Total Posts:68|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is Christianity false?

vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Yes...No... Do you know ?
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 2:34:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

I'd say no but that's just me :D
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 5:09:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 2:34:50 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

I'd say no but that's just me :D

Christianity is false in many respects, whether it be historical inaccuracies, unfulfilled prophecies, or the wild claims of magical metaphysics that have been indirectly proven wrong by nearly all accounts of scientific inquiry.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:11:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 5:09:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:50 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

I'd say no but that's just me :D

Christianity is false in many respects, whether it be historical inaccuracies, unfulfilled prophecies, or the wild claims of magical metaphysics that have been indirectly proven wrong by nearly all accounts of scientific inquiry.

Which metaphysics would those be? Please be specific.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I wouldn't call Christianity true but I wouldn't call it false either.

To call it 'true', I would have absolute proof to substantiate such a claim. But I don't.

To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

So I'm left with the position, "I'm seriously skeptical of the validity of Christianity."
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
jharry
Posts: 4,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:33:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
I wouldn't call Christianity true but I wouldn't call it false either.

To call it 'true', I would have absolute proof to substantiate such a claim. But I don't.

To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

So I'm left with the position, "I'm seriously skeptical of the validity of Christianity."

How about the "meaning" or "message" in it. Would you pick another over it if you had to?
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:35:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 6:33:10 PM, jharry wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:

How about the "meaning" or "message" in it.

I'm not sure what you mean... Elaborate?

Would you pick another over it if you had to?

No. To say it is 'true' or 'false' would be fallacious since I do not have the adequate proof to substantiate either claim. I'm extremely skeptical but I'm not willing to say that Christianity is 'false'.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:36:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 5:09:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:50 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

I'd say no but that's just me :D

Christianity is false in many respects, whether it be historical inaccuracies, unfulfilled prophecies, or the wild claims of magical metaphysics that have been indirectly proven wrong by nearly all accounts of scientific inquiry.

I bet you're not just rambling XD I'm killin myself :D
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

Also, don't you already abide by an "alternative philosophy" that you believe to be true? If so, and your philosophy is contrary to Christianity, wouldn't that mean you do have an "alternative philosophy" that holds Christianity to be false?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:26:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 5:09:04 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
magical metaphysics that have been indirectly proven wrong by nearly all accounts of scientific inquiry.

How can science disprove metaphysics?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Also, don't you already abide by an "alternative philosophy" that you believe to be true?

Something religious? No.

If so, and your philosophy is contrary to Christianity, wouldn't that mean you do have an "alternative philosophy" that holds Christianity to be false?

I don't though. I'm not religious nor spiritual.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:40:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Moving goal fallacy. No matter how much of you Bible you prove to be erroneous, you will never satify the majority of people.
Google "errors in the bible"... 3.5 million results.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:40:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Why not?

http://www.strongatheism.net...

Also, don't you already abide by an "alternative philosophy" that you believe to be true?

Something religious? No.

I said "philosophy."

If so, and your philosophy is contrary to Christianity, wouldn't that mean you do have an "alternative philosophy" that holds Christianity to be false?

I don't though. I'm not religious nor spiritual.

Again, I never said "religious or spiritual." I said "philosophy."
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
laleona89
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:43:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think it is true to some people but false to others.
It is depending on your beliefs.
but in general we cannot prove it is true nor false.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:47:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:40:48 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Why not?

Well, I have yet to hear any "Strong atheist" argument which absolutely disproves the chance of God. Don't get me wrong, I'm about 95% there. But I'm not going to claim that Christianity is 'false' as of yet.

http://www.strongatheism.net...

Also, don't you already abide by an "alternative philosophy" that you believe to be true?

Something religious? No.

I said "philosophy."

Then it's still a 'no'. Being an atheist does not prove that Christianity is 'false'. It shows that I do not believe in the Christian God and live under the assumption that he/she does not exist.

If so, and your philosophy is contrary to Christianity, wouldn't that mean you do have an "alternative philosophy" that holds Christianity to be false?

I don't though. I'm not religious nor spiritual.

Again, I never said "religious or spiritual." I said "philosophy."

See above.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:48:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:40:16 PM, tvellalott wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Moving goal fallacy. No matter how much of you Bible you prove to be erroneous, you will never satify the majority of people.
Google "errors in the bible"... 3.5 million results.

Yes, I know that. Which further substantiates my assertion that I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely 'false'.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 7:55:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:47:38 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:40:48 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why not?

Well, I have yet to hear any "Strong atheist" argument which absolutely disproves the chance of God.

Then I urge you to check the link.

http://www.strongatheism.net...

I said "philosophy."

Then it's still a 'no'. Being an atheist

Well, I'm not specifically referring to Atheism. You abide by a philosophical system that is much more encompassing than Atheism and is a combination of various philosophies. For example, you are a moral nihilist, logical positivist, atheist, etc.

does not prove that Christianity is 'false'. It shows that I do not believe in the Christian God and live under the assumption that he/she does not exist.

Let me put it this way:

P1: You believe that your "philosophical system" is true.
P2: Your philosophy negates many fundamental claims of Christianity (meaning they both can't simultaneously be true).
C: If your philosophy is true, then Christianity is false.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:12:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:55:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:47:38 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:40:48 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why not?

Well, I have yet to hear any "Strong atheist" argument which absolutely disproves the chance of God.

Then I urge you to check the link.

I've been looking at it and will let you know if anything interests me. Who knows, it could spur a debate. :P

http://www.strongatheism.net...

I said "philosophy."

Then it's still a 'no'. Being an atheist

Well, I'm not specifically referring to Atheism. You abide by a philosophical system that is much more encompassing than Atheism and is a combination of various philosophies. For example, you are a moral nihilist, logical positivist, atheist, etc.

The core tenants of Christianity are definitely illogical to me -- and are in opposition to my personal stances. I think of my own as the closest to being true but I cannot make the universal claim that they ARE true. I'll debate their truthfulness and attempt to prove that they are in fact more viable than the Christian ones (like Divine Command Theory) but can I really say that they ARE in fact 100% true? That's the dilemma for me. I'm always very careful about what I claim to be "true" or not.

does not prove that Christianity is 'false'. It shows that I do not believe in the Christian God and live under the assumption that he/she does not exist.

Let me put it this way:

P1: You believe that your "philosophical system" is true.
P2: Your philosophy negates many fundamental claims of Christianity (meaning they both can't simultaneously be true).
C: If your philosophy is true, then Christianity is false.

See above. I do not make the claim that they are in fact absolutely 'true'. I DO think they're closer to being true than the Christian ones...
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:31:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 7:40:16 PM, tvellalott wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:35:18 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 7:23:20 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/17/2010 6:26:53 PM, annhasle wrote:
To call it 'false', I would have an alternative philosophy or theory which absolutely proves that Christianity cannot in fact be truthful. But I don't.

What? You don't have to have an alternative philosophy or theory to prove Christianity is false. You can disprove Christianity whether there are alternative philosophies or not.

I cannot prove Christianity to be absolutely false.

And yes, I suppose I could go through each claim Christianity makes and analyze each historical or magical event it claims to have happened. And from there, I could make a stance against it's "truthfulness" but it still won't be absolute.

Moving goal fallacy. No matter how much of you Bible you prove to be erroneous, you will never satify the majority of people.
Google "errors in the bible"... 3.5 million results.

You have no idea how stupid people have become.
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:45:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

Probably.

I think God's existence is on par with Russel's teapot or Carl Sagan's invisible fire-breathing dragon that lives in a garage. ---->

Poopka doesn't think these are good analogies for some reason, but I think they are.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:57:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 8:45:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

Probably.

I think God's existence is on par with Russel's teapot or Carl Sagan's invisible fire-breathing dragon that lives in a garage. ---->

Poopka doesn't think these are good analogies for some reason, but I think they are.

They aren't good analogies but that reminds me that I've still got to make that debate for you. I now have time since finals are over.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:01:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 8:59:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The teapot analogy is as stupid as fish.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:07:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 9:01:11 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:59:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The teapot analogy is as stupid as fish.



Owned
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:09:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 9:07:38 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 9:01:11 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:59:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The teapot analogy is as stupid as fish.



Owned
Not at all.
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:17:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 8:57:24 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:45:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

Probably.

I think God's existence is on par with Russel's teapot or Carl Sagan's invisible fire-breathing dragon that lives in a garage. ---->

Poopka doesn't think these are good analogies for some reason, but I think they are.

They aren't good analogies but that reminds me that I've still got to make that debate for you. I now have time since finals are over.

No worries. I've still got to debate Mirza.

As for the analogy, I concur with Karl Popper. Any hypothesis which sets itself up to be unfalsifiable is a bad hypothesis (and borders on being useless).
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:18:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 9:09:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/17/2010 9:07:38 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 9:01:11 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:59:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The teapot analogy is as stupid as fish.



Owned
Not at all.

Yur juss jealouz of me skillz...
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:44:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 9:17:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:57:24 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:45:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

Probably.

I think God's existence is on par with Russel's teapot or Carl Sagan's invisible fire-breathing dragon that lives in a garage. ---->

Poopka doesn't think these are good analogies for some reason, but I think they are.

They aren't good analogies but that reminds me that I've still got to make that debate for you. I now have time since finals are over.

No worries. I've still got to debate Mirza.

As for the analogy, I concur with Karl Popper. Any hypothesis which sets itself up to be unfalsifiable is a bad hypothesis (and borders on being useless).

Popperian falsifiability doesn't really apply to philosophical positions...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 9:54:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 9:44:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/17/2010 9:17:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:57:24 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/17/2010 8:45:08 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 12/17/2010 2:34:19 PM, vardas0antras wrote:
Yes...No... Do you know ?

Probably.

I think God's existence is on par with Russel's teapot or Carl Sagan's invisible fire-breathing dragon that lives in a garage. ---->

Poopka doesn't think these are good analogies for some reason, but I think they are.

They aren't good analogies but that reminds me that I've still got to make that debate for you. I now have time since finals are over.

No worries. I've still got to debate Mirza.

As for the analogy, I concur with Karl Popper. Any hypothesis which sets itself up to be unfalsifiable is a bad hypothesis (and borders on being useless).

Popperian falsifiability doesn't really apply to philosophical positions...

God's existence is not a philosophical proposition; it's a scientific one. :P

Philosophy may help decide the matter, but it isn't detached from scientific inquiry.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright