Episode 61: Conversation with Danny Edge

[Redpower]

And by the way, are you going to let Scott get away with not believing in any of the Christian tenants but still having the nerve to call himself a Christian? I mean, at least ask him to define Christian. Since he ignores my posts, can you ask him for me?

Um...OK. I don't read every thread so it's possible I missed your questions. So I searched your posts, and I still didn't find any questions about my beliefs. Here's a list of some of the stuff I believe without reservation:

- Jesus existed
- He was killed, buried, and resurrected.
- We ought to practice self sacrifice in all areas of our life, especially when it comes to the well being of other people.
- Substitutionary Atonement
- The greatest moral command is to love God and Love people.
- Those who follow Jesus ought to embrace his teaching.

I could go on, but surely this incomplete list qualifies me to claim the title "Christian"

What I was getting at was the difficult questions you can't answer and the fact that you acknowledge the fact that there are a lot of issues you "struggle" with. I guess I'd like to know what evidence it would take for you to believe Christianity isn't actually correct. Is there any amount of evidence that would cause you to leave your religion?

[Pseudonym]

What I was getting at was the difficult questions you can't answer and the fact that you acknowledge the fact that there are a lot of issues you "struggle" with.

I don't understand the objection.

Bad analogy coming up:

Scientists have two extremely good theories about how nature works: the standard model of quantum mechanics (which covers types of matter and their interactions, including electromagnetic and nuclear interactions) and general relativity (which covers the motion of bodies and gravity). They appear to be, in a deep sense, fundamentally incompatible. Yet they both describe what they describe extremely well. All attempts to come up with theories that cover both cases have problems, not the least of which is that there's essentially no way to test any of them.

Why is it a problem that these are difficult questions that scientists struggle with?

Why is it a problem that economists struggle with things that they have difficulty understanding? Or historians? Or philosophers? Or writers? What's so different about a clergyperson that they should be immune from the same struggles that all thoughtful people have?

Is there any amount of evidence that would cause you to leave your religion?

That there could, potentially, exist some evidence that might contradict some of the points on Scott's list (e.g. Jesus' existence). But what evidence could you propose that would contradict this?

- We ought to practice self sacrifice in all areas of our life, especially when it comes to the well being of other people.

[StillSearching]

I'm not sure why you even addressed me to start with.

Because your posts are generally rude and unnecessarily confrontational.

I stressed a popular concern (I say popular based off what other people have posted in this thread),

Yes you did. But did you notice that everyone else managed to express this concern without resorting to personal insults? You called the guest a retard and the host closed-minded, among other things.

Emery complemented me,

No, he thanked you. There's a difference.

then you attacked me with what appears to be some sort of pedantic crusade to get me to leave the forum or thread or something.

I don't necessarily want you to leave. Wouldn't matter if I did. It's not my forum. I would hope to see you use less confrontational and insulting language in your posts.

If you're going to start accusing people of have social problems perhaps you ought to look in the mirror first.

I do quite well socially, thank you very much, and have no problem looking at myself in the mirror.

Again, I'm not asking you to leave. I'm asking you to be a bit more considerate in your posting. I'm going to leave it at that.

[Penguin]

Hey, Emery - I really liked the podcast.

I had read a few posts in this thread before I had a chance to hear it, so I went into it kinda expecting the worst. I think you really helped to show that people can disagree vehemently on fundamental things but still treat each other with respect and discuss those disagreements without getting into a shouting match.

[Salwinder]

Hey, Emery - I really liked the podcast.

I had read a few posts in this thread before I had a chance to hear it, so I went into it kinda expecting the worst. I think you really helped to show that people can disagree vehemently on fundamental things but still treat each other with respect and discuss those disagreements without getting into a shouting match.

I agree absolutely with this. Despite being a million miles away from becoming a Theist, I do find it interesting to listen to how "traditional" Christians think and rationalize their faith.

I do think that Emery stuck to safe ground throughout the conversation though. I wonder how "kindred" Emery would feel with Danny if they had discussed issues around homosexuality or abortion. I suspect Danny would probably espouse the traditional homophobic intolerance of gays and would come down pretty heavy on abortion too. It's this dark underside to "traditional" Christianity that I remain wary of and I think this would have been worth exploring in the podcast.

[isaone]

Being close to that mythical Atheist fundementalist, Emery's approach is certainly foreign to me and often causes internal stress but I can see the wisdom of it. I personally would love to be able to find some sort of sweet spot between the two sides where everyone can learn to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of their opinions in a passionate manner while still respecting all parties. As I see it Emery has chosen to err on the respect side of things and that is clearly his choice. Redpower appears to have determined that personal insults and a complete lack of anyone sho disagrees with him (and often those who agree also) are the way to go. Given a choice between those two approaches I would much prefer to live in a world populated by people with Emery's style than RedPower's .

[ColumnBreaker]

Being close to that mythical Atheist fundementalist, Emery's approach is certainly foreign to me and often causes internal stress but I can see the wisdom of it. I personally would love to be able to find some sort of sweet spot between the two sides where everyone can learn to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of their opinions in a passionate manner while still respecting all parties. As I see it Emery has chosen to err on the respect side of things and that is clearly his choice. Redpower appears to have determined that personal insults and a complete lack of anyone sho disagrees with him (and often those who agree also) are the way to go. Given a choice between those two approaches I would much prefer to live in a world populated by people with Emery's style than RedPower's .

Agreed. Complete hostility supported by zero positive traits such as eloquence, tact or charisma as per the Dawkin's style Redpower has adopted will get you no where with either side of the argument. It's childish and it's lacking any sort of basic social skills or social understandings of what people respond positively to. I enjoyed the episode quite a bit even though it lacked any sort of intellectual challenge from either side, it's always nice to hear from good spirited people who just happen to believe something I don't.

[crazylegsmurphy]

Ad hominem argument is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[Redpower]

I don't have the man-power to respond to everyone individually, and a lot of these are projection against me for some reason. Perhaps you're all too sensitive or old or something. I don't have this problem with people on other forums (entire threads answering questions I ask to specific people, entire threads attempting to gang rape me.). But power of numbers almost never fails, so enjoy your counter-productive kool-aid everyone. I just wish people would stop being so polite, it's a waste of time. And for the record, I'm the person who brought up the absurdity of the "bright" idea and now I'm being referred to as the "Dawkins" type. Strange. Emery was mocking the person he brought in for the latest show, it's the only possible explanation. Stop being so naive, nothing was gained from the previous podcast. Bye.

[ScottBarger]

Wow...this thread got prickly since I checked last.

[likamd]

I think the podcast was brilliant. In a very non-antagonistic manner Emery was able to question Danny repeatly about the details about the garden of eden story. You could hear the hesitation in Danny's voice as he then began to fabricate from his own imagination answers for Emery. Usually when one attempts to get that specific with a hard core christian the conversation is terminated. I would not mind if Emery brought him back for another show.

[militant02]

i just listened to this podcast today and for anyone who believes that danny edge is a fictional character i have talked to plenty of people who mirror DE so much its scary. people who think like danny are a dime a dozen in texas. you might be surprised how many people think that the bible was written by four guys named matthew, mark, luke and john who were eyewitnesses of jesus's life, the bible is inerrant and literal anything that contradicts the bible is some type of trick set up by the devil to dupe people...........


i've heard stories such as:

1. a woman who wanted to believe in god asked for a sign so god revealed his existence by parting the clouds on a overcast day for a few seconds so that the sun shined on the woman and that was good enough for her to become a christian
2. one friend who seriously told me that she had to go home to sprinkle anointing oil on their furniture because her furniture was possessed by spirits
3. a coworker who told me that being filled with the holy ghost felt like being pregnant. the thing that made this claim really unusual is that the coworker is a guy. this same person also told me that the devil also tried to kill him on three separate occasions by causing a car wreck, hooking him on drugs and having someone pull a gun on him that misfired.
4. god told a friend to quit their 9 to 5 job to start selling mary kay cosmetics full time

[martinjbaker]

It started out by amusing me but by the end I think it was one of the most depressing things I've ever heard. It amazes me that beliefs like this can still exist.