A friend of mine is a pretty die-hard Christian (shock horror, both of his parents are missionaries/vicars) and he often posts little sayings of some kind or another on Facebook, which I usually ignore. However, today he posted something that really irritated me for some reason:
"The more I look at science, the more in awe of God I become."
And just to make that worse, one of his Christian friends commented "Boom" as if he had made some kind of infallible argument. Somehow, I feel as though nothing I say will make any difference because they must be incredibly deluded already to believe that God just "invented" science. Basically, this is the guy who thinks he's a "modern and intelligent" Christian by saying that things like Noah's Ark are "just stories and aren't meant to be taken seriously by Christians". But if that is true, then why take ANY of the Bible seriously and where does he draw the line between stories and (what he believes is) the truth?
In the past I asked him and his friend where the evidence was. He claimed science (yes, seriously) helped prove Christianity and that Christianity was about "opening yourself" to it and believing, and then you "feel God" or whatever. How do you argue with someone like that??
What do you all say to religious people (not necessarily just Christians) who claim that science is just an invention of God? Is there a specific way to argue with someone who twists everything to awkwardly suit modern day thinking?
HA! That is priceless!
Non-chicken... That's awesome.
Amusingly this thread is titled "How to argue against a particular delusion," and thanks to Richard, we have somewhat demonstrated the answer! You just rebuke, rebut and counter his fallacious "arguments" (or lack thereof), and then wait until he realizes his impotence within the intellectual realm and runs away cowering.
I think I had a math prof do the same thing with probability theory....
I wonder why he announced his exit instead of just disappearing POOF! in a cloud of smoke?
Do 'Gods' go 'poof', when they stop being thought about?
Alas, poor Yorick Richard! I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite
jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath bore me on his back a
thousand times, and now how abhorr'd in my imagination it is!
My gorge rises at it.
Goodbye Fair Richard you will be missed, the brighness of my life diminished slightly by your passing this way never again, but fear not my friend some other christy foole will take your place and tickle my funny bone once more. :D
The deeper fates have received you, and off you go.
To serve in an abstract heaven, where strings of words are betrayed by silence?
We who lift the vail, can offer no tasty meal of certain truths, and can only show strings of symbols that do not include 'God' as a factor.
Is this the best of all possible universes, where 'God' is hardly more than a 'was once thought', footnote?
I wish you well.
In the vast web of 'data', will the appearence of 'God' reappear as that last decimal point? Will a vector resolve into a magnitude and direction, pointing to where 'God' must sit?
My hands seive not the deeper meanings at this moment, but if I sit quietly among the trees of deep time, will I perceive the great forest that surrounds the throne of 'God'?
One thing that I found really fun to watch was I would schedule some times with the local university's science department. Find out what type of experiments they have going on and taking my friends to watch/participate in simple experiments. There is a difference is reading about science and another to actual do it. Makes it hard to argue against.