Total Posts:85|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Convert me!

Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!
Dude... Stop...
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 5:49:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Let me try!

P1. If the universe is finely tuned, then it it finely tuned by God
P2. The universe is finely tuned
C. God exists

In defence of P2, there are several fundamental constants of nature that must be precisely tuned such that even basic chemistry could exist. Without basic chemistry there could be no life, simple as. And it's a far stretch to imagine a case where there could be.

Adjusting the gravitational constant to be higher, or vacuum energy to be a bit lower, would result in the universe collapsing before it has ever expanded to form galaxies. Vice versa and the universe would have diffused completely, without forming any galactic structures either. These variables are known to be tuned within ~1% each! and the odds stack up.

In defence of premise 1, there seems to be little reason to doubt that complexity was intentional of the universe, moreover the most aparent mechanism for variables to be tuned to specific values is for a sentient fine tuner who knows/tests the variables required and sets them to the right ones for complexity, and hence life.

There goes my half assed devil's advocate... Have fun!
SemperVI
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:00:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Can you say super ego.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:05:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:49:44 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Let me try!

P1. If the universe is finely tuned, then it it finely tuned by God
P2. The universe is finely tuned
C. God exists

In defence of P2, there are several fundamental constants of nature that must be precisely tuned such that even basic chemistry could exist. Without basic chemistry there could be no life, simple as. And it's a far stretch to imagine a case where there could be.

Adjusting the gravitational constant to be higher, or vacuum energy to be a bit lower, would result in the universe collapsing before it has ever expanded to form galaxies. Vice versa and the universe would have diffused completely, without forming any galactic structures either. These variables are known to be tuned within ~1% each! and the odds stack up.

In defence of premise 1, there seems to be little reason to doubt that complexity was intentional of the universe, moreover the most aparent mechanism for variables to be tuned to specific values is for a sentient fine tuner who knows/tests the variables required and sets them to the right ones for complexity, and hence life.


There goes my half assed devil's advocate... Have fun!

William Lane Craig-ish failure. If you really wanted to play "devil's advocate," you should have been more neutral...
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:24:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 6:05:20 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:49:44 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Let me try!

P1. If the universe is finely tuned, then it it finely tuned by God
P2. The universe is finely tuned
C. God exists

In defence of P2, there are several fundamental constants of nature that must be precisely tuned such that even basic chemistry could exist. Without basic chemistry there could be no life, simple as. And it's a far stretch to imagine a case where there could be.

Adjusting the gravitational constant to be higher, or vacuum energy to be a bit lower, would result in the universe collapsing before it has ever expanded to form galaxies. Vice versa and the universe would have diffused completely, without forming any galactic structures either. These variables are known to be tuned within ~1% each! and the odds stack up.

In defence of premise 1, there seems to be little reason to doubt that complexity was intentional of the universe, moreover the most aparent mechanism for variables to be tuned to specific values is for a sentient fine tuner who knows/tests the variables required and sets them to the right ones for complexity, and hence life.


There goes my half assed devil's advocate... Have fun!

William Lane Craig-ish failure. If you really wanted to play "devil's advocate," you should have been more neutral...

How so?
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:30:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

So I think the problem with religion is that people take it too literally. I believe most stories were for uneducated masses. It made it easier. I believe GOD =goodness. The spirit of goodness. Having a specific 'guy' to embody the idea was helpful, but not so much anymore.

Example: I've always interpreted scripture as follows: When Jesus talks about being the son of the God, he means we are all part of GOD (aka goodness is within us). Recognizing, it living by the way of good has its own rewards, and living badly has it's own private hell. Jesus as a very enlightened human being makes the most sense to me, but doesn't negate the prescence of goodness (GOD) in our lives. Separating us from animals, making us more aware of choice etc.

And the bible or koran or you name the book; man's search for meaning and historical conclusions. Very wise and insightful documents about human nature actually.

Believing in the higher power of good is and empowering, life centering choice. No need to stumble around in the details:

Ok...back to u.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:36:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 6:24:21 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 5/27/2014 6:05:20 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:49:44 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Let me try!

P1. If the universe is finely tuned, then it it finely tuned by God
P2. The universe is finely tuned
C. God exists

In defence of P2, there are several fundamental constants of nature that must be precisely tuned such that even basic chemistry could exist. Without basic chemistry there could be no life, simple as. And it's a far stretch to imagine a case where there could be.

Adjusting the gravitational constant to be higher, or vacuum energy to be a bit lower, would result in the universe collapsing before it has ever expanded to form galaxies. Vice versa and the universe would have diffused completely, without forming any galactic structures either. These variables are known to be tuned within ~1% each! and the odds stack up.

In defence of premise 1, there seems to be little reason to doubt that complexity was intentional of the universe, moreover the most aparent mechanism for variables to be tuned to specific values is for a sentient fine tuner who knows/tests the variables required and sets them to the right ones for complexity, and hence life.


There goes my half assed devil's advocate... Have fun!

William Lane Craig-ish failure. If you really wanted to play "devil's advocate," you should have been more neutral...

How so?

Dude... I was being "tongue-in-cheek." I was using your post to make fun of William Lane Craig (Craig vs. Hitchens), and take a pot-shot at another.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:37:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 6:00:10 PM, SemperVI wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Can you say super ego.

Yes I can.
Dude... Stop...
SemperVI
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:40:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 6:37:25 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 6:00:10 PM, SemperVI wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Can you say super ego.

Yes I can.

It was a rhetorical comment - it is painfully obvious we can see you think very highly of yourself and your desperate for others to see this as well.

FYI: This too was rhetorical
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 6:44:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 6:40:59 PM, SemperVI wrote:
At 5/27/2014 6:37:25 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 6:00:10 PM, SemperVI wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Can you say super ego.

Yes I can.

It was a rhetorical comment - it is painfully obvious we can see you think very highly of yourself and your desperate for others to see this as well.

FYI: This too was rhetorical

Nah. I don't think very highly of myself at all, I just thought this would be fun. Go away if you have nothing positive to post at all.
Dude... Stop...
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 10:31:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

You have already made up your mind that you cannot be converted into believing in a mythical character in the sky so trying to convince you that any invisible friend exists would be futile.

However, let's play a game with words.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org...
Theism, in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists.

What is a deity?
I will use the following definition taken from http://www.thefreedictionary.com... . >
"3. a person or thing revered as supremely powerful or beneficent."

I AM the supreme being of my own life. I AM the first and last of my kind. I AM unique.
I AM that I AM regardless of what you or any other person believe about me and whether you think I AM powerful or not.
I have the power to give life and also to take away life.

I AM a person who is revered as supremely powerful or beneficent by those who are less powerful and beneficent than I AM.

Have I convinced you that I exist?
Do you believe in me even if you do not comprehend a word I say?

If I have convinced you that I AM a deity then I have converted you from Atheism (a belief in the non existence of any deity ) to Theism ( the belief in the existence of at least one deity) . Whether I AM supreme in your opinion or not makes no difference to the fact that I AM a deity and I AM supreme in my own eyes.

Please ignore me though and just pretend I do not exist.
For all you know, I might be just a computer program answering your questions.
I might also be an alien pretending to be human.
I might just be kidding and I might not.
You are just a mere earthling so what would you know?
Defro
Posts: 847
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 10:54:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

If you don't convert, I will eat your family.
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 10:59:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
False, atheists believe there is no God or Goddess. I can easily use your "game" against you and say that you aren't a deity because the definition of a deity is God. Your argument fails to actually prove anything.
Dude... Stop...
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 11:00:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 10:54:10 PM, Defro wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

If you don't convert, I will eat your family.

I already did.
Dude... Stop...
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 11:02:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.

I'm using the I-pad God has given me and I'm seeking a real answer.
Dude... Stop...
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 11:03:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 11:02:05 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.

I'm using the I-pad God has given me and I'm seeking a real answer.

Yeah well, there is always one constant. If you do not seek in humility you will not find.
Fanath
Posts: 830
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2014 11:12:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 11:03:39 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 11:02:05 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.

I'm using the I-pad God has given me and I'm seeking a real answer.

Yeah well, there is always one constant. If you do not seek in humility you will not find.

Oh believe me, I'm more humble than any one here. No one could ever even hope to compare to me.
Dude... Stop...
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 2:02:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 10:59:50 PM, Fanath wrote:
False, atheists believe there is no God or Goddess. I can easily use your "game" against you and say that you aren't a deity because the definition of a deity is God. Your argument fails to actually prove anything.

And the definition of God is ...?

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...

2 (god) (In certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity:
eg: a moon god
the Hindu god Vishnu.

You can see a picture of the Hindu God or goddess Vishnu on http://en.wikipedia.org....

Vishnu was apparently reincarnated into visible human form in the year 2007. Here is proof >
http://www.weirdasianews.com...

Another definition of God according to Oxford dictionary is....
2.1 An image, animal, or other object worshipped as divine or symbolizing a god: Eg: wooden gods from the Congo.

Have you ever seen those wooden idols/gods, from the Congo?

If you wish to see an idol, go into any Catholic church and look at the wooden human idol hung on a wooden cross. That thing is the object of their worship. It is their God. Does that object of worship exist ? Does the wood it is made of exist? That thing is what they worship.

Do objects or worship exist in this world? If they are not gods or idols, what are they?
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 2:06:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 11:02:05 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.

I'm using the I-pad God has given me and I'm seeking a real answer.

You need to type in "Romeo, Romeo, Wherefore art thou Romeo? "
Type it in all capitals so Romeo might hear you better and answer you.

Do you think Romeo loves you ?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 3:49:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 11:12:31 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 11:03:39 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 11:02:05 PM, Fanath wrote:
At 5/27/2014 10:03:51 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

God is not an equation, he is a relationship. The scriptures do not say know and ye shall find, it says seek and ye shall find. God gives you enough that if you want to find him you will, and if you do not you will not. God is not a rapist who forces himself on you. He is not presenting a legal case as to why you should believe. He is Romeo at the window promising his love. You either believe he loves you or you do not.

Not much help, but it is a beginning.

I'm using the I-pad God has given me and I'm seeking a real answer.

Yeah well, there is always one constant. If you do not seek in humility you will not find.

Oh believe me, I'm more humble than any one here. No one could ever even hope to compare to me.

That was a joke right? cause you confirm you are not seeking with humility.
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 10:50:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

1. If there was a survival of the fittest, then why has the human race evolved to believe in things that don't exist? How do you account for the success of religion?

2. Evolution cannot explain the origin of life. There is no evidence that life could have risen from non-life. The atmosphere of the early earth was made out of carbon dioxide and ammonia so the chance that life was somehow made that way..is a bit preposterous.

3. The simplest cells are so complex and carry tons of information in their strands of DNA and RNA. Is it reasonable to say that these intricate, basic templates of life formed from random combinations of amino acids? Who programmed the cell with its digital code? Who gave it the capacity to make copies of itself? Evolution supposes that it came fully formed with the first hint of life. How could random combinations of chemicals create so marvelous a thing as a living cell?

4. How does atheism explain consciousnesses? How could atoms of hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, and so on somehow produce the capability for us to perceive the world around us?

5. Where did morality (the press to help others who are strangers and act against our evident self-interest) come from? How does evolution and the "survival of the fittest" account for me giving blood?

6. The universe could not have evolved from natural selection, as the universe makes up the whole of nature. Also, science is not the whole truth. It cannot make the case for naturalism and materialism because it operates within naturalism and materialism.

7. Immanuel Kant famously made the point that the human perception of reality does not correspond to reality itself. Reality does not come directly to us but is filtered through a lens that we ourselves provide. Therefore, the idea that we know everything about the universe is preposterous, because humans can only experience the universe through their senses only. To say that we have discovered reality is incorrect. The idea of a divine creator then, is plausible.

8. Miracles are possible because scientific laws are only assumed to be true through repetition. There is always the case that a scientific law could be wrong - they are proven wrong over and over. Therefore, one cannot say that miracles are impossible because of science because science itself is often found to be erroneous.

9. There are no laws of nature that operate outside the universe, so something such as heaven and hell are not "miraculous". Heaven and hell do not have to be a part of our universe.

10. Beyond the reach of reason and experience, the absence of evidence cannot be used as absence of evidence. Faith is an attempt to reach beyond the empirical realm and illuminate those questions.

11. It's much less risky to believe in God. If he doesn't exist and we believe, then we've just made a metaphysical error. But if he does exist and we don't believe, then the more serious risk is to be separated from God.

12. If the Darwinian theory were true, than humans would be producing according to what their genes say. However, some humans decide against having children, regardless of "what they should be programmed to do".

13. There are quite a few flaws in materialism. For example, matter seems "responsible" for our thoughts, emotions, and perhaps even our moral institutions. Why should I trust my own beliefs when I know that my beliefs are only made up of an arrangement of atoms? How can materialism account for the fact that we consider our accounts of the world to be not merely chemically generated reactions but true beliefs?

14. The universe follows mathematical laws, when it has no reason to. If there is no divine creator, then why do things in the universe follow a certain set of patterns and laws?

15. Whenever you encounter A, it has to be caused by B. But then B has to be accounted for, so let us say it is caused by C. This tracing of causes cannot continue indefinitely, because if it did, nothing would have ever come into existence. Therefore there must be an original cause responsible for the chain of causation in the first place. To this, we give the name God. But what caused God? Since God is by definition outside the universe, he is not part of the series. Therefore the rules of the series, including the rules of causation, would not logically apply to him.

16. If the universe was produced outside the laws of physics, then its origin satisfies the basic definition of the term "miracle".

17. You are walking in the desert, when you find a gold watch on the ground. It is wound up to the exact right time. You ask yourself, "how did it get there?" Now replace the gold watch as the human race. See what I mean?

18. The anthropic principle states that the universe we perceive must be of precisely such a nature as will make possible living beings who can perceive it. Why are the universal conditions just right for life to exist?
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
bulproof
Posts: 25,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 2:06:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:50:08 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

1. If there was a survival of the fittest, then why has the human race evolved to believe in things that don't exist? How do you account for the success of religion?

2. Evolution cannot explain the origin of life. There is no evidence that life could have risen from non-life. The atmosphere of the early earth was made out of carbon dioxide and ammonia so the chance that life was somehow made that way..is a bit preposterous.

3. The simplest cells are so complex and carry tons of information in their strands of DNA and RNA. Is it reasonable to say that these intricate, basic templates of life formed from random combinations of amino acids? Who programmed the cell with its digital code? Who gave it the capacity to make copies of itself? Evolution supposes that it came fully formed with the first hint of life. How could random combinations of chemicals create so marvelous a thing as a living cell?

4. How does atheism explain consciousnesses? How could atoms of hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, and so on somehow produce the capability for us to perceive the world around us?

5. Where did morality (the press to help others who are strangers and act against our evident self-interest) come from? How does evolution and the "survival of the fittest" account for me giving blood?

6. The universe could not have evolved from natural selection, as the universe makes up the whole of nature. Also, science is not the whole truth. It cannot make the case for naturalism and materialism because it operates within naturalism and materialism.

7. Immanuel Kant famously made the point that the human perception of reality does not correspond to reality itself. Reality does not come directly to us but is filtered through a lens that we ourselves provide. Therefore, the idea that we know everything about the universe is preposterous, because humans can only experience the universe through their senses only. To say that we have discovered reality is incorrect. The idea of a divine creator then, is plausible.

8. Miracles are possible because scientific laws are only assumed to be true through repetition. There is always the case that a scientific law could be wrong - they are proven wrong over and over. Therefore, one cannot say that miracles are impossible because of science because science itself is often found to be erroneous.

9. There are no laws of nature that operate outside the universe, so something such as heaven and hell are not "miraculous". Heaven and hell do not have to be a part of our universe.

10. Beyond the reach of reason and experience, the absence of evidence cannot be used as absence of evidence. Faith is an attempt to reach beyond the empirical realm and illuminate those questions.

11. It's much less risky to believe in God. If he doesn't exist and we believe, then we've just made a metaphysical error. But if he does exist and we don't believe, then the more serious risk is to be separated from God.

12. If the Darwinian theory were true, than humans would be producing according to what their genes say. However, some humans decide against having children, regardless of "what they should be programmed to do".

13. There are quite a few flaws in materialism. For example, matter seems "responsible" for our thoughts, emotions, and perhaps even our moral institutions. Why should I trust my own beliefs when I know that my beliefs are only made up of an arrangement of atoms? How can materialism account for the fact that we consider our accounts of the world to be not merely chemically generated reactions but true beliefs?

14. The universe follows mathematical laws, when it has no reason to. If there is no divine creator, then why do things in the universe follow a certain set of patterns and laws?

15. Whenever you encounter A, it has to be caused by B. But then B has to be accounted for, so let us say it is caused by C. This tracing of causes cannot continue indefinitely, because if it did, nothing would have ever come into existence. Therefore there must be an original cause responsible for the chain of causation in the first place. To this, we give the name God. But what caused God? Since God is by definition outside the universe, he is not part of the series. Therefore the rules of the series, including the rules of causation, would not logically apply to him.

16. If the universe was produced outside the laws of physics, then its origin satisfies the basic definition of the term "miracle".

17. You are walking in the desert, when you find a gold watch on the ground. It is wound up to the exact right time. You ask yourself, "how did it get there?" Now replace the gold watch as the human race. See what I mean?

18. The anthropic principle states that the universe we perceive must be of precisely such a nature as will make possible living beings who can perceive it. Why are the universal conditions just right for life to exist?
Eighteen points that say because you can't understand things..........................GOD.
Mineva
Posts: 336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 2:24:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Hi,

Actually the trolling is something you do currently , because there are topics for you in the forum to learn about theism and I dont think someone could help you to make you a believer. Only you can help yourself. Also I dont think you are ready to try to understand theistic viewpoint, you are just ready to fight against them.
12_13
Posts: 1,365
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 2:26:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Why should I convert you to theist? I think it would be better that you become righteous than theist.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 2:40:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Response: When you can prove evolution without referring to a science book, article, or an alleged peer-reviewed paper, then you have a legitimate reason to deny theism. Since you cannot, and all your evidence is based on "because a book says so", then you have no reason to deny theism. For any person who always has to provide evidence by quoting a source with no proof that the author is speaking truthfully, is the very definition of being brainwashed. And since that is what you do as evidence for evolution, then your belief in atheism is not based on logic, but being brainwashed.

Whereas, the existance of intelligent design is proven, without using the logic "it's true because a book says so".

So which one of us can prove their belief without the logic, " it's true because a book says so"? Me or you? The theist (me) or the atheist (you). Let's see. Whoever can do so wins and proves their position.

And... go!!!
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:09:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 2:40:51 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Response: When you can prove evolution without referring to a science book, article, or an alleged peer-reviewed paper, then you have a legitimate reason to deny theism. Since you cannot, and all your evidence is based on "because a book says so", then you have no reason to deny theism. For any person who always has to provide evidence by quoting a source with no proof that the author is speaking truthfully, is the very definition of being brainwashed. And since that is what you do as evidence for evolution, then your belief in atheism is not based on logic, but being brainwashed.

Whereas, the existance of intelligent design is proven, without using the logic "it's true because a book says so".

So which one of us can prove their belief without the logic, " it's true because a book says so"? Me or you? The theist (me) or the atheist (you). Let's see. Whoever can do so wins and proves their position.

And... go!!!

How has intelligent design been proven?
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:40:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 9:09:44 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/29/2014 2:40:51 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Response: When you can prove evolution without referring to a science book, article, or an alleged peer-reviewed paper, then you have a legitimate reason to deny theism. Since you cannot, and all your evidence is based on "because a book says so", then you have no reason to deny theism. For any person who always has to provide evidence by quoting a source with no proof that the author is speaking truthfully, is the very definition of being brainwashed. And since that is what you do as evidence for evolution, then your belief in atheism is not based on logic, but being brainwashed.

Whereas, the existance of intelligent design is proven, without using the logic "it's true because a book says so".

So which one of us can prove their belief without the logic, " it's true because a book says so"? Me or you? The theist (me) or the atheist (you). Let's see. Whoever can do so wins and proves their position.

And... go!!!

How has intelligent design been proven?

Response: The fact that neither you nor anyone else can produce a simple checkerboard pattern or any repeating pattern without choice, is firsthand evidence that it takes intelligence to do so. Therefore, the repeating patterns that exist in life and in the universe (water cycle, nutrient cycle, weather, reproduction,etc..) originated from Intelligent design.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:45:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 9:09:44 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/29/2014 2:40:51 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/27/2014 5:42:46 PM, Fanath wrote:
This is a challenge for theists. The goal is to try and convert me to a theist (I'm an atheist if anyone couldn't tell yet) or at least stump me with whatever arguments or evidence you would like. I am not allowed to ignore theists who are legitimately arguing, but if someone is trolling, spamming, etc then I can ignore them.

And... go!!!

Response: When you can prove evolution without referring to a science book, article, or an alleged peer-reviewed paper, then you have a legitimate reason to deny theism. Since you cannot, and all your evidence is based on "because a book says so", then you have no reason to deny theism. For any person who always has to provide evidence by quoting a source with no proof that the author is speaking truthfully, is the very definition of being brainwashed. And since that is what you do as evidence for evolution, then your belief in atheism is not based on logic, but being brainwashed.

Whereas, the existance of intelligent design is proven, without using the logic "it's true because a book says so".

So which one of us can prove their belief without the logic, " it's true because a book says so"? Me or you? The theist (me) or the atheist (you). Let's see. Whoever can do so wins and proves their position.

And... go!!!

How has intelligent design been proven?

Response: The fact that neither you nor anyone else can produce a simple checkerboard pattern or any repeating pattern without choice, is firsthand evidence that it takes intelligence to do so. Therefore, the repeating patterns that exist in life and in the universe (water cycle, nutrient cycle, weather, reproduction,etc..) originated from Intelligent design.

Expected is the part when you now say I am wrong by saying non-choice can create a repeating pattern, and your proof is not by doing it yourself (firsthand evidence ) but by quoting some alleged peer-reviewed scientific paper, with no evidence that the author is speaking truthfully. The very definition of brainwashed. Hence the absurdity of atheism.

And... go!!!