I was watching an older Atheist Experience clip this morning where Matt Dillahunty was talking about the waste of time from him "debating" Ray Comfort on some Christian radio show. You can find it on Youtube, it directly lists Ray Comfort in the title and it's episode #852. I'm not sure I'm allowed to link it.
Anyway, in describing the conversation he had with Ray, he said it was beneficial in his mind because those listening in their cars on the way to work would have clearly seen how Ray Comfort was making a fool of himself. I didn't listen to the "debate" but I have my doubts that this is true.
I've been thinking about this ever since the election. I had a faith crisis in August 2020 and as I've become more and more atheist, the more left I have started to lean. It's been a bizarre bit of disassociation to look back at pre-August me and the opinions I held, and to look at where I am now.
I was all in back then. Conservative Mormon. I was a fan of Jordan Peterson, Steven Crowder, Sargon of Akkad, Ben Shapiro, Tim Pool, Blaire White, Dave Rubin, etc. I had some inklings of bisexuality but accepted it as my cross to bear, my trial on this earth and nothing more. I watched a debate between Matt Dillahunty and Jordan Peterson back then and I DID NOT think Matt won. I rewatched the debate recently and...without God, without the "obvious" morality standard of Christianity, without the persecution complex, with reason instead of faith, it is clear to me now that Dillahunty made better arguments than Peterson. Peterson just flops around, can't stay on topic. He used to be a hero of mine and now, he's making claims he can't back up, and in the face of Matt's questions, Jordan just goes off on an unrelated tangent. But back then, I would have snorted at Matt Dillhaunty asking questions to keep them on topic and I would have swooned over how smart Peterson was. It's the same debate viewed at two different times in my life. Yet my confirmation bias would not allow me to see how weak Peterson appeared. I remember thinking he won that discussion.
I know most folks here have been atheist much longer than me but I was just wondering if you have had this similar experience? There's a wall there which makes connection and ideas incapable of jumping through. I think it is when you take for granted that God exists and that the repressive rules and purity culture are just a fact of life, the bases and foundation of a reasoned argument based on empirical data and reality seem like they "just don't know" or they "have the wrong priorities." My point is I don't think listening to a debate will really truly help most religious people see and understand the other side. Because there's that wall where they take for granted that their belief is the only truth.
Anyway, in describing the conversation he had with Ray, he said it was beneficial in his mind because those listening in their cars on the way to work would have clearly seen how Ray Comfort was making a fool of himself. I didn't listen to the "debate" but I have my doubts that this is true.
I've been thinking about this ever since the election. I had a faith crisis in August 2020 and as I've become more and more atheist, the more left I have started to lean. It's been a bizarre bit of disassociation to look back at pre-August me and the opinions I held, and to look at where I am now.
I was all in back then. Conservative Mormon. I was a fan of Jordan Peterson, Steven Crowder, Sargon of Akkad, Ben Shapiro, Tim Pool, Blaire White, Dave Rubin, etc. I had some inklings of bisexuality but accepted it as my cross to bear, my trial on this earth and nothing more. I watched a debate between Matt Dillahunty and Jordan Peterson back then and I DID NOT think Matt won. I rewatched the debate recently and...without God, without the "obvious" morality standard of Christianity, without the persecution complex, with reason instead of faith, it is clear to me now that Dillahunty made better arguments than Peterson. Peterson just flops around, can't stay on topic. He used to be a hero of mine and now, he's making claims he can't back up, and in the face of Matt's questions, Jordan just goes off on an unrelated tangent. But back then, I would have snorted at Matt Dillhaunty asking questions to keep them on topic and I would have swooned over how smart Peterson was. It's the same debate viewed at two different times in my life. Yet my confirmation bias would not allow me to see how weak Peterson appeared. I remember thinking he won that discussion.
I know most folks here have been atheist much longer than me but I was just wondering if you have had this similar experience? There's a wall there which makes connection and ideas incapable of jumping through. I think it is when you take for granted that God exists and that the repressive rules and purity culture are just a fact of life, the bases and foundation of a reasoned argument based on empirical data and reality seem like they "just don't know" or they "have the wrong priorities." My point is I don't think listening to a debate will really truly help most religious people see and understand the other side. Because there's that wall where they take for granted that their belief is the only truth.
