A challenge!

[Mystic]

If you have 100% conclusive arguments, then you've already won. What's left to debate?

Your confidence in your own position may not be as firm as you portray, methinks.

This is because you don't want there to be clear proofs and firm conclusive evidence at the moment. 

There is a time to doubt and there is a time when doubt is unreasonable and you have to shut it off and take a leap of faith with vision of the heart and strength.

[Jesster]

take a leap of faith

And this is why I could never take a debate with you seriously

[Mystic]

take a leap of faith

And this is why I could never take a debate with you seriously

Yeah that is why. 

[Jesster]

And this is why I could never take a debate with you seriously

Yeah that is why. 

Yes, it is

[Astreja]

This is because you don't want there to be clear proofs and firm conclusive evidence at the moment.

There you go again, pretending to be a mind reader.  (You don't seem to be very good at it, either.)

There is a time to doubt and there is a time when doubt is unreasonable and you have to shut it off and take a leap of faith with vision of the heart and strength.

That, MysticKnight, is extraordinarily bad advice.  Doubt is only unreasonable when one has solid evidence pointing to a solid conclusion.  Accordingly, due to the lack of evidence for your god, our doubts are very reasonable indeed.

Taking a leap of faith is also a bad idea if there's nowhere to land on the other side.

(Disclaimer:  I have never been able to generate actual religious faith.  It appears that My brain simply doesn't work that way.)

[robvalue]

Premise 1 is wrong, unless by "out there" you mean "may not have been discovered yet". Why would you assume it's a religion that's already known? There's an infinity of possible beings, and an infinity of rules and ways of worshipping them.

Clearly this is not always a true statement at all times without this concession, because no religion has been around forever.

[Minimalist]

If you have 100% conclusive arguments, then you've already won. What's left to debate?

Your confidence in your own position may not be as firm as you portray, methinks.

I bet it involves the fucking koran.

[Aoi Magi]

If you manage to get past your #2 debate, I might take you up on #3 but that'll have to depend on how much time I have to waste and definitely after 20th. Bullshit vs bullshit should be a nice shit fest.

[robvalue]

Premise 1 is wrong, unless by "out there" you mean "may not have been discovered yet". Why would you assume it's a religion that's already known? There's an infinity of possible beings, and an infinity of rules and ways of worshipping them.

Clearly this is not always a true statement at all times without this concession, because no religion has been around forever.

I don't know what format of debate you're looking for. But I'll happily debate the above point, if there's anything to even debate.

[Cyberman]

If you have 100% conclusive arguments, then you've already won. What's left to debate?

Your confidence in your own position may not be as firm as you portray, methinks.

This is because you don't want there to be clear proofs and firm conclusive evidence at the moment. 

There is a time to doubt and there is a time when doubt is unreasonable and you have to shut it off and take a leap of faith with vision of the heart and strength.

Yeah, that's right, I'm the closed-minded one. I just can't stand the idea that there might be a real god up there. I'd have to give up my life of sin and debauchery.

Do piss off.