I get the impression that most Christians these days think Faitheists (Atheists who are open to using religious faith to accomplish common, usually humanitarian, goals — who aren’t as interested in deconstructing religion) are on their side more than Antitheists (Atheists who are not as open to using religious faith to accomplish common goals and who are more overtly interested in deconstructing religion) — probably because Antitheists have the “anti” in their title.

The reason I am an Antitheist, though, is because I genuinely care about Christians. I was one for a long time, and the last thing I wanted as a Christian was someone who didn’t believe it using the religion to manipulate me. This was because I wanted to ensure that if someone was giving me spiritual advice, they were doing so from a place of honesty and consistency.

If God is not real, then He was made up, And the question to ask, if you think He was made up, concerns why He was made up. To that question several answers may be given, but I think one of the most possible answers is that God, if He was made up, was made up to manipulate or otherwise coerce people. I think most Christians can probably understand that — they may not concede that God is not real, obviously, but they may concede that if He were not real, He was probably made up, in part, to get people to behave a certain way.

One common attack we Antitheists hurl towards Christianity is that, to us, God appears to be a God of the Gaps — He is the placeholder for knowledge we don’t know. This can lead, it seems, to premature conclusions. I have had many debates with Christians about this, and will likely have many more; we can definitely debate this point. But if God is a God of the Gaps, that’s problematic in several ways. Take the view one has of humanity, for example. When you meet someone, you don’t know all about them at first glance. You have to get to know them, and even after a lifetime of doing so there are likely still mysteries in that individuals that you haven’t grasped. But that’s important, right? You shouldn’t be too prejudiced against people from the start. You should try to get to know them and who they actually are, rather than make up stereotypes about them.

Now, the Bible says we are all sinners, according to many Christians (likely there will be a Christian reading this thinking, “I don’t think ANYONE is a sinner — straw man” — and my response is that it’s not a straw man if there are people who believe it; if you don’t believe it, you’re not one of the people I’m addressing). Isn’t that a tremendous prejudice against ourselves as a human race? I think that if God doesn’t exist and, thus, is in no position to declare anyone a sinner, it would be healthy to get to know people first. Filling in that gap of knowledge with information from a God who doesn’t exist really closes people off from each other.

In addition, one would need to ask — why would someone want to create a God who said we were all sinners? To myself and other Antitheists, it’s clear that such a concept of God could be a way to manipulate people — if you can break down someone’s self esteem by saying they are a sinner and then make them dependent on a being of your own making if they want to get it back, you have tremendous power to manipulate them. So, long story short, if God is not real, then He seems to be a way to manipulate people that is kept alive by pastors and other religious leaders.

I’m an Antitheist because I don’t want to manipulate you with a version of a God I don’t believe in. I don’t want to endorse the view that you’re a sinner in need of grace if that’s not true, because I don’t want to help others control your sense of self esteem like that. And I don’t think you’d really want me to, if I didn’t believe it.

This doesn’t mean I’m not interested in trying to develop a relationship with you or trying to get to know you in ways outside of our disagreements with religion. Just the opposite. It’s because I genuinely care about you in other ways that I care about the religion you practice. In my view, a true friendship is one in which friends are open and honest with each other, so I’m openly honest about the fact that I don’t believe in God. That’s why I’ll tell you straight up that I don’t want you to be a Christian, because I hate you thinking you need a Savior I don’t think you need. Because I’m open about where I stand, you won’t have to worry about my using our relationship to, like, manipulate you into leaving your religion or anything. I’m going to tell you straight where I’m coming from in regards to religion.

As I speak my mind, I invite you to speak yours. I’ll be honest and straightforward, and I hope you feel you feel you can be honest and straightforward with me, as well. I’m not going to endorse views I don’t believe in, and I’m going to be clear that I don’t think belief in God is healthy. I think civility gets in the way when it polices conversation so much that we can’t be honest with each other, or that we appear to endorse views that we don’t, actually, endorse.

I also think my honesty here can make us better friends. A friendship that expects us to be silent about the most important parts of our lives somehow seems less genuine to me than one in which both sides straightforwardly speak their minds.

Hopefully that clears some things up.