Instead of asking

[Godscreated]

 You know this for a fact I'm assuming.

GC

I do, because your version is of the fairy tale make.  I cannot delude myself toward that way of thinking.

 If you do then where's the proof.

GC

[Silver]

 If you do then where's the proof.

GC

The proof is in accepting reality over the delusion you have accepted due to not being capable of reasonable thought processes.

[robvalue]

Most reasonable people don't ask for proof that a book full of magical events isn't real. The magical events are a very good sign you're reading something that's at least partly fictional.

Imagine if you had to disprove every fantasy novel ever written, or else you had to believe all the events in it happened. That would be exhausting.

The argument from ignorance, it's so overused I'm surprised it hasn't been worn down to nothing.

I just met God and he said I'm in charge of Earth now. Are you gonna disprove that, or believe it and bow to me? Or is that a ridiculous false dichotomy?

[Silver]

Except that we know fiction from historical reality.

Only the theists seem incapable of discerning the difference.

[robvalue]

It's amazing how quickly they'll say, "Oh but that's fiction".

Amazing that they don't have the same burden of proof they think we have.

[Silver]

It's amazing how quickly they'll say, "Oh but that's fiction".

Amazing that they don't have the same burden of proof they think we have.

I know.

Everything but their religion is fiction.

Every other religion cannot provide any more proof than theirs.

In the end, with proof not being provided, it is just hooey thanks to primitive minds.

[robvalue]

It's amazing how quickly they'll say, "Oh but that's fiction".

Amazing that they don't have the same burden of proof they think we have.

When pressed, they tend to say the author intended it to be fiction. This demonstrates the utterly broken thinking involved.

Firstly, the author may be lying.
Secondly, it could be intended to be fiction but not actually be fiction.
Thirdly, we have no way of accurately assessing what the authors of the bible intended. They're not more reliable because they're dead and can't be interviewed.

Instead, look at the actual things being written. If it's got loads of magic shit in it, then it's almost certainly fiction. It doesn't matter who wrote it or why. This is basic stuff you should teach to a child, and it's why religion is dangerous. It interferes with the most basic principles of thinking.

(Notice I said teach, not indoctrinate. It is easily explained via the Socratic method.)

[Bob Kelso]

Why do theists believe as they do,

We should instead be asking:

WHY THE FUCK ARE THEISTS SO FUCKING GULLIBLE?

You're welcome.

I can't imagine it's so much gullibility as it is indoctrination -as it was in my case- and emotional fulfillment. Not to say there aren't some seriously gullible suckers out there that can be told the world is flat, the moon is cheese, and that a Jewish demi-god died for them and rose from the grave and believe it.

[Silver]

The wonderful part of living is that there is a reason for believing anything.

[robvalue]

I've been studying lately the effect theistic thinking has on thinking in general.

Does bending the rules of credulity and evidence to permit one huge set of beliefs make you more likely to do the same thing in other cases?

The answer, according to my observations, is yes. I've seen many clear examples here on this board, even on subjects not related to religion. I think studies about this have been done on children and have come to this conclusion; I'm not sure if any have been done on adults.

It seems a very logical conclusion. The more you blur the edges, the more stuff is going to get caught up in it. It could of course be a lack of critical think skills in the first place. But then that begs the question of whether indoctrination has stifled the critical thinking. Since it cannot run parallel to nurturing proper thinking in a child, I see this as highly likely.