[split] Debating Lion IRC
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-01-2013, 05:19 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-01-2013 05:08 PM)Aspchizo Wrote:  Might as well close it, sure doesn't look like he's willing to debate.
No surprise there. Drinking Beverage

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
15-01-2013, 05:31 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
I'm locking the thread.

Nothing to see here. Move along. Drinking Beverage

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 05:34 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Unlocking thread. We do not lock threads without a legitimate reason.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like kingschosen's post
15-01-2013, 05:34 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-01-2013 04:38 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Why are you making up every excuse to avoid the challenge?

I beg your pardon? Angry
I just got through saying I WOULD accept the challenge once the challenge is actually defined.

"...there is no logical and evidence based reason to believe.''

''Logical'' to who? Blaise Pascal or someone biased whose logic is defective because they dont want God to be real.

''Evidence'' to what standard - Circumstantial, hearsay, balance of probability, trustworthiness, motive?

Reasonable according to whom - 3 billion Christians who dont want to risk going to hell?

Reason to ''believe'' what? That God exists and wants to show existentialists that death and sin are NOT terminal? That life after death is possible. That forgiveness is on offer from Him for anyone who wants?


It's not a formal debate if all you're gonna do is kick an ambiguous topic around for weeks and weeks ad nauseam until one side gives up.

And it took me a while to clarify if Atothetheist even accepted the historicity of Jesus' existence. So I'm not gonna debate someone whose closing statement is...oh well everybody knows Jesus never lived therefore no Resurrection ever happened.

Similarly, I wanted to see the ''color of his money'' so to speak by way of an admission that if anyone could do it, a divine being Jesus Christ could. I'm not going to debate miracles with someone who says not even God can do miracles. If you wanted to debate the impossibility of miracles, thats a DIFFERENT debate topic. (And a pretty bold assertion.)



(15-01-2013 04:38 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  ...Again, it is my responsibility to make you abundantly aware of the challenge until it is accepted or declined. If you do not wish to debate A2 on the proposed topic, then post in the topic saying that you do not wish to do so.

This isn't complicated.

We have formalities and protocols that we abide by when it comes to heavily moderate forums such as The Boxing Ring.

No, it isnt complicated. Did you miss the part of your own rules which says we have 7 days to decide whether or not to debate?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 05:39 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Oops - it seemed like people were still trying to figure out why they were taking up 15 pages with no resolve as to what to debate about.

I got lock happy. Undecided Won't happen again.

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 05:41 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Which is why I said to decline A2's challenge and offer a new argument with defined parameters.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 05:43 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-01-2013 05:39 PM)kim Wrote:  Oops - it seemed like people were still trying to figure out why they were taking up 15 pages with no resolve as to what to debate about.

I got lock happy. Undecided Won't happen again.
While I agree that this topic has all the substance of a stalk of celery, it still shouldn't be locked; nor should any topic really... outside The Boxing Ring.

Heck... Ask a Theist! remains open even after I stopped posting in it.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
15-01-2013, 05:55 PM
RE: I miss theists.
(15-01-2013 04:51 PM)kineo Wrote:  
(15-01-2013 04:27 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  I include the atheist's alleged lack of experience of divinity as falling into the category of delusion, misunderstanding, misinterpretation, assumption, bias, wilful ignorance, broken God-antenna, etc.

That's wonderful for you, and I don't aim to convince you otherwise....

[snipped all the stuff that wasnt trying to convince me of anything]

...I think that your argument is lacking in any real substance.

Yes, I didnt need to include any substance because I was merely saying the same about atheist/skeptics as you were saying about theist/believers.
If we are gonna sit here and call each others perception of reality wilfully or inadvertently distorted there's no need for substance.

It's a bit like the following nil-all-draw;

Atheist : You guys are afraid of death so you invent a religion which includes the afterlife.

Christian : You guys are afraid there might be an afterlife when you die so you invent a religion which has no afterlife....(in order to live like theres no tomorrow).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 06:06 PM (This post was last modified: 15-01-2013 06:09 PM by Adenosis.)
RE: I miss theists.
(15-01-2013 05:55 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Yes, I didnt need to include any substance because I was merely saying the same about atheist/skeptics as you were saying about theist/believers.
If we are gonna sit here and call each others perception of reality wilfully or inadvertently distorted there's no need for substance.

Well we did try to tell you what constitutes as evidence...

(15-01-2013 05:55 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Atheist : You guys are afraid of death so you invent a religion which includes the afterlife.

Christian : You guys are afraid there might be an afterlife when you die so you invent a religion which has no afterlife....(in order to live like theres no tomorrow).

Are you a troll? I'm starting to really think so. Why would anyone be afraid of an afterlife? I can see someone being sick of life and so wanting a break from thinking and shit, so non-existence after death might be appealing I guess... But an afterlife would be great in my opinion.

There's just no reason to believe a god, or an afterlife exists. If we took what you consider evidence as evidence then astrology, tarrot cards, palm reading, and psychics would all be legit. Hence why personal experience claims are not considered evidence. What is so confusing about this?

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2013, 06:12 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-01-2013 05:34 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Reasonable according to whom - 3 billion Christians who dont want to risk going to hell?
You're way off with that number. There are actually only about 2.2 billion Christians world-wide.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: