Debate discussion

150 views
One on one debates > Chrisitans/theists vs. me, the atheist

Comments Showing 1-50 of 716 (716 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 15

message 1: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments Would anyone like to debate? We could start a one on one maybe, or just go from here. If you want to, could you please spell out briefly what it is you believe (what religion, how literal you take religious scripture, etc.)?


message 2: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
There is a folder for one on one debates, if you want to use it.


message 3: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments Right, but first I need to find someone who is willing, and if there ends up being more than one, we can just keep it here, or start multiple one on ones. I am just trying to gauge the response first.


message 4: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
>.>
<.<
Most conservatives have left, actually. We scared them off. XD


message 5: by Sheeky (new)

Sheeky (sheekster) Well most of them.....except me.....


message 6: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
I'm sure you did.


message 7: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments lol. nathan (i am pretty sure that is sarcasm but i am not 100%)


message 8: by Lorna (new)

Lorna | 1273 comments It was XD


message 9: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments i think so 2


message 10: by Jayda (new)

Jayda I don't think you guys actually scared them off. More like they realized there was no point, like I have? xD I just haven't left since I like you guys ^^

Good luck finding a debate partner!


message 11: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments debating seems to only end with people getting upset and / or hurt


message 12: by Lorna (new)

Lorna | 1273 comments Especially when it's about religion.


message 13: by Jayda (new)

Jayda That's why I've stopped, kind of xD It's no point debating religion with atheists, anyway.


message 14: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments true


message 15: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
Because we ask for things you can't provide, naturally. X)


message 16: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments this be true


message 17: by Jayda (new)

Jayda But even when I DO provide things (which I believe I have provided answers for most, if not all of the questions you've asked) you dismiss it to be another one of religions fallacies, am I wrong?


message 18: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
Without empirical proof, what other proof is there? Logic isn't logic when your premise makes your conclusion whatever you want.


message 19: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments i presume you are right jayda


message 20: by Jayda (new)

Jayda But when we're discussing religion? Religious things shouldn't be viewed as fallacies in a religious discussion/debate, wouldn't you agree? What's the point in even going into religion when you can't use religion as a defense?


message 21: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments im not sure


message 22: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
When have we ever purely discussed religion? It's always been in the context of other debates.


message 23: by Jayda (new)

Jayda But it's always led to religion. Whether or not that was the topic, we have debated religion, even if we weren't meant to. Wouldn't you agree?


message 24: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
But not the nature of it itself, it's always been discussed as a reason for other opinions.


message 25: by Jayda (new)

Jayda No matter what we were talking about, we led it away from that topic into religion. I don't think it matters how it got started - we debated religion. It's not the name of the topic debated that should judge what is being debated - it should be the context of the debate that truly gives us that answer.

Anyway, we've debated religion enough in several different debates, including religious debates, I believe. God, Is God Pro-Choice or Pro-Life, along with many other debates that led to it.


message 26: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
However, both sides are held to the same standard of proving what they say with facts that can be verified.


message 27: by Jayda (new)

Jayda But when we're debating religion saying that we can't use religion, or what we use for religion (AKA, the Bible) there's no point in debating it. We should be able to use religion as a defense in a religious debate, whether or not it was meant to be that kind of debate at all.


message 28: by Lauren (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
Well, if religion really is true, surely you have more substantial proof then a 2,000 year old book?


message 29: by Jayda (new)

Jayda I don't think that bringing that up really has anything to do with what I'm saying. All I'm saying is that if we're discussing religion, the religious should be allowed to use their religion as a defense. Otherwise, there is absolutely NO point is them debating with you.


message 30: by Lauren (last edited Aug 07, 2009 05:43PM) (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 7365 comments Mod
In what sort of debate would using unverifiable information be okay?


message 31: by Jayda (new)

Jayda A religious debate where it IS verifiable. There is no point in debating religion when we can't use the information that we have.


message 32: by Dan (new)

Dan All I'm saying is that if we're discussing religion, the religious should be allowed to use their religion as a defense.

But that's circular reasoning. It's basically saying "religion is true because religion says so."

If you use, for example, the Bible as proof of something, that being a valid argument depends on the validity of the Bible, because you're making an argument from authority. So it's fine to cite the Bible if you can then turn around and establish the Bible as a reliable source of information. But if you just declare that the Bible is reliable, that's no different from just declaring what you believe to be true in the first place.


message 33: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments I agree with Dan. I am quite sure that Christians would readily point to parts of the Quran or the Vedas or what have you that do not have historical evidence, do not make sense logically, etc. but what of the bible? The bible lays out the religion and backs it up and everything else, but if it falls apart when scrutinized properly, then what good is it? Why believe it in the first place?


message 34: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments I would like to point out to anyone on the opposite side of the issue that I have debated Christians/theists before, and I promise I am respectful as can be. I don't resort to personal attacks or anything of the sort. I just have a lot of questions that no religious person has been able to answer to my satisfaction, and I also find it weird that all these unanswered questions never seem to trouble anyone of faith. However, I merely wish to have a conversation about the matter.


message 35: by Jayda (new)

Jayda I agree Dan, and I don't do that, in my opinion. What I'm talking about is when people say stuff about that Bible/what's in the Bible and then when I prove them wrong by giving them information that shows what things REALLY meant they push it off as just another fallacy. I'm not talking about proving the Bible to be right or true - I'm proving that what they say is in the Bible is different than what they think. Defending the Bible or my religion is mostly what I'm saying ^^


message 36: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments Jayda wrote: "I agree Dan, and I don't do that, in my opinion. What I'm talking about is when people say stuff about that Bible/what's in the Bible and then when I prove them wrong by giving them information tha..."

Do you mean like taking a verse and debating the meaning of it? Don't religious people do that all the time? And doesn't it make sense to examine the context, translations, and whatnot before coming a conclusion about what the original intent of the passage was?


message 37: by Jayda (new)

Jayda No, I'm talking about, for example, when Liz said that parents sold their daughters as sex slaves. I proved her wrong by using the Bible and study guides. That's more of what I'm talking about than anything.

And yes, but once you have examined those, where do you go next? I've studied the Bible for two years, but not everyone takes the time to do so.


message 38: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments that was the way i interpreted it jayda. i have read the bible twice through. once while i still had my faith.


message 39: by Jayda (new)

Jayda Yeah, and I defended it.

Even if it was the way you interpreted it, Liz, you still said it to make fun of the Bible and, what seemed to me (I definitely could be wrong), to make fun of religion, as well. So, I defended.


message 40: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments ok jayda. i really don't feel like getting into this right now.


message 41: by Jayda (new)

Jayda You don't have to. I was just responding to your post.


message 42: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments :)


message 43: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments Jayda wrote: "No, I'm talking about, for example, when Liz said that parents sold their daughters as sex slaves. I proved her wrong by using the Bible and study guides. That's more of what I'm talking about than..."

Ohhhh, okay I see what you're saying. Well, after that, I would say there are plenty of books that expand on those ideas, such as those by Karen Armstrong. Or, you could always read books that approach things in a more secular fashion, such as Breaking the Spell, or those that take an opposing stance, such as The End of Faith. Or you could pick up the Quran or another religious text.

Or you could talk about your thoughts and ideas on here or with others :)


message 44: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments the god delusion is pretty good


message 45: by jessi (new)

jessi (infinitevantage) | 437 comments Liz wrote: "the god delusion is pretty good"

I liked it when I read it, but I had also heard a lot of what Dawkins had had to say beforehand. It's really good as a sort of intro to the material, but I also think that Dawkins' material on evolution is much better. I also think there are better books out there for those who already understand the atheist position at least a little, which is why I recommended The End of Faith :)


message 46: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments :)


message 47: by Jenna (new)

Jenna Bonner | 75 comments i am a christian/lutheran and i dont really care what beleif u are. u beleive in what u are is what u are!


message 48: by Jenna (new)

Jenna Bonner | 75 comments Do I know you?


message 49: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 3163 comments You have posted a little around here, and we can already tell what kind of person you are. That is sad.


message 50: by Lorna (new)

Lorna | 1273 comments It may be merely a facade to shock...I'm hoping...


« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 15
back to top