I, I don't understand.

[Svata]

 So, I was talking with one of my friends, who started prothletising at me. We began a friendly debate, and after a while I asked that he stop using the bible as a source of evidence,  as his religion's holy book was obviously not an objective source. He responded "If I can't use the Bible, you can't use any science books." Up until then, I hadn't quoted any published source, merely pointed out obvious flaws in his argument. I look around the Web a bit, and see that this is a fairly common response.  I have to ask, why? Does anyone know?

[Art Vandelay]

Religious idiots of that type tend to think that either science is just another faith, or that science and religion are of (at least) equal merit. It's stupid, but what can you expect from someone who believes in a magical sky fairy who sacrificed himself to himself to protect us all from himself?

[ironbite]

Well then break out math books and start hitting him with them.

[rageaholic]

I heard this one before.  I'd make a point that the bible is just one book while there are many science books (and that's not counting the proofs outside of books), but knowing creationists, they'll find some way to twist it. 

[dpareja]

I heard this one before.  I'd make a point that the bible is just one book while there are many science books (and that's not counting the proofs outside of books), but knowing creationists, they'll find some way to twist it.

But they don't all agree, so they must be false, but there's only one Bible, so it must be true!

[mellenORL]

Just whip out an old set of Pokémon cards next time. Be about his speed.

[Svata]

I heard this one before.  I'd make a point that the bible is just one book while there are many science books (and that's not counting the proofs outside of books), but knowing creationists, they'll find some way to twist it.

But they don't all agree, so they must be false, but there's only one Bible, so it must be true!

That, and "The bible has lots of books in it. It's more an anthology than a single book"
Direct quote. I swear.

[Ultimate Paragon]

I heard this one before.  I'd make a point that the bible is just one book while there are many science books (and that's not counting the proofs outside of books), but knowing creationists, they'll find some way to twist it.

But they don't all agree, so they must be false, but there's only one Bible, so it must be true!

That, and "The bible has lots of books in it. It's more an anthology than a single book"
Direct quote. I swear.

How, exactly, does he think that's an argument?

[Svata]

I think it was when I asked him to vary his sources, and stop pulling everything from one book.

[rookie]

I'd say let him keep the book that says rainbows are made by God reminding us he won't flood the earth again, even though you can make one with a garden hose and sunny day. People who use the bible as their only source are annoying as hell, this is true. However when properly applied, science should be able to bury the bible when it comes to provable facts.

[Ironchew]

So, I was talking with one of my friends, who started prothletising at me. We began a friendly debate, and after a while I asked that he stop using the bible as a source of evidence,  as his religion's holy book was obviously not an objective source. He responded "If I can't use the Bible, you can't use any science books." Up until then, I hadn't quoted any published source, merely pointed out obvious flaws in his argument. I look around the Web a bit, and see that this is a fairly common response.  I have to ask, why? Does anyone know?

I guess you could explain in painstaking detail why methodological naturalism and the scientific method aren't "just another faith", but if I were just going in circles with a dishonest hack I would re-evaluate why he is my friend.

You can't choose your family, but you can choose your friends.

[Svata]

Because other than being stupid about religion, he's a pretty cool guy, and we share several interests. This is one of about two or three things we seriously disagree on.

[Thejebusfire]

Because there are people out there who legitimately believe crap like this:

[Cerim Treascair]

You can't choose your family, but you can choose your friends.

I beg to differ on the first part.  You CAN choose your family.


... especially in my case, I'm adopted and related to nobody by blood.  My sister, either.  That said, there are a whole lot of folks I call brother and sister and they're closer to me than even actual blood ties.

[Rime]

Science is the heaviest critic of the "Literalist" view.  Fundamentalists hide behind their interpretations to justify their feelings, so it's natural to come up with rules like "science is your religion, so you can't use your holy book either" without realizing that science draws conclusions from evidence, not prop up their preferred opinion with whatever they can use.

People who aren't so fragile about their beliefs won't have too much trouble dealing with criticism, those who have practically their entire existence based on appeasement of an angry deity who will only let you escape eternal punishment with approval from his "perfect son" will defend it with rabid fervor because they would have a lot of trouble dealing with a single mote of doubt about their interpretation.  After all, it could cost them the seat right next to Jesus!