Total Posts:145|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How is it possible to lose a debate about God

qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 2:52:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If I make a debate about the existence of God and the entire burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, why is it that I still lose?

Are voters insane, ignorant, vindictive, a-holes or what?

I mean there is no evidence for God and anyone who could actually prove there is a God, would end up winning a Nobel Prize.

Pretty much all the standard arguments (cosmological, transcendental, ontological, etc.) have already been debunked, so why even try to use them?

Seriously, if I can't win a single debate about the existence of God, then there's something really wrong with this website and it's users/voters.

It's just a major waste of time.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 2:57:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Guess you should leave then.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Daktoria
Posts: 497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:13:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:52:23 PM, qopel wrote:
If I make a debate about the existence of God and the entire burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, why is it that I still lose?

Are voters insane, ignorant, vindictive, a-holes or what?

I mean there is no evidence for God and anyone who could actually prove there is a God, would end up winning a Nobel Prize.

Pretty much all the standard arguments (cosmological, transcendental, ontological, etc.) have already been debunked, so why even try to use them?

Seriously, if I can't win a single debate about the existence of God, then there's something really wrong with this website and it's users/voters.

It's just a major waste of time.

I don't think you're being voted against on the basis of religion.

You're being voted against because people enjoy shifting burden of proof onto the negative while seeing your head spin.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:14:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
qopel... If you quit acting as if your 'side' is so obviously correct that no one should even take theism seriously, you'd probably find this site a lot more fun.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:15:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:52:23 PM, qopel wrote:
If I make a debate about the existence of God and the entire burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, why is it that I still lose?

Are voters insane, ignorant, vindictive, a-holes or what?

I mean there is no evidence for God and anyone who could actually prove there is a God, would end up winning a Nobel Prize.

Pretty much all the standard arguments (cosmological, transcendental, ontological, etc.) have already been debunked, so why even try to use them?

Seriously, if I can't win a single debate about the existence of God, then there's something really wrong with this website and it's users/voters.

It's just a major waste of time.

Well you see, the arguments made by the people arguing for God must appeal to the voter.

You're arrogant and dismissive attitude also probably puts people off.

Sorry you're a sore loser.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:28:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Sorry you're a sore loser.

I shouldn't be a loser at all in a debate like that. Thanks for proving me right.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:30:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:14:19 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
qopel... If you quit acting as if your 'side' is so obviously correct that no one should even take theism seriously, you'd probably find this site a lot more fun.

I'm not acting. It's true.
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:38:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
You lose because you do not know how to conduct a debate properly. That is more important than anything. Voters need to be able to read and clarify your argument. I went through some of your debates and little evidence was offered and the structure was bad to say the least. Your attitude needs a little work as well.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:45:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:38:47 PM, Pennington wrote:
You lose because you do not know how to conduct a debate properly. That is more important than anything. Voters need to be able to read and clarify your argument. I went through some of your debates and little evidence was offered and the structure was bad to say the least. Your attitude needs a little work as well.

If my attitude is bad, I should lose a point for conduct...at most, not the whole debate.

I use facts...how is that bad structure?
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:51:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:30:31 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:14:19 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
qopel... If you quit acting as if your 'side' is so obviously correct that no one should even take theism seriously, you'd probably find this site a lot more fun.

I'm not acting. It's true.

You're just making it worse for everyone when you have that attitude.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Sola.Gratia
Posts: 278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:52:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:52:23 PM, qopel wrote:
If I make a debate about the existence of God and the entire burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, why is it that I still lose?

Are voters insane, ignorant, vindictive, a-holes or what?

I mean there is no evidence for God and anyone who could actually prove there is a God, would end up winning a Nobel Prize.

Pretty much all the standard arguments (cosmological, transcendental, ontological, etc.) have already been debunked, so why even try to use them?

Seriously, if I can't win a single debate about the existence of God, then there's something really wrong with this website and it's users/voters.

It's just a major waste of time.

Although, I sympathize your confusion... There is lots of proof that many Christians have probably showed you but you do not believe it and since you do not believe it that is why you do not believe there is a God to be proven of Self-Existence...

I pity you as well for thinking so low of others including me by your accusations and name calling... (Even if it was just merely a question)...

Why give up so easily? If you think your right, why give up? Why not keep going? I mean that's what Christians do.. We keep going regardless if someone hates us or calls us name or says we're wrong.. Quitting is childlike and I would not believe that your a child are you? Your putting the blame on Christians for your quick action of quitting.. Its not our fault if we believe and you do not..

Its only a waste of time if you allow it to be... Just saying...
"What is sin? It is the glory of God not honored. Holiness of God not reverenced. Greatness of God not admired. Power of God not praised. Truth of God not sought. Wisdom of God not esteemed. Beauty of God not treasured. Goodness of God not savored. Faithfulness of God not trusted. Commandments of God not obeyed. Justice of God not respected. Wrath of God not feared. Grace of God not cherished. Presence of God not prized. Person of God not loved. That is sin." ~John Piper
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:52:23 PM, qopel wrote:
If I make a debate about the existence of God and the entire burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, why is it that I still lose?

Voters found your arguments not compelling. This could have been the case for a multitude of reasons. We'll explore them below.

Are voters insane, ignorant, vindictive, a-holes or what?

It's a fallacy to attribute all votes against your argument to voter error or to some other problem with voters. If they are not persuaded, then you have failed to communicate. Some people aren't reachable, but most are reasonable. Lashing out at "voters" generally (as you are doing here) is not a good way to reverse this trend.

I mean there is no evidence for God and anyone who could actually prove there is a God, would end up winning a Nobel Prize.

Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Pretty much all the standard arguments (cosmological, transcendental, ontological, etc.) have already been debunked, so why even try to use them?

I agree, but would go further. All arguments for or against the existence of a god are pointless; devoid of merit or value.

Seriously, if I can't win a single debate about the existence of God, then there's something really wrong with this website and it's users/voters.

lol

It's just a major waste of time.

Indeed.
Tsar of DDO
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:00:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM, YYW wrote:


Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Nobody can prove God exists and nobody can prove God doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, so unless the can prove God exists, there's no reason to believe God exists.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:02:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:28:25 PM, qopel wrote:
Sorry you're a sore loser.

I shouldn't be a loser at all in a debate like that. Thanks for proving me right.

No, you lose debates because you don't make good arguments then you throw a fit about it.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:03:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:52:48 PM, Sola.Gratia wrote:

Although, I sympathize your confusion... There is lots of proof that many Christians have probably showed you but you do not believe it and since you do not believe it that is why you do not believe there is a God to be proven of Self-Existence...

LOL. Proof needs to be backed by evidence, not just empty claims. Like I said, If they had real proof, they would be collecting their Nobel Prize, not debating with me!
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:04:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:00:49 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM, YYW wrote:


Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Nobody can prove God exists and nobody can prove God doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, so unless the can prove God exists, there's no reason to believe God exists.

No true lover of wisdom really cares about proof, what they care about is warrant and justification for a coherent belief.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:05:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:02:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:28:25 PM, qopel wrote:
Sorry you're a sore loser.

I shouldn't be a loser at all in a debate like that. Thanks for proving me right.

No, you lose debates because you don't make good arguments then you throw a fit about it.

I shouldn't have to make any arguments if I don't have the burden of proof. That's why I "throw a fit".
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:06:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:05:21 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:02:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:28:25 PM, qopel wrote:
Sorry you're a sore loser.

I shouldn't be a loser at all in a debate like that. Thanks for proving me right.

No, you lose debates because you don't make good arguments then you throw a fit about it.

I shouldn't have to make any arguments if I don't have the burden of proof. That's why I "throw a fit".

I've read your debates... and you don't make sufficient points to convince the voter. Therefore, you lose. Simple.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:06:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:04:10 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:00:49 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM, YYW wrote:


Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Nobody can prove God exists and nobody can prove God doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, so unless the can prove God exists, there's no reason to believe God exists.

No true lover of wisdom really cares about proof, what they care about is warrant and justification for a coherent belief.

..and you wonder why I think they are nutjobs?
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:08:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:06:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:05:21 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:02:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:28:25 PM, qopel wrote:
Sorry you're a sore loser.

I shouldn't be a loser at all in a debate like that. Thanks for proving me right.

No, you lose debates because you don't make good arguments then you throw a fit about it.

I shouldn't have to make any arguments if I don't have the burden of proof. That's why I "throw a fit".

I've read your debates... and you don't make sufficient points to convince the voter. Therefore, you lose. Simple.

People need to learn what "burden of proof means" Simple.
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:12:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:00:49 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM, YYW wrote:


Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Nobody can prove God exists and nobody can prove God doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, so unless the can prove God exists, there's no reason to believe God exists.

There is no evidence for or against the existence of God. Any argument to ground metaphysical claims (like the existence or non-existance of a god), is necessarily speculative -but that speculation is based on nothing.

Merely saying "the burden of proof lies with those who make the positive claim" does not make it the case. You're making a metaphysical claim, a normative claim that is not verifiable, not falsifiable, not testable. It is therefore not properly describable as "positive" in any meaningful or accurate way. So, the BOP you're positing isn't so much a BOP, but an improper demand such that you are mislabeling a claim, and then requiring that which cannot be offered in support of that claim. While ostensibly that should merit your de facto win, it just makes people (who actually understand the meaning of adjectives like "positive" in the context of claims) laugh.

Arguing for or against the existence of a God is stupid. That's the thick and thin of it.
Tsar of DDO
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:13:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:06:54 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:04:10 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:00:49 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:55:47 PM, YYW wrote:


Well, arguing for or against the existence of a god is itself an exercise of monumental futility. But then again, I take it that most haven't ever taken the time to realize that this is the case.

Nobody can prove God exists and nobody can prove God doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim, so unless the can prove God exists, there's no reason to believe God exists.

No true lover of wisdom really cares about proof, what they care about is warrant and justification for a coherent belief.

..and you wonder why I think they are nutjobs?

So a person who is warranted in believing that the external world she perceives is real, and also has justification for its existence, is a nut-job...

See here ladies and gentlemen that problem with this atheists thinking. All as a result of a demand of some ill-defined notion of proof.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:20:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:12:25 PM, YYW wrote:

Merely saying "the burden of proof lies with those who make the positive claim" does not make it the case.

Um...it goes like this:

Either you believe everything until you can prove it false, in which case you believe in every God, Unicorn, Leprechaun, Pixie, Big Foot, Alien, Flying Spaghetti Monster and anything else that can ever be imagined as true.

OR

You don't believe in anything until it can be proved true. Which is the sane and rational way to think.

So....if you want to shift the burden of proof and believe in God without evidence, you are not thinking rationally.

That's why the burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim. You needed that explained to you?
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:30:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:20:41 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:12:25 PM, YYW wrote:

Merely saying "the burden of proof lies with those who make the positive claim" does not make it the case.

Um...it goes like this:

Either you believe everything until you can prove it false, in which case you believe in every God, Unicorn, Leprechaun, Pixie, Big Foot, Alien, Flying Spaghetti Monster and anything else that can ever be imagined as true.

OR

You don't believe in anything until it can be proved true. Which is the sane and rational way to think.

So....if you want to shift the burden of proof and believe in God without evidence, you are not thinking rationally.

I would agree that faith in any form is irrational -that doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

That's why the burden of proof is on those who make the positive claim. You needed that explained to you?

lol

I don't expect to change your mind. But you're wondering why no one buys your arguments. If you just want to be dogmatic, whatever. Continue as you are.... I see no reason to discuss it further.
Tsar of DDO
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:31:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:13:28 PM, Apeiron wrote:

See here ladies and gentlemen that problem with this atheists thinking. All as a result of a demand of some ill-defined notion of proof.

As opposed to the Theist defined notion that it only takes faith to justify a belief.
FAITH-The excuse to believe something without evidence.

And you want to claim it's the Atheists that have a problem with thinking?!?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:34:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:31:33 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:13:28 PM, Apeiron wrote:

See here ladies and gentlemen that problem with this atheists thinking. All as a result of a demand of some ill-defined notion of proof.

As opposed to the Theist defined notion that it only takes faith to justify a belief.
FAITH-The excuse to believe something without evidence.

And you want to claim it's the Atheists that have a problem with thinking?!?

Just because you think that way doesn't mean everyone does, which is why you're not convincing the whole theist world of your viewpoint.
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:36:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:31:33 PM, qopel wrote:
At 4/1/2013 4:13:28 PM, Apeiron wrote:

See here ladies and gentlemen that problem with this atheists thinking. All as a result of a demand of some ill-defined notion of proof.

As opposed to the Theist defined notion that it only takes faith to justify a belief.
FAITH-The excuse to believe something without evidence.

That's the most intellectually weak judgement-laced definition of faith I have seen in a while. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. No more or less.

And you want to claim it's the Atheists that have a problem with thinking?!?

Dogmatism ftw.

HINT:

Learn the distinction between kinds of belief.
Tsar of DDO
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:41:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:30:04 PM, YYW wrote:

I don't expect to change your mind. But you're wondering why no one buys your arguments. If you just want to be dogmatic, whatever. Continue as you are.... I see no reason to discuss it further.

That's what I should expect from a gullible sycophant who believes in talking snakes, resurrections, people walking on water and virgins having children.

They should round you all up and put you away from the sane society.
qopel
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:45:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:34:34 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

Just because you think that way doesn't mean everyone does, which is why you're not convincing the whole theist world of your viewpoint.

There's a reason why they are called "Jesus Freaks".