[Terez]

Cold Iron, on Jan 14 2009, 03:56 PM, said:

Terez, on Jan 14 2009, 06:04 PM, said:

Why would you think that when such "conversions" happen all the time? You went on believing in god after it became obvious to you that the holy books were not factual, but lots of people just don't see the point.

Rubbish, nobody ever simply realises or is convinced that the holy books are not factual because they clearly never attempt to be.

Books don't attempt anything. And in most denominations of Christianity in the US, we are indeed raised to believe that the Bible is factual. You can go on and on about "oh they really know deep down inside that it's not true!" but that doesn't change the fact. If you prefer, I'll phrase it this way: Most people, once they are able to admit that their holy books aren't factual, see no reason to believe in their god(s) any more.

CI said:

And I actually didn't start believing in god until well after it was obvious to me that the holy books were not factual.

That's nice, but don't try to pretend that your position is the only one that makes sense, or even that your conclusions are somehow the more likely outcome of the aforementioned.

[Cold Iron]

Santa is also taught as factual. People aren't stupid. Stupidity this profound is a choice. Scratch any fundy and they will admit that "that part isn't exactly how it seems, it really happened like this".

This post has been edited by Cold Iron: 14 January 2009 - 11:35 PM

[Terez]

Sorry, but people are. Santa doesn't promise eternal life, and everyone figures out soon enough that if they stop believing in Santa, they still get the presents.

[Cold Iron]

Read edit

[Terez]

Cold Iron, on Jan 14 2009, 05:33 PM, said:

Santa is also taught as factual. People aren't stupid. Stupidity this profound is a choice. Scratch any fundy and they will admit that "that part isn't exactly how it seems, it really happened like this".

Yes, and they call it "interpretation". Which is not anything close to admitting that the Bible isn't factual, which is what we are actually discussing.

[Cold Iron]

No.

This is a stupid argument.

People who are indoctrinated are just saying what is expected of them, they don't even know if they truly believe it or not.

People who truly believe it are doing so despite evidence for whatever reason. When this reason goes away, the belief goes away. Nobody gets convinced of the bibles non-factuality by evidence or argument because their belief in it's factuality is not based on either.

[Terez]

Cold Iron, on Jan 14 2009, 05:51 PM, said:

No.

Yes.

CI said:

This is a stupid argument.

I agree, but it's all your fault.

CI said:

People who are indoctrinated are just saying what is expected of them, they don't even know if they truly believe it or not.

That's BS. They not only believe it, but they have a tendency to get extremely emotional and irrational when their beliefs are questioned. Granted, it's because they know that they have no proof for their beliefs, and nothing to stand on. But they believe it.

CI said:

People who truly believe it are doing so despite evidence for whatever reason.

That's true in a way, but often all it takes is for the lesson to be learned repeatedly. Even in childhood, the indoctrinated begin to question their holy books, and learn things that call certain details into question, but they will hold on to those beliefs as long as possible. That doesn't mean there's no chance they will ever decide that their holy books are not factual - it just means that it will take a great deal of effort to convince them. But they are, in general, not any more open to your existential mumbo jumbo than they are to atheism.

CI said:

When this reason goes away, the belief goes away. Nobody gets convinced of the bibles non-factuality by evidence or argument because their belief in it's factuality is not based on either.

Not true. Or at least, they often believe that their beliefs are based on evidence and argument, and that is what is important. I know many people (including myself) who have been convinced of the Bible's non-factuality by evidence and argument (though it often takes years). The fact that you repeat over and over that it's not possible doesn't make it true, and makes you look rather ignorant and self-centered.

[Cold Iron]

You win.

[Terez]

Yay.

[Mezla PigDog]

Link: Bus campaign developments

[Cougar]

I'd forgotten how massively anoying Terez vs Cold Iron arguments were, I thought I'd better dip in see if there was any modding needed and found the usual.

Terez slags someone off and then puts a smiley at the end, why? Did you not mean it?

Cold Iron only answers the points that suit his arguments and ignores anything that he doesn't like.

Hilarious and mind numbing all at once.

This post has been edited by Cougar: 16 January 2009 - 03:50 PM

[Terez]

Cougar, on Jan 16 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

Terez slags someone off and then puts a smiley at the end, why? Did you not mean it?

No, just to indicate that I'm not angry. I especially do this when I'm arguing with friends (like CI).

I used to get lots of rep for arguing with CI cause everyone seemed to get that I annoy him just as much as he annoys them...

[Darkwatch]

Cougar, on Jan 16 2009, 10:50 AM, said:

I thought I'd better dip in see if there was any modding needed and found the usual.

You see Cougar my dear friend, the DB and the Religion board in particular would require such constant and tyrannical modding to make it reasonable that any mod taking it upon themselves would die of fatigue within a week.

[RodeoRanch]

I look but rarely touch unless it gets particularly virulent.

I like reading these threads. I never know what the hell people are actually arguing for and against but it's occasionally informative and often hilarious.


Back somewhat on topic, which Dawkins book is generally regarded as his best?

[Terez]

I only have one of his books (The God Delusion) and I haven't managed to finish it.

[Shinrei]

RodeoRanch, on Jan 17 2009, 06:32 PM, said:

I like reading these threads. I never know what the hell people are actually arguing for and against but it's occasionally informative and often hilarious.

I...(draws himself up haughtily) am never..... HILARIOUS. Pghaw!

[Terez]

You, Shin, are like 40 lashes with a wet noodle.

[Illuyankas]

That's the most insulting insinuation about Shin's manhood I've ever seen on the boards! And possibly the first!

[Cougar]

wow, I am so stoned, this thread seems almost ok

[Terez]

I think I avoid the Discussions forum more when I'm going through periods of sobriety.