What you need to "get" is that believers don't see you (or any critical person, whether theist or atheist) as someone with whom to discuss their beliefs.
— baker

Don't know about tim wood specifically, but otherwise I beg to differ.
There are preachers, proselytizers, priests, imams, pujas (and indoctrinators) just about everywhere doing their thing. Often enough they refuse to carry their onus probandi, heck, at times they insist what your epistemic standards have to be. Then they have their faiths interfere in other people's lives, politics, etc. — jorndoe

Of course. Religious people will often talk about their beliefs with others (ingroup or outgroup), but not actually discuss them. That's my point. They preach, they teach, but they do not engage in discussion, in dialogue between presumed equals. It's beneath their dignity to discuss their religious beliefs on any other terms but their own.

A mistake people often make when trying to talk to religious people is assuming that what they are having or about to have is an actual conversation, a discussion, a dialogue. It's not.

He went on to ask me if I took comfort from the fact that Hitler was burning in Hell for all eternity. — Kenosha Kid

Surely he wasn't Catholic (because a Catholic isn't supposed to have certainty about who in particular will go to hell or not; although a Catholic still looks forward to God's justice being done, and as such, rejoices at the thought of people burning in hell for all eternity).

He almost fell off his box when I said no. I'm not sure which interpretation of 'no' stunned him, but I think it was the idea that I might derive no pleasure from someone being tortured for eternity for their crimes.

This is what makes you an atheist: not taking pleasure in God's justice.

Surely he wasn't Catholic (because a Catholic isn't supposed to have certainty about who in particular will go to hell or not; although a Catholic still looks forward to God's justice being done, and as such, rejoices at the thought of people burning in hell for all eternity). — baker

I used to live with a Catholic and we had a conversation about theology, my argument being that the Bible is apparently insufficient. She disagreed so I asked her about the chasm between Revelations and what the church preaches about the afterlife, heaven, hell, etc. She argued that there was no chasm: it may well _seem_ that they contradict, but... Thereafter theology, i.e. stuff not in the Bible necessary to reconcile the Bible with actual beliefs. I more or less gave up trying to make sense if it.

This is what makes you an atheist: not taking pleasure in God's justice. — baker

Well, that and not believing it's real of course.

I more or less gave up trying to make sense if it. — Kenosha Kid

It was never meant for you to "make sense of it".

This is what makes you an atheist: not taking pleasure in God's justice. — baker

What do you know of God's justice? How do you account for the injustice in the world? It is not enough to say that injustice is the work of man, for then God's justice seems indifferent to man's.

It's a question, intended to make you state your case regarding the connection between God belief and poverty. — baker

You are asking if poverty is bad?

State your case regarding the connection between God belief and poverty.

I did, in the OP.

What do you know of God's justice? — Fooloso4

Whatever can be done by syllogism.

How do you account for the injustice in the world? It is not enough to say that injustice is the work of man, for then God's justice seems indifferent to man's.

God's justice is above man's justice.

Vaguely.

Does, in your opinion, God belief make people poor?

No. Poor people tend to be ill-educated and hence susceptible to nonsense.folk

What do you know of God's justice?
— Fooloso4
Whatever can be done by syllogism. — baker

You mean like this?

A just God would not allow injustice in the world
There is injustice in the world
Therefore God is not just

How do you account for the injustice in the world? It is not enough to say that injustice is the work of man, for then God's justice seems indifferent to man's.
God's justice is above man's justice. — baker

That does not obviate the claim that God is indifferent to man's injustice. If you mean that we cannot understand God's justice then on what basis do you claim that God is just?

You mean like this?

A just God would not allow injustice in the world
There is injustice in the world
Therefore God is not just — Fooloso4

The second premise is false, so the conclusion doesn't follow.

That does not obviate the claim that God is indifferent to man's injustice. If you mean that we cannot understand God's justice then on what basis do you claim that God is just?

On the basis that God is typically defined as just.

Poor people tend to be ill-educated and hence susceptible to nonsense.folk — Banno

But God belief makes them ambitious and makes them strive to improve their material situation.

You might think so. The Pew research in the OP is evidence to the contrary.

It's short-sighted, comparing countries that have a history of being exploited by colonialists (who, BTW, had God belief) and those that weren't.

Except that the results are seen within countries as well as between countries:

https://www.pewforum.org/2018/08/29/the-demographic-characteristics-of-religious-typology-groups-2/

A mistake people often make when trying to talk to religious people is assuming that what they are having or about to have is an actual conversation, a discussion, a dialogue. It's not. — baker

The wisdom in this coincides with my sometimes bitter experiences. Well observed! And a lesson to be taken to heart.

Except that the results are seen within countries as well as between countries: — Banno

Is this a longitudinal study of the same people over the course of their work life?

Pffff. Read it for yourself. Keep in mind that it's in 'merica, which is far more religious than other wealthy countries.

The results suport the contention that education results in the rejection of religious belief and practice.

The second premise is false, so the conclusion doesn't follow. — baker

There is a whole lot of evidence to the contrary.

On the basis that God is typically defined as just. — baker

Well, if you want to take that as a matter of faith, then okay, but you can't at the same time make an appeal to logic. It does not follow logically from a definition that something is as defined.

a history of being exploited by colonialists — baker

So which is it, a history of being exploited or there is not injustice in the world? Or do you think the exploitation is just?

Neat. I don't understand how someone cannot see these obvious inconsistencies. Lack of critical ability, lack of insight or simple self-deception?

The same thing happened on the Euthyphro thread. I think it has something to do with an existential vested interest. I am sure that if you are wrong you'll be able to cope, but if they are wrong ...

The same thing happened on the Euthyphro thread. — Fooloso4

I will get back to the Straight Thinkers at some stage; the muddle there remains in a state of flux such that I'm in a quandary as to which aspect to address.

im sorry to have dissapointed you

Then the Christian claim that another diety eliminates the need to make sacrifices. :chin: — Athena

Yes, but only because the one true sacrifice has already made, and is reenacted in the sacrament of the Eucharist.

Keep in mind that it's in 'merica, which is far more religious than other wealthy countries. — Banno

A longitudinal study is relevant because it studies the development of a particular population over a long period of time. A study of development gives more insight than just a static cut through a population at a specific time.

But I'm generally skeptical of studies of religiosity, because the criteria by which religiosity is measured are superficial and not unified.

The results suport the contention that education results in the rejection of religious belief and practice. — Banno

Sure. What I'm interested in is what drives people to education and the pursuit of material wellbeing to begin with. I think religion plays an important role in this. Religion is what gives many people ambition for material pursuits. But once a measure of material wellbeing is achieved, religion tends to take a backseat. A longitudinal study would show this.

Neat. I don't understand how someone cannot see these obvious inconsistencies. Lack of critical ability, lack of insight or simple self-deception? — Banno

And I don't understand why some are so eager to make up their own definitions of "God". Lack of critical ability, lack of insight, or simple self-deception? Or maybe an agenda!

The second premise is false, so the conclusion doesn't follow.
— baker
There is a whole lot of evidence to the contrary. — Fooloso4

No, you're just measuring everything by your own human standards (instead of by God's) -- that's why you see injustice in the world.

Well, if you want to take that as a matter of faith, then okay, but you can't at the same time make an appeal to logic. It does not follow logically from a definition that something is as defined.

Of course not. But if you're going to talk about God, you need to stick to the definitions actually provided by actual monotheistic religions, otherwise you're just making shit up.