I will debate any theist on here
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-02-2015, 02:58 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Sorry. Even the most concrete empirical evidence can be countered with a "magic" response.

As seen in the "Satan put the dinosaur bones in the earth to create doubt" argument.

I’m not saying a person can’t hold that position, I’m saying that a claim like that one can be empirically shown to be false.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 03:09 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 02:58 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(25-02-2015 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Sorry. Even the most concrete empirical evidence can be countered with a "magic" response.

As seen in the "Satan put the dinosaur bones in the earth to create doubt" argument.

I’m not saying a person can’t hold that position, I’m saying that a claim like that one can be empirically shown to false.

Only if you deal in completely empirical evidence. If you deal with any faith-based evidence, the empirical evidence becomes suspect.

That's the point I'm making with Online Biker.

Let's use this current example:

"Prove to me that Satan didn't put the dinosaur bones on earth to create doubt for Christians. But, the rules are you have to prove that there is a Satan first and you can't use your Bible as evidence. Or your 'personal" experiences'."

So then... I think you see. What's the point? How is it fair to ask someone to prove that statement if the statement cannot be assumed as true?

But, on the flip side, going back to the other posts, if you did give credence to the "magic" answers, there can never be any type of resolution because it becomes a goddidit pissing match.

Thus, what I said, it's nearly impossible to have a fair debate on this.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
25-02-2015, 03:10 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
This seems rather defeatist to me to say that there can be no debate because the two sides can never agree on terms. But sadly I think I might agree. It's like art and engineering majors. Never the two shall meet. This is because the terms defined would would either exclude all evidence I could present to a theist as being irrelevant, and any "evidence" they would present me I would have to throw out as being inconclusive or unverifiable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 03:12 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 03:10 PM)natachan Wrote:  This seems rather defeatist to me to say that there can be no debate because the two sides can never agree on terms. But sadly I think I might agree. It's like art and engineering majors. Never the two shall meet. This is because the terms defined would would either exclude all evidence I could present to a theist as being irrelevant, and any "evidence" they would present me I would have to throw out as being inconclusive or unverifiable.

Yeah, I came to realize this a while back.

But, like I said, happy mediums can be found for fruitful discussions and actual good debates.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
25-02-2015, 03:56 PM (This post was last modified: 25-02-2015 04:05 PM by Mr Woof.)
RE: I will debate any theist on here
The demand to present a God person, comes across as quite spurious.
Person, spirit, and God,(Trinity) some 300 years post the beginning of Christianity
muddeyed the waters even more. An anthropomorphic concept of God tends
to degrade any attempts to understand the concept.

God as a vivifying mysterious force which includes elements of goodness is
a far more open way to consider such a possibility.Attempts to impose human
values as pleasing to God simply provides a rubber stamp for what is often
stupidity.

If higher ethical/intellectual and meaningful ways exist beyond our
understanding then our science and logic may not be privy to such.
Even Big Bang apologists need some sort of vivifying force, and chaos
as sole perpetrator is not totally convincing.

One of the major problems re God is the demands made for 'perfection'(?)
a state difficult to understand at the secular level, let alone the Universal one.
Religious people tend to mould God to suit there whims, while
conversely some atheists, in attacking religious ratbaggery, demand logical proofs for ineffable
albeit seemingly remote, possibilities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2015, 04:30 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Sorry. Even the most concrete empirical evidence can be countered with a "magic" response.

As seen in the "Satan put the dinosaur bones in the earth to create doubt" argument.

My question would be why choose the "magic" viewpoint in any debate, argument or discussion? Why side on "magic" as an explanation for something supported by evidence based in reality, when there is no proof for this "magic"?

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
25-02-2015, 06:10 PM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 03:09 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(25-02-2015 02:58 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  I’m not saying a person can’t hold that position, I’m saying that a claim like that one can be empirically shown to false.

Only if you deal in completely empirical evidence. If you deal with any faith-based evidence, the empirical evidence becomes suspect.

That's the point I'm making with Online Biker.

Let's use this current example:

"Prove to me that Satan didn't put the dinosaur bones on earth to create doubt for Christians. But, the rules are you have to prove that there is a Satan first and you can't use your Bible as evidence. Or your 'personal" experiences'."

So then... I think you see. What's the point? How is it fair to ask someone to prove that statement if the statement cannot be assumed as true?

But, on the flip side, going back to the other posts, if you did give credence to the "magic" answers, there can never be any type of resolution because it becomes a goddidit pissing match.

Thus, what I said, it's nearly impossible to have a fair debate on this.

It's pretty simple.

I don't buy the "you must have faith" line of B.S.

So... they can either play by my rules -- and show up with this "god" person in tow -- or they can move on down the line.

I guess I'm just being a hardass about it......

....
I applaud your willingness to accommodate the "faithful".... I guess I'm simply not feeling generous this week.....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 10:13 AM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(25-02-2015 06:10 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  It's pretty simple.

I don't buy the "you must have faith" line of B.S.

So... they can either play by my rules -- and show up with this "god" person in tow -- or they can move on down the line.

I guess I'm just being a hardass about it......

....
I applaud your willingness to accommodate the "faithful".... I guess I'm simply not feeling generous this week.....

I like you, dude... so please don't take this as me trying to "call you out" or whatever.

Curious, though... how is your statement not close-minded like some of the more fervent Bible-thumping YECers?

Let's change this statement up a little:

It's pretty simple.

I don't buy the "evolution" line of B.S.

So... they can either play by my rules -- and show up with this "proof" in tow -- or they can move on down the line.

I guess I'm just being a hardass about it......

....
I applaud your willingness to accommodate the "atheists".... I guess I'm simply not feeling generous this week.....

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
26-02-2015, 10:38 AM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
(26-02-2015 10:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(25-02-2015 06:10 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  It's pretty simple.

I don't buy the "you must have faith" line of B.S.

So... they can either play by my rules -- and show up with this "god" person in tow -- or they can move on down the line.

I guess I'm just being a hardass about it......

....
I applaud your willingness to accommodate the "faithful".... I guess I'm simply not feeling generous this week.....

I like you, dude... so please don't take this as me trying to "call you out" or whatever.

Curious, though... how is your statement not close-minded like some of the more fervent Bible-thumping YECers?

Let's change this statement up a little:

It's pretty simple.

I don't buy the "evolution" line of B.S.

So... they can either play by my rules -- and show up with this "proof" in tow -- or they can move on down the line.

I guess I'm just being a hardass about it......

....
I applaud your willingness to accommodate the "atheists".... I guess I'm simply not feeling generous this week.....

Easy, as been done multiple times recently at TTA, evidence and proof of evolution have been well presented and backed up - that is the difference!. You said it yourself, empirical evidence does not work when you have the "faith" or "magic" card to throw down.

I don't see it as ever being "closed minded" if you ask for evidence or proof of a claim, and neither should any adult. I would, on the other hand, be gullible to accept the "I just know or feel it" as support for any argument.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 11:12 AM
RE: I will debate any theist on here
It's simple...

Some days I get outta bed on the wrong side and I'm a prick.

I thought we already covered that...

Big Grin

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: