This is getting old

[tor]

I was talking to a theist today and he brought up argument from design, first cause and argument from ignorance.
I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.
Same arguments for 10 billion times. Same "I don't care I will believe anyway". Same "atheists suck".
Again and again and again. It's like I'm watching same movie over and over.
Same shit that was 1 year ago. 5 years ago. 10 years ago. No difference whatsoever.

Why is there no progress?

[LastPoet]

You can't fix stupid? Or was that a rethorical question?

[tor]

You can't fix stupid? Or was that a rethorical question?

The question is why can't same old arguments just die already.
It's like theists read the same book "Arguments for theism" written by the same author. There is absolutely NOTHING new.

Another thing I wonder is if he is gonna use same arguments against someone else after we talked.
Failed? Try against someone else. That's their motto.

[ThePinsir]

Be grateful he didn't bust out Pascal's Wager :p

There is no progress because humans are still terrified of death...and we can't seem to accept "I don't know" as an answer.

[tor]

Be grateful he didn't bust out Pascal's Wager :p

He did. But in a very sneaky way. "You don't have to believe if you don't want to but do it at your own risk". LOL

Maybe there is such a book but I don't know about it? lol

[Esquilax]

The question is why can't same old arguments just die already.
It's like theists read the same book "Arguments for theism" written by the same author. There is absolutely NOTHING new.

Why would there be anything new?

Think about it: religion by itself is stagnant. Everything is written down in books that need to accrue some age and credulous followers before they become divine text, so nobody is writing any new content for religions that exist now. Everything the followers feel they need to know is in those holy books.

Religions are carried along by society; secular progress is the reason religions change at all. Until some new scientific, moral or social progression is made from the outside, religions have nothing new to fit their god into, since they don't make anything of their own. Look down the line: every major theistic argument or apologetic has been made in response to- either a denial of, or an insidious robbery of credit for- a piece of secular progress. Intelligent design only exists because evolution does, the argument from design exists because of various naturalistic discoveries that makes design unnecessary at different resolutions, the cosmological argument only picked up steam because the big bang can be misinterpreted as a "beginning" of the universe...

There's nothing new in religious arguments because religions don't do new. You just have to wait for the next big scientific discovery or social change before you'll see a new theistic argument. First denial- that's where you'll get your arguments- then acceptance, and then credit robbery.

[tor]

The question is why can't same old arguments just die already.
It's like theists read the same book "Arguments for theism" written by the same author. There is absolutely NOTHING new.

Why would there be anything new?

Think about it: religion by itself is stagnant. Everything is written down in books that need to accrue some age and credulous followers before they become divine text, so nobody is writing any new content for religions that exist now. Everything the followers feel they need to know is in those holy books.

Religions are carried along by society; secular progress is the reason religions change at all. Until some new scientific, moral or social progression is made from the outside, religions have nothing new to fit their god into, since they don't make anything of their own. Look down the line: every major theistic argument or apologetic has been made in response to- either a denial of, or an insidious robbery of credit for- a piece of secular progress. Intelligent design only exists because evolution does, the argument from design exists because of various naturalistic discoveries that makes design unnecessary at different resolutions, the cosmological argument only picked up steam because the big bang can be misinterpreted as a "beginning" of the universe...

There's nothing new in religious arguments because religions don't do new. You just have to wait for the next big scientific discovery or social change before you'll see a new theistic argument. First denial- that's where you'll get your arguments- then acceptance, and then credit robbery.

Well kalam was invented 500 years ago or so.
So there was at least SOMETHING new 500 years ago. In science there is constantly something new. Theory of relativity for instance was discovered some 100 years ago. Puancare conjecture in math was solved in 1982.
But in theology there is absolutely nothing. Seems like they run out of ideas some 400 years ago.

[tommynba]

I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.

Why is there no progress?

That's why i don't talk with theists about their imaginary friends.
Indoctrination from the early years makes ignorance even stronger when you put the facts infront of them.

[Minimalist]

Why is there no progress?

Because bible-thumping morons can never change. Some can grow out of it but then they cease to be morons.

Sounds like you have found a real jesus star there.

[tor]

Why is there no progress?

Because bible-thumping morons can never change. Some can grow out of it but then they cease to be morons.

Sounds like you have found a real jesus star there.

Yeah but if arguments fail people search for other ones which will work. In theology it's completely opposite. They hammer same thing over and over even if it doesn't work.