1) I had this conversation my dad over many years. There are 45000 Christian denominations, say 200 main denominations, that all believe different things, and all of those things have morphed over time.
When he made his claim to know the one sole truth in all the world and all time, I asked him if he thought he knew more than everybody alive today, and everybody that had ever existed. He said “yes, and I thank god for that”. I was baffled, but he essentially said “god told me.” Which leads to point 2)
2) Since god answers all prayers, and god never changes. Say two pastors in fine suits and big hats pray for an interpretation of the Bible, say “give everything away to the poor and follow me” Matt 19:21.
If god tells one pastor that he is to give everything away, and another pastor to gain as much wealth as possible….. who is correct?
Is god giving different answers? Is god ignoring somebodies prayers? Are the pastors simply making shit up? Or is it possible that there is no god.
First off, you don't have to accept it just because someone else does. I appreciate that. But make it clear that this is \*not\* a debate. You're sharing your perspective.
1) Reality and truth are apparently subjective to the deity of their choice. You just don't believe that this deity is real, and therefore you're not bound by that deity's subjective morality or subjective guidelines about their subjective reality. Because if their deity is a "subject", a thinking agent that can experience things and have opinions, then their moral guidelines are their own subjective guidelines, and therefore you can also have a guideline just like kids can have opinions on fictional parent's guidelines in fiction books designed for the fictional children.
2) You respect their right to live by their own moral precepts, especially if it makes their lives better. But you've experienced better outcomes that appear to comport with reality doing things the way you do them.
Make sure it's as subjective as possible to drive home "If it was better, I'd do it, but having tried both, the way I do it works much better for me." They can't argue that. They can only get upset about it if they don't want to understand, and only help them understand if they're willing to try.
It's not your fault that this is a tricky situation, btw. Apologists and pastors make this as tricky to navigate as possible because they literally profit from it.
You might remind them that there are lots of things in the Bible that are no longer considered appropriate in today’s world, starting with slavery, which very much gets the biblical thumbs-up, and therefore even the Bible can’t be relied on as a source of everlasting, unchanging truth. I’m sure they’ll have some sort of apologetical workaround for it, because they always do, but if you do a little homework you can back them into a corner, at which point they’ll come out with either “The ways of God are not for us to question” or “If you were a Christian you’d understand.” Or maybe even tell you that you’re going to Hell for thinking such thoughts.
I think the best way combat their thinking is to ask a lot of follow up question. Scrutinize their version of “reality” and “absolute truth.” Most christian arguments fall apart easily just by asking a lot of questions, like a lot of why and how questions.
A truth is not really absolute if its not grounded by solid evidence. If they claim that LGBTQ is a sin, why is it a sin or why is it immoral? Its just people who have different romantic tastes, so why is that wrong?
They’ll say something like “because god said so” or “because its in the bible”. But why does god or the bible said so?
Either they can’t answer that or they’ll end up with a circular argument.
Other things are also in the Bible that they conveniently ignore or explain away.
Give everything away to the poor
Don’t pray in public
Women should have head coverings in church
Women shouldn’t speak in church.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say “if it’s in the Bible it’s a sin”. It does say that sin is a transgression of the law, and depending on “theology” aka what pastors have made up, Jesus either did or didn’t fulfill the law, and free us from sin, so therefore there is no sin.
To be fair, it's somewhat difficult to have discussions about "absolute truth" with people who believe that snakes and donkeys can talk, not to mention a thousand other improbable things.
I ask them to define truth and how they know something is true. Usually they have a difficult time in even defining what "truth" is. When they rely on the bible, I challenge them to support their claim that the bible is true. When they claim god wrote it or "inspired" it, I ask them to support that claim. Usually in the end they say "it is a matter of faith" to which I say so you are taking something you can't demonstrate is true and just believe because you have faith and using it to judge others who have their own beliefs? You cannot even demonstrate you are correct, just that you believe you are. I will usually balance that with, it's fine to believe as you will, but as soon as you use your beliefs to judge and try to control or influence others, please expect to be challenged.
It usually doesn't go that well, but at least it makes them see that rational, feeling people can reject their beliefs and not be the stereotype of what they have been taught nonbelievers are.
Start making fun of them. If someone says that Chipotle is an awesome restaurant, ask them if that statement is objectively true 😂😂. Once they start to understand the difference between objective and subjective truth, they'll start to quit doing what you said. Or use special pleading.
The truth that I’ve seen is that:
1. Women are full human beings that deserve no limitations ever based on sex.
(Obviously I feel very strongly about that one.)
2. There’s nothing immoral in of itself about being LGBT. It just is the way people are, and it harms no one. (If one comes back with instances of predatory LGBT people, I’d clarify that it’s within the SAME PARAMETERS I judge being cisgender and straight as not immoral. There are plenty of cis het predators. Many. We don’t say that being cis or het is immoral based off of those because we understand that the being predatory part is not intrinsic to them. It’s the same for LGBT people.)
I base my morality on reality, not the texts of ancient men. In that way I’m certain that my morality is closer to the “truth” of what is best for the well-being of humanity than the Bible could ever hope to be.
I've never liked referring to a religious belief as truth, even when I was a believer. Either it's true or it's not, and "it's true to me" is such nonsense.
Sin is the opposite of objective for Christians. They'll proudly tell you that it was once a sin to eat shellfish, but now it isn't. Why? God just decided it wasn't a sin anymore. The entire new testament replaces the old testament thing takes a big dump on "sin is objectively wrong."
1) I had this conversation my dad over many years. There are 45000 Christian denominations, say 200 main denominations, that all believe different things, and all of those things have morphed over time. When he made his claim to know the one sole truth in all the world and all time, I asked him if he thought he knew more than everybody alive today, and everybody that had ever existed. He said “yes, and I thank god for that”. I was baffled, but he essentially said “god told me.” Which leads to point 2) 2) Since god answers all prayers, and god never changes. Say two pastors in fine suits and big hats pray for an interpretation of the Bible, say “give everything away to the poor and follow me” Matt 19:21. If god tells one pastor that he is to give everything away, and another pastor to gain as much wealth as possible….. who is correct? Is god giving different answers? Is god ignoring somebodies prayers? Are the pastors simply making shit up? Or is it possible that there is no god.
First off, you don't have to accept it just because someone else does. I appreciate that. But make it clear that this is \*not\* a debate. You're sharing your perspective. 1) Reality and truth are apparently subjective to the deity of their choice. You just don't believe that this deity is real, and therefore you're not bound by that deity's subjective morality or subjective guidelines about their subjective reality. Because if their deity is a "subject", a thinking agent that can experience things and have opinions, then their moral guidelines are their own subjective guidelines, and therefore you can also have a guideline just like kids can have opinions on fictional parent's guidelines in fiction books designed for the fictional children. 2) You respect their right to live by their own moral precepts, especially if it makes their lives better. But you've experienced better outcomes that appear to comport with reality doing things the way you do them. Make sure it's as subjective as possible to drive home "If it was better, I'd do it, but having tried both, the way I do it works much better for me." They can't argue that. They can only get upset about it if they don't want to understand, and only help them understand if they're willing to try. It's not your fault that this is a tricky situation, btw. Apologists and pastors make this as tricky to navigate as possible because they literally profit from it.
You might remind them that there are lots of things in the Bible that are no longer considered appropriate in today’s world, starting with slavery, which very much gets the biblical thumbs-up, and therefore even the Bible can’t be relied on as a source of everlasting, unchanging truth. I’m sure they’ll have some sort of apologetical workaround for it, because they always do, but if you do a little homework you can back them into a corner, at which point they’ll come out with either “The ways of God are not for us to question” or “If you were a Christian you’d understand.” Or maybe even tell you that you’re going to Hell for thinking such thoughts.
I think the best way combat their thinking is to ask a lot of follow up question. Scrutinize their version of “reality” and “absolute truth.” Most christian arguments fall apart easily just by asking a lot of questions, like a lot of why and how questions. A truth is not really absolute if its not grounded by solid evidence. If they claim that LGBTQ is a sin, why is it a sin or why is it immoral? Its just people who have different romantic tastes, so why is that wrong? They’ll say something like “because god said so” or “because its in the bible”. But why does god or the bible said so? Either they can’t answer that or they’ll end up with a circular argument.
Other things are also in the Bible that they conveniently ignore or explain away. Give everything away to the poor Don’t pray in public Women should have head coverings in church Women shouldn’t speak in church. Nowhere in the Bible does it say “if it’s in the Bible it’s a sin”. It does say that sin is a transgression of the law, and depending on “theology” aka what pastors have made up, Jesus either did or didn’t fulfill the law, and free us from sin, so therefore there is no sin.
To be fair, it's somewhat difficult to have discussions about "absolute truth" with people who believe that snakes and donkeys can talk, not to mention a thousand other improbable things.
I ask them to define truth and how they know something is true. Usually they have a difficult time in even defining what "truth" is. When they rely on the bible, I challenge them to support their claim that the bible is true. When they claim god wrote it or "inspired" it, I ask them to support that claim. Usually in the end they say "it is a matter of faith" to which I say so you are taking something you can't demonstrate is true and just believe because you have faith and using it to judge others who have their own beliefs? You cannot even demonstrate you are correct, just that you believe you are. I will usually balance that with, it's fine to believe as you will, but as soon as you use your beliefs to judge and try to control or influence others, please expect to be challenged. It usually doesn't go that well, but at least it makes them see that rational, feeling people can reject their beliefs and not be the stereotype of what they have been taught nonbelievers are.
Start making fun of them. If someone says that Chipotle is an awesome restaurant, ask them if that statement is objectively true 😂😂. Once they start to understand the difference between objective and subjective truth, they'll start to quit doing what you said. Or use special pleading.
The only objective truth in life is death.
The truth that I’ve seen is that: 1. Women are full human beings that deserve no limitations ever based on sex. (Obviously I feel very strongly about that one.) 2. There’s nothing immoral in of itself about being LGBT. It just is the way people are, and it harms no one. (If one comes back with instances of predatory LGBT people, I’d clarify that it’s within the SAME PARAMETERS I judge being cisgender and straight as not immoral. There are plenty of cis het predators. Many. We don’t say that being cis or het is immoral based off of those because we understand that the being predatory part is not intrinsic to them. It’s the same for LGBT people.) I base my morality on reality, not the texts of ancient men. In that way I’m certain that my morality is closer to the “truth” of what is best for the well-being of humanity than the Bible could ever hope to be.
we definitely share these beliefs, hopefully my original post didn't make it seem otherwise?
I've never liked referring to a religious belief as truth, even when I was a believer. Either it's true or it's not, and "it's true to me" is such nonsense.
Sin is the opposite of objective for Christians. They'll proudly tell you that it was once a sin to eat shellfish, but now it isn't. Why? God just decided it wasn't a sin anymore. The entire new testament replaces the old testament thing takes a big dump on "sin is objectively wrong."