Re: How to defeat an Atheist in debate

An answer to that age-old question which irritates Atheists everywhere: "you can't prove that there is no God".

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• No
• God
• How
• to
• defeat
• an
• Atheist
• in
• debate
• Churchfellaway
• retarded
• unicorn
• UFO

[AxeMan0170]

All I get from atheists is "what they are not". Are they afraid of simply saying that they are, in their minds, products of random chance, with no origin (1), no purpose or meaning (2), no moral absolutes (3), and therefore without destiny and no hope (4)? Naturalists, as hard as they try, cannot account cohesively nor coherently for those four ever existent questions of life. If you are the product of a cosmic accident, you are in turn an accident yourself. Think about it.

[rocketmagnet]

@AxeMan0170

1) Don't you think god is an amazing accident? I mean, how amazingly lucky he existed at all, and that he was benevolent (despite what it says in the Bible), and that he was powerful enough to create the universe (despite not being able to defeat iron chariots).

2) What purpose is there under God? To praise him? purlease.

3) God breaks so many of his morals.

4) What is your destiny? To live forever, that's not really a destiny, more like a life sentence.

[pinball281]

YEAH BUT STILL YOU CAN NOT PROVE THERE IS NO GOD,GOD AND UFOS ARE VERY DIFFERENT,WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS.I CANT PROVE GOSD AND YOU CAN NOT PROVE GOD DOES NOT EXIST.IF YOU CAN NOT PROVE GPD DOES NOT EXIST THEN HOW DO YOU KNOW GOD DOES NOT EXIST?

[rocketmagnet]

@pinball281 There are an infinite number of things we could think of which we cannot disprove. So, should be believe in all of them? Or should be believe in none of them? Personally, I'll believe in none of them until they are proven. If you wish to pick some of them and believe in them for no reason, then that's your business.

[MdKnToker]

@rocketmagnet so your an agnostic basically...would be horrible if you were wrong

[rocketmagnet]

@MdKnToker I would consider myself an Atheist. I'm not sure if I'm agnostic, although you can be both atheist and agnostic.

It would be horrible if I was wrong, *and* the Christians, Muslims or Jews were right.

Likewise, it would be horrible for you if you were wrong, *and* some other religion turned out to be right.

[MdKnToker]

@hznfrst Good one basically the argument is I am lying....... weak and what a way to write an essay over you need to read what you wrote cause it is not clear at all. Good one I am dishonest and with others? Yet still believe wierd how that works

[screaminghawk100]

@rocketmagnet god is god he is not a man. god is not man and his purpose is to create life and to teach that life to love one another. his destiny is to be there for us and yes he dosent interfear as much as we would like but that is why there is faith. faith is a test of loyalty to god to test our will to believe in him or not to. if he interfeared all the time then we wouldnt learn from our actions because we would be to dependent on god. tell me what morals you are refering to.

[pinball281]

@hznfrst why are laws not evidence of a law giver is you can use fossils as evidence for evolution?? well you cant use fossils for proof of evolution but iuts open to interpritation.I see we have discovred the building blocks of life.Well who is the builder?

[AxeMan0170]

@rocketmagnet 2) What do i lose in believing in an absolute moral supernatural being?? 3)"his moral rules"? hey if there is no God there is no moral absolutes, is there? where did you get yours from? 4) I am sorry, but your understanding of eternity and time-space is either very limited or plainly botched. But, hey if you believe you are just an accident of nature...

[AxeMan0170]

@rocketmagnet 1) You prefer to believe that: a) big bang happened out of random chance, b) physical laws happened by random chance, c) entropy principles are caused by random chance, d) life on earth is a product of random chance, e) DNA is also a product of random chance, f) Earth was hit by a meteorite causing the extinction of dinosaurs by random chance g) Nature chose primates to evolve to become the dominant species by random chance??if that is not faith...

[AxeMan0170]

@hznfrst 3) Without an absolute truth perspectives are relative, hence who is to say i'm right or wrong? without a meaningful origin destiny and hope are valueless. 4)Not even the greatest minds of our time and past are in agreement with that assertion, very bold statement.

[AxeMan0170]

@hznfrst According to the naturalist 'creed' nature is what it is, unable to make decisions or 'intelligent' selections. In the observable real world randomness produces nothing, mathematics testifies to that. 1) 'Accidental' anything or chance produces no 'meaning' as much as you would want to generate it (0+0= 0). 2) Natural selection is in itself at best amoral and at worst immoral (survival of the fittest), so that argument is self defeating.

[hznfrst]

@pinball281 Look up the word "disingenuous" and then look in the mirror. Goodbye.

[pinball281]

@hznfrst there may be unicorns,maybe they have the unicron thing mixed up and it may just mean horned animlal,so a rhino may be a unicorn but we have an image over the media of a fairy tale creature