RE: Greetings,I commence open challenge to anyone
September 24, 2015 at 5:06 pm
(This post was last modified: September 24, 2015 at 5:08 pm by Simon Moon.)
(September 24, 2015 at 4:53 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(September 24, 2015 at 2:41 pm)Grehoman Ebenezer Wrote: I will happily debate any atheist on this forum.
Anyone can come forward,for a challenge against me.
- Cosmological Argument
- Argument From Design
- Argument From Consciousness
- Ontological Argument
- Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus
- The accuracy of the bible
- Bible archaeology
- Proving other religion's false
1. They'll say they've heard it all before...and some of them probably have...to varying degrees of clarity.
2. What is less certain is whether any of them can actually refute the arguments...though some are cock-sure they can.
3. Almost unanimously, they'll use #1 above to avoid actually trying to refute your arguments.
4. Unanimously, they will attack ME for pointing these things out to YOU.
Good luck!
I won't attack you, only your points.
1. Yes, we've heard it before. Stating so does not negate that all the philosophical arguments for the existence of a god all contain fallacies.
2. Almost every one here can. The fact remains, a-priori arguments cannot establish matters of fact.
3. No one here will use the statement that they've heard it all before in place of actual arguments. The fact remains, that any cursory search of this site, and every philosophy forum out there, will lead to thread after thread of these arguments being refuted. It's not our fault that every theist that as just been introduced to the philosophical arguments believes they are unassailable, and that our reason for being atheists is that we've just never heard them before.
4. I did not attack you. So much for your claim that we will attack you unanimously.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.