The Instigator
backwardseden
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CatholicApologetics
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

I can debunk every reason there is for you have to be a christian in favor of me being an atheist

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
CatholicApologetics
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2020 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 432 times Debate No: 126083
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

backwardseden

Pro

Am I so preposterously pompously self-confident that I can REALLY debunk every reason you might have and or give in favor for all of christianity VS me and my stance on atheism? Probably almost assuredly. Great! Prove me wrong. PLEASE give me somewhat of a challenge. Its been a very long time. Obviously they would have to be good, Honest, Genuine reasons and not some nutter ones from the hip as most supposed christians give.

Give 3 reasons per RD as to why christianity is better than atheism. Of course I will naturally attempt to debunk those 3 reasons per RD and will probably 100% succeed.

In turn, I will give 3 reasons why atheism is better than christianity. It will be up to you to debunk those 3 reasons.

Can you do it? Are you SURE you are up for it because you had better know what an atheist is should you decide to accept this debate? You as a supposed christian probably don't even have the foggiest clue as to what an atheist is.

Btw, No idiot flakey cop-out reasons on your part like "christ is "love" or "god created all life" as examples of your reasonings because those are examples that are true of every religion ever thus are amazingly easy to debunk. Give genuine valid reasons that would be somewhat difficult for me to expose and deflate and not something that is super cheap and full of anal-retentive crap.

Also, No turgid gooey reasonings such as "god is better for "me" because. . . " as that would be a "so what who cares" response as it would be a personal thing. In other words, Don't let your personal feelings cloud your hand grenade weight loss program judgment.

dsjpk5 is disqualified from the voting procedures as he tries to pretend he's god and thus change the voting structure of who wins and loses here on DDO.
CatholicApologetics

Con

God must exist, Something can not become from nothingness, If God does not exist, Where did anything come from? This is amplified by the concept of consciousness. Where does any of this come from?
Debate Round No. 1
backwardseden

Pro

Which god? And why only one god? Why not thousands, Millions, Billions, Trillions, Quadrillions of gods? Or the very best bet is why not any gods since you cannot prove that any gods exist because nobody in the history of the human race has ever been able to prove that any god from any religion exists?
Oh and btw, Let's suppose that whatever unproven storybook character god of print only you are referring to, Whatever god that may be, According to you, It would have had to have come from something since "Something can not become from nothingness" otherwise your unproven storybook character god of print only IS nothingness. That's according to you. So which is it?
But then again WRONG. According to Stephen Hawking, Perhaps the smartest person who has ever lived, And his colleague, They have come up with a mathematical equation that proves something does come from nothing. And mathematical equations are the only facts that there are. 2 + 2 = 4 as an example no matter which language you speak provided that the symbols are understood and the equation is not changed. Your unproven whatever god can easily be disproved no matter which language you speak. The Maya also invented the number 0. The number 0 is nothing. So in order to have originally thought of the number 0, Nothing would have originally have had to have been thought of. Makes sense? Also Lawrence Kraus has also shown how something does come from nothing.
Now since you did not pay attention to the rules and CANNOT READ which is so ridiculously typical of those who are religious and flat out lie as you clearly did, Um no you are in no possible way 28, Nice try, I peg you for your early teens at best trying to compete in an adult world which is an extremely bad idea, Just be yourself! There's nothing wrong with that. But then again, Since you broke the rules of this debate, You blew your earlier RD, So you'd have to try again if you wish this debate to move forward. And please come up with something original and unique that's not so ridiculously easy for me to debunk. K? Thanx.
CatholicApologetics

Con

To answer your first question, The Christian, Or more specifically Catholic God. Only one God exists because if there were to be more than one "Gods" Only one of them would be able to fulfill the necessities to be God, Omnipotence, Omniscience, Etc. Thus, The one fulfilling this one would be the true God. The Bible is not an "Unproven storybook", It is historical, But that is outside the scope of the debate. God has always been, And will always be, He is being itself. The big bang theory, If true, Would actually prove the existence of God. For it is matter coming from apparent nothing, And it still continues to according to modern science. How could matter come from nothing? It can't. It needs to come from something, Be that other matter, Or a supernatural being. So either all mater comes from nothing, Or is made by a supernatural being. I don"t understand how 2+2=4 is matter coming from nothing. In practical reality, There is no distinguishing between 2+2 and 4. It is only there in math. Now, Can you explain, How 0 can turn into 1, With no outside interference? Can you tell me which rule I broke, And if I did, I apologize.
Debate Round No. 2
backwardseden

Pro

What did I specifically tell you? I specifically told you "Since you broke the rules of this debate, You blew your earlier RD, So you'd have to try again if you wish this debate to move forward. And please come up with something original and unique that's not so ridiculously easy for me to debunk. K? Thanx. " Now what part of that DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? Typical so-called christian in which case there is no such thing as a christian, You CANNOT READ. So tell me why should I continue with this agonizing debate that you cannot follow simpleton instructions?
OK I will since you are a teeny bopper and a complete idiot and I guess you truly want to be humiliated, Destroyed, And dehumanized. So be it because you not only answered so absurdly. But so ignorantly and arrogantly.
Um no, Which christian unproven storybook character fabled god of print only since there are over 33. 830 denominations of christianity and catholicism is part of christianity? AND you'd have to rule out all the other millions of gods from all other religions that have ever existed. So EXACTLY how are you going to do this to prove that this ONE unproven god from the 33. 830 denominations of christianity is the real and true god?
"Only one God exists because if there were to be more than one "Gods" Only one of them would be able to fulfill the necessities to be God"
Horrid reasoning. How would you know what a god is capable of and is incapable of? Nice guess. I guess you know what a god's powers are and what they are not - correct? You do realize that according to your idiot bible, Your unproven storybook character fabled god of print only did not demonstrate all that much as far as powers were concerned - correct?
"The Bible is not an "Unproven storybook", "
Actually it is. The great flood did not happen. You cannot prove Exodus. You cannot prove the 10 plagues. You cannot prove the 10 commandments. Nobody can prove christ. Creation is all backward. Plants grew before there was sunlight. Serpents do not talk nor do they eat dust. Rabbits do not chew their cud. Prove that Adam and Eve existed. If the sun stopped, The earth would fall into it, Thus no earth. No prophecy has ever come true. How many supermassive hypocritical contradictions and inconsistencies do you want? There's at least 1, 000 thus making your bible unreadable.
"God has always been, And will always be, He is being itself. "
AGAIN which god? Make up your mind teeny bopper from the 33, 830 AT LEAST denominations of YOUR christianity. And what if your WRONG? What then?
Really? It's always been? According to what? You? How would you know? What grade level have you graduated from to make such an outlandish idiotic remark without any evidence to back up your claims?
Well, Of course, That's only true unless you KNOWINGLY state that something does come from nothing in which case Stephen Hawking and his colleague and Lawrence Krause are one helluva lot smarter than a no name teeny bopper like you how doesn't even know that 2 + 2 = 4.
Sorry. The big bang theory is big bang fact. It can be proven with evidence to back up its claim. Your unproven god has 0 evidence to back up any claim.
"How could matter come from nothing? "
That's where Stephen Hawking and his colleague and Lawrence Krauss have you by your cabbage batbrain. So rather than you saying "it can't" like the little spoiled brat that you knowingly are and saying "I'm so stupid and because I cannot think of anything better because I am an imbecile, I will say a god did it that I know absolutely nothing about. "
Now here's something to rot your jugular. . . When you don't know something, Rather than saying a god did it, You say "I don't know" for something that you don't know rather than lying to yourself and everybody you know and inventing excuses.
"It needs to come from something, "
According to what? You? How would you know? What grade of imbecilic lard omelets did yah come up with that one?

SO WHAT IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND SOMETHING? DO YOU REALLY THINK YOU UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT THERE IS TO KNOW YOU GOD DAMNED F--KING IDIOT?

https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=JZyic1xkLZM - Believing Miracles Cause Events Is Justified | Mark-RI | The Atheist Experience 24. 27
Matt Dillahuty: "Until somebody demonstrates that the supernatural exists and can in fact interact with the natural world, You are not justified in appealing to that as an explanation. "
Caller: "If that something existed that would not be explicable through normal science, Because if it was then the event would be natural and not supernatural. "
Matt "No. If there"s something supernatural, That"s where you went wrong. Because you are inferring something about something that you have no evidence for. You don"t know what it"s limits are. You don"t know what X is. You can"t tell me anything about it. And yet you"re trying to by saying if X is supernatural, Then there can"t be a natural explanation for it. But there"s no way there"s no way to demonstrate there CANNOT be a natural explanation. The only thing we can ever do is show there"s not CURRENTLY not a natural explanation. So you"re hiding a big argument from ignorance fallacy in this model. My definition is really simple" Before we get to use the supernatural as a potential candidate for an observation we must first demonstrate that the supernatural exists and could be a potential explanation for it. "

Matt Dillahunty: Would you just acknowledge that there"s just a supernatural realm that we just can"t test because I always have to throw in 20 different caveats. Because if you and I agree that there"s a possibility of a supernatural realm that we cannot test, Then you and I must also agree the fact that we cannot test for it means that we CANNOT---POSSIBLY---HAVE---EVIDENCE for it that would be sufficient for it to warrant belief. Which means now that both of us must acknowledge that we have no justification for believing in the supernatural yet. And now you"re in the tough position of explaining how you"re a theist when you can't justify believing in the supernatural.
Caller: So I think that"s fair. So I think there"s SOME evidence, I mean the bible itself, Or scriptural text"
Matt: Noo no. Harry Potter is not evidence for the supernatural is it?
Hemat Metha: The bible is true cause the bible exists cause the bible is true?
Caller: Well yeah your point is a good one. Let me not say evidence but we have at least some foundational for a faith belief of what these texts are describing or saying. Right?
Matt: Kind of.
Hemat: Which aspects are we talking about? I mean that kind of makes a difference. Talking of the geography of the bible or something, Yeah, Of places exists, Talking of supernatural at the beginning of the bible, Genesis stuff VS the miracles of jesus, That"s very different stuff what we"re asking now.
Matt : The bible says jesus raised someone from the dead - right? Do we have any good reason to believe that actually happened?

I'm done because you in no possible way have the ability to reason, Rationalize, Think, Use common sense, Nor use logic of any kind. AND you can't pay any attention to rules thus given to you. Wow.
CatholicApologetics

Con

First thing I need to say, Is stop using ad hominem tactics. If you want to tell me what is wrong about ME not my positions, Then you are not trying to debate, If I am wrong, And you want to convince me of such, Do you think that telling me that I can"t read, And that I"m a retard, Then you should study debate a bit more. You asked why we should continue with this so-called "debate" No reason to, Neither one are gaining from this.

"Um no, Which Christian unproven storybook character fabled god of print only since there are over 33. 830 denominations of Christianity and catholicism is part of Christianity? " Catholicism is not simply "A part of Christianity", It is Christianity in its true form. There are over 33, 830 denominations of Protestants, Only one denomination of Catholocism.

I do not need to disprove millions of religions, And millions of "Gods" because the only three religions that are not polyglot are Christianity, Jewish, And Muslim. So I need to disprove Islam, Jewish, Protestantism, And polyglotism.

I will articulate on my polyglot rebuttal: Omnepoitance, Omniscience, Etc can not be held by more than one entity, Because if it did, It would not be true omnipotence, Etc. In the natural world matter was made from something, Be it the big bang, Or God, Or whatever, In the supernatural world, The same concept applies. If a lesser "God" exists, It was made by a greater one. Fallow that, And you will get to one entity.

I would not be able to refute Islam and Judaism so concisely, So that can remain a subject for another day.

You said that God did not do much to demonstrate his power according to the bible. Read Genesis Chapter one, And St. John chapter one verse one.

Even if Genesis and exodus are not historical, That is not the point of them. The point is to make statements and act as an example. For example, The flood, Noe"s Ark represents the church. Noe and his family were in it, And were saved. Everyone else died. The same could be said for the rest of it.

"God has always been, And will always be, He is being itself. "
AGAIN which god? Make up your mind teeny bopper from the 33, 830 AT LEAST denominations of YOUR christianity. And what if your WRONG? What then?
Really? It's always been? According to what? You? How would you know? What grade level have you graduated from to make such an outlandish idiotic remark without any evidence to back up your claims? " God has always been because he possess omnipotence and other such aspects, And because God, Is existence, We can both agree that existence has alwas being, The disagreement is that such existence is a person. He is such a person for many reasons. If you want five good ones, Go to Siant Thomas Aquinas" five reasons for God.

Let me make this simple for you

Matter cannot come from nothing: 2 2=4

Matter can come from nothing 2 2=5.
Debate Round No. 3
backwardseden

Pro

"First thing I need to say, Is stop using ad hominem tactics. "
Knock it off with your s--t. K? Because it is entirely your problem that you show 0 intelligence and education. None. That's not my problem. That's yours. Got it? Good. When you show no intelligence and no education especially for the subject(s) that you claim to profess to have knowledge upon and you really don't and yet you pretend that you do by inventing excuses for it and or flatly lying about it AND you get caught at it as you clearly without question have, Then it is my absolute right to insult, Degrade, Humiliate and dehumanize you and or anyone that does this powderpuff imbecilic little minced mutton moron mechanical mind trick. This is taught IN COLLEGE. It is also taught that if you cannot back up your claims with evidence (and in no possible way have you been able to, You just blurted out nonsense and you know it) then you will lose every single genuine friend and loved one that you have. Try it! See how far you get. Your teachers will also give you an instant F every single time. You MUST think I'm stupid and ignorant to literally fall for your pretend excuses that in no possible way can you back up with any kind of evidence - right? So WHY SHOULD I OR ANYONE DEAL WITH YOU GOOP? ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CAN'T READ? Now what the f--k are the rules of this debate that you haven't followed?

Btw, I'm 10, 000x times smarter than you and in no possible way can you lecture me or tell me that any of your heebe geeby bull s--t is in any possible way correct because you are NOT smarter than Stephen Hawking and his colleague and Lawrence Krauss in which case you don't even know who the f--k they are and were.
Even worse is you pretend that a "god" actually exists. Even worse is you pretend that something of the supernatural actually exists when you have 0 evidence to back up any claim that it does.

I get it. I really do. You MUST think that you are better and smarter and more educated and more intelligent than every single person who has ever lived - correct? RIGHT TEENY BOPPER? Is this your testimony? You MUST know something that they don't. Because nobody has ever been able to prove any god from any religion and anything that is superstition or supernatural and guess what, Neither can you. So YOU stand at 0.

Guess what teeny bopper? You lost me I jumped down like a good little boy and didn't read what the f--k you had to say except for your supreme stupidity "Matter cannot come from nothing: 2 2=4"

There are 7 tests of you and ANYBODY who is religious to prove your and their ultimate failures. 1. Test, Demonstrate, Assert, And then declare your unproven storybook character fabled god of print only. Exactly how would you do this and 2. Expect it to jump from print and prove itself unto the world? 3. No idiot god if true and genuine in any possible way would never use text/ the written word, Namely, Your bible, Not for any reason, Not ever, As a form of communication, Advertisement, Correspondence, Which is the worst possible way to get its messages across from a god to man. There are at least 50 reasons for this. Hopefully, You can think of at least 3. If you can"t then you do not know your religion as well as you think. In fact, It"s not at all. 4. Go right ahead and you take all of your rat bat colossal mind-numbing ramblings to ---any--- scientific community from around the world that is not theistic (after all you cannot be biased and theism is not science) and see how far you get. They will not even let you in the front door. Take one lucky guess why? 5. Take all of your minced mutton moron mechanical mind gooey lard buffoonery's to 20 different churches within a 20-mile radius and see if you get a consensus. 1 billion to one you won't. Care to make a wager on that? 100, 000 to 1 you know you are wrong so you won't even make the trek because you are horrified in being proven wrong. Care to make a wager on that? That is if you are honest? 6. You will not take a 32 Pew Research Center quiz on religion in utter fear of failure as atheists do indeed know religion better than those that are religious. Also, Those that are younger as you clearly are have an even lesser education. So would you be willing to take this quiz? 7. No god from any religion has ever been proven. This includes anything from the supernatural. Now all of these things crash together meaning you have no god damned f--king right to preach to me and or anyone since you obviously haven't the foggiest clue as to what you are yammering about.
CatholicApologetics

Con

If you want to call me a retard, Who can"t read, Etc, Have one section of that, And then your argument. I do not in any way believe that I am the smartest person to ever exist, Have I ever even claimed intelligence? From all of my research, And my reasoning, I have come to the conclusion that God exists. I have come to you, To see the evidence for the contrary. You said that you have only read my stupidity, Why would you do this? If you only read the stupid things I have to say, And stop when I say something not stupid, Then it is apparent you are not trying to debate, This is also proven by your ad homonyms. If something happened to you to make you feel like you need to put others down, That is not the sanction. You can overcome whatever it is. I love you, And I forgive you.

I have not preached to you once, I come here in the hopes to find contrary opinions. If you want to understand more about Catholicism then I could ever tell you, Look up Saint Thomas Aquinas, He is officially the greatest theologian in the Catholic church. I specifically recommend you write a debut of his 5 reasons for God.

I hope that we can remove the wall of hatred rewards each other and that we can have a calm civilized discussion. I, For one desire for us both, To obtain truth, And if you hope the same, We can both come closer to such a goal. "Forgive them father, For they know not what they do. "
Debate Round No. 4
backwardseden

Pro

I don't sink that low to call anybody "retards". I use my own insults that are quite original, Dumb, And stupid.
See, That's the thing isn't it. . .
"From all of my research, And my reasoning, I have come to the conclusion that God exists. "
But you never, Ever, Have bothered to even look at it from the outside in. In other words from anyone else's point of view but your own.
You know where this is leading - right?
When you CONSTANTLY state "Matter cannot come from nothing: 2 2=4" it's completely worthless. You do realize that Mother Nature, Every single thing that exists in the universe is entirely math - correct? You, Me, Plants, Trees (tree rings), Every single molecule, Every single black hole, Galaxy, Supernova, Yep - the big bang, And it's now known that the earth's core is much younger than once thought. . .
Yet brilliant minds WHO KNOW BETTER THAN YOU and you don't even look at their research AND YOU KNOW IT and you could not even conceptualize what they have proven even if you did because it's far too advanced for you, Yeah even me, AND because you are so convinced that this god of yours exists but you have 0 evidence that it does, Because you have done no research on it AND YOU KNOW IT, Sorry, I do not better, Because I've done this for more than 3x your lifetimes, And so have millions of other scientists who would never let your god cross their front gates, And I've seen your kind come and go and believe me, You will go because in no possible way can you back up what you say WITH EVIDENCE.

Here's the thing that you utterly fail to understand. . .
It is better to have evidence and then believe and or wait for that evidence (in other words it is entirely this god's fault if it does not prove itself to you) rather than having no evidence and thus believing.
There is no definition for a god because no human has ever been in the company of a god and been able to prove it. You cannot test nor can you demonstrate a god. It is impossible because you cannot define a god because none has been defined by anyone in the history of the human race because no god has ever been seen, Defined, Told to anyone through talking about/ oratory, Written about from a god's point of view as far as to how it can be tested, Demonstrated and thus defined. So you as a believer have no evidence to back up any claim to thus prove that any god from any religion exists.

You know what's even worse? You cannot even think of one, Just one, Reason as to "why believe" as you unproven storybook character fabled god of print only is based on sheer terrorism, Evil and hate in which case you have not read your bible to know these things in which case as stated no idiot god would use text in the first place. IT WOULD TALK DIRECTLY TO YOU and avoid the fallacies of text.

You think the bible is a historical book. Really?
"Even if Genesis and exodus are not historical, That is not the point of them. "
There is no point of them except to get everything wrong. If there's one mistake, Just one, In what is supposed to be a perfect book FROM A PERFECT BEING, Then this god isn't perfect now is it especially to communicate it's messages wrong? So again "why believe? "

Now leading up to YOU CAN'T READ which is why I'm so p**sed off at you. The rules were really simple as given in RD1.
"Give 3 reasons per RD as to why christianity is better than atheism. Of course I will naturally attempt to debunk those 3 reasons per RD and will probably 100% succeed. "
You 100% failed at this which started off right from the get-go. So I could not even have the chance to debunk anything except for one little thing in which case was so easy to do and thus give you why atheism is clearly 100% better than christianity even though there were a few reasons, But not many.
CatholicApologetics

Con

""From all of my research, And my reasoning, I have come to the conclusion that God exists. "
But you never, Ever, Have bothered to even look at it from the outside in. In other words from anyone else's point of view but your own. " If I had never even looked from the outside in, Then why am I here? I told you in the last round that I am here to receive other opinions and your reasons.

I have read the whole bible about 1 and a half times, And no were in it have I seen any hatred, Terrorism, Etc.

I apologize for not giving you enough reasons, And for wasting your time. The only thing I can do to help you at this point is to tell you about Saint Thomas Aquinas. You can find his "5 reasons for God" on the internet. I know of a few atheists who read them, And it helped them convert.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by backwardseden 2 months ago
backwardseden
I never imply that because there are thousands of other questions to ask that you nor anyone has evidence for that can back up any claim. Why bother with the ridiculous because if that was a question to ask, Then POOF, You'd have to ask it of every single other god from every single other religion, And POOF automatically your unproven god goes POOF GONE DONE. And yeah, That'd be 100% dishonest of you if you and others cannot examine other religions, ALL OF THEM, To know exactly what they are and what they are about. BUT WAIT! Your unproven god gets jealous (yeah right, A supreme deity getting jealous? WHAT? ) of other gods and has caused umpteen genocides because of it. Jealousy is ---never--- a reason to harm a hair on anyone's head. Yet your god murdered babies and children, Millions of them, Simply because of jealousy. And yes, There are so many other questions that indeed fit the same exact bill that you haven't even considered.
"God had to have had a cause when the point of the argument is to demonstrate that that he did not is in contrast to that his creation does, "
Nope, He implied that something cannot come from nothing in which case was proven to him at least 4 times that it can.
I put stock in those that are "intelligent" and "educated", Those that profess to know what they are talking about as far as what their subject(s) are concerned and NOT making things up as they go along and thus inventing excuses for it as nearly every single debate I've had here do. And because someone doesn't know, What they do is they invent excuses for it and or they flat out lie. It's a very bad idea especially when I do know better and I catch them at it. It's not that hard. So damn right I either insult them or I walk. And really, Who wants to hang around with people like these? It's no one.
Posted by backwardseden 2 months ago
backwardseden
@Justaserver - You do realize that you are coming from a "christian" background - correct? And that it is ---always--- no exceptions, None, Up to you to prove that your unproven god exists.
Though there's no denial on my part at all that my conduct is lower than others EXCEPT when others show intelligence and education for the subjects that they profess to have knowledge upon. But in reality, If you were to see and or listen to just about every single live debate that there is, My conduct is truly minuscule as compared to what goes on on live debates.
"Rather than stay on the topic presented"
Now, Why on earth should I do that when my opponent should have brought up 3 topics per RD as the rules of the debate deliberately expressed in the opening RD? ESPECIALLY when he tried but failed miserably to present any of his claims with any kind of truthful evidence to back up what he was saying ESPECIALLY when I know better AND I can prove it AND he will not even look at any of the evidence which is the case of---nearly---every---supposed---christian---that---there---is? In other words, I had every single right there was to insult, Degrade, And dehumanize him as that is my right or walk as per what is taught in college. If he doesn't like it, As so many don't, They---can---leave. I do not ---ever--- ask anyone to enter my debates. I'm also not here to please anyone. Nor am I here to make friends even though I most certainly have.
"I made back farther along their own logic than initially was conveyed to demonstrate how sound they are. "
They are not sound, Not ever, If you cannot prove your god, And you can't, Nobody has in the entire existence of the human race. Now I do not remember what our debate was regarding, But if it was on religion, And I'm guessing that it was, Then it at some point would have to be about your unproven storybook character fabled god of print only.
"As is especially clear when you imply that the God had to have had a cause"
Posted by Justaserver 2 months ago
Justaserver
Hey, There, Backwardseden. It's me, Justaserver. I had a debate with you a while ago and It was a really interesting experience. I say this with nothing but complete respect for you, But I really think that you are doing more harm than good to your own cause. After having read the debate, I can say that while, Yes, Your opponent did not follow the rules to the T, They were still much more coherent and civil. Rather than stay on the topic presented, You continue to shove in just as many overbroad attacks on the characters of your interlocuters based solely on their religion. In our debate, You claimed once that I extended the topic of the debate beyond what it was supposed to be. I was just trying to cover my flank against the baseless attacks on my mind and character by tracing the arguments I made back farther along their own logic than initially was conveyed to demonstrate how sound they are. The only thing your opponent did wrong was not doing the same. I think that your dismissal of the prime mover/uncaused cause argument is reductive and does not grasp the true intent of the argument, As is especially clear when you imply that the God had to have had a cause when the point of the argument is to demonstrate that that he did not is in contrast to that his creation does, Rendering them completely conceptually dichotomous. More than that, I think that you put too much stock in "intelligence". Hawking himself said that people who brag about their IQs are losers. Einstein said that it is not intelligence but creativity which sets great men apart, Even claiming that he himself was not smarter than his colleages, But that if he did something they could not, It was because he could out-imagine them. For the sake of good debate, Please stay on the topic. At best, It is evasion, At worst, Red Herrings. I do not say this lightly. Respect.
Posted by chungusfanatic79 2 months ago
chungusfanatic79
"God must exist, Something can not become from nothingness"

You just contradicted yourself in the same sentence, Wow that must be a talent
Posted by kwagga_la 2 months ago
kwagga_la
@Backwards - You should reword the debate:

I can debunk every reason there is for you have to be a christian in favor of me being an atheist, By not answering your arguments and then forfeiting the last round so people cannot vote against me.

Have a nice day buddy!
Posted by DarthLogicus 2 months ago
DarthLogicus
perhaps its not Christians but people
Posted by backwardseden 2 months ago
backwardseden
@chungusfanatic79 - Yeah. That's basically true throughout their history even though of course they'll flatly deny it which of course is in their very nature. But then again, All they are required to do is to look to their babbling bible to see how false that is and even still they cannot pay any attention to their very own god's whimpering commands of text/ the written word. Deuteronomy 13: 9-10 and Deuteronomy 17: 2-5 are perfect examples.
Posted by chungusfanatic79 2 months ago
chungusfanatic79
No you have to be christian and harass minorities

its the rules
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Craighawley215 2 months ago
Craighawley215
backwardsedenCatholicApologeticsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con tried to have some kind of discussion. Pro repeatedly relied on ad hominems and insults, and didn't take any of Con's points seriously. Pro seems like they're not really interested in debate.
Vote Placed by Petfish 2 months ago
Petfish
backwardsedenCatholicApologeticsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro insulted Con repeatedly and used ad hominem attacks

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.