Revival of Reverse Debate #1 - Page 2

Lightdemon · 05-06-07, 05:41 PM

Well......Rhapsody1447 just sent me a PM and said he wont be participating anymore....

So that kinda leaves me just hanging here.

If anyone is willing to step up and take the atheist's position, please be my guest. Just pick up where Rhapsody1447 left off.

Sergeant Stinger1 · 05-06-07, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightdemon

That's right!

I submit a formal request to bring back the reverse debate about God's existence. I've read through the original thread and the comments that followed, and apparently there's some discontent about the substance of the debate. And I agree, there should have been more....meat I guess you can call it.

That is why I would like to bring this back to the surface and redo it in its entirety.

If this is fine with everyone, I would like to invite anyone who is willing to participate in this debate with me.

Technically speaking, I am agnostic, but certainly leaning towards atheism as I do live an atheistic lifestyle. I would naturally then be arguing for the existence of God, though I do sit on the fence on this one.

I've been involved in quite a few debates on God's existence, and I am no stranger to apologetics. I have heard nearly every theological theory that favors in God's existence, and managed to refute most of them. I've read some of Saint Augustine's work and some of Aquinas' as well.

So do we have any takers?

_________
This is too EASY! No one can prove if God exists or not. End of story!

Lightdemon · 05-06-07, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergeant Stinger1

_________
This is too EASY! No one can prove if God exists or not. End of story!

If you are going to formally debate this, please do so with an actual argument, and please address my opening statement.

Also, you have to be a theist in order to take the athiests position, as it is a reverse debate.

Sergeant Stinger1 · 05-06-07, 07:24 PM

[quote=Lightdemon;546093]If you are going to formally debate this, please do so with an actual argument, and please address my opening statement.

Also, you have to be a theist in order to take the athiests position, as it is a reverse debate.[/QUOT
~
What part of "no one can prove God exists or not" are you having trouble understanding?
~
I understand that you can have a debate about it but it will all just end up being "someones guess."
~

Lightdemon · 05-06-07, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergeant Stinger1

~
What part of "no one can prove God exists or not" are you having trouble understanding?
~
I understand that you can have a debate about it but it will all just end up being "someones guess."
~

Sigh....that's not what the debate is about. The debate here is to show that you can debate a topic even if you do not agree with it. It's more of a mental excersize, than a true debate.

Sergeant Stinger1 · 05-06-07, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightdemon

Sigh....that's not what the debate is about. The debate here is to show that you can debate a topic even if you do not agree with it. It's more of a mental excersize, than a true debate.

_______
I understand!

Lachean · 05-07-07, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergeant Stinger1

What part of "no one can prove God exists or not" are you having trouble understanding?

Not being able to disprove something we don't KNOW to exist is no argument for anything. Can you disprove the existence of unicorns? No.

Is that a reason to believe they exist? Only a moron would suggest so.

Sure its possible to prove god's existence, just as it is possible to prove anything, however the fact remains that after 3 millennia there still is not an ounce of evidence to support any monotheistic claims. And I don't think there is a living polytheist with a decent argument for their god's.

Lightdemon · 05-07-07, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

Not being able to disprove something we don't KNOW to exist is no argument for anything. Can you disprove the existence of unicorns? No.

Is that a reason to believe they exist? Only a moron would suggest so.

Sure its possible to prove god's existence, just as it is possible to prove anything, however the fact remains that after 3 millennia there still is not an ounce of evidence to support any monotheistic claims. And I don't think there is a living polytheist with a decent argument for their god's.

There are also other circumstances.

For instance a God, who you cannot see, cannot touch, cannot hear, and cannot smell, can exist. But His existence doesn't matter because he has absolutely no influence in the material world. In other words, God can exist in the immaterial world, but not effect the material world.

So it wouldn't matter either way. But he CAN exist.

Lachean · 05-09-07, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightdemon

There are also other circumstances.

For instance a God, who you cannot see, cannot touch, cannot hear, and cannot smell, can exist. But His existence doesn't matter because he has absolutely no influence in the material world. In other words, God can exist in the immaterial world, but not effect the material world.

So it wouldn't matter either way. But he CAN exist.

Precisely my point. Of course any of the gods can exist. My point is that if the bold is indeed true, then there is no reason to fear/worship him/it.

If it cannot effect the material world, what I call the universe, then it couldn't have created it. Or have done any of the things that the religious suggest.

Lightdemon · 05-09-07, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

Precisely my point. Of course any of the gods can exist. My point is that if the bold is indeed true, then there is no reason to fear/worship him/it.

If it cannot effect the material world, what I call the universe, then it couldn't have created it. Or have done any of the things that the religious suggest.

Hmm, seems that I've made a mistake. The example that I gave earlier is only half of what I believe. I cannot totally agree to my own example because somethings that are immaterial DO, in fact, affect us.

Things like the concept of numbers, love, good, etc. Numbers do not exist. You cannot point to something and tell me that is a number.

2, two, II, .... look at sections "written out" and "evolution of the glyph"

All of those are mere representations of the CONCEPT of the number two. Two doesn't exist in the material world, it can only exist in the immaterial world. The number two is useful to us in its representations described above. So the immaterial does in fact have some use.

I wouldn't necessarily rule out God's influence, but nor will I say that He does. The bottom line is that there is no way to prove it either way. Hence by position as an agnostic. The lack of evidence only leads one to suspend judgement.