Any Theists on AF, I Challenge You to a Debate on the Existence of God

[fr0d0]

So it comes back to believing what you want to believe, emotional reasoning and not logic. I think we eventually got to the point I was trying to make earlier Admitting there can be no proof or even evidence for something is admitting there is no logical reason to believe it, unless you define logic as being picking and choosing beliefs which may be true.

It seems like Fr0d0 is making Christianity the starting assumption of his logical path, and declares victory immediately by saying "hah, I'm being logical". This is like a proof by contradiction. We need to apply logic to the assumption of Christianity and show that it leads to a contradiction with the accepted opinions of science, history, archaeology, or Christianity itself.

Fr0d0's strategy works with deism, but it doesn't work with Christianity IMO.

Of course a proof by contradiction can only prove that the assumption is false; it can't prove the assumption is true. I think Fr0d0 is arguing that it is o.k. to believe something that can't be proven false, but we can prove Christianity false - or at least very unlikely.

No I disagree. I don't think I've made any actual defences of the detail yet. All I'm getting to answer are what I see as logical gaffs made in opposition. Well, the same logical gaff made over and over.

I have a thousand reasons to believe, as I said in another thread this past week. I'm immediately challenged on scientific contradictions which are simply not there in my faith. I stated this without going into detail. Then blind faith, which I don't hold. The straw men are coming thick and fast, and you're taking my position as that, my swathing defences against the straw men, without tasking me on any detail. I find that a strange point at which to make judgement. You must be aware how very inaccurate you are being?