Poll: Do christian apologetics avoid the real questions in debate?
Yes
No
I don't care
We all know the flying spaghetti monster is really in charge anyway.
[Show Results]
 
Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2014, 04:59 PM
Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

This last week I listened to a pastor talk about the story of the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:14-29) where 3 guys were thrown into a furnace because they refused to believe in the Kings god. They were unharmed because they were protected by god. He then preached how amazing this was, and that he would do the same thing for any of the believers because of the protection of the holy spirit. I did notice however that there was no demonstration. He did not climb into a furnace to show us how this worked.

In my opinion they sell christianity to people because of the divine power that it holds, but when they debate, they never defend that. They always debate that you could get your moral guidance from the bible. I would like to see the issue be pushed by atheists that they really should show some proof of the divine intervention, or be forced to admit that it doesn't happen, and that religion is more of a comforting mechanism than anything else, and should be treated as such.

Remember, just because you want something to be true, doesn't make it true. Yes, even if you have faith.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like microterf's post
08-11-2014, 08:00 PM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

This last week I listened to a pastor talk about the story of the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:14-29) where 3 guys were thrown into a furnace because they refused to believe in the Kings god. They were unharmed because they were protected by god. He then preached how amazing this was, and that he would do the same thing for any of the believers because of the protection of the holy spirit. I did notice however that there was no demonstration. He did not climb into a furnace to show us how this worked.

In my opinion they sell christianity to people because of the divine power that it holds, but when they debate, they never defend that. They always debate that you could get your moral guidance from the bible. I would like to see the issue be pushed by atheists that they really should show some proof of the divine intervention, or be forced to admit that it doesn't happen, and that religion is more of a comforting mechanism than anything else, and should be treated as such.

Daniel is a complete fabrication, click here:

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid674874

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2014, 08:03 PM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
[Image: 531425_10150941956067736_965042377_n.jpg]

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like dancefortwo's post
08-11-2014, 08:10 PM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(08-11-2014 08:00 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

This last week I listened to a pastor talk about the story of the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:14-29) where 3 guys were thrown into a furnace because they refused to believe in the Kings god. They were unharmed because they were protected by god. He then preached how amazing this was, and that he would do the same thing for any of the believers because of the protection of the holy spirit. I did notice however that there was no demonstration. He did not climb into a furnace to show us how this worked.

In my opinion they sell christianity to people because of the divine power that it holds, but when they debate, they never defend that. They always debate that you could get your moral guidance from the bible. I would like to see the issue be pushed by atheists that they really should show some proof of the divine intervention, or be forced to admit that it doesn't happen, and that religion is more of a comforting mechanism than anything else, and should be treated as such.

Daniel is a complete fabrication, click here:

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid674874

I still wonder why you don't have your own website

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Metazoa Zeke's post
09-11-2014, 04:20 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
here is the peer reviewed evidence for Christianity when preaching




Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Ace's post
09-11-2014, 04:34 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  ...
He then preached how amazing this was, and that he would do the same thing for any of the believers because of the protection of the holy spirit. I did notice however that there was no demonstration. He did not climb into a furnace to show us how this worked.
...

This holy spirit of theirs has mastered fire-control.

Couldn't quite pull of the same thing against Zyklon B. Perhaps the victims didn't have enough time to pray.

Nebuchadnezzar shoulda used Zyklon B.

Dodgy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like DLJ's post
09-11-2014, 05:01 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

This last week I listened to a pastor talk about the story of the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:14-29) where 3 guys were thrown into a furnace because they refused to believe in the Kings god. They were unharmed because they were protected by god. He then preached how amazing this was, and that he would do the same thing for any of the believers because of the protection of the holy spirit. I did notice however that there was no demonstration. He did not climb into a furnace to show us how this worked.

In my opinion they sell christianity to people because of the divine power that it holds, but when they debate, they never defend that. They always debate that you could get your moral guidance from the bible. I would like to see the issue be pushed by atheists that they really should show some proof of the divine intervention, or be forced to admit that it doesn't happen, and that religion is more of a comforting mechanism than anything else, and should be treated as such.

Of course they don't argue from that sort of position; they that sort of bullshit is indefensible so they don't use it; instead they are always on the offensive with nebulous claims about first causes and how can people have feels without Gawd.

This hole thing reminds me of the classic clip:



The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Free Thought's post
10-11-2014, 07:25 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

You'll notice a difference between how Christians talk about God when talking to each other or when talking to skeptics. When talking to each other, they make all sorts of unquestioned assumptions. It's not until their views are put under scrutiny that they have to start wording things more carefully.

I know I've posted this before, but it's rather apt. Here are Frank's thoughts on the matter of how God goes from being an invisible bearded leprechaun that meddles in all affairs to being some vague, distant concept:

FrankTrollman Wrote:That depends on whether you're talking about what they actually say to each other and believe or whether you're talking about the "sophisticated theology" that they trot out when trying to win arguments against atheists. In their actual theologies, their God is in fact an active participant. Not just in the personal lives of individual believers, but in the day to day workings of literally every single thing everywhere. That is what expressions like "God willing" mean. The idea that God personally fucks with absolutely everything all the time and is in fact omnipresent and omnipotent and every single thing that ever happens no matter how inconsequential or important is in fact directly caused by God. So anything that happens, or could happen in the future, happens only because it is the Will of God that such a thing happens.

Now, you may have noticed that if that were true that you're living in a Skinner Box crafted by someone who literally knows every single thing you would choose when presented with any possible set of stimuli and crafts literally every piece of stimuli you experience for the express purpose of eliciting such a response. And while such a thing is not logically impossible or anything (albeit kind of depressing to contemplate), it is logically incompatible with any meaningful amount of the "free will" that Abrahamic religions constantly wank to. And the moment some Atheist points that out, the Christians and Muslims start busting out the "sophisticated theology".

The difference between regular theology (the actual crap they actually believe) and sophisticated theology is that the sophisticated theology is created for the purpose of being hard to refute by sophisticated people. That means that God instantly stops being a giant bearded leprechaun in the sky that has real effects in the real world and would thus be in some way testable to being a "God of the Gaps". That is: God stops having any and all traits that are in any way falsifiable and the things he (or possibly "it" depending on how "sophisticated" we're getting) controls or even effects are relegated to crap that is for whatever reason currently outside the reach of observation.

So while the actual theology version of God is someone who is a giant glowing bearded White dude who is going to purge the Earth in the "very near future" and lead all of his followers into a giant zombie dance (which is why Christians and Muslims have to be buried whole, so they can be backup dancers during the giant Thriller remake in the very near future), the "sophisticated" version of God only ever did or does anything very long ago, very far away, or in a manner so subtle or tiny that it is completely indistinguishable from not existing at all.

And no, I don't actually think they believe in the sophisticated theology version of their God, because it's trivial and unworthy of worship. The actual heavenly father that they actually talk about in their actual church services would actually be worthy of worship, but since it demonstrably does not exist they are forced to get increasingly "sophisticated" during any discussion with people who ask tough questions.

-Frank
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like RobbyPants's post
10-11-2014, 08:22 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
Why do so many people have trouble pluralizing 'theist' and 'atheist'?

Atheism is the only way to truly be free from sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Colourcraze's post
10-11-2014, 09:19 AM
RE: Am I the only one frustrated with how Theist debate?
(10-11-2014 07:25 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(08-11-2014 04:59 PM)microterf Wrote:  After watching a couple hundred hours of debates over the last 2 years, I have noticed something that has really made me mad. They never debate based on what they sell.

You'll notice a difference between how Christians talk about God when talking to each other or when talking to skeptics. When talking to each other, they make all sorts of unquestioned assumptions. It's not until their views are put under scrutiny that they have to start wording things more carefully.

I know I've posted this before, but it's rather apt. Here are Frank's thoughts on the matter of how God goes from being an invisible bearded leprechaun that meddles in all affairs to being some vague, distant concept:

FrankTrollman Wrote:That depends on whether you're talking about what they actually say to each other and believe or whether you're talking about the "sophisticated theology" that they trot out when trying to win arguments against atheists. In their actual theologies, their God is in fact an active participant. Not just in the personal lives of individual believers, but in the day to day workings of literally every single thing everywhere. That is what expressions like "God willing" mean. The idea that God personally fucks with absolutely everything all the time and is in fact omnipresent and omnipotent and every single thing that ever happens no matter how inconsequential or important is in fact directly caused by God. So anything that happens, or could happen in the future, happens only because it is the Will of God that such a thing happens.

Now, you may have noticed that if that were true that you're living in a Skinner Box crafted by someone who literally knows every single thing you would choose when presented with any possible set of stimuli and crafts literally every piece of stimuli you experience for the express purpose of eliciting such a response. And while such a thing is not logically impossible or anything (albeit kind of depressing to contemplate), it is logically incompatible with any meaningful amount of the "free will" that Abrahamic religions constantly wank to. And the moment some Atheist points that out, the Christians and Muslims start busting out the "sophisticated theology".

The difference between regular theology (the actual crap they actually believe) and sophisticated theology is that the sophisticated theology is created for the purpose of being hard to refute by sophisticated people. That means that God instantly stops being a giant bearded leprechaun in the sky that has real effects in the real world and would thus be in some way testable to being a "God of the Gaps". That is: God stops having any and all traits that are in any way falsifiable and the things he (or possibly "it" depending on how "sophisticated" we're getting) controls or even effects are relegated to crap that is for whatever reason currently outside the reach of observation.

So while the actual theology version of God is someone who is a giant glowing bearded White dude who is going to purge the Earth in the "very near future" and lead all of his followers into a giant zombie dance (which is why Christians and Muslims have to be buried whole, so they can be backup dancers during the giant Thriller remake in the very near future), the "sophisticated" version of God only ever did or does anything very long ago, very far away, or in a manner so subtle or tiny that it is completely indistinguishable from not existing at all.

And no, I don't actually think they believe in the sophisticated theology version of their God, because it's trivial and unworthy of worship. The actual heavenly father that they actually talk about in their actual church services would actually be worthy of worship, but since it demonstrably does not exist they are forced to get increasingly "sophisticated" during any discussion with people who ask tough questions.

-Frank

Oh god yes. There is nothing more brain addling than listening to theist talk to each other about their faith. Especially when they go on about the after life... just a vapid dialogue filled with nothing but warm fuzzies and wishful thinking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Michael_Tadlock's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: