Help me help a friend

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.

coffee_cake

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.

coffee_cake

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.

coffee_cake

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.

humanji

Sonics2k wrote: »

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

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



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.

Go back and read the reason why the OP wants their friend to read any book that will devalue their beliefs.

Sarky wrote: »

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

Again, forcing your beliefs onto someone is fundamentally wrong.

pauldla

humanji wrote: »

Go back and read the reason why the OP wants their friend to read any book that will devalue their beliefs.


Again, forcing your beliefs onto someone is fundamentally wrong.

The thing is, I can see the word 'agreed' in the OP, but you're using the word 'forced'.

How did that happen? Did I miss something?

Galvasean

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.

'Agreed' no doubt under penalty of torture.

damn militant atheists! :mad:

Turtwig

I guess everyone has different values in life. Personally I'd hate a person for knowingly believing I held a false belief and never once attempting to correct me on it. I want to learn about this world as accurately as possible. I don't want to hide in some comfort bubble and I certainly don't want friends thinking that I'm a loony behind my back all the while letting me believe I'm this supposedly rational, mature adult. The OP's crush friend has agreed to read a piece of literature recommended by him. It's a mutual trust thing and there is absolutely nothing cynical about it unless he resorts to immoral aggressive persuasive techniques used by the CIA.

humanji

pauldla wrote: »

The thing is, I can see the word 'agreed' in the OP, but you're using the word 'forced'.

How did that happen? Did I miss something?

not trying to say her beliefs are stupid, just that the Bible isn't infallible.

Alright, you're all missing the point I'm making completely, so we'll end this properly, once and for all:


OP, what were the circumstances surrounding your friend agreeing to read the book? Why do you want her to read it? Did she approach you, or did you approach here about it?

pauldla

humanji wrote: »

Alright, you're all missing the point I'm making completely, so we'll end this properly, once and for all:


OP, what were the circumstances surrounding your friend agreeing to read the book? Why do you want her to read it? Did she approach you, or did you approach here about it?

Indeed! Or are you going to slip her a copy of 'God Is Not Great' and tell her it's the latest Twilight book?

El_Duderino 09

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.

That is correct and true. Excellent application of the word 'militant' there.
I'll tell you an analogous one is this militant medicine. Those militant medics going out of their way to disprove the belief that leeches cure ailments. Leeches were believed to cure ailments, and those militant b*stards went out of their way to prove that belief wrong.

Daemons were a perfectly good explanation for sickness and those militant scientists went and demonstrated germ theory.

humanji wrote: »

I'd be insulted by people going out of their way to try and prove my belief's are wrong.

That's exactly right we should never try to correct beliefs just because they are wrong. Doubly so if the beliefs are wrong.

The right thing to believe is probably the first thing that comes in to your head and never allow it to be questioned.

I salute you humanji

Standman

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.

I have had religious friends in the past present me with religious videos/literature and the like from time to time. I always thought it was a nice gesture and showed they care enough to suggest things to me which they think are important. Talking about and sharing information is not equal to "forcing beliefs".

Ickle Magoo

humanji wrote: »

Again, forcing your beliefs onto someone is fundamentally wrong.

You mean like your belief that nobody should be forcing beliefs onto someone?

magicbastarder

i'd suggest derren brown or ben goldacre - that way, you wouldn't be pushing an obvious atheist perspective, but both authors have one or more very accessible books with interesting things to say about magic, belief from authority and the like.