Have you ever tried to debate Christians that have no clue?

[BloodyHeretic]

If there was proof you wouldn't need Faith now would you? That's why it's called Faith, you just gotta believe it. The fact that so many people have faith in god is proof of god.

Just had to walk away after that one.

[Doubting Thomas]

No, the reason they have to rely on faith is because there is no proof.

Those kind of leaps of illogic and jumping through mental hoops are why I finally realized that religious faith is bullshit.

[bozo]

pointless exercise. they are all full of holy shit!

[MilesTailsPrower]

Most of my debates with christians they usually use "redundant" questions. Basically these are the questions.

"Who made us?"
"Who made the world"
Alternatively I would try and give a Logical explanation to is but they don't seem to understand because they got the bible shoved to far up their ass to think of anything other than the "Bible"

Always going to end up in this...

I think it's safe to say that atheists are considered this

And if you do believe in a god it's okay, until they ask you what god you believe in. So if you don't believe in their god than they just go straight to FUCK YOU! And then straight to a flame war full of false accusations and stupidity.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Um..it happens around here all the time.

-------and not just from theists.

[Rev. Rye]

I had one jackass on another board tell me that because there was no evidence for the exodus that was proof that it happened.

Sounds like when I used to debate conspiracy theorists. If there was no proof of a conspiracy, it just meant that it was even more real. I guess if you can't find proof of a government conspiracy, then the government is just really good at covering it up.

Because, as anybody who's read WikiLeaks knows, our government is really good at keeping secrets.

The blood from the shroud of turin is AB negative

I've actualy had a teacher in my Catholic High School who actually claimed that Jesus' Blood Type could be discovered from trace samples, but even he knew better than to use the Shroud of Turin as its source. At any rate, he claimed it's Type O, the universal donor.

[liferocks]

I have debated with all to many Christians that have absolutely no clue (preachers, pastors and ministers included). All too often Christians base their opinions on social values or religious ideals that they will prescribe as biblical truth when all along it is merely a rendering of what they think to be truth (keywords here are "what they think"), but what about this: Have you ever tried to debate Christians that DO have a clue?

[MilesTailsPrower]

I think it's safe to say it's impossible to talk to a christian with a "clue".

[Minimalist]

Gotta find one first.

[Anymouse]

And when I say no clue, I mean no fucking clue.
<rest cut>

Nope, 'cause "debate" implies rules and standards of evidence and shifting your position when shown to be invalid and not relying on evidence in future arguments when that evidence is shown to be false.

Christians as a rule, do not debate. They prosetylise: (speling) they are uninterested in being shown their arguments have fallacies, even if by being shown those fallacies they can improve their arguments. They are interested in conversion, and if that does not happen, you are the "close-minded" individual, for not accepting their illogical and unsupported premises. They then go on to the next target, assured that you will either "see the light" or be condemned to everlasting torment out of love. And you'd deserve it too.