The simple truth

[Jackalope]

They reject the actual understanding of evolution because to do so means that they've been lied to, and god wouldn't let that happen to them... would he?

No. But not for the reason they think.

[Cyberman]

As TAE's Tracie Harris once put it, "The thing that gets me though is it's like you believe that somebody walked across water and turned water into wine, and that someone spent three days in the stomach of a giant fish, but evolution just blows your mind."

[Jacob(smooth)]

That's a very cynical view.

The thing is, a simple lie is much more appealing than a complex truth. Christianity comes with a lot of payoffs and perks, and when people in positions of trust, who are offering such goodies, say "look at this science, not that science" its perfectly understandable that they do that. And the AIG version of science is much more accessible.

I think they reject the actual understanding of evolution because they don't want to expose themselves to it. Its hard, and complex and on some level they fear it will deprive them of some of they payoffs they get from their religion.

[fr0d0]

It's also a simplistic and ignorant Christian misunderstanding of their own faith propagated by leaders and carried out by the worker bees. Again you can see why they do it, but nothing undermines them more I think. I know incredibly intelligent people who think along the same lines. Scientists too.

I'm impressed with the open attitude to our concerns here. Kudos guys.

[Jackalope]

That's a very cynical view.

The thing is, a simple lie is much more appealing than a complex truth. Christianity comes with a lot of payoffs and perks, and when people in positions of trust, who are offering such goodies, say "look at this science, not that science" its perfectly understandable that they do that. And the AIG version of science is much more accessible.

I think they reject the actual understanding of evolution because they don't want to expose themselves to it. Its hard, and complex and on some level they fear it will deprive them of some of they payoffs they get from their religion.

An anecdote to illustrate this - I used to have discussions / debates with my ex about religion and science (she's a Christian of a sort that I've not quite been able to nail down).

She'd present a fairly stereotypical view of science - that is to say, where she thought the science was in conflict with her faith, she went with the apologetic straw men (something can't come from nothing, evolution is just a theory, etc).

All of her information on what modern biology and cosmology had to say came from apologists. I tried to get her to read books from popular mainstream scientists - she wouldn't do it. The excuse was that they were all atheists and were putting their anti-god spin on the truth. She trusts the apologists.

[Jacob(smooth)]

That's a very cynical view.

The thing is, a simple lie is much more appealing than a complex truth. Christianity comes with a lot of payoffs and perks, and when people in positions of trust, who are offering such goodies, say "look at this science, not that science" its perfectly understandable that they do that. And the AIG version of science is much more accessible.

I think they reject the actual understanding of evolution because they don't want to expose themselves to it. Its hard, and complex and on some level they fear it will deprive them of some of they payoffs they get from their religion.

An anecdote to illustrate this - I used to have discussions / debates with my ex about religion and science (she's a Christian of a sort that I've not quite been able to nail down).

She'd present a fairly stereotypical view of science - that is to say, where she thought the science was in conflict with her faith, she went with the apologetic straw men (something can't come from nothing, evolution is just a theory, etc).

All of her information on what modern biology and cosmology had to say came from apologists. I tried to get her to read books from popular mainstream scientists - she wouldn't do it. The excuse was that they were all atheists and were putting their anti-god spin on the truth. She trusts the apologists.

Good example.

It's a lot like smoking, or drinking, or drugs or overeating. You can offer people the truth but they don't want to hear it if it means giving something up.

[Faith No More]

Good example.

It's a lot like smoking, or drinking, or drugs or overeating. You can offer people the truth but they don't want to hear it if it means giving something up.

While I appreciate the sentiment you're trying to get across, I'm not sure how this should change anyone's approach. Have you ever tried to explain to a drug addict that they're an addict? They are purposefully ignoring reality in order to stay in their comfort zone, and gentle fact-pointing doesn't sink in. I'm not advocating being abusive, but there comes a point when the kid-glove approach is futile.

And when any contrary information is being ignored with self-righteous smugness, you have reached that point.

[truthBtold]

You have no idea how long it would take to teach a dullard such as yourself the myriad of principles behind evolution.
Read for yourself you dolt.
Some More
And More.


And?
That buffoon, Ron L. Hubbard writes a lot of fiction too and claims that its fact. Who gives a shit what a bunch of ancient goat herders wrote?

Why do most atheist resort to insults instead of respectful discussion?
Jesus warned that there will be many false Christ that would appear. There is only one truth, that coming from Jesus, the Son of God.

---

Given that only god knows who's a true christian and who isn't, it's not up to you to make those distinctions.

Actually you are right! I can't judge who is a real believer or not. However, I know that there are those out there that claim to be Christian who are not based on that verse. The greatest clue we get of a true believer is by the fruit they produce in their lives.

---

What they're getting is a big heaping helping of self righteousness, at the expense of looking down on us poor pitiful atheists. I, for one, don't appreciate being sneered at like I've never heard of the damn bible before, and I similarly don't like being threatened and cajoled with the possibility of hell.

Moreover, I dislike being lied to, and what else would you call this kind of retained ignorance in the face of requests to educate oneself, especially given that we've generally already done the wiki walking to link them right to the information?

You're right, they probably don't intend any harm, and even think they're doing a good thing, but I'm not going to be so condescending as to treat that ignorance with the kiddie gloves just because it's sincere.

At first we offered guidance. They refused to take it; what happens now is solely down to a refusal to even listen to a competing point of view.

I don't feel self righteous. In fact I understand that I am a sinner and there is nothing righteous about me outside of Christ. I need a Savior, I need to be saved, I was lost.

Try google maps....

[fr0d0]

But you always know abusing someone gets you nowhere, and that the intelligent thing to do would be to cut short the conversation. It's the same with atheists of a similar mold visiting Christian forums and proselytising about science over metaphysics.

[Jacob(smooth)]

Good example.

It's a lot like smoking, or drinking, or drugs or overeating. You can offer people the truth but they don't want to hear it if it means giving something up.

While I appreciate the sentiment you're trying to get across, I'm not sure how this should change anyone's approach. Have you ever tried to explain to a drug addict that they're an addict? They are purposefully ignoring reality in order to stay in their comfort zone, and gentle fact-pointing doesn't sink in. I'm not advocating being abusive, but there comes a point when the kid-glove approach is futile.

And when any contrary information is being ignored with self-righteous smugness, you have reached that point.

Indeed! I spend a good deal of my professional life trying to tell people things they don't want to hear and do things they don't want to do. And yes, some people's reactions are desperately frustrating.

I'd say everyone has different buttons and approaches. Some respond to facts, others to threats. Some people need driving, others guiding. Lots need to be made to think they reached the conclusion themselves and sometimes one can use reverse psychology.

I've never seem mockery work because then to accept your truth they have to accept your assessment that they're a fucking moron right along with it.

Not saying it's never appropriate mind, just that it help change minds. People like Jideoni-Charles can't and won't and as such a bit of mockery is clean fun with no downside.