist. But, you seem to identify him as an atheist? I wonder why?

  • TheSquirrel

    Yes, this is much like saying “How dare you be upset at X when Y happens all the time!”
    Besides, the entire point of this movie is to vilify and mischaracterize atheists. Frankly not only is the movie objectively bad on nearly every level, its offensive.
    I’m very sorry the only atheists you call friends are sad jerkish assholes with no life. They are hardly the representative sample you seem to think they are.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    If you believe that was the entire point of the movie, you entirely missed the point of the movie!

  • TheSquirrel

    Oh, I’m sorry! Was the point of the movie supposed to be something to the effect of “God is totes real, guys!” …Well maybe they should have done more with that then.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Hahahaha, you are sooo clever.

    Your response demonstrates that there is no need for me to continue as even you understand that your previous comment about the “entire point of the movie was to vilify and mischaracterize atheists” is false.

    Thanks for trying!

  • TheSquirrel

    Wow, missing the point completely.
    If the point of the movie WAS to prove god exists THEY FAILED HARDCORE!
    Now making atheists look like meanies, bullies and failures, THAT’S where all their effort obviously went, thus, the point.
    The point of a movie is only encapsulated in the title if you’re uneducated in literary analysis.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Sorry to burst your bubble but I haven’t missed your point, I simply do not agree with it. You understand the difference, right?

  • dbwindhorst

    So, Kyle…where in the N.T. will I find an example of your witnessing style?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    You think I’ve been “witnessing” here?

    Wow, what a stereotypical view you have.

    Kyle’s a Christian so he MUST be witnessing…right?

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    The conduct of Christians is, itself, the biggest testimony there is to the utter lack of credibility to Christians’ claims of having a divine power involved in their religion.

    A while ago my then-husband (a preacher) wanted to put a Jesus fish on our shared vehicle and I said he couldn’t until he learned how to drive in a safe and law-abiding way. I was a very fervent Christian, but even then I knew that if he put a Christian symbol on our car and drove like a maniac, it’d just be an anti-witness to the validity of our faith. A pity that modern Christians haven’t learned the lesson that I grasped instinctively 25 years ago.

  • dbwindhorst

    Ah. So, II Snarkalonians 5:21 (NIV), then.

  • TheSquirrel

    It’s ok, you’re allowed to be wrong.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Positing that I’m wrong and you are right without evidence is quite an interesting stance to take. I’d liken it to walking on quicksand rather than the sidewalk.

  • TheSquirrel

    I think this all started when I said “the entire point of the movie…”
    So yes, hyperbole is a thing. Most movies in fact do not have a single point, if there is a point to them at all. This is obviously not YOUR point, as you seem to claim there is another singular point to this film.
    If you are disagreeing with my point about it failing to prove god exists, and claiming I need “evidence” for such a claim, may I point out that clearly we watched two separate movies, as this film in question doesn’t even make a minimal effort at the serious business of theological apologetics. May I also suggest you provide evidence for YOUR claim that it does, as I can hardly sight every instance it DOESN’T seriously try to prove god, especially since that is the entire movie.
    If you disagree that the film goes out of it’s way to portray atheists as horrible people, again I must suggest that we watched separate movies, and would like to see the one you saw with the fair portrayal of an entire group of people.

  • Jan Civil

    It’s a big ol’ strawman of atheists. All this word ‘atheism’ means is, a person that does not believe there is a being requiring no prior cause that is the cause of all. It’s not a belief, ie., an affirmation of anything at all. Why would there be a consistency to the behavior of people just out of this label?

    I don’t believe that particular notion but I would not want to define myself in reaction to ‘theism’. It just is not that significant an idea, it’s rather childlike to me in the first place. But sure, there are people that are driven to argue on and on, to no gain for either.
    Yet in this film an ‘atheist’ is persuaded in the end. Because the argument is so compelling. Good luck with that!

    I think this is bad stuff, I think the extreme intellectual dishonesty here is a bad thing, that there is a hole to fill with this is a bad sign. As it takes the temperature of society, I see fever.

    So believers, ‘Christians’, supposedly, need this to beat up on WHY, exactly? One would think that if you’re secure in this faith, you don’t need this thing at all. But clearly there is enough of an obvious market for this, this thing gets produced, and it’s sure to make a profit. So the fact of this picture only reinforces one’s notion about the desperation of it all, doesn’t it.

    Your remarks btw are consistent with assholes I know. One can’t criticize this or it’s ‘whining’. You address none of the points of the piece; instead you have a little story to tell, using it as the opp.
    You’re a troll.

  • Heretic (apostate of FSM)

    Are you even aware of the fact that you are on an atheist blog?

    Nice mustache, by the way – it makes you look particularly Hitlerian. Hitler was a Christian, too.

  • wowchinga

    He’s not required to write any diatribes on the characterization of Christians in movies in order to make his points valid. You seem to be unable to look past persons and discuss ideas. Next is your bullshit claim of the movie being consistent with your experience of Atheists. On top of the fact that you’re obviously bigoted and hateful, your anecdotal dealings with Atheists is in no way a valid measurement of the attitudes of millions of other Atheists. Go spew your hate somewhere else, there are hundreds of forums for “loving Christians” such as yourself to practice their vitriol.

  • TheSquirrel

    Furthermore… His selective outrage? I’m sorry, is he reviewing a movie or all of Hollywood? Did you even think about this article before you wrote your comment? I suppose he’s supposed to include every facet of movie history into his review of a SINGLE movie.

    I’m sure he’s simply torn by your disapproval. Or not.

  • Neil Carter

    Perhaps it was the blatant way he mocked his aging mother’s faith in the final scenes of the movie. His alignment with “the bad guys” seemed pretty obvious to me.

    But shallow writing is a problem for me in all movies, not just Christian ones. It’s insulting to the intelligence of anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills. It reminds me of the funny line in Seinfeld where the priest asks Jerry why another guy’s Jewish jokes offend him:

    “And this offends you as a Jewish person?”
    “No, it offends me as a comedian!”

    http://youtu.be/qifwiNrVBFk

  • Mikus

    Yep you just described 90% of the christians, muslims, etc. not the atheists lol.

  • Evie

    I am a very conservative Christian, and I quite enjoyed the movie. However, I never thought to look at it from this point of view. This review makes me second guess my idea of going out and buying the movie.I can totally see your point of view. While I don’t necessarily agree 100% with everything you said, I can see how it (The movie) could be taken that way.

    I do have to say though, Christians are the main person group or religious group being persecuted in the world today. We are called bigots and close minded and judgmental, however we seem to be the only ones not accepted for our position.

  • TheSquirrel

    It amounts to emotional porn for believers (no offense meant, whatever floats your masturboat I say). It is however an objectively bad movie.

  • http://Www.theirishatheist.wordpress.com/ The Irish Atheist

    Perhaps the reason you are called a bigot and closed-minded and judgmental is because you actually are a bigot who does close-minded or judgemental things.

    Come back once you’ve been though all the things that Christians have done to the LGBT community and we’ll talk about how you’re the most persecuted.

  • Guest

    I’m not sure, but you may have misposted this…

  • Neil Carter

    Globally, the persecution of Christians is a legitimate problem, and my humanist friends are in full support of joining the church in helping reduce their suffering in those countries where they are persecuted because their faith isn’t privileged as it is here in the United States.

    But here in my country it’s a different story, especially in the region of the country where I live. Here in the Deep South, Christians enjoy a significant privilege to which they are so accustomed that even a slight loss of some portion of it feels like an all-out assault on their faith.

  • Alan Christensen

    There certainly is persecution of Christians in some countries, but a lot of my fellow Christians in America seem to think that having others vocally disagree with you in the public square = persecution.

  • Rod Haney

    Globally?
    Isn’t that being a little melodramatic?
    In reality it’s a few Islamic countries where christians endure real persecution. Not to make light of that, but it’s hardly a global problem.
    Here in North America, “christian persecution” amounts to removing the exclusive privileges christians have enjoyed here and applying equal rights to everyone.
    Unless you listen to those morons on Fox “news”, they’ll have you believe christians are being hunted down and slaughtered in the streets.

  • AceOfSpades

    What about homosexuals who are been outcasted from society and sometimes murdered in countries in the middle east?
    Or atheists who can be legally killed in at least 10 countries worldwide. They have also, statistically in USA, been regarded as less trustworthy than rapists.
    What about Muslims who seem to be continuously accused of being terrorists? And God help them trying to get through airport security if they had a metal ligament replacement.

  • African RockFish

    In seven states, there are laws barring atheists from holding public office, and in two states atheists have no legal standing to testify in a court of law. When a US state changes their constitution in order to prohibit Christians from holding elected offices, Christians can get back to me about that “persecution” nonsense.

  • Dale McGowan

    Good on you for seeing his point of view on this — that’s a hard thing to do.

    As for Christian persecution, here’s an interesting theory about that:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/08/05/why-do-evangelical-christians-constantly-act-like-theyre-being-persecuted-heres-one-theory/

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    “How dare they not tolerate our total intolerance!” What, that again? You know, maybe the reason you get called those things is that you are those things. Newsflash: Nobody cares what you believe in private. Be as bigoted, close-minded, and judgmental as you wish to be. Label those things “love” if it makes you happy to do so, as long as you understand nobody but you will find it loving and that nobody except you will accept this relabeling and rebranding attempt.

    But when you step out into the big bad world, we’ve got these agreements about how society works and how people should treat each other. Your relabeled hatred and intolerance, if they translate into behaving unfairly and cruelly toward others or making hate-speech statements, are going to be evaluated by the rest of us. And we are allowed to criticize them. We are also fully within our rights to make laws requiring you to treat others kindly and fairly and to extend full civil rights to all people, even the people in classes you deem inferior or unworthy, even if you totally don’t want to do it. if you go into business, you will be required to treat others fairly whether you want to or not. And if you cannot do those things, then go live somewhere that enshrines religious privilege and bigotry into law–though you may find that almost all of them are nightmarish, extremist-ridden hellholes. If you remain here in America, though, don’t go crying about how “intolerant” everybody is that they won’t allow you to skirt the law and maliciously mistreat other people in the name of your rebranded “love.” Nobody is required to tolerate intolerance.

  • TheSquirrel

    “I do have to say though, Christians are the main person group or religious group being persecuted in the world today.”
    Thanks, I needed to shit my pants with laughter today…

  • Guest

    Christian persecution in America is complex.
    I’m sorry, I meant it is A complex.

  • African RockFish

    LOL @ the poor, persecuted 80% majority!

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    Hi Evie,
    “We are called bigots and close minded and judgmental, however we seem to be the only ones not accepted for our position.”
    I’m an atheist. Do you accept me for my position?

  • gimpi1

    How do you see yourself being persecuted?

    If by that you mean that people are rejecting some of your political and social views, I can’t see that as persecution. It’s disagreement.

    Full disclosure: For myself, I do regard someone who wants to discriminate against gay people as a bigot. Note, I did not say someone who regards homosexuality as sinful, I said someone who wants to discriminate. You can hold to your beliefs regarding sin, but support full rights under the law. Much the same way some religions regard eating pork as sinful, but aren’t trying to outlaw bacon.

    If you regard that as persecution, I have to disagree.

  • http://www.Kamenriderrecap.com Sneezeguard

    If anything this movie just teaches that you can be an amoral jackass your whole life and if you say the magic words right before you die you get infinite rewards. Not really a good argument for living your life as a Christian when they get the same fate but don’t get to enjoy all that delicious sinning before getting there.

  • TheSquirrel

    TheBibleReloaded on youtube have a very excellent review of this awful awful movie.

  • Nick

    For the people saying something along the lines of ‘most movies exaggerate in order to make a point and the dichotomy between protagonists and antagonists is intentional in this way.’ I’m not sure if people realize that this simply supports the view that God is Not Dead is a bad movie and that it was not made to challenge minds and inspire deep thought. If you have never seen a movie that inspires in that way, then you are greatly culturally impoverished.

  • Neil Schmidt

    If anyone thinks that this film was anything beyond an opportunity to make a tidy return at the box office and a ton of residuals with DVD sales from the piety and gullibility of modern, uneducated. Western style Evangelical Christians, they are quite deluded. With the amount of commentary available through social media, the various perspectives of Atheists are well defined and yet the writer and director of this flickering catastrophe chose to ignore these perspectives in favor of every preconceived stereotype that is currently circulating in closed Christian circles.

    Watching Christians losing their minds in the comment section is quite telling considering that the only validation of them acting like the caricatures in the film is their own insistence that they’re not like that even though nothing specifically about them was stated. Further flavor that notion with a healthy dose of vitriol aimed at the author and you have his points completely validated. It’s the equivalent of telling a crowd of people that some of them are going to be statistically ignorant then having several of them leap to their feet to demand that you quit calling them ignorant.

    I am so thankful that I found my way out of this mythology.

  • DarkSoulsSauron

    I found a shitty pirated copy off the internet and listened to it. i could almost hear the moans of christians masturbating to it.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Thank you for your perspective on the movie. It’s interesting that throughout your post you are criticizing the movie for stereotyping and misrepresenting atheists but you can tell the tone of your post is that Christians everywhere will picture atheists in the light the movie (and as their pastors) portray.

    That Christians are just mindless drones that they will justbelieve what they are told to “fit in.” How stereotypical and misrepresenting!

    For you to be grotesquely offended by the “stereotypical” or “misrepresented” atheist from the movie would be like a Christian being offended by how often movies and TV make them a stereotype. As Lecrae would put it;

    “All the Christians in the movies so typical
    Alcoholic, child molesting, hypocritic and mystical”

    You are right that media influences how we view other people. But atheists are no less prone than Christians, Muslims, or any group or sub-group of people to accept a misrepresentation of others.

    You say the films chief failure is to demonstrate love to unbelievers. I find that unfortunate and likely based off of your personal views of Christians and Christianity.

    The pastor and his missionary friend who couldn’t get their car to start until the night of the concert and were stuck in traffic at the moment the professor was hit by another car, demonstrated love to the atheist professor by doing all they could to help. By getting out and racing to his side, by calling for an ambulance, by encouraging and comforting him, and at the end giving him the hope of eternity. Yup, the movie portrays that Christians should “hate the mean and angry atheist professor.”

    That scene as you’ve taken it, from another perspective could display God’s sovereignty, how a Christian or anyone should respond in a crisis or accident, and the true reality that our lives on earth do not always get the happy ending we expect.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Nothing like a little Christian gaslighting to make me realize anew how happy I am to be out of that religion. The scene with the car accident you describe is absolutely grotesque to me, but you are demanding that I find it loving and encouraging. Sorry, no, it’s still grotesque. I really think fundagelicals have totally lost their sense of compassion somewhere along the way. I’ve seen them twist any offense against humanity, any cruelty, any hateful act, into THE BONUS PLAN and see it as an awesome sign of the goodness of their god. Thankfully, I am not required to contort myself into that kind of cognitive dissonance anymore.

    You would know, if you actually had read the post, that Neil’s intensely interested in representing people fairly and that he is the very last person you’d ever find misrepresenting Christians. You would also, if you had not lost your sense of compassion along with so many of your brethren, know that the recent slew of movies put out by the fundagelical marketing machine all treat non-believers in this manner–making them out to be all secret believers with a grudge against a god they claim to think does not exist, painting them as caricatures of simply horrible beasts devoid of any humanity or morality, then send in some TRUE CHRISTIAN™ to save them from themselves. It’s disgusting and evil to put out such dehumanizing ideas about non-believers. And “Susie hit me first!” is not an adequate rationalization for it happening. It doesn’t really matter how offended you feel by the representations of Christians in the media; that does not excuse the false witness in these movies or the hatefulness of these representations. That you think that it does speaks volumes about where your headspace is as a Christian. You’re not in this thing to love. You’re in it to dominate. Don’t think anybody’s fooled.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    No where have I demanded that you find it loving and encouraging. I have simply stated a differing point of view of what the scene depicts.

    Why is it absolutely grotesque to you?

    First I will point out that I am not offended by how media portrays Christians. It’s atheists that feel the need to express how “offended they are by Christian movies misrepresenting atheists.”

    Secondly, when you say “it doesn’t really matter how offended you feel by the representations of Christians in the media,,,” You realize that goes for atheists as well, unless of course you are living by a double standard. It’s WRONG to misrepresent atheists in media BUT it’s OKAY to do it to Christians.

    Finally, as far as compassion goes. You do not know me, you simply have a belief about what all Christians believe based off of your experiences with them. You have perceived them to lack compassion. I assure you, I have a great deal of compassion for all peoples. To attempt to dehumanize me in such a way is as you have put it “disgusting and evil.”

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    You realize you sound like an abuse victim trying to explain why he’s got a bruise, right? You’re talking about an incredibly insulting, dehumanizing scene about an atheist who has gotten into a mortal injury caused by an accident (which, presumably, the Christian god was totally fine with allowing). Two preachers see him and instead of doing something useful, prey upon his fear and pain to get him converted. The myth about “no atheists in foxholes” is what is operating here, and it’s not only false but deeply insulting. I’m sorry that you are incapable of recognizing this predation for what it is or the sheer insulting degradation of a scene involving this kind of deathbed conversion or the sickening opportunism of the Christians who use the short time available to do something this vile to a vulnerable person. As Christians go, the ones in this movie are simply ghastly. But oh no, to someone with Jesus goggles on, you can twist and contort like you’re on a Twister mat to make this scene into something loving. Wow. Maybe you need to check at the lost & found for your sense of compassion and morality?

    And you’re still trying to rationalize this sort of characterization because you’re so upset with how Christians are represented. I never said, not even once, that I condone erroneous or unfair representations of Christians in media. But we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about how this movie in particular depicts atheists. You’re the one talking about that. Had you asked, I’d have gladly told you that I object equally to those representations as well. But again, we’re not talking about that. No double standard at all is in operation… except in the mind of someone masturbating over martyr and persecution fantasies.

    My belief about Christians is formed by half a lifetime in the religion and by how Christians behave–like you have here. You don’t get that this movie is not only disrespectful of atheists and misrepresents whole swathes of people to make a puerile, over-simplistic, hamfisted point, but that it feeds into the persecution fantasies of a group of people who already suffer from a bad enough case of false-persecution fantasizing already. You are not compassionate at all, but by redefining big words you don’t understand, have successfully made yourself believe that you are.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I am sorry but you do not “object equally to those representations as well.”

    Here you have attempted to represent me as lacking compassion and morality, as someone masturbating over martyr and persecution fantasies, and as being incredibly insulting.

    You are perfectly fine in attempting to represent others as negatively as you possibly can but if you or something you agree with is represented negatively you have a conniption. You also seem to think using personal attacks will help you win some sort of argument. It’s sad really.

    So what wasn’t useful about what the two preachers did: Run to his aid? Have others call 911? Touch his shoulder or hold his hand? Identify that his injuries were internal and there was nothing they could medically like apply pressure on an open wound? Or give him hope, peace, and comfort in his dying breaths?

    Or was the scene so dehumanizing that there was a car accident causing the mortal injury?

    What about all the other people the movie portrayed as just standing around, are those people more compassionate for not running to the mans side and sharing Jesus with him?

    But you are right, that scene is despicable and disgraceful. Those two preachers should be ashamed of themselves for trying to help a man struck by a car.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    That was magnificently obtuse. Do you do that on purpose? It’s really hard to fathom what you’re actually trying to accomplish here beyond trolling. So far you’ve pulled out all the big guns of Christian apologetics–gaslighting, redefinitions, demanding people explain things ad nauseum to poor widdle dumdum you who jusssssst doesn’t geeeeeet it, and then at the end, just as a last fillip, demonstrating that you’ve utterly and completely not listened to a thing anybody’s said by restating your original gaslighting comment. Impressive, but tomorrow I’ll wake up and say to my husband, “Wow, honey, you should have seen this hypocritical, narcissistic jackass of a Christian I tangled with last night.” I will not say “Wow, what an amazing Christian he was–how radiantly he demonstrated the love of the Savior he claims to follow.”

    Take your “just asking questions” tactics elsewhere, hypocrite. I will not be bashing my brains out to find the magical series of incantations that will finally make you understand how you’re coming off and why you’re so wrong. Right now your paycheck–that sense of smug superiority you’re exuding, your sense of being right, your sense of defensiveness, your need to feel persecuted, your need to feel vindicated–depends upon you not getting anything anybody is trying to tell you. Maybe one day you’ll be ready to hear it. But not today, it seems.

  • http://www.thirdistudio.com.au Andrew

    Well said

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I am so thankful to have met such a compassionate person who has demonstrated for me how erroneous the depiction of atheists in the movie was. Someone with such a marvelous understanding of what piety, hypocrisy, and dehumanizing is.

    The pleasure was truly mine for your responses to my comments.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    “Well, Susie hit me first!” appears to be your excuse for all of your various failings as a representative of Christianity and all of your religion’s various failings as a representative of a god of love and prince of peace. I never claimed to be a representative of anything, and I’m not actually an atheist. Sorry to blow your pet wild-ass guess out of the water there. Nor did you actually address anything I mentioned other than to gaslight me and continue to pretend to be “just asking questions.”

    May I gently suggest you stop identifying as such until you learn how to behave the way your religion’s so-called founder told you to behave? Because as it stands, you’re not lookin’ good here. You are not loving, and considering you’re the one under a threat of eternal torture for not being loving, you might want to address that problem before it’s too late.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Oh, so because you have not stated what you represent or that you are not an atheist it nullifies your words and actions here. That’s impeccable logic.

    You clearly do not see the irony in your comments. Your utter objection to what you viewed as dehumanizing a people group in a movie yet you have no issues attempting to dehumanize another person in an online discussion.

    The fact that you want to make half a dozen false claims about me and you continue to hold on to those in the face of reality is rather entertaining. I’m sure your “claims” and insults work to shut some people up, but really you’ve just demonstrated the objection of the post. The creation and reinforcement of a stereotype or misrepresentation of a people group/person. Or as some might put it a fictional character.

    I am not sure which is worse, that you ardently believe the things you’ve claimed about me are true. Or that others might actually believe you.

    To reiterate the same point I’ve been making all along: I do not find your words and actions unloving, offensive, or lacking compassion. I have no animosity towards you or any other who disagrees with me. The point of my analogy was not “Well, Susie hit me first” and the point of my alternative view on the accident scene was not gaslighting, both those arguments are unsupported. And I find the claims you keep making towards a fictional character me silly.

    Not to mention, it always amuses me when people use their ignorant views of Christianity to tell me what I should believe or am “under the treat of…” It’ll be fun to listen to your attempted argument, “Ugh, I KNOW what Christians believe because I USED to be one…” I’ll just say before you make some feeble attempt at this type of argument to look at who the subject of it is.

  • African RockFish

    “You’re in it to dominate. Don’t think anybody’s fooled.”

    Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that their endgame is world domination and subjugation of anyone who doesn’t buy into Christianity.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Nope. But I am interested in how you came up with that idea?

  • http://127.0.0.1 3lemenope

    The last eighteen centuries or so of human history?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Hmm, it seems the concept mentioned actually predates Christianity and can likely be traced back to human origins rather than just the last 18 centuries or so.

  • http://127.0.0.1 3lemenope

    Huh?

    You asked how someone could come up with the idea (described briefly by AfricanRockFish) of Christianity fostering in its users a more-or-less unconcealed monomaniacal desire for World Domination a worrisome amount of the time, and I responded, hey let’s look at the last eighteen centuries of the behavior of Christians, that might yield a clue how someone might entertain the notion.

    The “concept mentioned” is the alleged social goals of inchoate Christianity (i.e. “world domination and subjugation of anyone who doesn’t buy into Christianity”), which I am willing to assert confidently cannot be traced further back than the existence of Christianity.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    The concept of world domination and subjugation of those who do not hold a particular worldview Christian or other can more than likely be traced all the way back to human origin.

    So to claim or make a comment that the concept is “Christian” is false, as it applies to humanity across time and cultures. My understanding of what Christianity is or what God/Jesus intended it to be is actually the opposite of the concepts mentioned. That’s not to say that Christians have not distorted the concepts of God/Jesus to look nothing like what they were supposed to.

  • Matt

    So this movie doesn’t attack atheists at all?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Could you please rephrase the question?

  • TheSquirrel

    Wow, for a guy who likes to post small novels you sure do have a hard time with simple english.
    Does this movie attack atheists at all? How’s that?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    That’s a little bit better as you ask “does” as opposed to “doesn’t.” In simple English asking does is a clearer question than asking doesn’t.

    In what way are you asking me if the movie “attacks atheists” as including “at all” makes the question too vague.

    I do not have a hard time with English, I just do not answer poorly phrased questions.

  • TheSquirrel

    Does the movie attack atheists?
    Good enough for you?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    You really need to work on asking questions.

    Why? Because your question is trying to pigeonhole me into answering yes or no as to whether or not the movie attacks atheists. Much like asking, “have stopped beating your wife?”

    Rather than asking me my thoughts and views on the movie your question is an attempt to lead the conversation to whether or not the movie “attacks atheists.” This completely ignores any other dialogue about the movie. Do you see why the question is poorly phrased?

  • Matt

    The question is not poorly phrased. The answer is yes, and that’s why you don’t like the question.

    Does the film seek understanding in atheism?

    And what’s this about beating your wife? I’m sure that would be a yes or no question too… ? If anyone thinks they are getting pigeonholed with a question like that, they are probably still beating their wife..

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question#Defense

    You can read my mind now. That I don’t like the answer because you presume the answer to your question is only “yes.” How quaint?

    The question pigeonholes any involved into a discussion on whether or not the movie attacks atheists (in a general sense). Of which you yourself find that if the answer is yes than it is not a good basis for discussion on atheism or Christianity.

    So, why would someone bother to answer the question?

  • Matt

    What?

    I asked the question because you seem to think otherwise, and if you believe the answer is no then please feel free to say why. Were not going to shoot you down for stating your opinion, in fact, I would prefer it to you going on about whatever it is you’re going on about.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I’m sorry but it is you who seem to think that I think otherwise. I have a lack of position on the question. Since you have claimed in the positive that you believe the movie attacks atheists, please defend your position.

    How does the movie attack atheists?

  • Matt

    The whole article is about how the film attacks atheists!

  • Matt

    This whole article is about how the movie is biased and more or less attacks atheism.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    You realize that answering “yes” to your question means that the movie does not attack atheists, right?

    As you asked, “so this movie doesn’t attack atheists?”

  • CanuckAmuck

    I wish my dodgeball team had people who could dodge balls half as well as you dodge questions.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Why am I not surprised that I’m being accused of “dodging the question?”

    Let me ask you CanuckAmuck, Have you stopped beating your wife?

  • Ricci Fagg

    …Because you ARE dodging the question. You’re pointing out grammatical errors instead of simply stating your own opinion after having seen the movie. They asked you if Atheists were being attacked in the movie. It’s a simple enough question.

    And instead of answering the question you are throwing in stupid rhetorical questions, as if that will somehow effect the truth of the matter. Very, very mature of you.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    After seeing the movie I had no opinion to the question that was asked. So I ask you:

    In what way are atheists being attacked in the movie?

  • CanuckAmuck

    I’ve never been married.

    Now, what is your answer to The Squirrel’s question?

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I neither held nor do I now hold a yes or no position to the question.

    If you have an opinion as to whether or not the movie attacks atheists, feel free to express why you feel that way?

    Otherwise, thank you for your time!

  • CanuckAmuck

    Now, was that so difficult? For some reason you had to make getting even a non-answer answer out of you like pulling the proverbial tooth.

    As for my opinion on the movie, I’ve never seen it, nor am I likely to. I have little enough free time to watch any movies or TV shows, so I have to rely on others’ reviews to figure out what to add to the ever-expanding list for when I do have the time. Based on those reviews, this movie is not going to make that list.

  • TheSquirrel

    To be fair, it’s not really my question.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    To be fair: “Does the movie attack atheists at all?” was your rephrasing of the question. My comment is directed towards your rephrasing not the original question.

  • TheSquirrel

    Fair enough.

  • Matt

    So you’re telling me you really couldn’t figure out what was meant by that? I’m asking you, in general, does this movie attack atheist? It is certainly not seeking to find any understanding between christianity and atheism.

    So if this film is attacking atheists, how can it be good or a good basis for anything, let alone a discussion on atheism and christianity.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    No, I knew exactly what was meant by your question.

    I hope that you take the time to re-read your second paragraph and are able to see WHY I did not answer your question or WHY I did not enter into a discussion geared towards whether or not the movie “attacks atheists.”

  • TheSquirrel

    “You say the films chief failure is to demonstrate love to unbelievers. I
    find that unfortunate and likely based off of your personal views of
    Christians and Christianity.”
    THE FILM fails to demonstrate love to unbelievers. THE FILM itself shits on the very idea of a nonbeliever being happy, well balanced and centered. Yes, the christians in the movie displayed love (or proselytized at, I know it’s hard to make the distinction sometimes) to this sham, strawman of a made up atheist. THE FILM itself fails to even do that. Because if you really wanted to show love to an atheist you wouldn’t portray him in such an absolutely hateful manner, and if you wanted to proselytize at him, you’d deliver evidence, not age old debunked fallacious arguments and emotional porn.

  • Rod Haney

    “All the Christians in the movies so typical
    Alcoholic, child molesting, hypocritic and mystical”

    Those would be the catholic priests.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    Those were lyrics from Fall Back by Lecrae (ft. Trip Lee) of the Rebel Album. Perhaps before you make attempts at clever retorts you should actually listen to the song.

  • Rod Haney

    I have no idea who those people are.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I figured as much, that’s why I gave you the album, artist, and song to find it. You could go to A to Z lyrics or you could probably find it on iTunes and actually listen to it. Or you could continue to make undignified responses that you think are clever. Up to you really.

  • Rod Haney

    Undignified,,, you sure told me.
    I’m going to go sit in the corner and cry now, ok.
    That’s a lie.
    As for your “song” by a christian hip hop rapper,,, yeah, I’ll pass. Thanks.

  • http://simplifiedtheology.com/ Kyle Buss

    I thought you had no idea who those people were?

  • Rod Haney

    Google does work.

  • Mike

    Neil’s point was to demonstrate that the movie was designed with the intent to misrepresent atheists and to portray them in a bad light. He’s not saying that Christians are foolish or easily manipulated, but instead that the movie serves the purpose of reinforcing a Christian culture that’s intolerant of people who have different beliefs or philosophies. As someone who was raised in a religious home and is a pastor’s kid, I can tell you that this attitude towards non-Christians is a very real aspect of Evangelical Christian culture. When I attended youth group in middle and high school, ridiculous movies like these were shown all the time. To the perceptive, it is apparent that these movies are designed with a very “un-Christlike” agenda that seeks to demonize non-Christians and to glorify behavior that lines up with a fundamentalist viewpoint. If you really don’t see a problem with the ridiculous caricatures of atheists shown in this film, you should make an effort to understand why we’ve arrived at some of the conclusions we have. I never decided to become an atheist, it’s just something that happened when I began to question my faith and the value of believing something without evidence. I don’t hate god, my family, Christians, or people with different religious ideologies. I simply saw no reason or logic in continuing to believe in god and science provided a model of the universe in which god’s existence didn’t really make sense. The problem with this movie is that it represents people like me as people who are angry at god (ironically something we don’t believe in), have no moral basis, and arrive at conclusions irrationally. I think that this is a calculated effort to distract Christians from the *actual* arguments and evidence for the atheist worldview. The examples of “Christian love” that you provided still fail to represent atheists as little more than petty, irrational, bitter people who deserve to get in a car wreck in order to accept Christianity and die. I can’t imagine anyone seeing this as a humanizing portrayal at all. I do regret that atheists are actually guilty of creating straw men for Christians as well. However, for someone who emphasizes science and objective fact, it is very frustrating when people manipulate science and facts about the physical world to match their beliefs (ex*: Creationism and the Great Flood). To religious people, a professor’s fervency in the objective truth is an attack to their personal beliefs (as evidenced by that chain letter and this movie). Professors are seen as no more than intellectual bullies who want to demean your faith by presenting evidence that is designed to disprove god and make a mockery out of Christianity. The sad truth is that If you are offended by science or by different worldviews, there’s a good chance that you’re holding on to a view that is completely false.

  • Esther O’Reilly

    You do realize there’s more to creationist thought than Answers in Genesis… right?

  • Ray Gibson

    If you would consider a more reasoned and scientific defense of Christianity go to http://www.reasons.org

  • Paul Cherry

    “it’s teach” needs an edit to “it teaches”

  • Paul Cherry

    After reading the post, my reaction is that you have stated, very well, the stereotyped view of atheism in the stereotyped Christian culture. As a Christian, who just so happens to have free thought and reason, I was apprehensive about the premise of the movie and expected quite a few cliches… and there they were. Though, I’ve never seen the movie and will probably not rush to the store to buy the DVD, I do understand your own feelings about the Christian culture. Many of my brothers and sisters in this faith have performed horribly when encountering people who don’t subscribe to the neat canned Christian perspective… I’ve actually had people leave a Bible Study and subsequently the Church just because I refused to verbally condemn certain people to hell. But please understand, some of us actually do come to the Christian faith through science, reason, and free thought- we just have to cut through the bull of the canned program. I have many friends and family who are atheist and we have equal respect, admiration and love for each other. I take offense whenever the Christian culture mindlessly portrays any other group in a stereotypical manner; but I equally take offense when other groups mindlessly do the same against Christians. Because you are right, that’s just not love. Thanks for your post, it was really mind-opening.

  • dbwindhorst

    Allow me to introduce you to my Baptist family:

  • Paul Cherry

    Not sure what that means. They probably wouldn’t like me though.

  • Rod Haney

    Do baptist like anybody?

  • Paul Cherry

    To be fair, I think the point of the blogpost was that Christians tend to stereotype atheists in one way. My response was regarding my disdain for Christians or atheists stereotyping those who are different, so my response is that Baptists certainly have a position of interpretation of scripture that is different than my own, but that’s OK. We’re all human after all and are still working toward perfection, whether that means evolution or the constant refining in the grace of God… of course, I equate the two quite comfortably.

  • Bill

    Well, they like other Baptists. My mother’s side of the family (but not my mother) is fundamentalist southern Baptist. My grandmother told me I was going to hell (I was twelve at the time) because I was not. Some of them also expressed that a cousin’s marriage to a Lutheran woman was not a legitimate marriage, and refused to attend the ceremony. Now, I’m sure this does not describe all baptists any more than a group of obnoxious fedora-clad Atheists who spend their time congratulating one another on their intellectual superiority describes all Atheists. But there does seem to be a lot of Baptists who think only Baptists go to heaven.

  • dbwindhorst

    Southern Baptists are the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. Having watched a few Christian roadshow flicks in Baptist churches, I can assure you that the majority of that largest denomination will eat this movie up.

    It’s not a mindless stereotype if it’s true.

  • Paul Cherry

    Which is exactly how the Christian fundamentalists would respond about atheists (specifically meaning “because I’ve been around a lot of Baptists who act in this way, then all Christians act in this way). Ultimately, let’s not criticize others for doing exactly what we’re doing… frankly, I enjoy this type of dialogue because it teaches me what my misconceptions are and helps me grow. The author of the post did a really good job at illustrating that. Let us not allow ourselves to descend into the realms of sarcasm and bigotry just because we’ve “known people like that”. Not all Christians will eat this movie up, nor will they Tweet “God is not dead”

  • Tim Hunter

    I understand where you are coming from, but I still have to side with db when speaking of the southern Baptists. I was born and raised in that denomination – dunked in a river, even. Been to more “revivals” than I could possibly count. My Dad is a Southern Baptist Deacon, so I know this stuff inside and out. I’ve heard it from the pulpit and fellowship halls time and time again, read it in their little “bible study/Sunday school” books. This is the mindset – and yes, they will eat it up. FOX News certainly knows it. They’ve all but stuck their tongue up Kevin Sorbo’s butt on several of their shows.

  • Christopher Fisher

    “. But please understand, some of us actually do come to the Christian faith through science, reason, and free thought- ”

    PLEASE explain to me how this manages to happen? From my experience, all of these things are anathema to any religion, especially modern Abrahamic monotheism.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    My preacher ex thought he was converted that way, but the real problem was that he had a much higher opinion than he should have of his critical-thinking skills. As the saying goes, it’s a lot harder to fool folks who think they’re educated than those who aren’t under such illusions.

  • Rebecca Mullen

    Happy to see you on Patheos! Enjoyed my introduction to you a year ago when your video made the rounds and happy to see you now have a blog here. Cheers!

  • kd2mill .

    People who say they “used to be Christians” never really were. To become a Christian is to be born of the Spirit Of God. God, through His Spirit comes to live with you inside your body (the body is the Temple of the Spirit Of God). Once there, He has promised through His Word never to leave you. You don’t become a Christian by joining the church. There’s no such thing as a “used to be” Christian.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    *gigglesnort*

    AH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!

    *wheeze*

    HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!

    Hee…

  • Jake Adams

    By that reasoning we are all Christian. We are all created by God, given life by God and our bodies are his temple filled with God’s holy spirit.

    If all that is true then why are there still people of the Jewish Faith? Their Faith is even older than Christianity and they were the chosen of God. You’d think that God would have done that nice Godly decree ( cause the God of the Old Testiment was rather chatty) and said ” you are all Christians now cause I’m changing the rules. Oh and that pesky “free will” thing ( That I have proven I don’t really care about) is moot cause I said so.”

    When I was Christian I believed I was the good little “God fan boy”. I even felt the calling of the pulpit, As I grew mentally I couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the bible. So either the “Spirit” left me or I found a way to evict it.

  • Adolf Verloc

    2 Peter 2:20-22 “For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the
    knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled
    in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the
    first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the
    way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy
    commandment delivered to them. What the true proverb says has happened
    to them: “The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing
    herself, returns to wallow in the mire.””

    Certainly sounds to me as though Christians can become apostates. You seem to be adopting the “No true Scotsman” fallacy,

  • dbwindhorst

    Yeah. Keep repeating that to yourself if it helps you sleep better.

  • Rod Haney

    News flash!!!!
    No one is “born of the spirit of god”.
    That my friend, is taught.

  • African RockFish

    Interesting variation of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy,

  • Mike

    I presume that certain groups of Christians that hold different theological views than you conveniently don’t count as Christians too, right? It’s easy to score when you get to move the goalposts…

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    It’s abusive and malicious to negate and dismiss another human being’s lived experiences. I’d faster say that you are a false Christian than that Neil was never one at all. You are not loving, while he is very loving. Love is as love does. Maybe you should try it?

    The problem is, there is no real way to tell who is a TRUE CHRISTIAN™. So when someone deconverts, you’re in a real pickle, aren’t you? You have to figure out what that person did wrong. There’s no set procedure for determining what a TRUE CHRISTIAN™ is like, so you base it upon yourself. Whoever deconverts obviously wasn’t praying enough (like you do), or going to church enough (like you) or going to the wrong church (unlike yours), or hanging out with the wrong folks or reading the wrong books or not enough of the right ones (all of which you do fine), or believed the wrong doctrines (unlike yours) or whatever it is you happen to think are the external signs of a TRUE CHRISTIAN™, which by wild coincidence will look a lot like whatever you value. Once you figure out what that person did wrong, you can feel smug and safe again. Whew! You’re safe. You’ll never deconvert, not you, never you…. except that just about every ex-Christian I’ve ever met was more fervent, more loving, more honest, and more eager to know Jesus than just about any Christian I’ve ever run across, and that categorically includes people who treat people the way you have here.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    To be honest, though, I think we may have been victims of Poe’s law with kd2mill’s post.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Oh very possible! Not like every one of us hasn’t heard the same nonsense in earnest, though.

  • Rational Muslim

    Actually, it is quite easy to tell a TRUE CHRISTIAN™. Do they act like Jesus acted or do they merely pay lip service? Gandhi was a TRUE CHRISTIAN™. Pat Robertson is not.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    I wish it was that easy. You and I, as outsiders to Christianity (I’m assuming, with your username being “Rational Muslim”), can see if a given Christian is acting loving and charitable, but trust me on this: the ones who do not have contorted themselves into believing they are acting loving and charitable when they really aren’t at all. The most toxic Christians out there are dead-convinced that they’re being totally like Jesus, and most of them have tons of Bible verses they’ve twisted to back up their position. Some holy book, huh? It can be made to support absolutely anything.

  • http://www.knightsofmarsroundtable.wordpress.com/ Sir Phobos

    Are you intentionally saying this to anger people? I mean, seriously. This article directly addressed the exact thing you’re doing right here. You don’t get to tell me or anyone else what is going on inside my own head. I used to be Catholic, and now I’m not. That’s the end of that story. People can think about things and change their minds.

  • Xerxes

    So being Christian is some permanent fixture of your essence, that (if you’re special enough to have it, like you obviously think you are) you can’t ever loose? So, by your argument, all attempts at conversion and proselytizing are pointless, since we’re Christian already and just don’t know it. In that case, you and your ilk should all just shut your traps.

    Oh wait, I almost forgot – I *am* a Christian, not an Atheist. Just one who isn’t so certain that I’m right about everything that I’m a caricature of self-righteous pride.

  • http://www.crackedhouse.com SusanLynn

    I believe you misunderstood or are deliberately adding in something he did not say. He didn’t say we are all Christian already. He just believes that once you are, it is forever and that if you change your mind, you never were. Not all Christians agree with this. I personally think it should be left out of the discussion because it is irrelevant to the ex-believer.

  • Michael Brian Woywood

    CALVINIST ALERT!

  • Nemo

    So then, nobody was ever a Christian, since frankly there’s no evidence that the Magic Ghost exists, let alone lives inside people. Nice to know.

  • Rod Haney

    Hey, they left out the most important thing about atheists,,,
    #11 Atheists eat babies!
    I like mine slowly cooked on the BBQ, smothered in homemade BBQ sauce! =)

  • Esther O’Reilly

    Everyone’s saying there are no sympathetic non-Christian characters at all, but isn’t the Chinese kid a non-Christian before converting at the end? He seems consistently likable throughout the movie.

    Atheist/liberal bullying of Christian students isn’t unheard of, so I didn’t think it was so far-fetched to have an atheist professor be a bullying jerk, though it is far-fetched for nobody at any point to suggest that Josh approach the chairman or… somebody. I liked all my secular philosophy professors, but others have had different experiences so I’m not going to make blanket statements either way.

    I just wished the story had been better and that the characters were more interesting. And I didn’t get why the whole class was convinced by the end of Josh’s presentations. That would never happen. They should have had just the Chinese kid convert. Speaking as a Christian, I don’t like the idea that young Christians are being given false hope about the success of their efforts. The best conversation I ever had on my campus culminated in a courteous thank-you, mutual appreciation and friendly parting of ways, but nothing dramatic on the spot. Real life just doesn’t work that way.

    Add to that the bizarre choice to intercut the ending with the Newsboys concert, and my inner director/editor starts to get a brain-ache.

    So while I’m not really on your side, obviously, and while I don’t think it’s so implausible to write characters who happen to be both jerks and atheists (because obviously there are jerks everywhere), I’ll just put out there for the record that I had a much better time in the theater when I went to see Captain America 2 twice.

  • Matt Rock

    “…and while I don’t think it’s so implausible to write characters who happen to be both jerks and atheists…”

    I don’t really think that’s the issue, though. If the professor was just churlish, it would be merely characterization. I haven’t seen the film yet, but even the previews seem to make it that he is supposed to be the author’s / director’s vessel for arguing against atheism, and his presentation thereof is problematic for being so off-base. It would be like casting a Westboro Baptist Church pastiche as the clear representative of Christianity as a whole – even those who would be on the author’s side have to find that sort of misrepresentation counterproductive.

  • Esther O’Reilly

    I was thinking too of the character who dumps his girlfriend—I mean lots of guys do that.

    My problem is not so much “The atheists are bad—that’s so unloving, it’s going to hurt people’s feelings.” It’s more like, “The atheists are bad—but they’re bad AND boring.” Like the scene in Homeward Bound where the old dog says “Just over the hill, you can see our house from there,” and when they get there, the younger dog says “Wow, you can see everything from up here! Except the house, where’s the house, I don’t see the house?” That was me in this movie going, “Except the character arc, where’s the arc, I don’t see the arc?” They made a limp try with the professor, but his moment of grace is so rushed and badly handled. Now if you want a good example of a really sincere, well-executed “preacher making an impassioned plea to a car accident victim” scene, watch The Apostle.

    While I’m at it, I’ll put in a good word for the reporter’s moment at the computer—the girlfriend dying of cancer. She has a cracking up moment that’s well done. She’s obviously a good actress, too bad her character was so flat and uninteresting.

  • Esther O’Reilly

    I’m sorry Matt, I had a reply here and can’t find it now. Thanks for the response.

  • African RockFish

    Not surprising. You have to be weary of Christians…their allegiance to the truth is one of convenience, and to Christians, there’s no such thing as stooping too low since their end game is to hold dominion over every man, woman and child on the planet.

  • http://www.crackedhouse.com SusanLynn

    I think that is also called stereotyping.

  • Jonathan Sullivan

    I got fired from a megachurch because they found out I was an atheist and I wouldn’t go to their “classes”. Never mind the fact they hired me knowing that I didn’t follow a religion and that it never got in the way of being one of the only people there who could do their job without asking five million questions.

    In short Christian colleges asking for statements of faith does not seem surprising in the least.

  • Rod Haney

    Sue them.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Unfortunately, churches aren’t usually bound by the same rules that secular businesses/groups are, and thanks to the Jesus Party Republicans’ efforts, most states have laws allowing someone to be fired for just about any reason barring protected-group status, and atheists are not a protected group anywhere, alas.

  • Wissenssucher

    Sounds about right.

  • Rod Haney

    I would suggest checking with your state laws.
    Most states now do in fact have statutes on their books pertaining to workplace discrimination. Including religious discrimination.
    I would go after every tax free penny I could get out of them!

  • Rational Muslim

    Much as you might like to, you can’t go after a church for religious discrimination if you are not of their religion. Case law is quite extensive on this.

  • John Piippo

    In my PhD work in philosophical theology at Northwestern University I was refused support by the then-head of the philosophy department because I was a Christian and affiliated with a Methodist seminary. See my post on this here – http://www.johnpiippo.com/2014/04/gods-not-dead.html. While of course all atheists are not like the philosophy professor in the movie, I had one who was.

  • Robert Lawrence

    OK. So Hollywood stereotypes an atheist and you are offended? Have you ever laughed at the Simpsons?

  • Logan Belcher

    The Simpsons is a comedy, sketching a caricature of religious people. Instead, as a drama, the goal is to write real-to-life characters. Failure on their part.

    If they were trying to caricature atheists, then Dean Cain should’ve had a goatee as well.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    Shows like the Simpsons and South Park are equal opportunity offenders. If they haven’t made fun of your group or your belief yet, just wait, and they’ll get to you eventually. God’s Not Dead doesn’t do that. It only says “Atheists – bad; Christians – good.”

    It’s also quite a stretch to say this movie came from Hollywood.

  • Tommykey69

    How can anyone forget how South Park portrayed Richard Dawkins?

  • Nunya Bidness

    its not hollywood.. and the dangerous thing is that this will be used at homes and churches ad a means to further indoctinate people against the evil atheists.. When i say “christians follow a god who is ok with rape” thats a fact.. its in the bible. ITs not a personal attack on them just a comment on their invisible leader. there is no hidden message. BUt when you present oh..say.. children with this it will color their perception on such a deep and basic emotional level that im sure it will affect they way they regard anyone calling themselves an atheist in the future. The difference between the two groups (gnostic and agnostic) is this. THe majority of atheists do not match up with the stereotype being presented. However the majority of christians do match up with many statements we make as atheists. Things like “you dont read your bible” or “you hate homosexuals for no reason other than a book says to” or “there is a lot of misogyny in the bible and its surrounding religions” these things can be demonstated.

  • Rsnbl Faith

    The funniest part of this article is when he says this is based off of the ridiculous story of Albert Einstein, when at the end of the movie it actually gives a large amount of citations of similar events that actually happened which inspired the movie. This is what I call lax research and basing opinion off of assumptions.

  • Brian Westley

    at the end of the movie it actually gives a large amount of citations of similar events that actually happened

    Not exactly:
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/logical-take/201403/god-s-not-dead-neither-is-philosophy?quicktabs_5=0

    The movie actually lists a number of court cases, in the credits, as the “inspiration” for the movie, to leave the viewer with the impression that this kind of thing happens all the time. In reality, of course, they are largely just the aforementioned “Christian-email-forward boogeymen.” Take the case of Raymond Raines, who Christians claim was picked up by the scruff of the neck and yelled at by his teacher and principal for praying over his lunch in public school at the tender age of five. In reality, he was ten (not five), he got detention (not picked up and yelled at), and it was for fighting in the cafeteria (not praying over his lunch).

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    It’d be super-nice if Christians learned what actual citations are and how to access and present evidence for their ideas. It’s a real black mark against their religion that they haven’t got the faintest idea what proof actually looks like, yet are so hung up on having some for their ideas.

  • Jewels

    I saw this advertised on TV and made a look like a confused Bugs Bunny. Really, 2014? Really?

  • pixeloid

    A pile of garbage that I wouldn’t watch if you paid me. Well, OK, maybe if you paid me, but it wouldn’t be cheap.
    With the exception of a philosophy class (relevant to the class), I never had a professor OR student mention religion in class. Not once. Where are all these evil atheists that Christians say are running rampant?

  • Ryan Lawson

    My experience mirrors this. Despite many classes over several years, religion has come up as a topic of discussion once, in philosophy. That philosophy professor was a Christian, and felt the Ontological Argument was quite powerful. So much for atheist brainwashing factories.

  • Al Newberry

    I’m a Christian and waited until now to see this. Heck, I downloaded a torrent because I suspected it wasn’t worth supporting. And my suspicions were confirmed. Your review here is spot on. It’s a movie only a sheltered Christian who doesn’t associate with non Christians could love.

  • TheNutR

    “This is not love. You cannot love people while ignoring everything they tell you about themselves. You are not loving people when you refuse to listen to their stories. You are not loving them well when you decide before hearing them that you already know all that you need to know about them, overruling their own self-descriptions and self-identifications because you are convinced you know better than they do what’s going on inside of them. ” Yes. I totally agree. I am a Christian, but I haven’t seen the film myself. Thank you for this analysis. It kind of confirms what I was already thinking this movie would be like.

  • pianoman

    At any point in this movie, does Professor Radisson cook and eat babies? Because it would seem that was all that was missing from this script.

  • Al Willig

    They’re better raw, like sushi.

  • LikeSenpai

    They managed to make atheists, christians and muslims all look stupid in 113 minutes. Impressive.

  • rllawren

    Seriously…cry me a river that the first time a major Christian films portrays one type of an atheist everyone gets offended…(and for the record, if you saw the movie he was actually raised as a Christian who struggled with the problem of evil when it struck close to home and got mad at God for it) so by all accounts he was a backslidden Christian, not a true Atheist, who came back to the faith when confronted with death. I would think Atheists would jump all over this as a depiction of “God of our fears” theory! How many who were offended by the movie laugh daily at the Simpsons or the HOST of mischaracterizations in Media today about “fire and brimstone preachers” street-corner evangelists, and “blind faith believers”…a ton are made in this article! (This is how all Christians see Atheists…is about as stereotypical as it gets…reread the article and count how many times the author says “all Christians” to portray that way one group of Christians are…)

  • Matt

    It’s much different when atheists are the minority and seen as outcasts by many evangelicals and christians. Many christians believe they are being persecuted no matter what they do, even though thats not true.

  • Jeremy Shaffer

    Seriously…cry me a river that the first time a major Christian films portrays one type of an atheist everyone gets offended…

    I don’t think too many people were all that offended by this movie. I’m sure there were some but most simply pointed out how offensive it could be (often pointing out that its offense wasn’t just limited to atheists and that to a fair extent many Christians should have been offended by the movie’s depiction of them) but that’s not the same as being offended. It seems most people found the movie itself too ridiculous to be offended. In the end what most people were was annoyed.

    by all accounts he was a backslidden Christian, not a true Atheist, who came back to the faith when confronted with death.

    Which is the common stereotype of atheists many theists have, and one that gets better each and every time it’s trotted out, which was the point of the last half of this article.

    This is how all Christians see Atheists…is about as stereotypical as
    it gets…reread the article and count how many times the author says
    “all Christians” to portray that way one group of Christians are…

    Okay. I counted zero times. Maybe I missed some, care to point them out to me?

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    “by all accounts he was a backslidden Christian, not a true Atheist, who came back to the faith when confronted with death.”
    “[…]Which is the common stereotype of atheists many theists have”

    His was actually a true statement.

    The professor flirted with autotheism in the middle of the movie, but the “big reveal” at the end of the movie was that he was a misotheist all along, who was posing as an atheist.

    He never disbelieved in God, which (curiously) revealed that the plot was defined by Josh’s struggle to defend theism against the oppression of other theists. It’s no wonder nobody in the movie had a clue what “God is dead” meant. An atheist professor would have known.

    Once you learn of the big reveal, the movie is made all the more amusing the second time around, as you watch it trip over its own feet.

  • Nunya Bidness

    I can say something general. Many christians.. most christians.. dont read. dont do research- cannot be trusted to read their own bible let alone anything else you link them to. That covers about 90% of them .

  • Ryan Lawson

    “This is how all Christians see Atheists…is about as stereotypical as
    it gets…reread the article and count how many times the author says
    “all Christians” to portray that way one group of Christians are…”

    OK, literally, not a single time. About a third of the times he even brings up the word “Christian” are for nouns (Christian school, etc), another third he specifically mentions himself (When I was a Christian, etc), and most of the remaining are characterizations from the movie (The Christian, the Christians from the movie). Further mucking up your argument, THE FIRST mention of the word in the whole article is “MOST evangelical Christians.”

  • Neil Carter

    IKR? I’d say I worked hard to make sure I qualified any generalizations except that I really didn’t because I don’t think in blanket statements…like SOME PEOPLE do. :P

    I know too many different kinds of Christians, and I know many who would be as repulsed by this movie as I am. Although I don’t come across many of them speaking up about it in a very noticeable way. They’re out there, but any of them who have a large enough following know better than to bite the hands that feed them.

    True story: I have an evangelical friend with a fairly high-traffic podcast who doesn’t agree with Creationism but would never say a negative word about it on air because he knows good and well he’d lose half his income almost overnight. Fun side note: He often speaks about how Christianity is better than atheism because the only the former “can safeguard against the materialism inherent in our culture.”

  • Nunya Bidness

    You didnt read the article did you. Do you know what a meta-message is?

  • aiseruchan

    I feel like I want to watch this movie.
    Just to see how bad it is.

  • Neil Carter
  • aiseruchan

    because it probably is so bad…

  • MartinNaskovski

    Neil, why are you so hellbent on proving that there’s no God? Have you heard the expression “whatever you resist, persists”? Why don’t you write about supplements, fitness, driving, fun times with your daughters, reforming our education? Why engage in these … onanistic diatribes? It’s a waste of your time. We get it – there’s “no objective proof” that will ever convince an atheist of God’s existence or that Jesus is His only begotten Son who came to atone for yours/mine/our collective sin (such as idolatry, for instance), and if there is God, you only get to find out when you meet Him, whenever that is for you, right? So enlighten us with something else, other than proving the non-existence of God. Please.

  • Neil Carter

    Did you mean to comment on this post, or another one? I don’t recall trying to prove there’s no God in this post. Did you have another one in mind?

  • MartinNaskovski

    Ok Neil… :) I see your act. I’ll be direct – who is Jesus Christ to you?

  • Ryan Lawson

    You have no idea what this article, that you’re commenting on presently, is even about, do you?

  • MartinNaskovski

    I do. It’s a review of a movie. I am more concerned with his message (the atheist discussion group moderator by the name of Neil Carter)

  • Neil Carter

    My message was that this movie misrepresents us as out to attack other people’s beliefs. Some even spend their spare time getting on other people’s blogs just to tell them they’re wrong and should write about other things. Can you imagine?

  • MartinNaskovski

    I think it’s a very good representation of a typical atheist, and I haven’t even seen the movie. Just your review. I will watch it. Someone on facebook posted this so I clicked, and it amused me. By the way are you going to answer my question about Christ or are you going to continue to show me how witty you are?

  • Neil Carter

    Sounds a bit trollish, bro. I mean, the message of the article was about how disrespectful and unloving the portrayal was, and your reply is, “Nailed it”? I’m guessing troll.

  • Nunya Bidness

    Martin . Go to any library or use the internet. Actual history can tell you where the bible came from. (COuncil of nicaea) . Its a story that uses the best parts of other older stories . It was an attempt to codify a new religion to help shore up a failling Roman Empire. It was used by charlemagne to commit genocide in the name of this god and thereby spread chrstianity to all of europe and so its the very tool the very vehicle your god must have chosen (were he real). So there is little chancethese conquerors were just doing it wrong. Christ is a story book character. nothing more.
    im sorry this sounds mean and attacking but we often feel that when things we cling to are being help up to the same criticisms we use for just about every other situation in life. Its not personal its not an attack its just saying “hey ..this makes no sense at all as a cosmic truth”

  • Jose Chung

    I’m a ‘typical’ atheist, I suppose. No one really knows about it, though. Know why? Because the life I lead is indistinguishable from the lives christians are leading. I’ve no doubt some people I know just assume that I’m as ‘good’ a christian – at least nominally – as they are. I could be your colleague or next-door neighbor, and you wouldn’t be any the wiser.

  • Nunya Bidness

    LEt me just turn that back on you sir. What is the god of the bible to you? Because to me hes ok with rape and slavery so even if he were real hes not worth my time. ok now you rebut that with some facts to support your diagreeing with me. this is how debate works… go ahead.. we will wait for you to do some research.

  • Jason Dubinsky

    His message is that the movie is terrible, and that atheists aren’t awful, uncaring people. Not too complicated.

  • Nunya Bidness

    Typical christian response. “hey please stop talking..i would argue with you but i got nothing to base a real argument on” . I dont see a kind loving god working thru *you* and your actions sir. Its made up.which is why you can be mean in support of it. This is an analytical piece on a movie..why do you have sch a problem with dissenting opinion? Offer a real case please or stop being a troll.

  • Rod Haney

    Why do you believe there is?

  • JRRMS

    Do you let your 4 beautiful daughters choose to believe in GOD if they want to? And if they do would you try to talk them out of it or let them be their own individual and love them as such and let them believe in a God?

  • Neil Carter

    Not that it’s any of your business, but my girls aren’t atheists, they’re Baptists :) Does that answer your inappropriately accusatory question?

  • MartinNaskovski

    They have not “evolved” into your views yet. They will outgrow God and become atheists under your modifying influence.

  • Neil Carter

    Thank you, I only needed one more critical reply. I’m pretty convinced you aren’t out for constructive contribution, so see ya.

  • Matt

    Atheism is something that people come to on their own. I have never met an atheist, and do not know of any, that try to force their point of view down peoples throats. Religion is all about being informed, after being presented with and learning all the facts, if someone chooses to live without religion that shouldn’t be a problem.

  • lapona

    In fact, I became an atheists after I read the Bible 3-4 times completely, cover to cover.
    Children don’t read the Bible completely, they just listen to their authoritative religious leaders.

  • Matt

    Of course, I was sent to a catholic school my whole life and brought up thinking that it was the only way to live. Which is clearly wrong, but I think a lot of anger or contempt with atheists may come from feeling like they’ve been lied to their whole life. Which.. they have. But that eventually leads to feeling content and free.

  • Nunya Bidness

    just like the modifying influence of religion. Because it must be taught. People arent born as christians.. IN FACT your own god says youre born a sinful creature. Just the way he made you ..imperfect so that he can punish you for noe being perfect.. makes sense.

  • JaySBee

    Unlike religion, most atheists don’t feel the “need” to convert people to our way of thinking. Unlike the worst (and growing) sects of religion, the most we usually ask is that they don’t use their way of thinking to take away the same rights.

    I can’t name a war that was started by atheists in an effort to convert or kill those who don’t believe in them. I can’t name a law that was made by atheists that said you had to be an atheist to hold office or dodge taxes or get married to someone you love.

    Atheists don’t institutionalize hate or make hate groups to burn crosses or blow up strangers. There is no need for us to do that. We aren’t working to an audience that is watching us eternally and wrote one book.

  • Moonhill

    Most communists are atheists and they have executed millions of people, including Christians. They feel the need to “convert” everyone to their way of thinking, or else. I can’t think of one hospital that was started by an atheist though I can think of many started by Christians.

  • Matt

    This might be the most absurd comment on here so far.

    Edit: It is definitely the most ridiculous, uninformed, crazy comment on here. Good Job!

  • Matthew England

    Bill Gates may be the philanthropic man on planet earth and he is atheist I believe

  • lapona

    Oh, boy! When that typical nonsense : “communists are atheists” and “christians made hospitals”, will end?

  • Matthew England

    I don’t normally comment on this stuff because I would avoid the inevitable argument. Most, not all, atheists I know do try to convert people to not believing in god because I guess maybe it offends their intelligence that someone else could believe in something that is so unbelievable. Most atheist I know are also as equally close minded as the Christians they argue with for being close minded. I think that unfortunately is a trait that belongs to most humans not a religious sect. Also why does this writer care how atheist are portrayed.. …it is a movie dude. I don’t watch the ninja turtles and become mad about how rhinos or warthogs are betrayed because of bebop and rock steady. It is a movie. Who cares. Be happy in your belief system and let other people have their and ignore their horrible pop culture, they can’t make you Christian buddy

  • Matthew England

    Never mind I do know, you have a blog or article to write and you need something to write about, I get it. I just guess I wouldn’t be offended the same way by a crappy film

  • Matt

    Believe me, if this was portraying christians the same way and atheists as the heros there would a hell of a lot more backlash. It’s good to stand up for your belief system especially when its discriminated against so harshly.

  • Ryan Lawson

    Some of us have immediate family that look down on us. You may have missed the part where the author lives in Mississippi. The Deep South is, spoiler alert, kind of religious. Some of us experience this almost every day.

  • lapona

    I don’t think atheists were less offended by this crappy film than were the Christians. I’ve read a lot of reviews made on Christian blogs, and they found this movie atrocious from the intellectual perspective.

  • Rod Haney

    Really, it has Kevin Sorbo in it. Doesn’t that say enough to the quality of the movie?

  • Neil Carter

    You may have missed the part where I said that people I love will judge me through the lens of this movie. The target audience for this movie does NOT approach this as fiction, fantasy, or sci-fi. They see these things as real and realistic, and they will relate to me at some level according to how this film teaches them to see people like me.

  • Matthew England

    I definitely know people that do that for sure but if they are worthwhile and should be someone that needs to be in your life I wouldn’t think they would. People’s acts are noticeable than their beliefs right? So if they truly know you are you are a good man your beliefs of God don’t matter

  • Neil Carter

    Evangelicals are taught that no one is good, and that it’s your beliefs that determine your destiny. For them, character is inextricably derived from your beliefs.

  • Ryan Lawson

    Funny, most atheists I know are tired of having religion shoved down their throats at almost every social gathering, tired of having crap shoved on us from politicians, being told we’re immoral or amoral freaks that are going to burn for an eternity, you (EDIT: hopefully) get the idea. We care how we are portrayed the same way so many Muslims complain about being overwhelmingly portrayed as terrorists.
    Straw man about the Ninja Turtles (you can’t come up with a better/more coherent example) aside, uninformed Christians believe the portrayals like those shown in this video. I know, because almost all of my family are exactly that, Christians that think atheists are just like the professor. For some of us, this isn’t abstract, there isn’t “some group” of Christians that “might believe” this. We know people that DO believe this.

  • Rod Haney

    That’s funny, because of all the atheists that I know, not a one runs around trying to convert anybody.
    What we will do though, is stand up for ourselves when chistianity is forced upon us.
    There’s a little metaphor that I like, and have come to live by;
    Believe in whatever you want. I really don’t care.
    You can worship a rock for all I care. But if you throw that rock at me, you can be dam sure I’m going to pick it up and throw it right back at you.

    And that is what is most likely happening when you say atheists are try to convert anyone. They are sick of it, and throwing the believers religion right back in their face.

  • lapona

    No child born in a religious family chooses to believe in a God, Gods, god or gods. Only children born in an atheist family can choose to believe in any kind of God, Gods, god or gods, until their realize the falsity of any kind of God, Gods, god or gods.

    I was born in a communist country, but parents still brainwashed their children with Christianity, communist party members still baptized, married and buried using Christian religious services, so you can see that children do not choose to believe in God, Gods, god or gods, when born in a religious family.

  • Ryan Lawson

    I remember when my dad and I went to see The Passion of the Christ many years ago. It had a lot of buzz, and we’re open-minded people, so whatever, right? As the movie ended, there was much cheering and applause, while we just stared at each other for a second, got up, and left the theater pondering why we wasted $20 on that crap.

  • MartinNaskovski

    Did you go and get your HuffPo fix right after that to straighten you out?

  • Ryan Lawson

    The Passion of the Christ came out in 2004. Huffington Post was founded in May 2005. Troll harder.

  • Neil Carter

    He’ll have to troll somewhere else. I’m taking this one to private email. He can tell me his issues in private from this point on.

  • Ryan Lawson

    AKA, he can yell as loud as his keyboard will let him?

  • https://medium.com/@andreatorti90 AndyT

    Obviously, among the atheist baddies, there is a Chinese man…
    Atheists and Chinese: the worst enemies for these brave Christian patriots!

  • R Vogel

    ‘It’s a scary place where the bad guys are the educators. ‘

    Not too long ago I attend Sunday services at a local Presbyterian Church (PC (USA): that’s supposed to be the liberal one, right?) and I was happy to see the reading a topic of the sermon was from Amos. I glanced over the title of the sermon making reference to ‘Joe the Plumber’ His sermon turned out to be some sort of thinly veiled rant about the dangers of ‘the entertainment industry’ and ‘the academy’ (air quotes from him), the latter of which was clearly a reference to the liberal (insert sneer) educational establishment! Needless to say I got out of there at the first opportunity.

  • Amanda Martinez

    That video was great! Very well-put.

  • lapona

    Atheism at its core is just disbelieving religious, theistic claims.
    And boy, those Christians get so mad! The venom Christians throw is not because atheists are bad, but because atheists disbelieve Christianity, and anybody who disbelieves Christianity is insulting the savior puppet, Jesus.

  • Rod Haney

    It’s born of fear.
    Fear that if I don’t believe in the hysteria, that others won’t believe in the hysteria, and so on and so on,,,,and ultimately they will have to look at the stupidity of and realized they’ve known all along that it was bullshit.

  • Ben Holeton

    Reminder to those planning on showing the movie in your church. You need to get a license to do so

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    No church that I’m personally aware of has ever cared in the slightest about copyright law.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    Ours does. But we’re not showing this movie.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    Neil, you are a super nice atheist! I appreciate that a great deal. Your smile and kind approach are both refreshing. And I know that my responses are those you’ve heard before, but I think they are important. For the record, I agree with most of your criticisms about the movie. I haven’t seen it, but I’m familiar enough to know I’d cringe. I don’t like stereotypes and I don’t think the movie is very loving towards atheists, and so on. Having laid that out, let me offer a thought in response to your post and video.

    On the matter of ethics, no Christian apologist worth his salt would say that atheists are bad people, or at least any worse than other people. This is a straw man. I would never doubt that you are kind, loving, etc. But the argument is that, on Atheism (particularly Naturalism), there is no grounding for an ethic. That is, there is no objective reason for being good as opposed to being bad.

    Well, see that is a very different argument than the one you portray that Christians make. Now granted, plenty of people will make the poor argument you criticize, but I think you’d make better use of your time dealing with the real argument, namely, that on atheism morality is groundless in any objective way.

    And this leads me to a second thought, namely that Christians approach these issues from within a theological structure that leads them to certain beliefs. For example, if a person believes in the God of the Bible and believes that the Bible is true, than Romans 1 teaches us that all people know there is a God and suppress that knowledge in their unrighteousness. So if a Christian asserts, “Neil, I believe you actually know God, but suppress this truth.” Well, the Christian is not saying, “I know you better than you know yourself.” Rather he is saying, “I know myself and I know I trust the Bible as from God, and the Bible teaches Neil knows there is a God and suppresses this knowledge.”

    So in principle, I agree with you that Christians should not pretend to know atheists better than the atheists knows himself, but I’m hoping you see why this statement might often be made. Christians are coming at this from an authority structure that we have submitted to. I understand you don’t think we should submit to it, fair enough. But we have submitted to it.

    For this same reason, someone may say, “If you don’t believe in God, you hate God.” For the Christian, our theology says there is only one God. Every page of both OT and NT asserts this, and we acknowledge our trust in this doctrine. Furthermore, God is the Creator of all people, and so all people should at least believe in him and at most follow him with their lives. This is the theological framework we are coming out of.

    So it is not meant as an insult to the atheist to say, “If you don’t believe in God you hate God,” but rather it is a theological assertion based on our worldview.

    In a sense, I’d ask you to give the same respect you request. That is, don’t claim to know us better than we know ourselves.

    With all that said, I’d like to agree with you one more time on the movie. It didn’t help anybody. And to Iapona, the last commenter, I realize many Christians spew venom, and I really hate that. I wish I could legitimately apologize for the whole group. Alas, I can’t. But when we follow Christ the way he commanded, our demeanor should be full of love, joy, peace, and patience. It doesn’t insult me at all if someone disbelieves. It’s a bit heartbreaking, because I believe the Christian worldview to be the only truth, but (especially as a Reformed believer) I’m not insulted.

    Thanks again for the post.

  • lapona

    “I realize many Christians spew venom, and I really hate that. I wish I
    could legitimately apologize for the whole group. Alas, I can’t. But
    when we follow Christ the way he commanded, our demeanor should be full of love, joy, peace, and patience. It doesn’t insult me at all if
    someone disbelieves.”
    ===

    Do you realize that it is impossible not to mention that Christianity is a horrible religion when you read the history of Christianity?

    No matter that only “some”, “most” or “a few” Christians are bad, the “good” Christians should change their name in something else. The damage to the “Christian” is already done even by the “good” Christians who say to be full of love, joy, peace, and patience, or else, at the second coming of the Christ, you’ll be thrown in the eternal_____ (fill in the blank, you’re Christian, you must know)

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    If Einstein were a murderer, it wouldn’t make e=mc2 false. Likewise, the Christian worldview as a whole shouldn’t be judged on the misbehavior of some of its adherents (or even all of them). The real question is whether the Christian worldview is true or false.

    I attempt to apply that same logic when analyzing arguments for Islam or Atheism or any other view. I’m more interested in truth then in all the ways people fail.

    However, I do sympathize with your position, and I admit it is with warrant that you read history seeing the horrors perpetrated in the name of Jesus. Of course, horrors have been perpetrated in many other names as well.

    Additionally, in my own personal life, I have failed more than succeeded in loving others as myself, laying my life down even for my enemies, and so on. Indeed, there are few very good examples of someone who lives (or lived) exactly like Christ.

    For that reason, I would always want to point people to him. He is the shining example of truth, love, sacrifice, and goodness. To the degree that any person’s life looks like his, that is pure mercy and grace.

    As far as being thrown in the eternal ____________. Well, even the doctrine of hell is based squarely in the theology we have received from the Word of God. I would never tell another person such a thing, except I believe God has revealed it on his authority. I do believe him, but that doesn’t make me care about you any less or feel like I need to insult you or disrespect you. Indeed, if I did ever tell you that I was worried about the eternal future of your soul, it would only be after I had worked hard to develop a relationship with you and felt you trusted me and vice versa.

    Fair enough, plenty of people who wear the label “Christian” would spit it out at you just as soon as they could. But for me – couldn’t do it. It would be like walking up to a cancer patient I had never met and immediately start talking to them about how they are going to die soon. Couldn’t do it. Let me know your name first, your family, your story, and so on. Let’s have some conversations and find mutual respect. And then, if / when the time was right, we might have that conversation.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    The problem is that Christians claim that their worldview is inspired by nothing less than a living god. Many of them claim that this living god lives inside of them and informs their behavior, thoughts, and actions (in various ways up to and including this god taking control of them temporarily for his own reasons–speaking in tongues, dancing in the Spirit, etc). Almost all of them believe that this living god has made various promises and threats to humanity regarding how people ought to live and treat each other. And almost all of them believe that if humans don’t live up to those threats, then they will pay for their finite lifetimes’ crimes with varying periods of torture and torment. Huge swathes of them believe as well that their god is returning Any Day Now™ to kick-start the end of the world, which makes conformity and obedience doubly important.

    And yet almost every one of them do things that run counter to the truth claims they make.

    As a comedian once said, if I genuinely believed that a giant butt was hanging over my head and would poop all over me if I cussed, then you can bet I would never cuss again!

    I’m truly sorry to contradict someone as civil as you, but I’d say that the behavior of Christians is absolutely up for consideration here when we evaluate this religion’s truth claims. If they can’t even act like they believe that their truth claims are in fact true, then I don’t see why I should worry about those claims. Christians’ behavior and hypocrisy is all the proof anybody needs to see to know that they don’t even buy into all this nonsense they claim to believe. And it’s totally okay that they act like normal people–I don’t begrudge them their anger or peccadilloes at all. But their failings betray what they truly believe, and I think that yes, actually, it’s very germane to the question of the validity of Christianity’s claims.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I do believe he is a living God.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    And yet, even with their supposedly superior moral framework, Christians lie, cheat, steal, murder, and do every other thing that is considered evil (by Christians and non-Christians alike) just as often as those that aren’t Christians. They probably do those all of those things more often, even, because they know they can just ask for forgiveness from their god for whatever they do, and humans are all filthy sinners anyway.

    Many animals, humans included, are ingrained with a basic moral and ethical code that allows their societies to function, and for their species to prosper. Christians need to stop pretending that their religion invented morality and ethics, or that they own this concept somehow.

  • lapona

    “And yet, even with their supposedly superior moral framework, Christians lie, cheat, steal, murder, and do every other thing that is considered evil”
    ===
    From Jason, I think you’ll get the same nonsensical answer: “Those are other Christians”, typical subterfuge.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    No, I’m one of those people. I would never try to say I’m not in the group of guilty. I’ve lied, and still do. I have cheated, and have stolen (still do if you can’t people’s time), I’ve hated (which is essentially the same as murder), and a host of other sinful acts. That is me now.

    But I would add that this is all of us. We are all morally inferior, broken, and damaged. Something is severely wrong with the human race as a whole and in all its parts, and that includes me – especially me.

    We need a Savior who doesn’t lie, cheat, steal, murder, or any other sinful act.

    One thing about biblical Christianity – it humbles everyone and exalts the Lord. Any version of Christianity that doesn’t do this is a fraud.

    Now again, I’m speaking from within my theological framework. I’m speaking as an “insider” as far as the Christian worldview is concerned. That said, and I promise, I’m not trying to convince you to believe my arguments, but just trying to clarify biblical Christian beliefs.

    This seems to be a place where that type of thing is respected. I’m hoping to show why Christians may say and do certain things. It stems from our particular view of the world, of God, people, and so on.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I appreciate the counter-argument. Though, of course, I disagree with your conclusion. But I was only making the point that Christians ought to argue the better: “Atheism offers no objective ground for morality” and not the weak: “Atheists are bad people.” I was telling Neil that he might be better served working on the former of these and not the latter. Though Christians often make the latter argument, it can be dismissed as frivolous and false. The former provides a strong debate. I’m not interested in rehashing that debate here and now, though.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    Christianity doesn’t offer an objective ground for morality, either. No religion or worldview does. So saying that atheism has no objective ground for morality makes atheism no different according to that metric than any other worldview.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I’m only saying this argument is better than the “Atheists are bad people argument.” That is all I am saying. The debate of objective morality happens all over the place in many forms.

  • Clint W. (Thought2Much)

    And I would state that neither argument is true or effective.

    Objective facts:
    2+2=4; the earth orbits the sun; triangles have 3 sides, and the sum of their interior angles is 180 degrees

    Objective morality:
    This would be what, exactly? If there were an objective morality as provided by a god, then that same morality would have existed throughout human history. Yet, we see a multitude of interpretations of what constitutes morality over the ages, both before and after Judaism and Christianity were even a gleam in some zealot’s eye, many of which hold mutually exclusive positions.

    To state that this argument that atheists hold no objective reality is better than “atheists are just bad people” is simply not true. One is just not an ad hominem, is all.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I just disagree with your conclusions. There are books and articles which explain why. You’ve likely read them. We won’t convince one another. I certainly disagree that both arguments are bad, but one is not ad hominem. But I also know I will not be convincing you of that.

    Again, I’m just making that case that it would better suit Neil to deal with the more substantial of the two arguments. More of a friendly suggestion than anything.

  • Brian Westley

    Pretty odd you would avoid a rebuttal about objective morals, while saying to Neil:
    I think you’d make better use of your time dealing with the real argument, namely, that on atheism morality is groundless in any objective way.

    So, that’s the argument Neil should be making here, but you aren’t really interested in that argument?

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I only avoided the argument to make the point. Neil said that Christians say, “Atheists are bad people.” My point was, there is a better argument, namely, that “Atheism has no objective ground for morality.” I realize that folks on here don’t like either argument. That’s fine. My point is a challenge to Neil on which argument he should deal with in his presentations.

    When he says that Christians assert, “Atheists are bad,” I’m saying he should dismiss that and deal with the stronger argument of objective morality.

    I’m not interested in debating it here, because wow, it has already been debated to the high heavens. Surely you already know all my arguments, and I know yours. Why spend time typing?

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    I’m actually fine with what Neil said.

    The few Christians I speak with who are familiar with Christian apologetics tend to assume two things:

    1) That the typical Christian’s criticism of atheists (on moral grounds) isn’t about whether atheists can be moral, but about whether they can justify some alleged feature of morality (generally) or normative claims (specifically), and

    2) That atheists don’t understand the “real” argument, and are attacking a straw man.

    I’m sorry to say, this isn’t a straw man. The substantial majority of the Christians people like me end up in dialogue with do in fact (when they criticize my being an atheist on moral grounds) criticize it on the basis of my supposed inability to BE moral, or to MAKE ethical decisions. They couldn’t identify the moral objectivist position if their life depended on it. We understand the difference between an applied ethical critique and an epistemological one…we’re saying it’s the applied ethical critique that we overwhelmingly encounter.

    …and that’s me, who lives in relatively-secular but theologically-literate Chicago. I can only imagine the sorts of Christian arguments Neil comes across in the deep south.

    Yes, apologists aren’t so unscrupulous, and (while both criticisms are absurd) apologists are careful enough to avoid the most absurd of the two.

    Most of the Christians we speak with have never read those apologists.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Only in Christians’ minds. Their religion is not a source of objective morality, which is quickly ascertained when one realizes that there are 40,000 denominations, plus countless individual quirky takes on the source materials, many of which have moral positions that directly contradict each other–and all of which have seen their moral positions shift and alter with the centuries. Things that most Christians take for granted as immoral today were not immoral just a couple of centuries ago–and stuff that most Christians didn’t have objections to centuries ago are now, by and large, utterly anathema to big swathes of Christians.

    I know it feels comforting to think that you have a totally true, objective, timeless, unchanging moral base here, but the only way you can arrive at such a conclusion is to ignore the facts of your own religion’s very checkered past.

  • Matt

    Atheism does offer objective morality, through much better processes too. It allows you to think for yourself and not base your morals on what you hear in church or from the Bible. If anything, the morality offered through christianity is completely subjective since it does not allow you to come to your own conclusions.

  • Mike

    Objective morality from an atheist perspective is based upon social contract theory. Animals living in groups operate under certain rules in order to promote the greater good for the group as a whole. The same concept applies to human societies in which we agree to not murder, rape, and steal in order that others will comply with the same “moral” standards. In other words, morality is an evolved mechanism that benefits species that live in large groups. The common misconception amongst opponents of evolution is that evolution only provides a dog vs. dog view of morality, otherwise known as Social Darwinism. This simply isn’t true because “morality” can be observed in any species that lives together in a group. Animals that break these rules are quickly shunned or left for dead. Sound familiar to how humans treat these outliers?

  • Jack

    I’d argue that biblical definition and objectification of morality is a framework retroactively applied to inherent social rules/mores that develop as a society matures. To me, these things don’t need “objective” reasoning. Subjective is fine. In my subjective opinion, it is good when people aren’t randomly raping and murdering each other.

    I don’t like the idea of others experiencing pain and from a practical point of view, if we have rules forbidding murder, the chances that someone I care about or I myself will get murdered goes down compared to a society in which murder is not punished or at least frowned upon. The rules, whether law or unspoken, are good for everyone.

    Also, if you need eternal damnation to keep you from killing, raping, stealing, etc. do you really have much of an argument against Atheists, who I might remind you, generally manage to not kill, rape, or steal without such a consequence.

    TL;DR Why do you have to have an objective reasons to follow social rules that are fairly obviously good for everyone?

  • Mike

    I’d say that the reasons you listed for morality are very objective or pragmatic at the least. For organisms that depend upon each other to flourish in a group, certain “moral” standards must exist. How could a group of animals survive if they are killing and stealing food from each other? The same concept applies to humans except the terms “colony, pack, etc.” are replaced with society. This is the basis for social contract theory and other forms of objective morality that are not religiously based.

  • http://nailtothedoor.com/ Dan Martin

    Wow Neil. May I say as a Christian that I already knew I didn’t want to see “God’s Not Dead,” but you certainly have validated my instinctual revulsion to the idea. You might even find some common ground in an article I wrote recently, taking some purported Christian journalists to task for sloppy science reporting: http://nailtothedoor.com/lies-damned-lies-and-apologetics-the-latest-evolution-controversy/.

    Some of us actually agree that the best way to engage someone starts with accurately representing what they do (and don’t) say. So though I have no right to speak for any other Christians, please accept my apology anyway.

  • http://www.gloryfocus.com Jason Dollar

    I have to go. Church starts in a few minutes. But I didn’t want to leave folks hanging in the conversation. I enjoyed the good discussion, and am grateful you let me be a part of it. Good evening to all.

  • advancedatheist

    Atheists are miserable because they believe life is meaningless.

    Uh, hello? The alleged “atheist” Alex Rosenberg recently published a whole book on the meaninglessness of life. Because christians apparently invented the concept of nihilism in the 19th Century as a false alternative to believing in their superstition, I have to wonder if the Templeton Foundation slipped this so-called “atheist” some money to write christian propaganda in the form of how a Sophisticated Theologian (TM) would try to present the case for “atheism.”