Arvel Joffi

Years ago I worked with a pastor in training; we cleaned swimming pools. He was a pretty nice guy, had the usual born-again story: he was violent, a womanizer, did drugs and drank too much, then he found in Jesus in the Navy.

Well, we were working together one day, he was helping me catch up on my route, and we were having a pleasant, hours longs philosophical discussion. We made our points, listened to each other, and responded politely. Until...three hours into the talk he cut me off to say, "But Michael, don't you see? You're just spouting philosophy while I'm speaking truth." This was thirteen years ago and I still remember his exact words, they were so ridiculous.

I told him I found the word "spouting" to be insulting, but he responded, "Well. It's true."

Of course, the things I was spouting were the points of Christianity that are absurd, contradictory, or proven wrong. Do you sometimes wonder if it's even worth the trouble?

Strawberry

It depends on the xtian for me. If it's my mom or dad or someone else close to me, then it's worth it to have civil discussions on the issue, because I'd like for them to eventually understand how I feel even if they don't agree with me.

If it's the arrogant asshole who walks up to me in the grocery store because I'm alone and look like an easy target, tries to convince me to go to his/her church group, and gets pissed off and won't leave when I say I'm an atheist, I would say no, it's not worth it.

Just my 2 (Canadian, therefore practically worthless ) cents, of course...

fando

Belief is a very hard thing to change. The most effective way to change it is to present lots of contrary evidence. Eventually, enough doubt accumulates that someone is willing to re-evaluate his or her beliefs. However, it takes time and willingness on part of the person to change opinions. If neither of those are present, then why bother debating? In that light, I don't see why it's worthwhile to debate issues without an audience that might benefit from hearing contrary opinions. And if you wish to convince a friend or relative of your position, you have plenty of time to present evidence. The only problem is willingness to consider new data by the subject.

Rusting Car Bumper

Is it worth arguing?

Depends on what you are arguing about.

Is it about beliefs? I'm right.. you are wrong. No. Its not worth arguing about.

Arguing to convince people that god belief is irrational? No. Why bother?

Arguing about common concerns? Arguing to demonstrate that nonbelievers are as reasonable and respectful and deserving of such as anyone else? Yes. That's worth arguing for.

Arguing in some face to face say on the street about apologetics is generally a waste of time.

DC

Marduk

I'm with DC, I just don't see any point.
Other than here on this web site, for entertainment purposes only.


OTOH I do see a need to fund organizations like the ACLU and Americans United, to keep the Political machine of the Fundy right in check. But I don't see that as a religious argument, those people want money and power and are no more theological than Stalin.

seebs

It's not worth trying to "convince" people if that's your primary goal. It is definitely worth trying to learn to understand positions other than your own, and both parties should learn something from most debates.

beastmaster

There are only two arguments that I think are worthwhile with born-agains:

(1) arguing over the political consequences of their beliefs; i.e., keep fundamentalism out of govt!

(2) pitting Xn beliefs against other Xn beliefs.

Fundies have filters on. A born-again sees the non-believer as being like his or her "Old Self." No matter how convincing your arguments for non-belief are, the born-again will chuckle and say "oh yes, my Old Self used to think that was convincing too -- until I realized the bankruptcy of that lifestyle." You might as well pound sand.

But a born-again may at least consider arguments that church and state must be separated, or about conflicting Biblical or theological interpretations.

beyelzu

i argue for 2 reasons.

hear cuz its fun.

real world, to make a stand for other non believers. america is a heavily christian society, and it is important to let other atheists know that we are out there. and plus it can be fun.

christ-on-a-stick

Most of the time, no. With my superfundy family, definitely not.

HOWEVER; in some cases I think it can definitely be worth it because I know that *I* may not have deconverted, or at least as relatively early in life, if it hadn't been for some of the "arguments" I had with nontheists I was trying to "witness" to.

Those discussions/arguments are what prompted me to start researching for myself a lot of the contradictions and absurdities of what I was trying to tell them - which, of course instead of bolstering my faith and converting them as I had expected instead led me down the path of reason and out of the darkness of superstition.

So I do think that it *CAN* be worth it. Probably only a small percentage of the time but I guess a lot of has to do with gauging their degree of openness to begin with.

Rusting Car Bumper

Understanding is a nice goal. However, all the abstract justifications of beliefs are not really why people believe in the first place. Christians in general don't go around believing because of fine tuning and cosmological arguments even though they will try to argue these with you.

Most arguing is about these abstract beliefs and/or biblical apologetics. There is, IMO, very little understanding about beliefs when you argue about these things.

DC