Why Richard Dawkins should debate Christians

[smax]

You didn’t answer my question though, if you are indeed the one with the delusions how on Earth do you know that you are accurately perceiving anything that you just mentioned above?

You think you've gotten to know me? Wow have I gotten to know you. The above response typifies your response to just about everything, and I've seen you use the same pattern with other posters.

I presented a brief, yet compelling, case that scripture is, in the very least, significantly flawed. And what do you do? You question whether or not I have a deep enough grasp of reality to even consider such matters! LOL.

If you can't beat em, question their perception, that's what I say.

What's that, the Earth is spherical, you say? How do you know aren't just deluding yourself into believing that? How do you the billions of other people who think the same thing aren't deluding themselves? Hell, how do you know that you aren't deluding yourself about others thinking that when in reality is just you alone who thinks the Earth is round.

He is protecting it; those whom He desires to come to the knowledge of the truth have no difficulties coming to the knowledge of the truth. There’s a reason Jesus spoke in parables (Matthew 13).

And people wonder where Joseph Smith got the idea for magic glasses!

Christians do debate, and that’s a very good thing, that however does not mean the truth is unobtainable.

There is no clear truth in Christianity. It's so open that a new Christian religion practically develops on a bi-weekly basis.

Being childish is not the same thing as “being a child”. Not only this, but if the vast majority of adults do believe in a deity (which is undeniable), then believing in a deity would not be childish at all but rather something both children and adults believe in, which is like many beliefs.

It's a childish mentality, and we are talking about psychology here. Try and keep up.

It’s not childish to believe that your parents love you, even though both children and adults share that belief.

No one said it was. Then again, believing that your parents love you isn't exactly a supernatural claim now is it?

Believing in a friend that does not appear, does not speak, or make himself universally and undeniably evident, is a supernatural claim.

Children believe in Santa Claus but eventually stop because their parents admit to them that it was a lie just to get them to bahave.

Adults believe in thousands of different types of gods. Unfortunately, these same adults do not have an authority such as their parents to tell them that it's a lie to bring them under control.

It's the same childish condition, it just doesn't have an end.

No, he does exist, and His existence is the only reason either of us cope.

Wow! You just convinced me. All this time I've been trying to get you to tackle subject matter, and you were holding back undeniable proof such as this.

"He does exist". I don't know why, but that's just so much more compelling than the same argument all other religions are making!

They are physically children?

Mentally, yes.

That’s irrelevant.

Convenient.

I would not necessarily use the word imaginary; falsely named, falsely conceived of, or falsely identified would be more accurate.

I think those other religions would say the same thing about yours. Only, most of the gods that have ever been invented, predate yours. In fact, your god, in many ways, is the accumulation of many of those gods.

Good! Then you should know that God never promises to protect His elect, in fact He tells them they will experience more trial, suffering, and tribulation simply because they believe in Him than they will if they didn’t.

And yet Christians make up over 30 percent of the world. Couldn't have discredited scripture better myself, thank you.

So your assertions that Christians believe in God so He will protect them is absurd.

Not at all. Christians do believe in god so that he will protect them from eternal torment.

Pretty obvious, dude! Are you okay? I feel a little bad having to teach you the basic fundamentals of your own faith. Although, it's not even close to the first time I've had to do it.

It has everything to do with presentation, I usually make it past this point with most atheists, you’re just struggling more than most do.

I'm sure many Atheists have done a better job than me, I don't mind conceding that. That said, I don't think that is why you have failed to get to the subject matter in this case.

For one thing, I won't allow you to dictate the terms of our discussion. You want to draw me into an endless discussion about what I mean about everything. That may have worked with others, but it will not work with me.

Another thing that I suspect you are avoiding is dealing with the fact that I know your religion as well as you do, which puts you at a significant disadvantage in this case. This explains why you are completely resolved to avoid the subject matter in this case.

I don't blame you.

I have no problem discussing the material. Present it.

The suggestion itself is redundant.

Since you have read the Bible and claim to be quite familiar with it, I am sure you are aware that scripture claims that unbelievers are not able to formulate a coherent view of reality. They essentially become futile in their reasoning. So when I ask you to back up what you are saying and you are unable to do so I am essentially adding credibility to scripture because you are doing exactly what it says you will do. There’s a method to my madness.

I've explained myself fine. You just don't want the explanation to lead anywhere, so you refuse to let it.

I mean, let's face it, anyone who thinks he's sporting a special pair of glasses that give him a clearer understanding of things is going to be quite difficult to effectively communicate with.

It's like trying to break down the walls of communication with an autistic, it's damn near impossible.

I asked you how you determine whether a claim fits your definition, that’s completely different.

As often as I possibly can, I try to avoid wasting peoples time by creating my own set of special meanings for words and terms.

But clearly this is a common practice for you, which explains why you have such a difficult time communicating. .

We’re supposed to be talking about verification here, not magnificent claims, that was the question above.

I gave you the same answer for the sake of time and because it's basically the same question.

Sure it makes those claims (although they are rather roughly stated). You still haven’t told me how you know those are indeed magnificent claims though.

And I won't. Either you are just stupid enough to not understand the supernatural implications, or, as I've made a case for, you are just trying to create an endless series of meaningless Q and As in order to deflect away from the subject matter.

You say you usually get farther by now. Why do I get the distinct feeling that you usually succeed in sucking others into this trap of yours?

I never said that’s what suffices as adequate proof.

You haven't said anything for that matter.

No, everyone is born deluded; the elect overcome it through God’s grace.

Man, that is some sound logic there!

You’re right; there is no reason to doubt the Bible. In fact, without the Bible there’d be no ability to reason.

And yet human's managed without it for well over a 150000 years.