Help me help a friend

Tea_Bag

I've got a very close friend who is a strong Christian believer. family, friends, the works.

She's agreed to read a book of my choosing.

I'm hoping to start with evolution, and stuff like the earth isn't 7000 years old, Adam/eve, universe doesn't give a **** about us etc. Just kinda dispute the all perfect factual Bible stuff, not attack her faith in a god. not yet anyway, that's likely going to take a very long time.

I've read and own a few Dawkins books, and while good, he's a bit of a condescending D!ck, and assumes you have doubt in your mind already if you get me.

any suggestions? maybe a more entry level Dawkins that I don't know about?

Sonics2k

Tell her to read the Bible, from the beginning to the end.

No rational person can read that book and not walk away as an Atheist or Agnostic.

I'm not even slightly joking.

Tea_Bag

I know what you mean, its probably the reason I'm atheist, but its not going to work. I'm not trying to say her beliefs are stupid, just that the Bible isn't infallible.

I need something with simple, logical arguments.

Sarky

Small Gods by Terry Pratchett. srsly

IamtheWalrus

Not a book but a quick read of this gave me a lot of clarity.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/evolution/evolution.htm

Turtwig

Honestly I'd start with "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson. Then "Cosmos" by Sagan. Then I'd move into something containing critical thinking. My personal recommendation would be "Theory and Reality by Peter Godfrey Smith" but that requires a bit of dedication on the reader's part. So perhaps something simpler like Asimov's essays. 'The Relativity of Wrong' being a good starter.


At the same time I recommend reading up on books of neuroscience for yourself. Anything by Steven Pinker or Bruce Hood on the science of belief. Namely you want to familiarise yourself with how humans thinks so you can try to avoid a situation where your friend stonewalls.

Pushtrak

Jernal has you sorted. I haven't read it myself, but one that I intend to read that may be worth reading... A Universe From Nothing by Lawrence Krauss. Anyone here read it? Its on my to read list. Though I haven't even bought it yet, and when I do buy it, I have a number of other ones I'll get to before reading it. Anyone here get it yet?

Tea_Bag

Jernal wrote: »

Honestly I'd start with "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson. Then "Cosmos" by Sagan. Then I'd move into something containing critical thinking. My personal recommendation would be "Theory and Reality by Peter Godfrey Smith" but that requires a bit of dedication on the reader's part. So perhaps something simpler like Asimov's essays. 'The Relativity of Wrong' being a good starter.


At the same time I recommend reading up on books of neuroscience for yourself. Anything by Steven Pinker or Bruce Hood on the science of belief. Namely you want to familiarise yourself with how humans thinks so you can try to avoid a situation where your friend stonewalls.

Thanks.


just ordered a short history of everything. £4.03 delivered. if anything, I'll get a read out of it, though I've a feeling I've read it before..

NecroSteve

Maybe some mythology from the general Mediterranean region. Lots of miracles, virgin births, resurrections, children of gods, etc. etc.

Tea_Bag

NecroSteve wrote: »

Maybe some mythology from the general Mediterranean region. Lots of miracles, virgin births, resurrections, children of gods, etc. etc.

what?

Supermensch

Nietzsche's The Will to Power has some fairly good logical arguments on Atheism. Heavy going, but an interesting read.

Burt Lancaster

Tea_Bag wrote: »

I'm hoping to start with evolution, and stuff like the earth isn't 7000 years old, Adam/eve, universe doesn't give a **** about us etc. Just kinda dispute the all perfect factual Bible stuff, not attack her faith in a god. not yet anyway, that's likely going to take a very long time.

I've read and own a few Dawkins books, and while good, he's a bit of a condescending D!ck, and assumes you have doubt in your mind already if you get me.

any suggestions? maybe a more entry level Dawkins that I don't know about?

I'm not sure that’s a great starting point.
Despite what the tinternet likes to portray, most mainstream Christian denominations, inc. Catholicism etc. are not actually creationists, but believe in theistic evolution, which in effect does not conflict with physical science, i.e. the how rather than the why.

But if she happens to be a creationist such books might be educational

Tea_Bag

she is a creationist. I know evolution doesn't disprove a god, but it does put a big dent in the old testament.

pauldla

Wot Jernal and Sarky said. Small Gods, the Bill Bryson book, and Cosmos. Should be enough there to get her started. FFS don't let her anywhere near Hitchens, he's an entertaining read, and fun to watch in an interview, but his books are far too pugnacious, in my opinion.

joseph brand

Tea_Bag wrote: »

what?

I think that Necrosteve was hinting at the history of places like Egypt. The story of the virgin birth and the resurrection is common in other cultures, some pre-dating christianity. As to 'what' books, I wouldn't know.

im invisible

The DaVinci Code

pauldla

im invisible wrote: »

The DaVinci Code

I found that challenged my faith in humanity, rather than my faith in god

MagicMarker

A Letter to a Christian Nation - Sam Harris

Short and sweet.

philologos

OP: Are you open to listening to what she has to say. What if she's right? It could be that you're not helping her?

Sonics2k: I've read it through. When I did I stopped being an agnostic. The idea that atheists are the only rational people in society is laughable. Have you read it right through? If yes I'd be interested in getting into the details of it. If no why are you making this claim?

humanji

I'd agree with Philologos. Why do you feel the need to force your beliefs on others? Just let her believe what she believes.

MagicMarker

I must have missed the part in the opening post where the OP mentioned tying his friend down and prying her eyelids open to read a book of his choosing.

pauldla

MagicMarker wrote: »

I must have missed the part in the opening post where the OP mentioned tying his friend down and prying her eyelids open to read a book of his choosing.

Well the OP obviously meant it metaphorically.

Dades

Tea_Bag - I'm not convinced "A Short History of Nearly Everything" is the best book for this. While it is excellent, I found it really just information overload without a particular voice.

I'd recommend (as mentioned) Cosmos, or The Demon-Haunted World as Sagan writes passionately, but convincingly without being condecending and without being just chapter after chapter of sciencey stuff.

philologos wrote: »

OP: Are you open to listening to what she has to say. What if she's right? It could be that you're not helping her?

She's a creationist. She's not right.

humanji wrote: »

I'd agree with Philologos. Why do you feel the need to force your beliefs on others? Just let her believe what she believes.

You think it's a bad thing for a creationist who has agreed to read a book to do so?

From the OP:

Tea_Bag wrote: »

She's agreed to read a book of my choosing.

FullBeard

The best antidote to any given monotheistic belief in the first instance is not science, but a gentle assault by means of history (i.e. Thor, Zeus, Apollo, and the myriad of Jesus-like figures throughout mythology), and a philosophical dismantling of the common arguments that God must exist.
You can also expose the poverty of "faith", explain why faith is not a virtue, and demonstrate that it is legitimate to substitute the word "God" in every sentence that is used to defend his existence, with "leprechaun".

It's a bit early to frontload the science on your friend, in my opinion.

I'm afraid that you might also need to be prepared to lose your friend over this issue.

El_Duderino 09

You could try Guy P Harrison '50 reasons people give for believing in a god'

robindch

philologos wrote: »

I've read it through. When I did I stopped being an agnostic.

Let me get this straight - amongst other stuff, you read Leviticus and said to yourself "OK, this is something I want to be part of"?

humanji

MagicMarker wrote: »

I must have missed the part in the opening post where the OP mentioned tying his friend down and prying her eyelids open to read a book of his choosing.

Dades wrote: »

You think it's a bad thing for a creationist who has agreed to read a book to do so?

From the OP:

Ah come on. Do you honestly believe the friend went to the OP asking for a book that's counter to her beliefs? Or is it more likely that they had a discussion about their beliefs and the OP wants the friend to read a book in the hopes it will shatter her beliefs?

Just let her be and live your own life.

Sonics2k

philologos wrote: »

OP: Are you open to listening to what she has to say. What if she's right? It could be that you're not helping her?

She's not right. It's fantasy and mythology. Stories told to comfort people thousands of years ago based on fear and no understanding.

philologos wrote: »

Sonics2k: I've read it through. When I did I stopped being an agnostic. The idea that atheists are the only rational people in society is laughable. Have you read it right through? If yes I'd be interested in getting into the details of it. If no why are you making this claim?

Yes I have, in fact I've told you this before.

The Bible describes two very different acting Gods, an impossible aspect of an infallible being that Christians describe him as. He is described as perfect, yet seemingly makes mistakes and even changes his mind.

The Old Testament is a barbaric, brutal, misogynistic book that shows Gods pleasure of killing the innocent and weak, just because they are of different tribes.
Any parts you don't like are simply claimed as 'non-literal' (such as Psalms and the baby killing)
A rather common aspect of the various religious texts at the time.

The New Testament attempts to save face, changing the system of God (again, logically impossible) and ushering the excuse of "Jesus came to fulfil it"
Texts are twisted to suit the view of the person reading it, one chapter can be literal, but others are not.

Oh, and for the whole "Jesus loves us" nonsense, have you actually read what happens in Revelations? It seems that even the poor gits who've never even heard of Jesus will be tortured, go to hell and various other things.

So yes. It's a load of crap honestly. A book used to inspire fear, ignorance, prejudice and turn rather intelligent people into blibbering fools who may as well worship the Easter Bunny.

Sonics2k

robindch wrote: »

Let me get this straight - amongst other stuff, you read Leviticus and said to yourself "OK, this is something I want to be part of"?

Ah but sure, they throw out the "Jesus brought a new age" nonsense when that rational argument comes up. They only use Leviticus for the gheys and their abominous ways!

Just ignore the stuff about mould, what food to eat and beards. Sure that's all non-literal and irrelevant now

pauldla

If I had such a discussion with a friend, and they suggested that, further to the conversation, I read X, Y or Z, I'd at least give the book a once over.

And if I suggested the same to them, I'm sure they would give it a look, too.

If they didn't, what harm.

Friends do recommend books to each other from time to time.

i don't see why people are jumping on op because he wants to recommend a book
i also don't see why we are going to "but what if she's right"
well if she is right then it'll make for an interesting discussion when OP recommends a book reflecting his outlook and she is able to counter it etc

implying that people should be left alone in their little bubbles and never read anything different is a bit insulting to all concerned

philologos

robindch wrote: »

philologos wrote: »

I've read it through. When I did I stopped being an agnostic.

Let me get this straight - amongst other stuff, you read Leviticus and said to yourself "OK, this is something I want to be part of"?

I wanted to be a part of it because I was convinced it was true. As far as I'm concerned I had no other choice but to accept Jesus as Lord because there is no good case against it and quite a strong one for it and for the veracity of the source material.

Truth has nothing to do with desire. Truth exists irrespective of what people feel. Truth isn't necessarily what is warm and fuzzy.

Sonics2k

bluewolf wrote: »

implying that people should be left alone in their little bubbles and never read anything different is a bit insulting to all concerned

And thus how Religion continues.

Instead of encouraging our children to learn about the planet, the universe and sciences, they're pushed to keep their heads down and pray over and over until they believe it.


rantrantrantrantrantrantrantrant

FullBeard

philologos wrote: »

I wanted to be a part of it because I was convinced it was true. As far as I'm concerned I had no other choice but to accept Jesus as Lord because there is no good case against it and quite a strong one for it and for the veracity of the source material.

You have got to be kidding.

By your standard of belief, would you not agree that Little Red Riding Hood and Hansel and Grettel are also quite likely true? The accounts are very old, females often wore red caps in medieval Europe, and parents often abandoned children in woods that were historically likely to have been deep and dark. Witches and werewolves appear frequently in the European legal record too, and there are many eye-witness accounts of their acts.

pauldla

philologos wrote: »

I wanted to be a part of it because I was convinced it was true. As far as I'm concerned I had no other choice but to accept Jesus as Lord because there is no good case against it and quite a strong one for it and for the veracity of the source material.

Truth has nothing to do with desire. Truth exists irrespective of what people feel. Truth isn't necessarily what is warm and fuzzy.

The veracity of the wha'? Are you referring to that well-known tome 'The Bible'?

humanji

bluewolf wrote: »

i don't see why people are jumping on op because he wants to recommend a book

From what the OP has said, it doesn't seem that they are merely recommending a book. They want the friend to read a book that is counter to their beliefs. That's militant atheism and is just as bad as having religion crammed down your throat.

implying that people should be left alone in their little bubbles and never read anything different is a bit insulting to all concerned

I'd be insulted by people going out of their way to try and prove my belief's are wrong. And it's a bit of a strawman to claim anyone is saying she shouldn't read. But she should be allowed to choose what to read instead of being badgered by someone out to prove her wrong.

pauldla

humanji wrote: »

From what the OP has said, it doesn't seem that they are merely recommending a book. They want the friend to read a book that is counter to their beliefs. That's militant atheism and is just as bad as having religion crammed down your throat.


I'd be insulted by people going out of their way to try and prove my belief's are wrong. And it's a bit of a strawman to claim anyone is saying she shouldn't read. But she should be allowed to choose what to read instead of being badgered by someone out to prove her wrong.

There is no injury in consent. She's agreed to read a book of his choosing. I don't see a problem.

I'd be interested to know, though, if the OP is going to return the favour, and read a book of her choosing.

yellowlabrador

I still think that a study of the bible is the gateway to starting to think more deeply about the question of religion. I know it's not a book but 'introduction to the new testament' a series of lectures at Yale University would be a good start. you can find it on Youtube. It's not pro or anti religion but it examines it's origin, the history and the society. It also gives insight in the purpose of the authors. There's a good reason why catholics are discouraged from reading the bible and only get presented with 'quotes'. A thorough study of the contradictions and an understanding of the early church does wonders to open a Christians' eyes to their beliefs.

humanji

humanji wrote: »

From what the OP has said, it doesn't seem that they are merely recommending a book. They want the friend to read a book that is counter to their beliefs. That's militant atheism and is just as bad as having religion crammed down your throat.

I'd be insulted by people going out of their way to try and prove my belief's are wrong. And it's a bit of a strawman to claim anyone is saying she shouldn't read. But she should be allowed to choose what to read instead of being badgered by someone out to prove her wrong.

she is allowed choose what to read, she's just agreed to read one extra thing on top of that

humanji

pauldla wrote: »

There is no injury in consent. She's agreed to read a book of his choosing. I don't see a problem.

It's the intent that's the problem. He wants to devalue her beliefs. It's horrifically insulting to her. It doesn't matter that she believes in sky fairies. What harm is coming from her beliefs? Why does the OP need to change them? Why can't he just let it be?

Sarky

Tea_Bag wrote: »

she is a creationist.

Definitely Small Gods then. Pratchett writes without using many scary big words.

pauldla

humanji wrote: »

It's the intent that's the problem. He wants to devalue her beliefs. It's horrifically insulting to her. It doesn't matter that she believes in sky fairies. What harm is coming from her beliefs? Why does the OP need to change them? Why can't he just let it be?

-Hi Tina
-Hi Jim
-Tina, you should read this, but I'm warning you, it might challenge your beliefs!
-Thanks, I'll give it a go at the weekend.

What a bastard! Leave her alone, you dog!

Sonics2k

humanji wrote: »

It's the intent that's the problem. He wants to devalue her beliefs. It's horrifically insulting to her. It doesn't matter that she believes in sky fairies. What harm is coming from her beliefs? Why does the OP need to change them? Why can't he just let it be?

I usually try and tip-toe around these things. Be nice, bit of PR and all that. But frankly, I'm not in the mood.

She believes in Creationism. This is stupid. It is extremely stupid. It is daft and stupid.
Anyone who believes in Creationism is, stupid and or ignorant.
They are proof that religious interference lowers the intelligence levels of people.

Creationism. Is. Stupid.

humanji

humanji wrote: »

It's the intent that's the problem. He wants to devalue her beliefs. It's horrifically insulting to her. It doesn't matter that she believes in sky fairies. What harm is coming from her beliefs? Why does the OP need to change them? Why can't he just let it be?

why are you on a discussion forum disagreeing with people? why can't you just let them be?

that's why
there's nothing insulting about it

humanji

bluewolf wrote: »

she is allowed choose what to read, she's just agreed to read one extra thing on top of that

She's being badgered by someone with an agenda to read that one extra thing.

And you're missing the point. The book is a McGuffin. It's not the issue. The OP is trying to force his beliefs onto his friend. If it was a Catholic forcing their beliefs on an atheist, there'd be uproar here.

humanji

humanji wrote: »

She's being badgered by someone with an agenda to read that one extra thing.

And you're missing the point. The book is a McGuffin. It's not the issue. The OP is trying to force his beliefs onto his friend. If it was a Catholic forcing their beliefs on an atheist, there'd be uproar here.

no he isn't trying to force anything
she agreed to read a book
i agreed to read a book a friend lent me recently, i hated it, end of story
no big crisis or insults

also
"Just kinda dispute the all perfect factual Bible stuff, not attack her faith in a god."

if a catholic did the same, there'd probably be a thread going "i'm reading this book a religious friend wanted me to read, here's some excerpts, lol"

humanji

bluewolf wrote: »

why are you on a discussion forum disagreeing with people? why can't you just let them be?

that's why
there's nothing insulting about it

The OP and their friend aren't in a discussion forum. As I've said, the purpose of the OP giving their friend the book is to attack her beliefs.

humanji

bluewolf wrote: »

no he isn't trying to force anything
she agreed to read a book
i agreed to read a book a friend lent me recently, i hated it, end of story
no big crisis or insults

also
"Just kinda dispute the all perfect factual Bible stuff, not attack her faith in a god."

if a catholic did the same, there'd probably be a thread going "i'm reading this book a religious friend wanted me to read, here's some excerpts, lol"

She is a creationist. She believes everything in the Bible is true. Trying to prove that the Bible isn't all true is attack her core belief.

pauldla

humanji wrote: »

The OP and their friend aren't in a discussion forum.

Yes, they talk in the real world. Much more scary.

Actually, do we know that? Maybe they are in a discussion forum. I hope they're having fun like we are.

Sonics2k

humanji wrote: »

She's being badgered by someone with an agenda to read that one extra thing.

And you're missing the point. The book is a McGuffin. It's not the issue. The OP is trying to force his beliefs onto his friend. If it was a Catholic forcing their beliefs on an atheist, there'd be uproar here.

Uh no, you're making an assumption she's being badgered.

We (those darned militant atheists) have read the OP and seen the evidence

Tea_Bag wrote: »

I've got a very close friend who is a strong Christian believer. family, friends, the works.

She's agreed to read a book of my choosing.

So there we have it. She has agreed to read one book.
People are now suggesting books that she may find interesting.
There is no pressure from the OP, no bullying or harassment. Just advice.

One of them is a even a Terry Pratchett novel after all.

Sarky

humanji wrote: »

She is a creationist. She believes everything in the Bible is true. Trying to prove that the Bible isn't all true is attack her core belief.

Leaving aside the fact that she chose to indulge her friend of her own free will: So? It's a stupid belief. It SHOULD be challenged. Christ, even philologus doesn't try to defend it.