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?
To paraphrase Sam Harris: If someone does not respect evidence, what evidence could you provide that would make them respect evidence? If someone does not respect logic, what logical argument could you make to convince them?
I also like this one: Debating a xian is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are at chess, the pigeon will just knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around as if it won the game.
I think it all breaks down to the beginning of life. If your friend does value science then I presume he accepts evolution. If evolution happened then there was no Adam and Eve. If there was no Adam and Eve there was no original sin. If there was no original sin, then there was no need for a savior. Thus, Jesus was just some apocalyptic dude that got arrested and crucified.
Problem is people like me when i was a christian. To me adam and eve just use to be a metaphor ect. just like lots of gensis is actually a hebrew poem. So i fully accepted evolution and simply thought adam and eve ect were just poems/metaphors ect.! luckily i still managed to find my way to the truth eventually!!
You are using logic to make an argument to people who don't respect logic. They are programmed to doublethink and rationalize their self-contradicting beliefs. They are unable to follow a straight-line logical thread to its conclusion if that conclusion is that there is no god.