1. Comment #73665 by Janus on September 25, 2007 at 7:20 pm

Thank God for Jack Chick.

Other Comments by Janus

2. Comment #73668 by Crazymalc on September 25, 2007 at 7:23 pm

Bastard Sinners!

I would of loved to have seen a big dino. like T-Rex.

I've only seen the small ones, like the Tuatara of New Zealand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuatara

Other Comments by Crazymalc

3. Comment #73669 by MattInOz on September 25, 2007 at 7:28 pm

OK, I know the larger portion of the world's Christian population have long since abandoned such blatantly childish notions (only to replace them with more nuanced childish notions, mind you) but please, how does one talk to people like this?

I ran into a old friend from uni the other day (our degree was in Applied Science) and was jaw-droppingly astounded to find him spouting some of this nonsense in response to some passing comment of mine that mentioned "evolving". I stopped, checked I understood him correctly and then entered into a protracted and heated debate about these polar opposite world views. This has evolved into an email debate, but I must admit I am at a loss as to how to come at this one.

In all seriousness (I am not going to just write him off as stupid - I have seen plenty of evidence to the contrary in times past) does anyone have any hints as to the best way to gently, gently convince him otherwise? He is quite welcoming in debate, but I literally don't know how to begin. I thought this only happened in America....

I thought it instructive that he appeared to be in denial re global warming too.

Help.

Other Comments by MattInOz

4. Comment #73673 by BAEOZ on September 25, 2007 at 7:44 pm

Notice that the Jews who are betraying Jebus are big nosed, evil looking stereotypes. But Jebus doesn't look that way at all??? And Jebus is god, and god didn't die, so he sacrificed nothing...la la la...
And it's funny about the oxygen comments and water locked up in the sky, where is it now?
Sorry, I'm being silly. Please ignore this post. :)

Other Comments by BAEOZ

5. Comment #73676 by Crazymalc on September 25, 2007 at 7:46 pm

MattInOz,
I've been thinking similar thoughts to you.

I am from New Zealand, but am currently an English teacher here in Korea. I've been checking out the Yoido Full Gospel Church here and its associated Prayer Mountain.

Yoido is officially recognized as the world largest Christian church with a membership of around 800,000. About 3,000 are added every day.

Yoido is a fundamentalist church and have some pretty whacked out doctrines.

Not trying to sound vain, but I am clever guy. I studied Electrical Engineering at uni. Even so though, I am plainly not more intelligent than the aforementioned 800,000.

So, why do I see through the shallow facade, and 800,000 do not?

I'm starting to get an inkling of an answer by reading Dan Dennett's Breaking the Spell book. In it, he gives a preliminary outline of how religion evolves out of simple folk beliefs.

I would recommend you give it a read.

Other Comments by Crazymalc

6. Comment #73678 by Lil_Xunzian on September 25, 2007 at 8:01 pm

MattInOz,

Your poor friend has just gone insane...literally. Religious ppl are usually crazy and stupid, but plain ol' crazy works by itself, too. Trying to kill yourself gets you thrown in the madhouse, but if you spend your entire life waiting for heaven, getting all teary-eyed at the thought of your own death, well then you're upright and good.

Other Comments by Lil_Xunzian

7. Comment #73680 by Crazymalc on September 25, 2007 at 8:17 pm

Lil_Xunzian,
You may be right. His friend might have gone insane.

I think though that answers like "He's crazy" or "She's stoopid" are lazy answers.

What makes it that people belief such farfetched ideas? What was the first cause?

This is why I like the aforementioned Dennett book so much. He gives ideas about how modern day religion can evolve - with small immediately beneficial results - from adopting the intentional stance to things like clouds and rocks.

Other Comments by Crazymalc

8. Comment #73681 by Sittingduck on September 25, 2007 at 8:19 pm

"plants, animals, and people were drowned and sandwiched with the dinosaurs into layers of mud and rock..."

The poor Fintstones! If only Fred & Barny could have fashioned their own ark and saved themselves as well as Dino.

I wonder why we never find fossils of their cool foot-propelled cars?

Other Comments by Sittingduck

9. Comment #73682 by mdowe on September 25, 2007 at 8:29 pm

Comment #73676 by Crazymalc

So, why do I see through the shallow facade, and 800,000 do not?

The relative intensity of childhood indoctrination is likely part of the reason. The power of childhood indoctrination to warp a mind is rather astonishing. I count myself very fortunate that mine was mild enough that I shook it off before puberty.

Other Comments by mdowe

10. Comment #73683 by Inferno on September 25, 2007 at 8:33 pm

So..... Noah saved the dinosaurs only for them to be eaten afterwards? Man, he must have been pissed.

Other Comments by Inferno

11. Comment #73684 by LoneStarTravis on September 25, 2007 at 8:35 pm

When I started reading this comic, I thought it must be a work of satire. As I read on, I was met with the sad reality that it was actually sincere.

Slightly off-topic, but...

The stories in the Bible are absolutely terrible. If one were to examine these stories as pure fiction while looking for timeless qualities which make these stories truly great, one will be greatly disappointed.

The way of the Jedi is my religion, and The Force is my god.

Other Comments by LoneStarTravis

12. Comment #73685 by Crazymalc on September 25, 2007 at 8:40 pm

Comment #73682 by mdowe

The relative intensity of childhood indoctrination is likely part of the reason. The power of childhood indoctrination to warp a mind is rather astonishing. I count myself very fortunate that mine was mild enough that I shook it off before puberty.

Yes, child indoctrination plays a large role.

Once again though, it delays the question. What made their parents believe?

I don't think there are any easy answers here. Understanding religion as a natural phenomenon is not easy, but I think worth the effort.

Other Comments by Crazymalc

13. Comment #73686 by BT Murtagh on September 25, 2007 at 8:47 pm

That's right, Jesus DIED for you, for THREE WHOLE DAYS! He gave up his ENTIRE WEEKEND for your sins!

Other Comments by BT Murtagh

14. Comment #73687 by Goldy on September 25, 2007 at 8:49 pm

What can I say...fuck me....sound of jaw hitting ground...

Other Comments by Goldy

15. Comment #73688 by steveroot on September 25, 2007 at 8:56 pm

I dated a girl in college who wound up valedictorian with a double major, then earned a PhD and taught at a university. She suffered a head injury and now does "nursing home ministry", saving (she believes) the oldsters before they lose their chance of getting into the country club. She talks like this comic strip and begs me to accept Jesus... yada, yada...
Pathetic.
Steve

Other Comments by steveroot

16. Comment #73689 by MattInOz on September 25, 2007 at 9:08 pm

Crazymalc,

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate the input. I get a sense that you actually understand the depth to which I dispair at getting anywhere in the looming argument.

I have read Breaking the Spell as well as Darwin's Dangerous Idea and hosts of others that I use as reference sources and (at least I think) I understand in a more than vague way where it all comes from. However:

In a debate like this, I find myself for the first time actually speechless, as if I have had any "platform of common ground" ,if you will removed from the arena of discourse and am left floundering as to what terms I could possibly couch ideas within such that they breach his filters of indoctrination. (he does claim to have had a period of atheism around our graduation) I have tried taking it right back to basics to talk about where we get confirmation of our ideas from and how we unthinkingly use evidence and science whenever we need conflict resolution (for goodness sakes, we both use this in our jobs EVERY day) I guess I'm at a loss as to how one can temporarily suspend all this when required.... I agree that writing him off as stupid is both unfair and lazy ,and gets one nowhere. I just don't know how to get around it and am surprised how difficult it really is when faced with someone of some intellect that is convinced the "wisdom of the day" is a carefully crafted conspiracy to hide the truth of biblical literacy.

Shrug. Where to...?

Other Comments by MattInOz

17. Comment #73697 by Robert Maynard on September 25, 2007 at 10:17 pm

MattinOz, there's no clear-cut process. One of my oldest friends is a Pentecostal and biblical literalist, and although it doesn't get in the way of our friendship, it's still a process of awkward, passive-aggressive probing whenever talk turns to religion.

The very worst part of these infrequent discussions is that there seems to be no way to consolidate progress. That is to say, I and others can argue him into accepting a point, or admitting that a point of his is deeply flawed, but then next time it comes up, all that groundwork has been washed away. One of my friends has referred to this problem as "evangelical amnesia", but I obviously couldn't say for sure how strongly it effects your friend.

My simplest advice would be, ask him questions about his beliefs, get an idea of where his beliefs end. Understand exactly where his disagreements with science begin.
Don't be hasty in giving him answers to big questions, unless you're confident you can carry them through to their conclusions - eg. don't assert the scientific age of the earth unless you can counter anti-radiometric dating arguments and confidently explain the techniques (and preferably the basic physics). He will remember concessions of deference to 'orthodoxy' in science. :)
Devour science literature, because that will help you discuss the big topics from a scientific/atheistic standpoint (besides that, scientific literacy is its own reward).
Above all, remember that he's your friend (aww). Some friends are all about one-upping each other, and comfortable, uninhibited disagreement (these are the best kind of friends) but there are usually limits to this. :P

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

18. Comment #73698 by Inferno on September 25, 2007 at 10:47 pm

haha, I love the phrase: "He is worthy of death!" That's so my new catch phrase!

Other Comments by Inferno

19. Comment #73701 by MattInOz on September 25, 2007 at 11:14 pm

RobertMaynard,

Again, to you this time, thanks for your input. I had to laugh at the appropriateness of "evangelical amnesia".....

It is not of dire concern to me, this debate, as I know we both respect the other and this won't change anything. (this person is not a close friend as I only ran into him for the first time since university, 8 years ago, the other day) When the arguments he presented so stunned me, I calmly walked into my room and handed him a copy of a book on Quarternary dating techniques. I found his response of not even bothering to open it quite instructive. I showed him other books he might find useful in getting to the truth (not just the usual suspects, which were there) but others on science in general as well as the quirkiness of some of it's past proponents. I suggested also The Demon Haunted World as an excellent catch-all, along with some historical narratives but alas...

I am amply versed in physics, geology, astronomy, genetics etc and both he and I did an Applied Science course together that was health related so there is no deficiency of scientific literacy on either side of the fence.

I see the whole debate as a constructive challenge, but what I find difficult in this particular case is that I can't use that common base to argue from. Arguments with people who are LESS informed on their science are typically more successful as they at least seem to acknowledge some level of authority within its method. I truly am having trouble working out his thought processes. I guess, not living in the USA, I'm not used to such in-your-face contradiction.

Thanks for the advice, if you think of anything else, let me know.

Other Comments by MattInOz

20. Comment #73706 by epeeist on September 25, 2007 at 11:27 pm

Comment #73685 by Crazymalc

Once again though, it delays the question. What made their parents believe?

I was once admonished by the flea for this - its a pyramid selling scheme.

Get your entry into heaven, or avoid going to hell, by recruiting other people.

Other Comments by epeeist

21. Comment #73708 by Tumara Baap on September 25, 2007 at 11:40 pm

You'd think someone with more than a pair of brain cells would at least sugarcoat propaganda for modern consumption. Most of the time, I have enormous difficulty telling whether some of their websites are a parody. For example, the Baptists for Republican Faith at http://baptistsforbrown2008.wordpress.com/ has as one of its top posts "Teaching your child that satanism and atheism are the same thing: "Mommy, why is that man skinning our cat?"".

I kid you not!

Hats off to those posters here who have acquaintances like these, and still manage a friendly relationship. Frankly, I could not do it.

Other Comments by Tumara Baap

22. Comment #73710 by Veronique on September 25, 2007 at 11:53 pm

MattInOz

I think it was on the Leprechology thread that someone said You just have to pray to God until you are insane enough to be saved.

Robert Maynard always gives good advice to questions like these:-). not sucking up Robert, it's true!! And BTW, I think that evangelical amnesia (great term) is what happens to every fundy religite who posts on these threads. For dozens and dozens of posts they say the same thing over and over again. They partially concede minor points and then forget that they have done so in the next post.

It's the faulty reasoning that is hard to get through. There is often that 'I used to be an atheist but' that, as RD mentions is said as a special pleading for more street cred. If you haven't already, listen to RD reading the new preface for TGD on the boat to the Galapagos Islands. The link is on the home page.

Dennett is great (I am reading him myself), but rational arguments don't go far in the religion-addled brain. The religious filter is firmly in place. Listen to Alistair McGrath trying to debate RD in the uncut interview. I am staggered at the way this smart theologian can commit intellectual dishonesty time and again and not realise it. The second time I listened to it, I really, really watched McGrath's facial expressions. He had no idea what he was giving away to the viewer when he spoke.

People like this have surrendered reason for faith. The emotionaI need must have much more pull than the desire to understand properly. The need for certainty is too strong.

I think it is also interesting that fundy religites can't even read anything that doesn't prop up their beliefs. That surprises me – maybe I am wrong about the strength of these needs. Not being able to read anything that isn't religious seems to indicate a tenuous hold rather than a strong one.

I am starting to ramble. If it's any help, I have difficulty talking to them as well:-), but I haven't close friends of this particular ilk. I don't really understand the religious brain, as you can tell:-).

Cheers
V

(Edit) I like the 'Pyramid Selling Scheme', hahaha.

(Edit 2) Welcome AKBob

Other Comments by Veronique

23. Comment #73712 by BMMcArdle on September 26, 2007 at 12:12 am

The world's foremost biologists, geologists, and paleontologists are a bunch of nincompoops!

Other Comments by BMMcArdle

24. Comment #73713 by Inferno on September 26, 2007 at 12:19 am

Amazing how merely eating the fruit from just one tree meant mankind was "lost" forever. That's some design flaw!

Other Comments by Inferno

25. Comment #73714 by Crazymalc on September 26, 2007 at 12:23 am

Comment #73689 by MattInOz

In a debate like this, I find myself for the first time actually speechless, as if I have had any "platform of common ground" ,if you will removed from the arena of discourse and am left floundering as to what terms I could possibly couch ideas within such that they breach his filters of indoctrination.

I can understand your frustration. I recently watched a documentary called The Most Hated Family in America that was about Westboro Baptist Church and their rather extreme views, best encapsulated in the name of their web site: www.GotHateFags.com

The interviewer tried in vain to present simply argumements to them. Their indoctrination was so deep, that it was almost as if they didn't hear them. The head pastor/father was a scary man.

Comment #73706 by epeeist

I was once admonished by the flea for this - its a pyramid selling scheme

Ha! Pyrimad selling works though. It makes everybody on earth incredibly rich. Well, except for the last guy. He gets kinda screwed.

Comment #73691 by AKBob

I',m not proud of this and its probably one of the lowest points in my life

Firstly, welcome AKBob!

Secondly, I know whay you mean. I look back at my time as Born Again Boy and the beach missions I did that were specifically designed to bring young kids into the faith. Ugh.

Other Comments by Crazymalc

26. Comment #73715 by logical on September 26, 2007 at 12:33 am

steveroot,
interesting you mention head injury as cause to belief. When I learned Danish I read several Scandinavian novels where this and strokes had this effect - and of course, the beginning of the bad end of the "hero". My teacher, one of those nice upperclass born state church members, called the connection between brain damage and fanaticism "something everyone knows"!

Other Comments by logical

27. Comment #73716 by MattInOz on September 26, 2007 at 12:38 am

Veronique,

Cheers for your thoughts - have read/watched the stuff you speak of several times and would have to agree with you. I was watching the A. McGrath one with my brother one night and we just looked at each other incredulously. Like you say, it is obvious to any rational person watching just exactly what astonishing intellectual acrobatics are taking place during such discussions.

I guess I remain stunned to have met these ideas being defended in flesh and blood for the first time, esp here in "who-gives-a-shit" Oz. (my own indoctrination with the Catholic nonsense slid fairly easily away - I did make a great altar boy though)

Anyway, I'm off to write the next email refuting the chronology of his Flood geology. Wish me luck.

M

PS - don't you love how they lay the responsibility for the downfall of MANkind at the feet of a weak WOMAN. Tells me all I need to know about creation myth. (Those damned temptresses - their seductive fruits in evil conspiracy with their sensuous curves....)

Other Comments by MattInOz

28. Comment #73717 by MattInOz on September 26, 2007 at 12:42 am

Crazymalc,

Wasn't that doco scary!!! Saw that - almost as bad as that Jesus Camp (I think it was called). That poor little guy that was getting "home-schooled"... Shudders.

M

Other Comments by MattInOz

29. Comment #73718 by hungarianelephant on September 26, 2007 at 12:43 am

Oh this is priceless stuff.

I've had a poke around some of the others and my favourite is "The Promise" http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5004/5004_01.asp. Apparently the root cause of all the problems in the Middle East is that Ishmael made fun of Isaac. Wicked, wicked Ishmael!

Glad we got that cleared up.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

30. Comment #73720 by Veronique on September 26, 2007 at 1:23 am

MattInOz

I live in tiny Mullumbimby on the North East Coast and my tenant in the other half of my house is a charismatic Christian. I think they are Baptist fundies. I know he goes to a church in Byron sometimes.

I have tried to ask him about what he believes and why and he's okay for a bit but then he becomes agitated. I asked him once whether he would like to read Bryson's Short History.... He declined after looking at the Contents page, because there was a chapter on the age of the earth. He says, however, that he has a great respect for science:-) but evolution is just a theory.

I started to explain what a scientific theory actually was; he got agitated and walked back inside his door. Poor blighter had a heart attack last week and is still in hospital. I don't want to agitate him any more now!! He's 70 in a couple of months. He has been a fundamentalist since 1963 and described finding a church that preached this as 'coming home'.

He is the first fundamentalist Christian I have ever known (well, 'know' is probably the wrong word!). Incomprehensible stuff. He is not willing to see anything except his fantasy that he will be wafted up onto (into?) clouds with Jesus. And he prays for me!! I reckon I could do a George Carlin on this one:-).

Good luck with your 'younger' acquaintance:-). He has had 8 years (that you know of) in which to arrive at his deluded state. That's a fair amount of time; I am not at all convinced that you will get through, although I understand that you have to try:-).

Keep us updated with your 'progress'.

Cheers
V

Other Comments by Veronique

31. Comment #73721 by Yeti on September 26, 2007 at 1:24 am

It took quite a while to realise that wasn't satire.

It's not like stories gain credibility when they're drawn in the style of Roy of the Rovers.

"Religion for the hard of understanding". Probably quite a bit market.

Other Comments by Yeti

32. Comment #73725 by Liveliest Crib on September 26, 2007 at 1:32 am

Well, I'm glad to see that Jack Chick is still completely cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs screws loose loony toons.

10. Comment #73683 by Inferno
So..... Noah saved the dinosaurs only for them to be eaten afterwards? Man, he must have been pissed.

Funny, isn't it? I especially like how the Dinosaur species died out because they were not fit for their environment. Not only was that god guy too stupid to avoid using flood chemicals toxic to one of the species Noah brought onto his continent-sized boat, but in so doing, he showed (partly) how evolution works.

Of course, I suppose Noah probably found it all par for the course with the bipolar sky fairy. I mean, this is a deity who took a week to create all these different kinds of creatures, whom he supposedly loved, and then structured a food chain. He said, "Here you go, my creatures. I have given you life. You may now think, and breathe, and love, and enjoy and experience all the wonders of existence. Now.....EAT EACH OTHER!!!!"

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

33. Comment #73727 by Veronique on September 26, 2007 at 1:43 am

Liveliest Crib

Don't you mean tripolar?:-) hahaha

Cheers
V

Other Comments by Veronique

34. Comment #73728 by HunterZolomon on September 26, 2007 at 1:48 am

Gotta love Chick! There's a man who's not ashamed of being a barking fundie. I recall someone making a Lovecraft / Chick spoof way back, *googling* and here it is:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=135

As usual, it's hard to satirize but salvation through "being eaten first" is priceless.

Other Comments by HunterZolomon

35. Comment #73729 by pewkatchoo on September 26, 2007 at 1:59 am

MattInOz
I suggest that you try and get him to look at it from the other direction. That the bible was the original conspiracy, look at the wealth of the RC church and other religious organisations as evidence of that, then look at how controlling the church is. Then take it from there.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

36. Comment #73730 by Liveliest Crib on September 26, 2007 at 2:00 am

Since folks are sharing stories about the frustrations of conversing with the indoctrinated, I'll toss the following into the mix:

I went to a public high school in the late 1980s in southern California. There were plenty of fundamentalists there, and they regularly told me I was destined for hell since (a) my family was Jewish; and (b) I didn't believe in any god at all.

One day, two of the aforementioned indoctrinated sat within earshot of me, and proceeded to discuss evolution.

"I can't believe the bio book has something on evolution in it! How annoying! I don't believe such a ridiculous theory!" exclaimed one of them.

"What is that theory anyway?" asked the other, adding, "I mean, I don't believe in it either, but what is it?" Yes, that's what she said. I've never forgotten.

When her companion opened her mouth to answer, out poured perhaps the most deliciously absurd explanations of evolution ever uttered. "Ok, it' so obvious it's not true. Anyone can see," she began. "Evolution says that we all used to be other animals, but we changed into people. So that when you're in your mom's belly, you're a frog. Then, when you're born, you're a monkey. And it's not until you're about three or four or so that you evolve into a human being. I mean, come on! Do little babies look like monkeys to you?!"

Now, while I appreciate that I should not merely dismiss the uneducated as hopelessly stupid or insane, I hope you'll all forgive my doing exactly that. See, I feared that if I had tried to engage these people in conversation, I would become so frustrated by both their words and the need to prevent myself from laughing hysterically that my head might actually explode.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

37. Comment #73743 by Logicel on September 26, 2007 at 3:54 am

The rare times that I am confronted with religious believers I use the same approach that I did many decades ago with delusional patients. I make it clear that I accept that their delusion seems real to them, but that I do not share in any way this delusion with them. It sets the parameters of reality without debating, without terrifying them that they need to let go of their 'reality.'

Consistency, patience, and the acceptance how ingrained their religious ideas are, goes a long way.

Other Comments by Logicel

38. Comment #73744 by bamboospitfire on September 26, 2007 at 3:55 am

I note that the scientist in the cartoons bears a fairly strong resemblance to Adolf Hitler.

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

39. Comment #73749 by Mysturji on September 26, 2007 at 4:14 am

I can't see the pictures!:o(
Show me the comix!

Other Comments by Mysturji

40. Comment #73752 by OrbitalMike on September 26, 2007 at 4:30 am

When I was 10 in the early 70's, my barber used to have a rack of Chick Tracks in his shop. Since I was bored waiting my turn, I read a few. They scared the shit out of me! The images from these tracks still pop up at times and make me shudder. I wish I could sue for all the pain and suffering they caused.

Other Comments by OrbitalMike

41. Comment #73757 by _J_ on September 26, 2007 at 4:47 am

Sorry, long post.

On the cartoon

There's a weird feeling whenever I read one of these cartoons. Satire relies on the author establishing the sense of a shared joke with the reader (unless the reader is the object of the satire, that is), so you have the feeling that you and the author both get the joke and are having a pointed laugh at the expense of whoever's at the sharp end.

With these cartoons, I just keep falling for it, starting off by thinking 'Ah, I see where this guy's going!' – and then feeling that sense of connection drift away as the thing that looked like being the butt of the joke actually turns out to be his argument. It's like going to hear a speech from the politician you voted for and hearing him slowly transform into a neo-Nazi. Makes you feel…very wrong.

Upon reaching the (figuratively as well as literally) black and white ending, it makes me wonder: if this is the sort of argument that Christians find persuasive, is this the tone we should adopt?:


Mankind has rebelled against reality in his arrogance. It's YOUR choice whether you live in the real world, or walk about in your own personal fantasy land of superstition, homophobia and sectarian violence. Either you're a reality-denying twat or you're not. Which is it...?


On which subject:

For MattinOz's 'How do I talk sense into someone I thought was sensible?' discussion, here's my tuppence-worth.

First, on the dangers and pitfalls of such arguments, following Liveliest Crib, 38:

I feared that if I had tried to engage these people in conversation, I would become so frustrated by both their words and the need to prevent myself from laughing hysterically that my head might actually explode.

Adrenaline's a killer. I find that, in face-to-face discussion, I too easily become Angry Atheist Man. I'm not usually actually angry, but I find that I'm so eager to jump in and stamp on bad arguments, and so wound up about hearing them advanced seriously, and so surprisingly tense about finding someone I like and care about doing so, that it becomes very difficult to discuss things calmly.

One thing that I find very frustrating is that people often use unbelievably childish tactics when arguing for their religion. Realising this can give a similar feeling to realising that Chick is not actually a satirist, because the content of the argument is so at odds with the tone. My religious friends tend to be very good at talking with great calmness and conviction, giving a sense of peace and maturity, as though they have grasped the true meaning of things and these little arguments are not important in the grand scheme of things. And yet the actual arguments and debating tactics I'm given by them are:

- 'the bible says it, so it's true' or 'I believe it, so it's true' or 'it feels amazing, so it's true' or 'just accept that it's true, and you'll accept that it's true'.

- The Christian Policy On Doubt (whereby every problematic argument is filed away under 'Doubts That Make Me Feel Virtuously Humble', with the assumption that God has an answer, even if He hasn't revealed it yet).

- Babyish dirty tricks, like 'You sound cross, so I'm allowed to ignore you', or 'The bible predicted that fools would harden their hearts to god [dot dot dot, pause for effect], so I can ignore you', or 'I feel so sorry for you that you can't just accept that I'M RIGHT, I JUST AM, and you're damned, so I'll pray for you, and in the meantime ignore you', or 'This is the last thing I'm saying, and then the argument's over so you're not allowed to say anything else, and if you do I'll roll my eyes and say "You've just got to have the last word, haven't you?" – and ignore you'. All of which are variations on the theme of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming loudly (but somehow also managing to pointedly raise a middle finger at the same time).

By and large, I agree with Robert Maynard's suggestions. It's a good idea to try to pin down where the leap from reasoning into religion takes place. Whether even this deliberately methodical approach will actually prevail against the 'evangelical amnesia' (excellent phrase), I don't know. It's like trying to sweep water – clear a patch and it washes immediately in behind you. (Special water, that spouts constant biblically-founded arguments from authority and ad hominems.) And when, finally, your discussion partner gets tired of re-occupying ravaged positions (perhaps because it is now 3am) I find that the last resort is 'Okay, I can't beat you in rational argument, but it's not about rational argument, it's about believing and knowing and feeling God's love [and so on]'. And, as friendships do not generally survive violent strangulation attemps, this is where I usually have to give up in astonishment.

My personal suggestion is this. I, too, find it fascinating how someone can be very intelligent and scientifically literate, but somehow hold religion in a separate bit of their brain where all the doors are locked to argumentation. A good tactic is the Trojan Horse strategy of relying heavily on analogies.

An argument that always works for me personally, when I start to wonder whether it's actually me who's mad after all, is to ask myself this: if God existed, and He really wanted us to know about it (as the God of the bible clearly does) what kind of evidence could he give us? On the other hand, if there were no god, and just a lot of people who mistakenly believed in one, what kind of evidence might they be able to produce? Whenever I reflect on this, I find that all of our evidence is of the 'made-up god', variety, and absolutely none of it is of the 'omnipotent God who really wants you to believe in Him' type. This re-persuades me every time.

I think most intelligent, rational people are capable of seeing this. But the doors slam closed around the God part of their mind and they refuse to apply the logic to Him. Hence the Trojan Horse approach.

For me, this amounts to the Argument from The Demon-Haunted World. Carl Sagan mentions religion a few times (in a very friendly, atheistic way), but is chiefly fighting a one-man war against pseudoscience. In particular, he spends a series of chapters eviscerating the case for alien abductions. Happily, his arguments (which include the good evidence, bad evidence one I've just outlined) reapply perfectly to theism. In many places the parallel is spookily close.

So try and sneak a copy of The Demon-Haunted World to your friend. Or, on an occasion when you are not talking about religion, have a discussion about alien abductions. Try to get your friend to accept the arguments against that. And then, when that's settled, point out how exact a match that is for religion.

Finally, here are two other useful things that I have read contributors to this site (and possibly another one) say. One pertains to the start of a discussion with a theist, and one to the end:

- Try to establish whether your friend accepts that there's even a tiny chance they could be wrong. Make it clear that you do. If they won't accept this…well, it doesn't bode too well for the discussion.

- Don't worry too much about it. People have their minds changed by reason, but not necessarily right now, by your reason. It might take years of hearing arguments like yours, from different sources, in different contexts, before the penny finally drops. Try not to feel like you've failed in anyway if your friend seems not to budge. You've done your best, and may have played an essential part in a longer journey of un-doctrination.

Good luck. (And remember - maybe we are the mad ones... ;) )

Other Comments by _J_

42. Comment #73758 by Aquambulus hirsutus on September 26, 2007 at 4:48 am

Mysturji (73749)

Just click the link at the top of the article (the 'Reposted from' one). It's worthwhile.

Other Comments by Aquambulus hirsutus

43. Comment #73759 by Mr DArcy on September 26, 2007 at 4:50 am

The Chic Comics just show the religion Christianity for what it is: childish, threatening, ignorant, belligerent and money grabbing.

I daily give praise to my parents for not bringing me up as a believer. Perhaps Jefferson was right, the only way to deal with the ridiculous is ridicule.

Other Comments by Mr DArcy

44. Comment #73762 by HumanisticJones on September 26, 2007 at 5:09 am

Peter Griffin: Teacher, why did all the dinosaurs die out?
Teacher: Because you touch yourself at night!

Other Comments by HumanisticJones

45. Comment #73767 by RascoHeldall on September 26, 2007 at 5:45 am

I don't think rational argument works against the majority of theists (though it certainly needs to be made, at every available opportunity!). The fact is, the arguments against religion are obvious enough that intelligent pre-pubescent children can make them.

The reason rational argument usually fails is because the 'battleground' if you like, is at an emotional rather than rational level, and so no amount of rational argument will touch it. Trying to use logic and reason to talk someone out of a religious delusion is like trying to talk someone out of loving their wife. It simply isn't going to work. The only time I've ever been able to make 'inroads' is when I've asked questions like - "what do you feel you would lack in your life without this belief?" or, even more pointedly, "Why is it necessary for you to believe in God to be happy?"

Other Comments by RascoHeldall

46. Comment #73768 by Goatboy2012 on September 26, 2007 at 5:52 am

Ah Jack.

Funny to think that he used to be one of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy's best and brightest.

We trained together, back in the day; disguising ourselves as Xtians to discredit the "One TRUE Faith™", learning to free associate ad-hoc fundigelical bullshit at the drop of a hat, practicing how to foam at the mouth convincingly. He excelled at all the dark arts. No-one in our cell could hold a candle to Jack; he was also a surprisingly good BBQ chef, his hickory smoked kittens were legendary. Happy days.

Then it all fell apart.

The late sixties, Jack had been working deep cover in California. Spreading the lie that Jesus was actually a bit of a hippy. I was his contact with the EAC's high command (or, Satan, as we all called him). Me and Jack would hook up every few months; give him a break from maintaining his cover. We'd get trashed and shoot the breeze, him telling me about the latest deception he'd practiced on the believers, me updating him on how immanentizing the eschaton was going.

Then one day, when we were supposed to rendezvous at a Turkish baths in downtown 'frisco, he just didn't show. I was freaked, I admit it. Jack was a pro, there's no way he'd ever leave his contact hanging; I thought.

Man, I hung around in that Turkish baths for hours, until finally the amyl fumes drove me out into the fresh air, head pounding and fear rising.

The first 'Crusader Comic' hit the stands six months later.

I still wonder what happened, how did Jack of all people, manage to get himself lost in his cover, through the looking glass. Was there something I could have done? Talked to him more often, reminded him that Satan loves all his little children. Maybe if I hadn't given him that economy size box of LSD soaked communion wafers for Christmas '69 he'd still be one of us, fighting the bad fight (if nothing else, I reckon those bloody wafers are to blame for his embarrassingly rabid anti-catholicism).

I've run a lot of guys for the EAC since then, but none of them, not Falwell, Haggard, or even Ratzinger, will ever be the agent Jack was.

So next time you decide to pull a Poe on some Xtian message board, remember Jack and, please, be careful out there.

Other Comments by Goatboy2012

47. Comment #73770 by BAEOZ on September 26, 2007 at 5:59 am

Don't listen to Goatboy2012, he's a double agent. He sold Jack up the river to get some brownie points with the heavenly host. Jack wouldn't be doomed to eternal bliss if Goatboy2012 held fast with Satan.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

48. Comment #73773 by Dr Benway on September 26, 2007 at 6:10 am

I accepted Jesus as my personal lord and savior when I was 13 years old. It was my best friend's doing.

Normally when hounded to go to church, I replied, "No thanks. I'm an atheist." But we'd had a bad argument one day, and later after some apologies and in a moment of weakness, I got suckered into praying. A few days later, I'm tagging along to church. Thus begins my weird two year journey into Pentecostalism.

The convincer for me was a rather wonderful feeling-state that worship could induce. Others seemed to share it, and would use phrases like "the presence of God" or "sense of grace" to describe it. It was quite intense and enduring for about two weeks after my conversion. A year later, the experience was much less frequent. It came and went unpredictably, but was more likely when I was in a group than when I was alone. I constantly wished to have it again. The mere memory of it was enough to keep me hooked for another year.

I understand these experiences quite differently now and recognize degrees of it in many circumstances: worship across many religions, meditation, falling in love, bipolar mania, personality disorders, head injury, drug experiences (particularly X), sadomasochism, fan fanaticism, temporal lobe epilepsy, hypnosis. It's an hallucination of an all-good other. The capacity for it, like the capacity for seeing colors or tasting something salty, lies within the brain.

Brains hooked on that drug aren't going to walk away from it just because some smarty-pants offers up a seemingly clever argument. All addicts are deniers and liars. Every need shall bow - including the need for truth - to the Great Need.

After my conversion, if someone had shown me examples of this experience outside of Christianity, I might have guessed the non-Christian joy was false or illusory, or even demonic. But if someone helped me see the underlying neurology, the basic schemas the brain uses to represent self-other relationships, I'd have been impressed. And I'd have been reassured that I could enjoy those feelings from time to time in my life without devotion to a particular religion.

Perhaps there's a TV documentary in there someplace.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

49. Comment #73774 by BAEOZ on September 26, 2007 at 6:13 am

Thou art wise oh Dr.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

50. Comment #73776 by Goatboy2012 on September 26, 2007 at 6:31 am

Don't cheek me, imp, I stand by every word.

May I never again enjoy the taste of sweet kitten flesh, or bask once more in the warmth of a burning and desecrated church if I lie.

};op

Other Comments by Goatboy2012