Why aren't Christians able to debate their own religion?

[PatrickHenry]

Like he said...

[RickSp]

Quote by: Rive Well we aren't really getting the correct spectrum of religious followers here. We are getting the internet savvy christians. I'm sure there are some christians out there that can debate christianity. I may have once or twice, but thats only because i don't see the bible literally. Most of the volconvo zealots do. Its a problem, i know.

From my experience the Christians best prepared to debate their views are those who are the least evangelical. Jesuits and Orthodox Jews, for example, have a sufficiently rationalist tradition that they can pose some really interesting arguments and perspectives, whether or no one agrees with them. On the other hand the evangelicals and fundies who can only manage to spout memorized Bible verses get boring pretty fast. The ability to quote Ephesians, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves", does not an argument make.

[phoenix_fire]

Now, now, now. Surely you don't believe that's universally true...

[RickSp]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Now, now, now. Surely you don't believe that's universally true...

I began with the caveat "from my experience". That being said I think it makes sense that groups with a tradtion of rationalism are more experienced in making local arguments. Evangelicals seem mostly trained in selling used cars, figuratively or literally. A useful skill, no doubt but not as useful in debate.

[phoenix_fire]

That was me getting offended. Of course, I consider myself evangelical.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Dirty Name I'll debate my religion anytime, and anywhere. But let's lay down some ground rules first, because judging from this quote, you subscribe to a particular stereotype that has colored your view in a way that isn't fair to most religious people: Likewise, what I cannot and will not accept is the notion that your views are some way "proven." But more importantly, no true student of Christianity tries to claim that God and Jesus can be proven to exist via the scientific method. It's foolish. As I've said elsewhere, such thinking removes the requirement for faith. If it could be "proven" then faith would be unnecessary. So, I'll agree that those who claim it "proven" are fooling themselves. That said, let's debate. =)

How are we supposed to debate with someone who can't prove his veiws? O.o How are we supposed to debate with faith?

You just admited you can't prove your beliefs. But you believe it any way, cause it's called "faith".

That's like trying to debate with someone why the color green, is green, when they tell you in advanced that they supposedly have "faith" that green is actually red, and that they don't have any proof to back themselves up?

Atheist: Well.. here are geological records of the Earth. There is no record anywhere in the geological record of any worldwide flood.

Theist: Wrong.

Atheist: What do you mean?

Theist: The Bible says there was a great flood that covered all the Earth

Atheist: But.. where is your proof?

Theist: I don't need proof. It's called faith you dummy.

Atheist: Oook... wtf?

Here's an example. No proof. We're just wrong. Cause religion is right. The end. Notice how "selling of religion" comes into play.

Quote by: PatrickHenry Who cares what the atheists think? There are spiritually wounded people who need and respond to God's love, as expressed by the followers of Jesus. You know-it-all "debaters" are just full of hot air. By their fruits, you shall know them: https://www.compassion.com/Default

[RickSp]

Quote by: phoenix_fire That was me getting offended. Of course, I consider myself evangelical.

Who knows, you might be the exception. I grew up around evangelicals who took high school kids, made them memorize chapter and verse and then set them out on the streets, pestering folks, saying "How you found Jesus." Equal parts annoying and inarticulate.

[Dirty Name]

How are we supposed to debate with someone who can't prove his veiws? O.o How are we supposed to debate with faith?

What makes your point of view any different from mine? You can't "prove" it either. But you might sway my opinion...

What happens is that thinking people debate the evidence that exists by exchanging ideas and receiving feedback on those ideas from others who have a different point of view. Naturally, there will be few conversions, but every now and then, one of the parties involved may come around to the other way of thinking.

My goal in all of this is two-fold:

1) To strengthen my own faith. For if I cannot answer challenges to my faith with a valid argument, then you might make me starting doubting what I've come to believe. By defending my faith, it grows stronger.

2) To point out the errors in thinking of people on both sides of the argument, but especially those errors made by the opposition.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Dirty Name What makes your point of view any different from mine? You can't "prove" it either. But you might sway my opinion... What happens is that thinking people debate the evidence that exists by exchanging ideas and receiving feedback on those ideas from others who have a different point of view. Naturally, there will be few conversions, but every now and then, one of the parties involved may come around to the other way of thinking. My goal in all of this is two-fold: 1) To strengthen my own faith. For if I cannot answer challenges to my faith with a valid argument, then you might make me starting doubting what I've come to believe. By defending my faith, it grows stronger. 2) To point out the errors in thinking of people on both sides of the argument, but especially those errors made by the opposition.

Proof does exist to a certain extent, Dirty Name. It's all about extremes. Who's proof do you think is going to win on the happenings of a world-wide flood? An old book? Or scientific research and geological records?

No, DN, no one can prove anything at all. Only to extents.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Zhavric Why aren't Christians able to debate their own religion?

Wrong question.
It indicates that All the Christians are not able to debate their own religion. That is a syllogism.
Re-phrase it, please.

[Mia]

Quote by: Kite The problem with the methodology of, 'Just because I can't prove something exists doesn't mean its not there' does not open a good debate. By this logic, just because something can't be proven means its automatically true, unless I am missing something. By this same logic, I could claim that an invisible cookie that resides on the 8th plain of power in the realm of Nugaltha controlled all events that occured on June 12, 1987. There is no way to defeat this logic.

No, that logic suggestes it cannot be disproven, not that it is proven. (All scientific 'facts' are theories that have not been DISproven, btw).

On another note, I do not think that Christianity and science are mutually exclusive, as some in here have portrayed.

[Mia]

Quote by: Zhavric Ah, the "I know you are, but what am I" defense. Excellent. It had been at least twenty minutes since I'd read one.

Strawman. Not what was said at all. he merely stated that he would not agree that your belief is proven anymore than you would agree his is. In other words, no one can prove this one way or another! It is a subject, perhaps, best amenable to discussion rather than debate.

Quote by: Zhavric What I have is reality as it is. What you have is a fairy tale you're demanding the rest of us believe. Which do you think is valid?.

Where did he demand that you or anyone else believe it, and calling it a fairy tail is not debate, rather just an insult. And claiming that what you believe should be accepted as 'reality' makes you guilty of what you accuse your opponents of.

Quote by: Zhavric But we both know that's false. .

Obviously, that's not the case, or he wouldn't be stating the opposite.

Quote by: Zhavric We both know that most, if not every, Christian believes in Christ on the grounds that he ACTUALLY showed up circe 2000 years ago and that the bible is an ACTUAL accounting of those events from people who were ACTUALLY there. We both know that Christians have jumped all over any and every archeological tid-bit that supports even the most tangential claims in the bible.

Same is true of evolutionists. And anyone else out to prove their view.

Quote by: Zhavric We both know that's false...

Another fallacious argument. For someone condemning the debating skills of Christians, you have a lot to learn.

[Mia]

Quote by: Zhavric I was thinking the same thing. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...alem/salem.htm http://www.medievalcrusades.com/ http://www.godhatesfags.com/ http://www.brojed.org/contents.html

I didn't realize these people spoke for me and all other Christians. Thank you for correcting me. :rolleyes:

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Rainbow Wrong question. It indicates that All the Christians are not able to debate their own religion. That is a syllogism.

Syllogism or not, it's correct.

Re-phrase it, please.

If you actually, you know... debated me... then you wouldn't have to stamp your feet and demand that I re-phrase arguments.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Mia Strawman. Not what was said at all. he merely stated that he would not agree that your belief is proven anymore than you would agree his is. In other words, no one can prove this one way or another! It is a subject, perhaps, best amenable to discussion rather than debate.

Have you taken college level logic? Philosophy 101 is really all you need to get a basic introduction to formal logic. I am amazed that you would make such an ignorant statement.

We can know things. We can prove things. X = X. X =/= Y*.

Taking this course of argument... the "nothing is proven / nothing is provable" approach... is a dead end. Anyone who's passed basic philosophy can pull this argument to pieces.

My stance is knowable and provable. Theism is not.

Where did he demand that you or anyone else believe it, and calling it a fairy tail is not debate, rather just an insult. And claiming that what you believe should be accepted as 'reality' makes you guilty of what you accuse your opponents of.

Absolutely false.

1) If you feel insulted when someone calls your fairy tale a fairy tale, that's your problem, not mine. I don't feel particularly insulted when you call my stance reality and if you choose to call it something silly & innacurate, I have the ability to prove you wrong.

2) I have evidence to back up my claims and do not have to resort to sophomoric claims of "it's not proven".

Same is true of evolutionists. And anyone else out to prove their view.

1) WTF does evolution have to do with this argument?

2) So-called "evolutionists" (I believe you mean to refer to non-theists) aren't the ones hypocritically claiming that there claims cannot be proven because they require faith and then doing a 180 to latch onto any scientific evidence that supports their claim. Scientists aren't mystics, my luv.

3) Why are you defending someone else's indefensable argument?

Another fallacious argument. For someone condemning the debating skills of Christians, you have a lot to learn.

I'd be really amazed if you could name three fallacies without googling them.

* =/= means "does not equal"

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Mia I didn't realize these people spoke for me and all other Christians. Thank you for correcting me.

No problem.

I find that Christians have a disturbing tendency to not be able to take accounting for their whack-jobs, mistakes, blunders and atrocities. It's not like politics where we can safely and securely admit that there are morons and 'tards in both the conservative and liberal camp. With Christians, it's always, "He did what?!? Oh, well, he wasn't really Christian."

I guess Jesus wasn't that big on responsibility.

[Kite]

Quote by: Mia I didn't realize these people spoke for me and all other Christians. Thank you for correcting me. :rolleyes:

Well, the ones that yell the loudest are usually the ones that get paid attention to. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, as my mother says. Of course, the way I see it, the squeaky wheel gets bitched at and ignored.

[Mia]

This is not worthwhile.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Mia This is not worthwhile.

Why? Because 245 post count Zhav is beating you?

[Chris the Chees]

Zhavric, I suggest you drop the condesending tone and the 'luv' comments (among others). People are not here to read your sarcastic and patronising attitude. You construct strong arguments, but the added extra is not necessary and is just unpleasant.

Do not respond to me within this thread. PM myself or Sean with any questions.