I had a Socratic dialogue with a couple of religious believers, that you might find interesting:

------------------------------------------
Christian #1:
I can certainly understand your sentiment, but I must also humbly submit to you that you don't really have an understanding of who or WHAT "God" is.
I can agree with you on one thing:   God is NOT some mythical, invisible old man that lives in the sky and looks down on people, judging them or moving them around like game board pieces... I was told pretty much the same thing when I was a child and it NEVER made sense to me.   Everything I was told about God from my family to pastors, to other religious zealots CONTRADICTED pretty much everything I ever read about God in the Bible and other scriptures.
However, to believe that there is NOTHING out there that's GREATER than yourself, is equally ridiculous.  Proof of such is that we cannot give our own selves LIFE.  There is a force and power beyond ourselves that brbrought us into existence... even if you tried to explain the creation of human life by cells and atoms, there was a FORCE that made those cells and atoms move and join together.  That's why I honestly don't believe there's any such thing as an actual "atheist".  "Agnostics" is more of an acceptable term.
The term, "God" has to make sense to you, in order for you to believe it... that's why I don't blame you for your current disbelief.  
So far, the worldwide MAJORITY of those who believe in God, accepts fairy tales that contradict the very Laws of Life, Nature. Science and Mathematics that He Himself have created and have based ALL of creation.
Me  @Christian #1
  Yes there are forces that move cells and atoms around.  Electromagnetic forces, gravity, the laws of quantum mechanics.
It sounds like you are identifying God with the laws of physics.
Christian #1  @Me  Yes sir in a way I am, however it's much deeper than that. I am talking about the unseen Force that gives power to the laws of quantum mechanics. Scientists tend to not believe in God in most cases because to them, the concept of God, as believed by the massive majority, does not compute with what they've learned. They believe in that which can be PROVEN as factual. It's like the law of Mathematics.
Most people tend to not even try to explain the REALITY of God's existence in the physical sense because they believe that do so somehow puts a limit on God's power or knowledge.
My point, is that GOD is the TRUE "Center" or Power behind everything in existence. The creation of and the laws governing nature, all branches of science, mathematics, etc...they can ALL be traced back to the same "Source".
God does not break His own laws that govern the universe...He is the Creator and Master of it All.
Me @Christian #1:
What makes you think some kind of being is the cause of the universe?
Christian #1 @Me
Good question!  Everything that we ever need to know about ANYTHING can be found in a book...in this case, I think it's only appropriate to use the Bible as one of my sources...now, before I answer, if you are one who does not put too much stock in the concept of a Supreme Being you may reject this explanation...and you are free to do so.  "Free will", is a Divine Blessing bestowed  upon ever human being, and oftimes we turn can that blessing into a curse when we begin to believe and act as if the world revolves around US!
As we are taught in grade school and high school, everything in existence has an origin.  One of the greatest deceptions that's been around for many years is the "mystery" or "secret"  of Who or What God is.  One of the most widely read books throughout the world is that of scriptural writings, mostly the Bible, which only contains about 6,000 years of history..this planet, and even Man have been around, WAY longer than that.
In order to answer your question, I feel that it is first necessary to "parse"  (analyze, describe, or uncover a deeper meaning) of the word, "being".  
BEING:  
1.  the fact of existing; existence
2.  conscious
3.  substance or nature
4.  a living thing
With everything that's been recorded in human history, and with even the extremely limited educational institutions that we attended as students from grade school to and beyond college, how could it even be conceivable that the universe and everything in it came into existence ANY OTHER WAY? 
I'm not sure how or when it began, but somewhere over the last few thousand years, the knowledge of the True origin of God and His is physical existence (as described and referenced continuously throughout our very own Bibles!)  has been relegated to a ghost story...throughout our scriptures, it tells us in almost every book that God is Supreme...He is Beneficient, He is Merciful, He is called, "Wonderful" , "Mighty", Counselor,  The Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace... all of these characteristics are describing a "being".  Someone who is of actual substance; someone who is really ALIVE...He is a living, breathing thing.  There are three major life forms on our planet... Human, Animal and Plant.  In all three life forms, there is "spirit" , which is the ENERGY of one's life.  When we hear these descriptions of God, and all of the many wonderful names that He has, what is the image that shows in your mind, even if but for a fleeting second?  Are you visioning a plant?  Animal?  A mythical creature, or does the image of a person show there? 
Remember, if we read the Bible and say we believe in it, then we have to bear witness that we were made in His image and after His likeness.  
Ever heard someone tell you that you look like your Mom or Dad?  That's because you have their image and their likeness... and you SHOULD...they gave BIRTH to you!
How on earth did we move away from KNOWING that God looked like us, to believing that He's some intangible, formless, spirit with no specific looks or characteristics, but is somehow deeply involved with and responsible for Human affairs?
Before there was Sun, Moon or Star, there was God...before there was light... there was God.  There IS a beginning to all of this... there is an eternal source... He had to come FIRST before ANYTHING else!  There was nothing in this universe before Man.
You say it's impossible for God to be Man?  Every scripture that we read TELLS us that He's a Man.  He has ears, He walks, He talks, He loves, He gets angry, He becomes pleased, He judges, He sorrows, He avenges, He punishes, He is capable of and EXERCISES conscious thoughts, He has the ability to reason and decide affairs... these are characteristics that describe a Man... a Son of a Man.  
Tell me this... are there ANY other Men, that are NOT "Human"s  If so, Who?  And where?  What living organism is HIGHER than that of Man?
It's right in our books...and STILL people find that either hard to believe or IMPOSSIBLE to believe.
The question is, WHO told us that this was IMPOSSIBLE?  That a human being CAN'T create things?
Everything in existence is a manifestation of that basic Truth...we touch it... feel it, sense it, build with it, rejoice in it, reap the benefits and blessings of it... and yet, we allowed for someone to tell us that it was NEVER real.
Christian #1 @someone else
Thank you for your response!  I absolutely LOVE a good dialogue on thread posts...and you're right...it's INCREDIBLY rare to see a mature dialogue on these kind of threads, so this was a refreshing change!  LOL!
Me @Christian #1:
 What makes you think "everything that we ever need to know about anything can be found in a book", in your case referring to the Bible?
 You gave several different definitions of "a being", so I don't know what you mean by "God".
There are other possible answers for the question "what caused the universe".
First, maybe the universe was always here, so it didn't "come into being".  Hinduism and Buddhism teach that the universe is eternal.
The other answer is that nature somehow explores all the possibilities for universes.  We observe a universe that is suitable for intelligent life.  If the universe weren't suitable for intelligent life, nobody would be aware of its laws of physics, etc.
There are many variations on this idea.  One is that the universe IS mathematics - and any mathematical structure exists.  Our universe seems real to us because it's a (very complicated) mathematical structure that allows consciousness.  This idea is explored in Our Mathematical Universe, by the cosmologist Max Tegmark.
Another idea is "cosmological natural selection" - see The Life of the Cosmos by Lee Smolin.
Christian #2 @Me:
Anyone using time can't understand the universe. Time someday will end, indicating it had a beginning. You can't comprehend anything that doesn't have a ending or beginning.
Me @Christian #2:
What makes you think time someday will end?  Or that time must have had a beginning?
Christian #2 @Me:
Well, for one thing the bible says it will, and for another, time doesn't make since astronomically as death. 75 years of life for a human indicates something happened to cause death. For that to be all there is doesn't add up. This planet is full of diseases, and we have to have an immune system to keep from dropping dead. Were not evolving, were dying.
Me @Christian #2:
Why do you believe what the Bible says about the end of the world?
I don't know what your other statements are intended to imply.  Yes we have an immune system, otherwise we'd die quickly.  How does that relate to the end of time?
Christian #2 @Me:
 Read Sir Isaac Newton. He was the greatest scientist who ever lived. Maybe he can make you understand better than me. ?
Me @Christian #2:
 So you believe that time has an end and beginning - but you don't personally know why you believe this?
What is it that Isaac Newton said that you feel is relevant to the end of time?
 Yes, Isaac Newton was religious.  Do you think Newton was infallible?
Christian #1:
He is correct that "Time" DOES have a beginning...but he's also correct that one may not be able to comprehend WHEN time began...the only thing that's known for certain is that Time began when there was first MOTION...no matter how many millions or TRILLIONS of years ago it was, MOTION had to come first.  Time is the measurement of motion.
I just disagree with the 2nd point, Mr. Bishop made however... there will NEVER be an ending to Time itself, but there IS an ending to a particular Time period.  The  Bible is truthful regarding that..this current time period where WE are now... that is DEFINITELY coming to an end...
...if you don't believe in God, or put too much stock in the Bible, this next part probably won't make a lot of sense to you...
Me @Christian #1:
 Why do you believe what the Bible says?  There are many ancient religious books.
Christian #2:
When God said let there be light," there was a great explosion. This could have been the beginning of our Universe? However I don't think time started at this moment. I think time started when Adam and Eve the son of God disobeyed him and had the fruit. And also death began. The time or days referred to in the bible of creation is an outline, not a text book on the subject. A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day with God, meaning it's irrelevant. But Moses had to explain it with a time element so we could some what understand it?
Christian #1:
...We all know that there was a beginning... we are proof of that.  But this creation called, Earth and the people therein, were meant to live in total peace and harmony, among each other and among the beasts of the field and every creeping thing that crawls on the Earth, each in their separate families, kingdoms, classes, and species; each after its own kind.
The current world we are living in is ABSOLUTE CHAOS.  There are lies, deceit, murder, rape, abuse of drugs, abuse of children, abuse of men and women, abuse of the land, air, seas, pollution, selfishness, greed, jealousy, envy, arrogance, racism, classicism, sexism, cronyism, theft, pride and just overall dissatisfaction.   All of this came into the Earth,when Satan was granted his time to rule, and he DID say that he would make the WHOLE WORLD deviate, and make evil, "fair-seeming"...we see these behaviors AND WE PRACTICE these behaviors every day, and we are so de-sensitized to it that it's almost not even a shock anymore...
"That's life", is one of the phrases we utter when such misfortune befalls us...
That is NOT how life is supposed to be.  This world is in absolute CONTRADICTION to what the Supreme Being had in mind when He brought this Earth into existence. There WAS a purpose for it, and only He knew the purpose... even the angels questioned Him on it... His response to them (angels) was, "I know, what you know not."
 This world may not look as if it's ending, but it is... and the closer it gets to the end, the WORSE and more HORRIFIC these behaviors and events we're going to witness firsthand.
This world has GOTTA GO...it's  just gotta go... if we say we believe in a Hereafter, then this current condition CANNOT last... Heaven is NOT some place we're going to go after we DIE... our scriptures teach us that the Kingdom of God is going to be RIGHT HERE, after Satan and his world is removed.
That's why it's called, "HEREafter"... not "THEREafter".
Christian #1 @Christian #2:
I doubt that time began when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.  There were people on the Earth LONG, LONG, LONG before Adam and Eve got here.
Remember, after Cain killed his brother, he was afraid, so he ran off and eventually married a woman from a different tribe.
Me @Christian #2:
 Cosmologists do form theories about what was before the Big Bang.  You can find some of them on Youtube by putting "before the Big Bang" in the search box.
You get a lot of your ideas from the Bible - but why do you believe what's in the Bible?
Christian #1 @Me:
You are correct that there are many ancient religious books...the  Bible itself only covers about 6,000 years of history so I usually find it very foolish to limit all of religious history to just one book.    I study, the Bible, Holy Qur'an, and I've even studied the Bhagavad Gita before,  I reference the Bible a lot because it's the book that's most familiar when I have these types of discussions...
The Bible is widely used and widely misunderstood, because so much if the stories therein are allegorical and are taken as LITERAL accounts.  However, the truth is going to remain the same, no matter what book is referenced. 
Me @Christian #1:
If you don't take the Bible literally, then why do you believe God exists?  Maybe God is a metaphor too.
Christian #2 @Me:
 IT goes back to my own experience. I have experienced God in the Holy Ghost. It's a super natural manifestation. And our small mind's cannot comprehend it.
Me @Christian #2:
 Why do you think your experience proves the real existence of a supernatural being outside yourself?
I have also had a "perception of God".  But I don't see how the real existence of a supernatural being, follows from such a perception.
And why do you think your experience shows that time had a beginning and a supernatural being created the universe?
Christian #2 @Me:
I don't tell many people this because I don't want them to think I am lying. But something told me when I was a young child I would live to see the end of time. I didn't understand it. But why would a child have thoughts like that in the first PLACE. And every day I think about that. I started studies on it. Sir Isaac Newton. Believed it too, but he thought 2020 or so. No much sooner
Me @Christian #2:
 Perhaps every human lives to see the end of time.  Maybe when they die, that's the end of time.
When you felt that something told you that you would live to see the end of time, did you think that "something" was outside yourself - if you do?
People have a lot of thoughts that aren't true, how do you know it was a true thought?
(Christian #2 disappeared after this)
Christian #1 @Me:
 I do believe in God, but I believe that God is a REAL person...a real, live human being, differing from us because He's a Supreme Being in knowledge, wisdom, understanding and power.
Ever since I was a child, I was taught that God was just a "spirit"... I was told that he's some big, invisible man that lives in the sky and looks down on us and moves everyone on earth as if they were chess pieces.
I'm an adult now...I no longer believe God to be that, especially once I began reading the Bible and gaining a better understanding.  Every reference in the  Bible constantly tells us that God is an actual Man, mighty in power. 
Me @Christian #1:
So you think the parts of the Bible that talk about a transcendent Being called God or Yahweh, are sufficient evidence that such a being exists?  Why do you think that is sufficient evidence?
Christian #1 @Me:
Because to me, no other explanation of God ever made any sense.  I mean, think about it:  it is written that we were made in His image so that automatically tell me that He must be human, because nothing else looks like a human except ANOTHER human.
The Bible teaches that He gets angry, exacts vengeance, it says that His own arm upheld Him; the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah stinks in his "nostrils",
 ... it's even written in the Book of Genesis that when Abraham was resting under a shade tree that he saw "three men: coming towards him, and ONE of them was God.   He immediately stood up, came towards them and BOWED and said, "My Lord, if I have found favor, pass not away from your humble servant".  Even his wife, Sarah saw him and invited Him and the two other men to have supper with them.
Spirit" is the energy of LIFE.  In that sense, we can lean on the common knowledge we acquired in elementary school when we learned that 'energy' cannot be created, no destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another".
It's not just the Bible that convinced me that the existence of a Mighty One is sufficient.  
This human body of ours is a MAGNIFICENT creation ...in fact, the scriptures teach us that the creation of man is God's very BEST of all of His creations...
Think of how everything was made, or created... every magnificent structure, every advance in the fields of science and medicine, ALL of it came from an idea that sparked in the brain of Man. There is literally NOTHING ELSE that has the capability or capacity to produce such ideas, nor have the power to bring it into existence.
It is said that the average man uses only about 10 PERCENT of his total brain capacity. Can you image how powerful one could be if He used 100% of his brain power?
Think about it:  What other being do YOU know that is on a HIGHER plane with regards to intellect, form and/or function?
This also bears witness to the scripture that teaches that God's "throne sits on water". The average person would read that scripture and picture a man sitting on a big chair in the middle of a body of water.  That is NOT what that means! (smile)
Our brains are surrounded by "water"...doctors refer to it as "brain fluid" or cerebrospinal fluid.
Me @Christian #1:
You seem to think what you said is evidence that God exists, but I don't see any evidence in what you said.
What is your reason for believing that God exists?
Christian #1 @Me:
Respectfully sir, if everything that I stated in my previous responses STILL do not convince you that there is a power greater than yourself, then chances are that you'll probably identify yourself as an "atheist".  
Considering how the mass majority have been "taught" about who or what God is, I don't blame you for your doubts... we've ALL been taught about God as if He was some kind of "ghost story", where He throws lightening bolts, or makes people walk on water or get virgins pregnant.  
I identify as one who believes in God, but I also believe that it is equally important to understand the REALITY of God... we have been so conditioned to believe that God was not one of us, DESPITE our very own Biblical and holy scriptures that tells us JUST THAT.
One big reason that I believe a God or Supreme Being exists is because I DID NOT give myself LIFE.  NONE of us did, except,  or course, the FIRST God, or "Originator" (remember, earlier in our discussion we were speaking about "the beginning"...there HAD to be some kind of "beginning").  Then, as it is with ANY family, we reproduce...it has been this way since the beginning of time (don't ask me how long ago that was... I have NO CLUE!  lol )
Me @Christian #1:
Here's a nice article about how life is thought to have originated on the earth.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/
It seems life first started about 750 million years after the earth formed.  So it was after a huge amount of time.  There was time for unlikely things to happen.  According to the article, after life started on earth, for 2 billion years there were only single-celled organisms, like bacteria, on the earth.
Christian #1 @Me:
Thanks!  I'll be sure to check it out in my free time (I'm posting while working).
(I didn't hear back from Christian #1 after this)
----------------------------------
Peter Boghossian is more indirect and gentle about his questioning than me.  I listened to a Socratic dialogue he did, and he cushions the threat from the Socratic questioning with a lot of flattering attention and indirectness.  Maybe that's how he gets Christians to not disappear when you say something that really challenges their belief system.
However, I hope this dialogue stimulated questioning in these Christians.  Also, if you want Christians to quit making unfounded assertions about reality, this seems to work. 

Views: 100

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Wow, very patient and well done! They really can rationalize anything, can't they??

I once dated a guy, over a decade ago, who would troll christian message boards. Back then, I didn't think of myself as an atheist so much as a lapsed catholic, but I wasn't a believer anymore. I thought it was funny but a little mean. Don't know what he would post exactly, somehow I doubt it was anything as thoughtful or patient.

I should practice on those message boards, asking genuine questions.

I think Peter Boghossian's method in A Manual for Creating Atheists really gets to the heart of things.  I don't have any appetite for arguing with religious people, I'm not interested in developing snappy comebacks to "You're going to hell", etc. 

What PB talks about is helping religious people develop critical thinking skills through the Socratic method, and his technique focuses on getting religious people to think about their standards for believing in things. 

I don't know if what I did above was successful in raising doubts about their beliefs.  At least with Christian #2, I did give him an alternate interpretation of something he'd considered a mystical revelation.  PB is puzzlingly indirect in many of his sample Socratic dialogues in his book, he says it decreases the feeling of threat that religious people have when their faith is questioned. 

I found the conversation rather profound, actually, with intimations of mortality and a really good question from Christian #1 at the end - since everything has a parent, how could life begin? 

The best current scientific answer is in the article on the evolution of cells - cells may have evolved from the "RNA world".  RNA can evolve, since it's a molecule that can replicate itself.  I didn't know about the "RNA world" hypothesis before this conversation, I think it's really interesting. 

The key is showing people that not everybody falls into step with supernatural beliefs. Religion has long enjoyed an unchallenged run, b/c people get "offended" and such.

Now that religion is trying to take over science, health care and education, secular people are finally speaking up for good reason. It can't continue unchallenged.

You don't have to explain all the science to them about how life began. Evolutionary biology and astrophysics are two separate sciences, for one thing. Second, scientists don't know everything about everything, at least not yet. Remind the religious that "God" usually fills in the gaps of knowledge until science DOES find out.

Peter Boghossian's Socratic method aims at eradicating faith - belief without good evidence. 

The idea is to get believers to think critically about their beliefs about reality and why they hold them. 

It's astonishing to hear Christians declaring "knowledge" about things like the end of time, whether time had a beginning.  They claim to know things that physicists have no knowledge of.  Like, if you have such profound knowledge, why don't you prove it and you can pick up your Nobel Prize in physics? 

The reason I brought up the currently-favored scientific idea about how life began, is that Christian #1 brought up this issue as a reason to believe in God.  It's a phase of the Socratic method where one gives alternatives to the person's hypothesis.  The idea is to open doors in the person's mind - not to tell them The Real Truth. 

Indeed, even if scientists had no idea of how life began,  the existence of a personal God would not follow from that.

Peter Boghossian calls his method "Street Epistemology".  The idea is to counteract the epidemic of people claiming knowledge about reality that they don't actually have. 

When Christian #1 went on at length in the response starting "Because to me, no other explanation of God ever made any sense" - I had NO idea of how what she said was supposed to be evidence for the existence of a supernatural God.  Then she said

if everything that I stated in my previous responses STILL do not convince you that there is a power greater than yourself, then chances are that you'll probably identify yourself as an "atheist"

I had to laugh.  So she regarded the things she said as clinching the case for God!

Peter Boghossian writes about "coherentism" - meaning belief that's justified by a lot of elements - an ancient text, one's feelings, one's experiences - where one element justifies others in a circular way, but there's no justification from an outside source.  He says it doesn't work to challenge those elements one by one because of the circular nature of the justification.  He advises targeting faith instead:  the use of an unreliable process for coming to knowledge. 

Christian #1 seems to have a coherentist faith justification.  All her statements, which to me didn't mean much of anything, to her seemed like proof when they were all taken together. 

So why do this "street epistemology"?  For me, it's a way of learning how to stand up for myself.  PB's "street epistemology" violates the taboo against questioning people's beliefs.  The world is full of irrationality and people who believe things for no good reason.  This irrationality is harmful, and his method helps me to stand up for myself in practical situations as well - without having to become combative.  The Socratic method is very useful for this.

I haven't literally done it on the streets, though :)

There's a "Street Epistemology" group on Facebook where people discuss these techniques.  I joined it and I've been having interesting discussions. 

Thanks Laura: that was an interesting dialogue.  I like people who will invest in a long discussion even if, especially if, they don't agree with me.  And so I have some respect for Christian#1, even though they made a big serving of word salad.

One of the several things that struck me was that Christian#1 referred a couple of times to "A power higher than yourself", as if someone who dismisses the idea of gods somehow therefore sees themselves as some ultimate being in some kind of existential hierarchy.  And then he/she goes on to talk about just such a hierarchy, at the pinnacle of which is humanity, and further that a super (male) human is the actual God.  This, to me, smacks of someone who misses Daddy.

I live deep in the Bible Belt, and have several friends who I like and respect who hold many of these same views.  I think that such views are harmful to society, but realize that I'm not the only one with a valid opinion.

I think that Peter Boghossian has the right idea when he says that these individual assertions are not as important as the basic concept of faith -- believing that you know something that you don't.  With that as a lynchpin, you can carry on a Socratic dialogue of continually asking someone to explain why they believe what they do.  Unfortunately this often results in a deep bowl of word salad, as seen here.  But sometime there are some nice cherry tomatoes in there.

I think that such discussions are worthwhile, and really don't know what else we could do that would be productive.  Thanks again Laura.

Peter Boghossian has the right idea when he says that these individual assertions are not as important as the basic concept of faith

Yes, his ideas are sound and they're supported by evidence on how you change people's minds, exiting cults, etc. 

He emphasizes that it's not a combat, that one is trying to clear up foggy thinking that people have been taught is praiseworthy, and it's something that needs to be done in a friendly, positive way.

Both of those people had thought about their religion more than most believers. 

It seems like being taught to believe things with no evidence is a kind of rape of one's cognitive processes, and people who've been raped over this way may have a hard time evaluating non-religious claims as well.

Peter Boghossian says he's been called "the mouth of the devil" etc. etc. when doing his interventions ... and the same people have come back later and thanked him! 

I especially love the part of the book where the father of the college student complains about his class, where he challenges religion. PB patiently starts asking him questions, such as how the koala bear got to Australia from Mount Ararat (whatever the mountain where Noah landed is called.) "They migrated!" the guy answered, before calling his pastor and leaving a message asking him. LOL!!

I'm not as precise with the questioning as you are, so I should be careful, but I've been going through the book again. I tend to go with the conversation- don't think I have the guts to challenge people as directly as PB.

It is encouraging to read that even people who react angrily to him at first, will often tell him much later that he got them thinking, and often, changed their minds. Some of his questions that confuse religious people would confuse ME so I try to keep it conversational.

That's why I should practice more online, so I can take a little more time to analyze their reasoning and be more precise.

Yes, PB's ideas about how to get people to quit having faith are difficult to convey.  His book is kind of confusing - I'm not too sure what he actually recommends.  His interventions vary a lot in style. 

He says the "street epistemology" is something people learn by practice.  People try different kinds of Socratic questioning and over time they get a sense of what works with what kind of believer. 

I've been wondering what I could say to a very Christian friend who I haven't seen for many years, if I did get back in touch with him.  I didn't question his faith back then - I was sort of a wannabe Christian, only nobody ever convinced me of its truth.  And later, I realized he was in fact delusional.  I'd been admiring his mild ongoing craziness. 

I might really have been a friend to him if I managed to get him to question.  That's what a nonbeliever can do for a believer. 

Yes, on Youtube is safe, and one can think about it.  It might be unsafe to literally do street epistemology - people get angry when you question their faith, and there are a lot of unstable people around. 

Well done Luara! I think you did quite well

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
17 minutes ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
1 hour ago
Grinning Cat replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
1 hour ago
Luara replied to Daniel W's discussion Are same sex marriages more stable than so-called traditional marriages? in the group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends
1 hour ago
sk8eycat replied to Joan Denoo's discussion The Bible is not Great by Soren Sagan in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago
Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina on "Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative" in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
1 hour ago
Luara replied to Daniel W's discussion Are same sex marriages more stable than so-called traditional marriages? in the group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends
1 hour ago
sk8eycat replied to Joan Denoo's discussion The Bible is not Great by Soren Sagan in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago
Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina on "Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative" in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
1 hour ago
Tom Sarbeck commented on Loren Miller's blog post Is god good?
2 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to jay H's discussion What the freakin hell is wrong with this country???
2 hours ago
Jason Blair replied to Daniel W's discussion Are same sex marriages more stable than so-called traditional marriages? in the group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends
2 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service