RE: Why I'm Still a Christian
February 25, 2015 at 8:28 pm
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2015 at 8:28 pm by Simon Moon.)
This is about all that can be hoped for in these discussions.
Congratulations for coming to some rational views based on the use of, at least partially, reason and logic. Considering they are of the type that do not seem to have a negative effect on society, I commend you.
Your theistic views, however, do give cover to the more extreme and dangerous people that read the same 'holy' texts as you do and get much different information from it. Case in point: the Idaho Congresswoman that is okay with letting children die of neglect because she defends faith healing, found in the same texts as the one you get your beliefs from.
The reason I am fine debating and discussing the same issue with theists on this, and other sites, repeatedly, is not because I have any hope that I will change the views of the person involved in the debate. But there tend to be a lot of people sitting on the sidelines that may be starting to question their faith based beliefs, that will be swayed by the correct use of skepticism and logic.
Congratulations for coming to some rational views based on the use of, at least partially, reason and logic. Considering they are of the type that do not seem to have a negative effect on society, I commend you.
Your theistic views, however, do give cover to the more extreme and dangerous people that read the same 'holy' texts as you do and get much different information from it. Case in point: the Idaho Congresswoman that is okay with letting children die of neglect because she defends faith healing, found in the same texts as the one you get your beliefs from.
The reason I am fine debating and discussing the same issue with theists on this, and other sites, repeatedly, is not because I have any hope that I will change the views of the person involved in the debate. But there tend to be a lot of people sitting on the sidelines that may be starting to question their faith based beliefs, that will be swayed by the correct use of skepticism and logic.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
