How to debate a Christian

[dreamer2008]

@the OP: there are lots of refutations of common theistic arguments, like the Cosmological and Teleological, online. Iron Chariots is a good website. The main arguments and counter-arguments are summarised well by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. If you want a serious philosophical refutation, the best book that I have encountered is J.L. Mackie's The Miracle of Theism. This is fairly expensive, even online (about fifteen pounds sterling, I'm not sure how much that is in dollars), but it deals with pretty much every common argument for God's existence.

Alright, thank you for the info, I will search for that book.

Hello, I am an atheist, and I love to challenge the faith of some people around me with the hope that maybe with a successful debate I can help some of them see how useless and harmful the religious institutions are.

The only kind of people, with those sought ideas, you are going to convince are stupid people.
Religion has done a lot of good.

But a lot of evil too. Mostly evil actually. And you think that believing in fairy-tales is the intelligent option?

[solja247]

But a lot of evil too. Mostly evil actually.

Name some evils then.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

But a lot of evil too. Mostly evil actually.

Name some evils then.

I'm very sorry Solja,, but that is such a profoundly ignorant thing to say that I'm having a hard time believing you're serious.

Just in case, a few broad examples just from Christianity:


The Crusades and constant massacre of innocents during each Crusade,beginning with a pogrom killing the local Jews

Over 1000 years of vicious European anti Semitism which made the Nazi holocaust possible and arguably inevitable.

The massacre of the Cathars,which led to centuries of horror under the Inquistion.

The murder of heretics by Catholics AND protestants.

The suppression of science by the Church,from Galileo and Gordiano Bruno,to the current lunacy of new earth creationists and resistance to cell stem research. Religion ALWAYS rejects science which conflicts with dogma.

The protection and promotion of slavery in our society as 'the will of God' (justified by the Bible) until the C19th

The gross evil of the Catholic Church and its institutional protection of pedophile priests.

The attitude of the Catholic church to birth control, which results in great suffering in millions of people and countless needless deaths due to AIDS..

-I won't even start on tax rorts or the obscenity of televangelists.


As I said, it's hard for me to believe your're serious.I think you're a troll.

[The Omnissiunt One]

I'm looking forward to seeing his reply to this, Padraic. Could it be that these were not true Christians?

[fr0d0]

Being 'Christian' does not magically make you do 'Christian' things OO. Christianity is an aim to be like Christ and not an end point. Christians, and some ultimately prominent ones, have done some atrocious things, that can't be denied. What can't be said is that any of those things reflect Christ's ideals.

[tackattack]

In response to the OP (because I'm lazy and didn't feel like reading)

debating a Christian is no way to convert him. The mechanics of a debate harden each side to their own views. If you want to de-convert a Christian, just have a discussion with them about why they believe what they believe and point out any logical incongruity. Be tolerant and respectful, but at the same time genuinely concerned that they're deluding themselves.

[Minimalist]

Being 'Christian' does not magically make you do 'Christian' things OO

Of course it does....Pad just gave a list of them!

[RAD]

I'm very sorry Solja,, but that is such a profoundly ignorant thing to say that I'm having a hard time believing you're serious.

Just in case, a few broad examples just from Christianity:

Broad is right. What's mind boggling about these is that to be valid, they depend on Flew's NTS "fallacy" which he invented from thin air in the 70's. He invented it so atheists could stop making intelligent distinctions between people claiming to be Christians

The Crusades and constant massacre of innocents during each Crusade,beginning with a pogrom killing the local Jews

Doing the exact opposite of what Jesus and the apostles said to do with heretics. (Leave them alone)

Over 1000 years of vicious European anti Semitism which made the Nazi holocaust possible and arguably inevitable.

See above.

The massacre of the Cathars,which led to centuries of horror under the Inquistion.

See above

The murder of heretics by Catholics AND protestants.

You're repeating yourself

The suppression of science by the Church,from Galileo and Gordiano Bruno,to the current lunacy of new earth creationists and resistance to cell stem research. Religion ALWAYS rejects science which conflicts with dogma.

Make that "the Catholic church." Jefferson'r "three greatest men in the world of that era were Protestants and nobody was bothering them. (Newton, Bacon and Locke) It's amazing what you can't find out in this forum.

The protection and promotion of slavery in our society as 'the will of God' (justified by the Bible) until the C19th

Total nonsense, invented from whole cloth by "secular humanists." Wesley called it the "scourge of the earth" at the same time Voltaire was justifying it on economic grounds. Some Quakers first condemned it 50 years earlier. The abolitionists were all Protestants, mall "fundies." They were actually following Jesus' mission statement in Luke 4.

The gross evil of the Catholic Church and its institutional protection of pedophile priests.

Good, you put Catholic in there.

The attitude of the Catholic church to birth control, which results in great suffering in millions of people and countless needless deaths due to AIDS..

I agree except this is like saying we should let homosexuals who hate wearing condoms marry because they will get less AIDS. (The other issues aside)

-I won't even start on tax rorts or the obscenity of televangelists.

OK good, that way you won't continue pigeon-holing to the point of absurdity.

As I said, it's hard for me to believe your're serious.

I could say the same thing

I think you're a troll

Yeah trolling for a semblence of the whole truth probably

So the question is, if a "Christian" hasn't even read the NT or refuses to follow it, what does that have to do with whether Jesus should be followed, by you or me? Answer: nothing

Tell me, was Marx evil merely because his followers commited atrocities that make the Inquisitions look like a bump on the knee? And of course Marx doesn't seem to have worried much about Communists using violence against heretics like Jesus clearly did (And the apostles)

Ironically, all you have done is support Chesterton's and my claim that few have ever actually tried Christianity.

---

I don't know a single Christian who has a problem with stem cell research per se. They just want to know how and where the cells were aquired

But then you have to make only broad statements. Specifics would destroy your case and confuse the worshippers of Lord Self.

[everythingafter]

I read a couple pages of responses, and if someone brought this up, forgive me. But you could point out the many contradictions and outright scientific errors in the Bible. If you don't want to read it, google is invaluable. So is the Skeptic's Bible. Believers will retort that while the book was written by men and may contain some flaws because they wrote from a less enlightened age, the general message was inspired by God and still holds true: that of the forgiving power and salvation of Jesus. You can still suggest why the book that supposedly is the most important one ever written was cobbled together so sloppily. You could suggest that you yourself could have written a more moral book. You could ask how an all-powerful God could possibly have allowed such an account to be his ultimate message for mankind. Couldn't he have insured without a shadow of a doubt that it was timely and scientifically accurate and free from self-contradiction? Surely this wouldn't have been a hard task for a being that hung the stars. Or, if an account from people just after Christ was absolutely essential, he could have, with his omniscience, updated different writers down through the ages and with each generation, issued an updated account as times have changed. He could have explained why he allowed slavery to take place on his watch, the witch trials, the Holocaust and the rest of it. He could have explained why he created us knowing full well the entire ugly business of humankind and sin coming into the world before it happened. He could have answered the basic question: Why bother in the first place?

Just some thoughts. Good luck.

[The Omnissiunt One]

Broad is right. What's mind boggling about these is that to be valid, they depend on Flew's NTS "fallacy" which he invented from thin air in the 70's. He invented it so atheists could stop making intelligent distinctions between people claiming to be Christians

It is a fallacy in certain situations, such as the example he gave. A Scotsman is someone born in Scotland, so arbitrarily changing the definition of Scotsman to fit a particular theory is a fallacy. Whether or not the word 'Christian' would discount these examples depends upon the definition.

I agree except this is like saying we should let homosexuals who hate wearing condoms marry because they will get less AIDS. (The other issues aside)

No, it's nothing like it, as gay people marrying harms no-one.

So the question is, if a "Christian" hasn't even read the NT or refuses to follow it, what does that have to do with whether Jesus should be followed, by you or me? Answer: nothing

Tell me, was Marx evil merely because his followers commited atrocities that make the Inquisitions look like a bump on the knee? And of course Marx doesn't seem to have worried much about Communists using violence against heretics like Jesus clearly did (And the apostles)

Ironically, all you have done is support Chesterton's and my claim that few have ever actually tried Christianity.

You asked us to name evils caused by religion. We did so. Whether they were based on an accurate interpretation of Jesus' teaching is another matter, but they were most probably inspired by religious beliefs in most cases. Anyway, why pick out Jesus' teaching, when the OT is full of such delightfully heinous moral guidance? Indeed, why ignore Jesus' own teachings which are often distinctly sectarian, as in Matthew 15:26, when he initially refuses to help a woman from Canaan? Why ignore his teachings on family values: 'If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple.' -- Luke 14:26

All in all, I'd rather not follow Jesus' teachings, good though some of them are.

I don't know a single Christian who has a problem with stem cell research per se. They just want to know how and where the cells were aquired

Ah, yes, it's only okay if it comes from adults. That does rather narrow the scope of stem cell research.