Stump the Christian?

[Tonus]

Your inability (or unwillingness) to understand what a scientific theory is, and the difference between the facts of evolution and the Theory of Evolution, are a barrier to getting you to understand why your post is so off-base.

[abaris]

Despite the vitriol that is sure to come, this is not an unreasonable THEORY--much like believing in evolutionary theory is not unreasonable.

Oh how little we know!

Oh holy ignorance!

Oh holy willingness to stay uninformed!

Oh holy failure of the school system!

[dyresand]

1) The universe had a cause
2) Life exists
3) Complex biological systems exist
4) The ancient Jews interacted with God quite a bit
5) Jesus came, ministered, performed miracles, died, and was resurrected
6) Miracles still happen
7) There is a god-shaped hole in everyone's psychology
8) The "inter-witness of the Holy Spirit" (there, that should get all the WLC fans going)

1. The universe doesn't have a cause no one created. Nature working as intended. 
2. No shit life exists. We are probably not the only living things in the universe. There was life giving carbon found in space on meteors.
3. Evolution google that shit. 
4. Nah they didn't 
5. Still never existed you gotta prove his mom existed for him to exst.
6. Why Science Can't Accept Miracles (Even If They Happen)

• The oft-stated claim that miracles are "outside of science" is true enough, but doesn't explain anything, and merely makes science look arbitrary and closed-minded in the eyes of non-scientists. So it should simply be junked.
  
  
• Too credulous belief in miracles can be a lazy way of dealing with any problem or explaining away any inconvenient fact. Can't see how evolution works? Must be miracles instead. Just imagine if accountants accepted miracles as explanations for discrepancies, or the police accepted miracles as explanations for how fingerprints got on things. Even if miracles occur, they could only be accepted as such after the most rigorous scrutiny. Anything else is an open invitation to intellectual anarchy.
  
  
• One principal reason science rejects miracles is that the vast majority of miracle claims have proven untrustworthy and the rest are indeterminate. Religious believers need to clean up their own house before accusing science of being unreasonable. Don't tell me that you personally are reliable. Get the whole house clean. That will pretty much keep you busy for the rest of your life, in case you're looking for a purpose in life.
  
  
• A well known fallacy in UFO studies applies here, too. UFO enthusiasts agree that fakes and mistaken observations are widespread but there is always a small "residue" of cases that can't be dismissed. But we live in a universe of patterns. If most UFO sightings are fakes or erroneous, we are justified in assuming the unexplained cases are too. The burden of proof is on the believer to show that his case is genuine. Exactly the same reasoning applies to miracles.
  
  
• Even if an unquestionably anomalous event occurred, not explainable in terms of any known laws of nature, we cannot rule out the possibility that the event is due to unknown laws of nature. Hume was right; no amount of evidence for a miracle can rule out the possibility of some hidden flaw in the evidence or unknown natural explanation. However, Hume made the unwarranted leap from "miracles can't be proven" to "miracles don't happen."
  
  
• A second principal reason science rejects miracles, therefore, is that writing something off as a miracle forecloses any possibility of explaining it in other terms.
  
  
• Even if, through some unknown means, we establish that an event is genuinely miraculous, we are left with an isolated anomaly that tells us nothing. Just because a miracle is reported by a member of some sect doesn't mean the event supports that sect's interpretations.
  
  
• The fact something is possible doesn't mean we have to regard it as likely. I may get hit by a meteorite, but I don't spend time dwelling on it. A miracle may influence the course of a disease, but most religious believers will still go to the doctor. (The ones who have the courage of their convictions and reject all medical intervention usually die.)
  
  
• taken from https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/WhyNoMiracles.HTM
  7. Do you even know what a god shape is. god is only in the brain because you wan't it to be there.
  8. No no no no once again give proof or gtfo

[Anima]

Rob, doesn't it seem perfectly natural that sciences owns the real material world, and the minute some comes along without an explanation, it must be the work of "their" god!
The thought that it might be someone else's god, we'll that's just being stupid now...

These guys are completely barking mad!

I liked this. Only because it seems perfectly natural that Newtonian Physics and Gravitational Theory (that is right. It is a theory best described by general relativity) owns the real material world. As pragmatic as it would be to say that nothing exists which is not described by Newtonian Physics and Gravitational Theory, saying such would eliminate entire class of the physical world (quantum mechanics)

And by the way. When there are anomalies in the gravitational theory. The common proposal is to some aether or ethereal substance such as dark matter or dark energy.

"Extra-fast stars: Stars in galaxies follow a distribution of velocities where stars on the outskirts are moving faster than they should according to the observed distributions of normal matter. Galaxies within galaxy clusters show a similar pattern. Dark matter, which would interact gravitationally but not electromagnetically, would account for the discrepancy. Various modifications to Newtonian dynamics have also been proposed.
Flyby anomaly: Various spacecraft have experienced greater acceleration than expected during gravity assist maneuvers."

"Accelerating expansion: The metric expansion of space seems to be speeding up. Dark energy has been proposed to explain this. A recent alternative explanation is that the geometry of space is not homogeneous (due to clusters of galaxies) and that when the data are reinterpreted to take this into account, the expansion is not speeding up after all,[29] however this conclusion is disputed.[30]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Ano...crepancies

(Because it would be ridiculous to say there are ethereal things that are not simply stuff. Ethereal stuff...okay. Ethereal things...Possibly. Ethereal stuff or things with sentience as to qualify as being. YOU ARE A NUT!!!)

[FatAndFaithless]

Where the hell does any scientist describe dark matter as "ethereal"?

[Anima]

How can I corner, of course with my words, Christians and make them feel they have no choice but admit to rethinking their position or part of their positions when it comes to the bible or their god? I usually go fishing online at conservative news sites like Breitbart News Network. I'll click on a story or headline, look down at the comments and either look for key words that Christians use or post a stimulating comment, which they would of course feel the need to correct me or defend their so called faith. Is there any tools or creative weapons of reason and logic that I can use to stump them?

As quoted from a Man for All Seasons:
"God made the angels to show Him splendor, as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But Man He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of his mind. If He suffers us to come to such a case that there is no escaping, then we may stand to our tackle as best we can, and, yes,... then we can clamor like champions, if we have the spittle for it. But it's God's part, not our own, to bring ourselves to such a pass. Our natural business lies in escaping."


In regards to your original question. The best argument I have ever heard to stump Christians is the argument to supremacy and redundancy of the will. Which in short goes:
P1. If the will of man and the will of God conflict than the superior will is manifested.
P2. The will of man is observed as manifested.
C1. Therefore the will of God is either inferior to that of man or God's will is that man does man's will in which case God's will is redundant.

The rebuttal will focus on the second premise in regards to the limits of man's will and whether that will is observed as manifest since his intention may not lead to his desired result. Further argument will be made in accordance with the or aspect of the conclusion as redundancy does not equate with nonexistence (think two kidneys or two lungs when one will do).

[Crossless2.0]

According to the Christian THEORY (since I don't need to be certain of anything to have a theory, I just need some evidence that agrees with my conclusions) God has interacted with our reality (not meant to be an exhaustive list):

1) The universe had a cause
2) Life exists
3) Complex biological systems exist
4) The ancient Jews interacted with God quite a bit
5) Jesus came, ministered, performed miracles, died, and was resurrected
6) Miracles still happen
7) There is a god-shaped hole in everyone's psychology
8) The "inter-witness of the Holy Spirit" (there, that should get all the WLC fans going)

Of course you will pick apart each one as "you can't prove..." and "baseless assertions". I don't have to prove them, just like evolution, the mountain of evidence I have points to a probabilistic conclusion that the God of Christianity exists. Until I am presented with a theory that answers all of these questions with a different answer, that is what I choose to believe.

Despite the vitriol that is sure to come, this is not an unreasonable THEORY--much like believing in evolutionary theory is not unreasonable.

Willful, obstinate ignorance doesn't help your case.  If you are determined not to learn how words like 'theory' are used in science, then perhaps the best thing would be to bow out of the conversation now since your post above is simply childish.  Is that really the witness you intend to bring?

[SteveII]

1) The universe had a cause
2) Life exists
3) Complex biological systems exist
4) The ancient Jews interacted with God quite a bit
5) Jesus came, ministered, performed miracles, died, and was resurrected
6) Miracles still happen
7) There is a god-shaped hole in everyone's psychology
8) The "inter-witness of the Holy Spirit" (there, that should get all the WLC fans going)

1. The universe doesn't have a cause no one created. Nature working as intended. 
2. No shit life exists. We are probably not the only living things in the universe. There was life giving carbon found in space on meteors.
3. Evolution google that shit. 
4. Nah they didn't 
5. Still never existed you gotta prove his mom existed for him to exst.
6. Why Science Can't Accept Miracles (Even If They Happen)

• The oft-stated claim that miracles are "outside of science" is true enough, but doesn't explain anything, and merely makes science look arbitrary and closed-minded in the eyes of non-scientists. So it should simply be junked.
  
  
• Too credulous belief in miracles can be a lazy way of dealing with any problem or explaining away any inconvenient fact. Can't see how evolution works? Must be miracles instead. Just imagine if accountants accepted miracles as explanations for discrepancies, or the police accepted miracles as explanations for how fingerprints got on things. Even if miracles occur, they could only be accepted as such after the most rigorous scrutiny. Anything else is an open invitation to intellectual anarchy.
  
  
• One principal reason science rejects miracles is that the vast majority of miracle claims have proven untrustworthy and the rest are indeterminate. Religious believers need to clean up their own house before accusing science of being unreasonable. Don't tell me that you personally are reliable. Get the whole house clean. That will pretty much keep you busy for the rest of your life, in case you're looking for a purpose in life.
  
  
• A well known fallacy in UFO studies applies here, too. UFO enthusiasts agree that fakes and mistaken observations are widespread but there is always a small "residue" of cases that can't be dismissed. But we live in a universe of patterns. If most UFO sightings are fakes or erroneous, we are justified in assuming the unexplained cases are too. The burden of proof is on the believer to show that his case is genuine. Exactly the same reasoning applies to miracles.
  
  
• Even if an unquestionably anomalous event occurred, not explainable in terms of any known laws of nature, we cannot rule out the possibility that the event is due to unknown laws of nature. Hume was right; no amount of evidence for a miracle can rule out the possibility of some hidden flaw in the evidence or unknown natural explanation. However, Hume made the unwarranted leap from "miracles can't be proven" to "miracles don't happen."
  
  
• A second principal reason science rejects miracles, therefore, is that writing something off as a miracle forecloses any possibility of explaining it in other terms.
  
  
• Even if, through some unknown means, we establish that an event is genuinely miraculous, we are left with an isolated anomaly that tells us nothing. Just because a miracle is reported by a member of some sect doesn't mean the event supports that sect's interpretations.
  
  
• The fact something is possible doesn't mean we have to regard it as likely. I may get hit by a meteorite, but I don't spend time dwelling on it. A miracle may influence the course of a disease, but most religious believers will still go to the doctor. (The ones who have the courage of their convictions and reject all medical intervention usually die.)
  
  
• taken from https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/WhyNoMiracles.HTM
  7. Do you even know what a god shape is. god is only in the brain because you wan't it to be there.8. No no no no once again give proof or gtfo
  

I don't have to prove any of it. It is my THEORY. Just like scientific theories (like evolution), I am considering the evidence, developing a probabilistic scenario that fits this evidence, and I cannot find solid contradictory evidence or a competing theory that fits these observations better. You can whine that any or all of these things are not true but you cannot prove any of them are untrue.  Therefore I am reasonable (not necessarily right) to conclude God exists. 

Oh, and I can test my THEORY: God still works in people's lives, there is the "inter-witness" of the Holy Spirit, miracles still happen, and we continue to have a god-shaped hole in our psychology generation after generation.

[dyresand]

Rob, doesn't it seem perfectly natural that sciences owns the real material world, and the minute some comes along without an explanation, it must be the work of "their" god!
The thought that it might be someone else's god, we'll that's just being stupid now...

These guys are completely barking mad!

I liked this.  Only because it seems perfectly natural that Newtonian Physics and Gravitational Theory (that is right.  It is a theory best described by general relativity) owns the real material world.  As pragmatic as it would be to say that nothing exists which is not described by Newtonian Physics and Gravitational Theory, saying such would eliminate entire class of the physical world (quantum mechanics)

And by the way.  When there are anomalies in the gravitational theory.  The common proposal is to some aether or ethereal substance such as dark matter or dark energy.  

"Extra-fast stars: Stars in galaxies follow a distribution of velocities where stars on the outskirts are moving faster than they should according to the observed distributions of normal matter. Galaxies within galaxy clusters show a similar pattern. Dark matter, which would interact gravitationally but not electromagnetically, would account for the discrepancy. Various modifications to Newtonian dynamics have also been proposed.
Flyby anomaly: Various spacecraft have experienced greater acceleration than expected during gravity assist maneuvers."

"Accelerating expansion: The metric expansion of space seems to be speeding up. Dark energy has been proposed to explain this. A recent alternative explanation is that the geometry of space is not homogeneous (due to clusters of galaxies) and that when the data are reinterpreted to take this into account, the expansion is not speeding up after all,[29] however this conclusion is disputed.[30]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Ano...crepancies

(Because it would be ridiculous to say there are ethereal things that are not simply stuff.  Ethereal stuff...okay.  Ethereal things...Possibly.  Ethereal stuff or things with sentience as to qualify as being.  YOU ARE A NUT!!!)

Dark matter/energy is not ethereal.  

1. dark energy definition. An as yet unknown and unidentified form ofenergy that pervades the universe and produces a force that counteracts the gravitational attraction between galaxies. Note: Dark energy is thought to be responsible for the accelerating universe.
   meaning it causes the rapid expansion of the universe. But considering as of now i'm on, the universe is going to collapses back in on itself. Dark matter/energy make the universe expand but not forever, that being said well our place in the universe will be up soon though humanity wont more than likely wont be around to see the end. 

http://www.iflscience.com/physics/big-cr...d-universe

[FatAndFaithless]

I don't have to prove any of it. It is my THEORY.

You're incredibly dishonest.