A word of advice to our believing friends who visit here.

[Brian37]

Think before you make your first post. Atheists are not lost puppies for you to save. We do not mind you visiting or becoming a member, but far too often we get wet behind the ears inexperienced believers who think their arguments will blow us away and magically make convert. You will be in a world of hurt if you approach us with such a naive view. Some atheists like a library debate, and others like me have no problem with no holds bard verbal boxing. The most important thing you can do is treat us as individuals and do not take how we respond to your claims personally.

Here are some simple rules to make your visit last.

1. No preaching.

2. Arguments from tradition do not work.

3. Quoting a book to prove a book does not work.

4. Retrofiting science to prop up your book also does not work.

5. Perception in humans is notoriously flawed so personal experience does not work.

6. If you are arguing it do not think other people with other god claims have not used the same argument.

7. Keep in mind most atheists know much more than you think.

8. There is a difference between a historian and an theologian apologist.

9. Equating atheists to dictators also will not get you anywhere.

10. Whining is not an argument.

That is a short list, but most importantly as I have said, if you take things personally you will not enjoy yourself here. Especially if you are new to debate and have not spent much time in the shark tank, the best thing might be for you to read and learn first.

[stromboli]

What, no mention of chewtoys? You are being too nice.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

By the way, we've also seen all of these.

Conversion tactic #1 - the Knock on the Door.

This is a favorite tactic of Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, though I've known quite a few Baptists to engage in it.  Don't let the name fool you, though.  Some people engage in it by handing out literature to anyone who walks by, or to cashiers at stores, or by leaving on your doorstep, or by mailing it to you.  The common element is a complete stranger introducing their faith to you.

Conversion tactic #2 - you Secretly Agree

This is an interesting one from a psychological standpoint.  The basic premise is that everyone already agrees with the missionary, and all the missionary has to do is to get you to admit to it.  Perhaps you don't know that you already agree, that the information is buried deep down, but you already agree.

Conversion tactic #3 - let's Talk.

"I just want to talk" is an opening to try to convert you.  Once you start talking, the missionary will try to look for weak points in what you say so that he may pour his God into those weak points.  Conversation as a lead in to conversion is the most annoying type of conversion attempt.  Just when I think I can try to dispel the misunderstandings people have about my faith, I find out that he's not at all interested in learning about my faith beyond where he can try to shake it.  All it shows is that the missionary isn't very ethical.

Conversion tactic #4 - the Guilt Trip

"It's just that I don't want to see you burn in hell, that's the only reason I'm telling you this."  If you don't convert, it is because you want to see the missionary cry?

Conversion tactic #5 - the Accusation

This is a lame tactic, that often alienates those who are the target of the conversion.  Take someone who is a #2 tactician, and add the belief that your secret knowledge is conscious, not unconscious.  Then, add the belief that you are expressing other beliefs as a way to directly attack both God and the Missionary.  This missionary is likely to scream at you that you are going to hell.  It is frightening in person as there is reason to believe this person might actually attack you.  It is very entertaining on the internet as you get to see some spectacular meltdowns.

Conversion tactic #6 - the Invitation

This one assumes that the missionary has access to magical powers. Just accept their invitation to go and visit their church, or just follow their suggestion to read the Bible (Koran, Book of Mormon, Talmud, Rig Veda, etc.) and suddenly you will see where you have been wrong all along.

[PickelledEggs]

We had a thread like this a while ago, but I think it got buried. Can we make this one a sticky?

[the_antithesis]

I like how at least two of the six items Jason listed are just emotional manipulation. It's their best and only weapon.

[PickelledEggs]

I like how at least two of the six items Jason listed are just emotional manipulation. It's their best and only weapon.

This is true.

[Solitary]

That's because they don't think rationally, and if they did they wouldn't be deluded believers in magic and religious nonsense in the first place. Solitary

[Jason78]

Whining is not an argument.

But why?

[stromboli]

But why?

Have children. Whining is an argument.

[Nam]

8. There is a difference between a historian and an theologian apologist.

You have your "a" and "an" mixed up, it should be "an historian" and "a theologian".

;-)

-Nam

[Nam]

Conversion tactic #6 - the Invitation

This one assumes that the missionary has access to magical powers. Just accept their invitation to go and visit their church, or just follow their suggestion to read the Bible (Koran, Book of Mormon, Talmud, Rig Veda, etc.) and suddenly you will see where you have been wrong all along.

I actually used to accept but to get their particular version of the Bible, or their "Handbook" (which, at times, contradicted their version of the Bible or the Bible itself) just to get the literature for future use. These days it's all mainly on the internet.

-Nam

[AllPurposeAtheist]

11. Shave your head, wear pajamas and go try your nonsense at airports. Good luck.

[Johan]

I like how at least two of the six items Jason listed are just emotional manipulation. It's their best and only weapon.

Well that and ignorance.

[Lion IRC]

....We do not mind you visiting or becoming a member,

Thanks but, actually, I was invited. See the forum banner? It doesnt say atheists only.

...far too often we get wet behind the ears inexperienced believers who think their arguments will blow us away and magically make convert. You will be in a world of hurt if you approach us with such a naive view.

The banner also says "freethinkers".
Please dont presume to know what I think based on what you perceive about others.

...The most important thing you can do is treat us as individuals and do not take how we respond to your claims personally.

Right back atcha pal.

...Arguments from tradition do not work.

They do sometimes. Its often quite reasonable to stick with a tried and tested tradition when you have nothing better.

...Retrofiting science to prop up your book also does not work.

You cant quarantine science to prevent it from being used to validate one particular book.

...Perception in humans is notoriously flawed so personal experience does not work.

All science is the result of human sensory perception of reality. Is science flawed?
Of course humans can corroborate their shared experience and testify that they are all telling the same experienced truth but even then, others are free to disbelieve or report alternate sensory experience.

...Keep in mind most atheists know much more than you think.

Why should I believe YOUR "notoriously flawed" perception? You are human too arent you? It's OK. We all have opinions.

...There is a difference between a historian and an theologian apologist.

Right. and there is a difference between a historian and an atheist counter-apologist.

...Whining is not an argument.

Calling your opponent's argument 'whining" is not an argument.
(BTW - this whole Op of yours resembles a whine-a-thon IMHO)

...most importantly as I have said, if you take things personally you will not enjoy yourself here.

How would you know what every single newbie personally finds enjoyable? You're sounding very judgmental and presuppositional.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Thanks but, actually, I was invited. See the forum banner? It doesnt say atheists only.
The banner also says "freethinkers".
Please dont presume to know what I think based on what you perceive about others.
Right back atcha pal.
They do sometimes. Its often quite reasonable to stick with a tried and tested tradition when you have nothing better.
You cant quarantine science to prevent it from being used to validate one particular book.
All science is the result of human sensory perception of reality. Is science flawed?
Of course humans can corroborate their shared experience and testify that they are all telling the same experienced truth but even then, others are free to disbelieve or report alternate sensory experience.
Why should I believe YOUR "notoriously flawed" perception? You are human too arent you? It's OK. We all have opinions.
Right. and there is a difference between a historian and an atheist counter-apologist.
Calling your opponent's argument 'whining" is not an argument.
(BTW - this whole Op of yours resembles a whine-a-thon IMHO)
How would you know what every single newbie personally finds enjoyable? You're sounding very judgmental and presuppositional.