PDA

View Full Version : Have the atheists lost the war on ODN?



Prime Zombie
September 10th, 2009, 01:12 PM
Here you go Christians! Now is your chance to show us how and why the atheists are losing debates on ODN. I suggest you give us a blow-by-blow summary of a debate, or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned and/or played the "too busy" card or any other similar cards that you Christians play all the time.

You (the Christians) were asked to provide us with an example of Christians pwning atheists in Trend's big, ugly monster of a thread that I don't think I need to link to. You were also given blow-by-blow summaires of debates of Christians getting pwn...err... I mean abandoning debates, playing the "too busy" card, etc. You were also given many examples of Theists (including Christians) that have converted over to agnostics/atheists. How many atheist/agnostic to Christian converts do you guys have? I honestly don't know.

So let's see it. Show us where our game is lacking. You've already been show how your game is lacking, and have yet to do anything about it. I find it quite ironic/amusing that even DURING the other thread in question, at least one Christain that I know of abandoned a solid rebuttal in a religious debate! And all the while the Christians are still trying to claim that they are not losing.

Good luck!

And for the 398498 time... Chad's big ass Cosmo debate is NOT a Christian debate, it is a deist one. I am really sick of you guys trying to use that as an example of a victory for your side. Further more, he and other Christians got taken to task in that thread, which has already been beat to death and left ignored by the Christians in Trend's thread.

Sigfried
September 10th, 2009, 01:18 PM
I don't like the idea of this all that much, waste of time....


That said, I do think it would be cool to pick a single thread... lock i t down somehow, and then debate about who won and why. An interesting exercise.

Aspoestertjie
September 10th, 2009, 02:28 PM
Here you go Christians! Now is your chance to show us how and why the atheists are losing debates on ODN. I suggest you give us a blow-by-blow summary of a debate, or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned and/or played the "too busy" card or any other similar cards that you Christians play all the time.

This debate is probably the worst I have ever seen from the Atheist camp. :)

Needless to say. The second last post is from a theist, and no Atheist ever replied or came up with a rebuttal.

Zhavric abandoned it at the time.

A gracious offer from yours truly (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=16669&page=2)


You (the Christians) were asked to provide us with an example of Christians pwning atheists in Trend's big, ugly monster of a thread that I don't think I need to link to. You were also given blow-by-blow summaires of debates of Christians getting pwn...err... I mean abandoning debates, playing the "too busy" card, etc. You were also given many examples of Theists (including Christians) that have converted over to agnostics/atheists. How many atheist/agnostic to Christian converts do you guys have? I honestly don't know.

Well, I certainly think the day went to the Christians in the thread I linked. :)

Do you disagree? :)


So let's see it. Show us where our game is lacking. You've already been show how your game is lacking, and have yet to do anything about it. I find it quite ironic/amusing that even DURING the other thread in question, at least one Christain that I know of abandoned a solid rebuttal in a religious debate! And all the while the Christians are still trying to claim that they are not losing.

Good luck!

And for the 398498 time... Chad's big ass Cosmo debate is NOT a Christian debate, it is a deist one. I am really sick of you guys trying to use that as an example of a victory for your side. Further more, he and other Christians got taken to task in that thread, which has already been beat to death and left ignored by the Christians in Trend's thread.

Truth is PZ, there are probably many such threads I can find, but it really is not worth the effort, the time or the energy.

What is lacking from the side of the Atheists....is respect.

Debating disrespectfully with your Theistic counterparts, only infuriates them.

I have been saying this for very long time now, and will say it again. If Atheist wants to actually debate the topics and stop attacking the person behind the argument, things might get better. You might even find that more Theists will convert in the end.

The example I provided is exactly the reason why Theists will not ever feel respected or appreciated on this site. As long as they are not respected for their viewpoints, I don't see any reason why they should even engage in religious debates. It is humiliating and down right just sad.

Personally I think there are equal numbers of good Atheist and Theist debaters on ODN. But when it comes to snide and condescending remarks, the Atheists WIN by far. ;)

KevinBrowning
September 10th, 2009, 04:02 PM
Lock this thread please.

Trendem
September 10th, 2009, 04:21 PM
The last thread was closed as people were incapable of debating whether one side had lost or won without getting personal. This time, anyone who insists on demonising the other side instead of analysing debating performance will get an infraction.

chadn737
September 10th, 2009, 05:53 PM
Is it any wonder that the Theists don't enjoy debating these religion anymore?

I've been gone about a month without being able to log onto ODN because the government computers wouldn't let me. When I come back, I find all sorts of drama. And I find one group of debaters have come forth and now consider themselves the all-time champs.

I really do miss the old days. The fun is gone. This ODN is nothing like when guys like Slipnish, Antimaterialist, and others were regular debaters. I remember when Booger and Zhavric were actually civil debaters who didn't incur infractions everytime they got on.

This sucks. It really does. The mood here had been on a slow decline well before I had to leave, and having gotten the chance to get back on, I find it at an all time low.

Why the hell should I debate when things are like this. When its now normal for one group of individuals to create threads about how badass they are compared to everyone else.

You know what I think. We should go back before all of this competitive ********.

Get rid of the rep system. Get rid of all these rankings. I at one time debated for fun, but because we are all so damned obsessed with one upping one another, with who beat whom, its not fun.

---------- Post added at 03:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 AM ----------

You know what theists, lets end this debate right here and now. As long as this ******** continues, debate here is going to suck.

So lets all admit it. We've lost the war. The atheists are the number one debaters. Let them have the title. Why does it matter?

What made us join this community? Was it to rub our superiority in other peoples faces? Was it blow our own horn?

For me it was the enjoyment of mentally testing myself against others. There are trolls aplenty on the net. Kids who use the internet to tear others down to feel better about themselves. I can't keep up with them. I never could. Nor do I want to. ODN is becoming that sort of community. I don't know how to change it, but I'm not going to keep on encouraging it by by falling into the trap. I've been more than guilty of it in the past, but I've never been good at chest-beating games so I'm no longer going to try.

So if the atheists here want to think they are the best debaters, that they have won this so-called war.....then let them. I'm not going to dispute it and instead I'm going to hope and pray that debate around here can go back to simply about the joy of debate and not how much the other side sucks.

flameskull95
September 10th, 2009, 07:11 PM
although I am Buddhist and I am new to ODN, I think Atheists are probably winning, because I can think up so many argument topics they could easily win with.
But I don't get how the Christians are going outta topic and criticizing Atheists personally, I thought Christianity accepted anyone no matter what they have done, even the worst people like pedophiles and serial killers, and isn't it true that if you don't follow the orders given by 'god' you are going to end up like Lucifer? So, if Christianity does accept anyone, and the ODN Christians aren't accepting Atheists, aren't they already 'damned'?

Sigfried
September 10th, 2009, 07:17 PM
I think we just need to drop the whole subject and move back to the actual arguments.

Personally I've found most of the religious threads quite interesting and that generally both sides give a good fight. Folks should understand that outnumbered is not fun and make allowances and they should also realize that religious debates get heated and are prone to offend. It just comes with the territory.

And perhaps we can all just stop using the Disagree option and make a moot issue of it.

Aspoestertjie
September 10th, 2009, 10:19 PM
I agree with Chad and Sig.

I think this thread and the previous thread had runs its course.

I think it is time for everybody, Atheist and Theist alike to start debating and stop arguing.

We all have something in common here. We all love ODN. :smitten: I am sure we all can try to make it an even better place for all, where everybody will feel welcome to give their point of view without being ridiculed.

Prime Zombie
September 11th, 2009, 11:32 AM
This debate is probably the worst I have ever seen from the Atheist camp. :)

Camp is kind of a glorified word for Zhav and a few others.


Needless to say. The second last post is from a theist, and no Atheist ever replied or came up with a rebuttal.

Zhavric abandoned it at the time.

A gracious offer from yours truly (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=16669&page=2)


I agree with you that the thread kind of sucked. It was crass and full of shock value to strike up an emotional response. It was doomed to die, and I think Zhav knew this too, but I won't speak for him. It just comes across like he wanted to take a jab at Christians, which is no surprise coming from Zhav.

But on the other hand, take this thread, which deals with the same issue, which is the problem of suffering:

http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=16602

By the very same guy, a worth-while thread. And look what happens in the thread. The Christians along with Perv (who was not really staying on topic anyhow, no surprise there) are taken to task, as usual. While you might point out that Chad's contributions to the thread are left without any rebuttals, note that his post need no rebuttal. He himself says admit that there is no way to substantiate his claims:


2) You ask why not keep us in glass beakers....etc. That is a possibility, which I alluded to in my first post. However, I consider that irrelevant to whether or not the Free Will argument succeeds or fails and also rather irrelevant to the Problem of Evil. We know that Evil exists in our world, the challenge then is how an all powerful and good God can allow this. The reason why the Free Will argument succeeds is by claiming that the non-existence of evil and the existence of Free Will are contrary. It then retorts that if we possess Free Will then the potentiality for evil must exist. Why God chose to create the World this way is not something I pretend to know the answer to. Maybe the standard Christian answer of "God wants creatures who choose to love Him out of their own Will" is really the case, maybe its something completely different. I don't pretend to know. Perhaps God possess a drive to create, and so here we are. I could sympathize with that sentiment as I think any Scientist, Artist, Writer, etc who wishes to see their ideas become reality would, but it is rather preposterous for me to presume to assert any of these with authority.

I laud Chad's honesty and rare display of humility. But it does nothing to answer the question of why and all knowing all loving god lets suffering go on the way it does. Because no Christian has presented a satisfactory answer to that question that I know of, this one goes to team atheist.

I think that in of itself is enough to not believe in the Christian god, and it is but one of many solid reasons.


Well, I certainly think the day went to the Christians in the thread I linked. :)

Do you disagree? :)

Trick question. Kind of like having a 12 year old beat a MMA champion at a fighting video game. Yeah Hyde got in the last word, I will give him that. But whoopie. The thread was not a good debate, nor was the OP even very serious. Even if Zhav intended for it to be serious, which I don't think he did, it's a lackluster shocker and that's that.

The thread I link, however, is another story. We see Christians abandon left and right, we see MT play the (as Dio paraphrased it) "cuz Gawd sayz so" card, AKA the trump faith/know it in my heart card. Which of course is... sorry, I just can't sugarcoat it... ********.

Then look at the atheists. Dio, Allo, Trend, and yes even Zhav make some very solid posts and rebuttals.



Truth is PZ, there are probably many such threads I can find, but it really is not worth the effort, the time or the energy.

Ha. Again with the existentialist crisis card. :grin:

I will ask you the same questions I asked several others that have played this card. What is worth the effort, time, and energy? The blue room? Shootin' the Breeze? For me to take such a reply seriously, would take someone that literally never posts in any non-serious debate threads, and even then I would have my reservations. After all, we all could be out feeding homeless people and writing symphonies.

And frankly, I respectfully challenge your assertion that you could find "many" threads out there where the atheists get stomped. You've only found one, and I've already explained why I don't take that examples very seriously. I will admit that Zhav did suck in that thread, and that perhaps that thread should not have been made at all.


What is lacking from the side of the Atheists....is respect.

The same could be said of the other side. One could also argue that claiming that there is disrespectful atheists is simply an excuse for not engaging in challenging opponents. In the above counter-example I provide above, I don't think team atheist is being disrespectful. I can't wrap my head around the idea that Christians in general are oversensitive. That just does not hold water. I think it is just another method of avoidance.


Debating disrespectfully with your Theistic counterparts, only infuriates them.

Why not just say that debating disrespectfully infuriates them?


I have been saying this for very long time now, and will say it again. If Atheist wants to actually debate the topics and stop attacking the person behind the argument, things might get better. You might even find that more Theists will convert in the end.

Many examples have already been provided in Trend's thread of debates devoid of ad hom attacks. I am not saying that atheists don't also fall into ad hom attacks, but this is simply glossing over the issue here. It is simply false to say that the problem is that the atheists are in general attacking the person.


The example I provided is exactly the reason why Theists will not ever feel respected or appreciated on this site. As long as they are not respected for their viewpoints, I don't see any reason why they should even engage in religious debates. It is humiliating and down right just sad.

See above.


Personally I think there are equal numbers of good Atheist and Theist debaters on ODN. But when it comes to snide and condescending remarks, the Atheists WIN by far. ;)

You will of course have to support both of those claims, if you are being serious that is.

Sure I think there are lots of great Christian debaters on ODN. But the Christian debate in general is lacking to say the least.

---------- Post added at 09:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------


I agree with Chad and Sig.

I think this thread and the previous thread had runs its course.

I think it is time for everybody, Atheist and Theist alike to start debating and stop arguing.

We all have something in common here. We all love ODN. :smitten: I am sure we all can try to make it an even better place for all, where everybody will feel welcome to give their point of view without being ridiculed.

Whoa. Give me a break, Aspo. Are you really trying to suggest that the numerous examples that have been provided are arguing? And that everyone does not feel welcome to give their point of view without being ridiculed?

Because I thought that me and the many other atheist debaters that I respect (and that have even earned the respect of Christians too) WERE debating and not arguing.

And I guess my definition of ridiculed is much different that yours is. Because I don't really see it going on in the solid blows of debate being given left and right to the Christian side.

And this thread has run it's coarse if the Christians can't provide any solid examples of the atheists getting the same kind of smack down laid on them.

I will be the first one to admit that such a post is what it is when I see it. I might even jump back into such a thread and try and set things straight. Us atheists seem to be better about abandoning debates without good reason.

---------- Post added at 09:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:12 PM ----------


Is it any wonder that the Theists don't enjoy debating these religion anymore?

This is not about why or why not theists enjoy debating religion. I would not enjoy it very much if I was on the side that was not up to snuff either, but it would be irrelevant to my side's lacking debate.


I've been gone about a month without being able to log onto ODN because the government computers wouldn't let me. When I come back, I find all sorts of drama. And I find one group of debaters have come forth and now consider themselves the all-time champs.

Banter and pointing out the obvious...


I really do miss the old days. The fun is gone. This ODN is nothing like when guys like Slipnish, Antimaterialist, and others were regular debaters. I remember when Booger and Zhavric were actually civil debaters who didn't incur infractions everytime they got on.

Your nostalgia is noted. And this is relevant... how?


This sucks. It really does. The mood here had been on a slow decline well before I had to leave, and having gotten the chance to get back on, I find it at an all time low.

Why the hell should I debate when things are like this. When its now normal for one group of individuals to create threads about how badass they are compared to everyone else.

You know what I think. We should go back before all of this competitive ********.

Your opinions are noted. Did you have any threads you wanted to discuss that actually demonstrate a victory for your side?


Get rid of the rep system. Get rid of all these rankings. I at one time debated for fun, but because we are all so damned obsessed with one upping one another, with who beat whom, its not fun.

Your suggestions are noted, but this is more suited for the Site Feedback forum, no?


You know what theists, lets end this debate right here and now. As long as this ******** continues, debate here is going to suck.

So lets all admit it. We've lost the war. The atheists are the number one debaters. Let them have the title. Why does it matter?

Etc.

A chess team goes to a chess tournament. They go on their own free will and no one forces them to go. They plays in many games. One of the opposing teams reports games they have won, and ask the other team to do the same in order to determine which team has a better over-all game. The team refuses to acknowledge the victories of the other team, and refuse to present proof of any games that they had won. The team refuses to discuss which team has won, but then all of a sudden tell the other time they just have their empty victory. They storm out of the tournament, and many of the team members say they will never play chess again because of how rudely they were treated by a few players.


Why bother to play chess at all?

MindTrap028
September 11th, 2009, 03:36 PM
Here you go Christians! Now is your chance to show us how and why the atheists are losing debates on ODN. I suggest you give us a blow-by-blow summary of a debate, or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned and/or played the "too busy" card or any other similar cards that you Christians play all the time.

Just so we are on the same page.. could you please define "win".
Do you mean it in the sense of
A) "Atheists are winning based on correctness"
or
B)"Atheists are winning based on form, and rule"

----- ON "A"
Because the reasons you listed do not apply to the former. Being the last to post in a thread does not mean you have the "correct/right" position in the least.

With that ruled out, what exactly are you claiming victory too?

I will be the first to say it, and certainly Allo can attest to it. I am chief among those that disappear from a debate. One thing that has NEVER been the reason was because I lacked an answer. My biggest enemy has been ADD, and time constraints. At one point, I was involved with Allo in 3 very deep threads. While composing page long responses to 2-3 Atheists per thread, there was no question that I was going to forget about one thread, or get so far behind (as in too much to respond to) as to make mounting a response a task I could not do.
In all things I am to blame for this. I shouldn't engage in so many debates at one time.... Yet Atheists ask the most interesting questions, and I simply can't resist.

To that end, regarding "A", we are all losers. Those who base victory on "B" delude themselves with a false sense of accomplishment. Because "B" is a hollow victory indeed. If Threads are not hammered down to a real end, how can you find truth? By continually painting each other as opponents instead of partners in discovering truth, we get lost on the path to truth.

Lets get back on the same page. Lets start listening to each other. Lets go back to debating the issues.

---- ON "B"
There is no doubt in my mind that Atheists are winning the debate based on rule and/or form. There are a lot of you guys, and well you simply post last.
So I for one, concede to the case you have made.
|||||||||||| CONGRATULATIONS ||||||||||
Your a winner.

I will earnestly attempt to rectify my contributes to your awesome win.


Now, lets get back to the real issues.

Prime Zombie
September 11th, 2009, 04:26 PM
Just so we are on the same page.. could you please define "win".
Do you mean it in the sense of
A) "Atheists are winning based on correctness"
or
B)"Atheists are winning based on form, and rule"

I don't know why you bothered to quote me at all in your post, as you didn't bother to address the points raised in it. The quote ask Christians to demonstrate how the atheists are losing, and gives suggestions as to how to go about that. I tried to be as clear as possible and think the quote speaks for itself. So your reply, much like Chad's, is not relevant or productive to what we are trying to figure out.


----- ON "A"
Because the reasons you listed do not apply to the former. Being the last to post in a thread does not mean you have the "correct/right" position in the least.

Did I say that being the last to post in a thread means you have the "correct/right" position?


With that ruled out, what exactly are you claiming victory too?

I don't recall claiming victory. Did you read the OP? Perhaps you are confused with that other thread that Trend started. I didn't claim victory there either, that I can recall, but please correct me if I am mistaken. What I remember is giving examples to substantiate the claim that Christians often withdraw, abandon, or give other excuses (or "cards" as I like to call them) in debates of substance/solid rebuttals.

I don't recall me or any other atheist claiming that the person who gets the last post in wins the debate. That's just silly. But when a solid rebuttal is left unanswered, even after requests to answer it, and weeks and even months go by, well... that's something else altogether.

And I find it rather odd that Christians seem to have such busy lives. Much more busy that atheists, it seems. ;):


I will be the first to say it, and certainly Allo can attest to it. I am chief among those that disappear from a debate. One thing that has NEVER been the reason was because I lacked an answer.

With all due respect, I don't believe you. By all means, I encourage you to prove me wrong. All you will have to do is provide answers. Answers you imply that you have but are not giving because...oh yeah, we're getting to that:


My biggest enemy has been ADD, and time constraints. At one point, I was involved with Allo in 3 very deep threads. While composing page long responses to 2-3 Atheists per thread, there was no question that I was going to forget about one thread, or get so far behind (as in too much to respond to) as to make mounting a response a task I could not do.
In all things I am to blame for this. I shouldn't engage in so many debates at one time.... Yet Atheists ask the most interesting questions, and I simply can't resist.

Hmm. You would think with your time constraints that you would not have taken the time to post here in this thread. Again, kind of odd. But I of course do know what you mean with being busy and all. I too have a very busy life which leaves me not very much time to mess around on the internet. You will note that the little green bar under my avatar is a bit on the low end, and that I still have under 1000 posts. You on the other hand...


To that end, regarding "A", we are all losers. Those who base victory on "B" delude themselves with a false sense of accomplishment. Because "B" is a hollow victory indeed. If Threads are not hammered down to a real end, how can you find truth? By continually painting each other as opponents instead of partners in discovering truth, we get lost on the path to truth.

I am still confused as to why you keep using the word "victory". This thread was for you (Christians) to show us (atheists) what debates we have lost or did poorly in. This in turn would encourage people on both sides to continue their quest for the truth, no? I did exactly what I am suggesting in Trend's thread, and none of the examples I gave have changed that I know of. I would again encourage you and all Christians to go and give it another try in the examples in question. You know. Like how you can be sure that it's Jesus that talks to you and not Krishna. Or perhaps you've stumbled upon a solid piece of evidence that would support the default claims you make by calling yourself a Christian: that Jesus is the one true god, the bible is the word of god, etc. Just giving examples, no need to get into the debate here. Go and find the threads that are already in place.


Lets get back on the same page. Lets start listening to each other. Lets go back to debating the issues.

...I thought we were listening to each other. I thought we were debating the issues. :huh:


---- ON "B"
There is no doubt in my mind that Atheists are winning the debate based on rule and/or form. There are a lot of you guys, and well you simply post last.
So I for one, concede to the case you have made.
|||||||||||| CONGRATULATIONS ||||||||||
Your a winner.

I will earnestly attempt to rectify my contributes to your awesome win.

Ah. I think I get it. Very clever. I bet you got the idea from Chad. I wonder if you guys talked about this in the Christian forum first before springing it on us, or if it was two separate bursts of wit. Regardless, good job guys. :afro:

I suggest you recruit more members, if you think that numbers are a problem. And I've already been over the fact that no atheist to my knowledge has said that last post = win. Again, kind of silly.



Now, lets get back to the real issues.

...Such as?

MindTrap028
September 11th, 2009, 05:14 PM
I don't know why you bothered to quote me at all in your post, as you didn't bother to address the points raised in it.
:) Here you go.


Now is your chance to show us how and why the atheists are losing debates on ODN.
This assumes that we are claiming you are losing the debates.
My post goes on to show how I think you are winning, and how I think you are losing.

Do you see now How my post responded to your first assumption?
Was my post not reasoned in its explanation of how I think both winning and losing applies to Atheists, as well as everyone.


I suggest you give us a blow-by-blow summary of a debate, or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned and/or played the "too busy" card or any other similar cards that you Christians play all the time.

Here you assume that "abandoning" a debate, and playing the "too busy" card was proof of losing.


You were also given blow-by-blow summaires of debates of Christians getting pwn...err... I mean abandoning debates, playing the "too busy" card, etc.
Here again, you equate "abandoning debates" with "being pwned".

My response addressed this directly.


Did I say that being the last to post in a thread means you have the "correct/right" position?
Exactly why I asked you to clarify "winning", and what you mean by it.
I then went on to explain the two alternatives, and my response to them.


I don't recall claiming victory. Did you read the OP?
You said we were "pwned"..
Am I mistaken in the meaning of that. Does "pwned" not mean beaten.. as in.. you win. aka Claiming "victory".. if you will.


I don't recall me or any other atheist claiming that the person who gets the last post in wins the debate. That's just silly.

please read

You were also given blow-by-blow summaires of debates of Christians getting pwn...err... I mean abandoning debates
Your victory is here in assumed, and proofed by exactly what you are now disavowing.


And I find it rather odd that Christians seem to have such busy lives. Much more busy that atheists, it seems.
Have you not heard that there are fewer of us, then atheists? Of course any one of us responding to many more of you will be busy.


With all due respect, I don't believe you. By all means, I encourage you to prove me wrong.
I understand, and that is certainly your right.
But think about this. In order to prov what you ask. I would have to answer, every single atheist new and old, till the cows come home.
Because, indeed the questions never stop.


Hmm. You would think with your time constraints that you would not have taken the time to post here in this thread.
Meh, I thought this issue important enough.


I am still confused as to why you keep using the word "victory".
Be confused no longer. As I have explained above you didn't use the word "victory", but you certainly made the implications.


Just giving examples, no need to get into the debate here. Go and find the threads that are already in place.
That would be to the end of holding a position that I don't espouse.


I suggest you recruit more members, if you think that numbers are a problem. And I've already been over the fact that no atheist to my knowledge has said that last post = win. Again, kind of silly.

I agree, silly. (that is sort of punny)



...Such as?
Basically, all of ODN.

Spartacus
September 11th, 2009, 08:50 PM
Is it any wonder that the Theists don't enjoy debating these religion anymore?

I've been gone about a month without being able to log onto ODN because the government computers wouldn't let me. When I come back, I find all sorts of drama. And I find one group of debaters have come forth and now consider themselves the all-time champs.

I really do miss the old days. The fun is gone. This ODN is nothing like when guys like Slipnish, Antimaterialist, and others were regular debaters. I remember when Booger and Zhavric were actually civil debaters who didn't incur infractions everytime they got on.

This sucks. It really does. The mood here had been on a slow decline well before I had to leave, and having gotten the chance to get back on, I find it at an all time low.

Why the hell should I debate when things are like this. When its now normal for one group of individuals to create threads about how badass they are compared to everyone else.

You know what I think. We should go back before all of this competitive ********.

Get rid of the rep system. Get rid of all these rankings. I at one time debated for fun, but because we are all so damned obsessed with one upping one another, with who beat whom, its not fun.

---------- Post added at 03:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 AM ----------

You know what theists, lets end this debate right here and now. As long as this ******** continues, debate here is going to suck.

So lets all admit it. We've lost the war. The atheists are the number one debaters. Let them have the title. Why does it matter?

What made us join this community? Was it to rub our superiority in other peoples faces? Was it blow our own horn?

For me it was the enjoyment of mentally testing myself against others. There are trolls aplenty on the net. Kids who use the internet to tear others down to feel better about themselves. I can't keep up with them. I never could. Nor do I want to. ODN is becoming that sort of community. I don't know how to change it, but I'm not going to keep on encouraging it by by falling into the trap. I've been more than guilty of it in the past, but I've never been good at chest-beating games so I'm no longer going to try.

So if the atheists here want to think they are the best debaters, that they have won this so-called war.....then let them. I'm not going to dispute it and instead I'm going to hope and pray that debate around here can go back to simply about the joy of debate and not how much the other side sucks.
I agree. I think the rise of the rep system corresponds directly to the decline in quality and tone of the debates here.

Chad -- I would have given you a pos. rep for this, but the system told me I had to spread it around.:afro:

Prime Zombie
September 12th, 2009, 12:38 AM
MT:

Your entire reply is shifting the burden over to me to play semantics about the prerequisites of what constitutes a victory. This is not relevant to this thread, and I would again point you in the direction of Trend's thread. If that thread is locked or whatever, by all means start a new thread.

What I did in that thread was give examples of certain debates Christians have lost, and I have already elaborated on how and why these examples represent a loss. Again, all of this is relevant to the other debate in question.

What the OP asks is for YOU guys (the Christians) to try and do the same thing US guys (the atheists) have done in that other thread. And if you are still confused about what exactly this means, I will explain it for the last time:

1. Find a theological debate in favor of Christianity that you deem is a good example of a loss for the atheists.

2. Link the debate here.

3. Explain how and why this example you provided represents a loss to the atheists.

I had hoped it would not come down to this holding you by the hand, but it seems it is warranted. Here is a reverse example of what I am talking about:

Post #93 of the other debate in question (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showpost.php?p=397054&postcount=93)

Post #109 of the other debate in question (http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showpost.php?p=397463&postcount=109)

I will of course note that as far as I can recall, both of these posts were ignored and the examples used in them remain the same. Feel free to start another thread if you disagree or to correct me where I am wrong. Or even better, participate in the threads uses as examples of losses on the Christian side. We're (the atheists) all eagerly awaiting many replies. :)


Spart:
This thread has nothing to do with rep, and this makes your post spam. Please try again.

MindTrap028
September 12th, 2009, 04:29 AM
Your entire reply is shifting the burden over to me to play semantics about the prerequisites of what constitutes a victory.
No, no it isn't.


Now is your chance to show us how and why the atheists are losing debates on ODN.
This, assumes we think you are losing.



or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned
This describes the kind of loss you are looking for.


I responded to that kind of win. Where it exists, for Christian or Atheists it is meaningless IMO.



It seems now that you are content do "abandon".. "leave without reason".. that line of reasoning for another, different than the OP, stance.




What the OP asks is for YOU guys (the Christians) to try and do the same thing US guys (the atheists) have done in that other thread. And if you are still confused about what exactly this means, I will explain it for the last time:
I am not aware of any threads where an atheists hasn't posted.
In fact, I'm not aware of many threads actually started by christians.
I think Apok has the only one on the first page of the religious forum.


I had hoped it would not come down to this holding you by the hand, but it seems it is warranted. Here is a reverse example of what I am talking about:


Wonderful examples by the way.
I would say the verdict is(*L*... inside joke)... Christians are losing, we need to be more focused and do a better job of laying out the overall debate. (AKA, I concede your win)

So, I think you guys have won. (which would make your OP a bit of a strawman).

What do you say... best out of 3?
Can we get a rematch?
A Mulligan?
A do over?
Come on, give us a chance to win our marbles back.

KingOfTheEast
September 12th, 2009, 07:42 AM
So, I think you guys have won. (which would make your OP a bit of a strawman).

What do you say... best out of 3?
Can we get a rematch?
A Mulligan?
A do over?
Come on, give us a chance to win our marbles back.

I think this sarcasm excellently addresses the mood of this thread.

So, even if Christians concede that atheists have won "the war" and Christians have "lost the war" (which I find personally the most silliest and childish way of explaining "debates" as either "winning and losing wars"), what does that accomplish? Sure, many atheists will feel all good about it, and some theists will be disappointed and probably cry (is that what you atheists WANT...HUH? *sarcasm) but does that further our debates? Is ODN a community that's based more on "wins and loses" than on debates and "the battleground for truth" (as its motto is)? I honestly find no need for these such threads and if someone is to disagree, then please point out any positives and constructiveness that can come out of them or that will further spark anything of our previous debates. I do find a need to address them though because it takes away the enjoyment of debating which is why we're here.

And once again, I urge all Christians on here to concede (as Mindtrap has done) that we somehow "lost this great cause of a war" but honestly, what does that accomplish? Do we continue debating religion because we want to win wars, or do we do it out of a serious passion for debating and understanding religion's influence (whether positive or negative) on the world and our quest for truth? So I apologize if this rant was too long, or if it did not specifically answer the OP but this "winning and losing" thing HAS to stop, because this type of attitude (by both atheists and Christians) will only bleed over to other threads and doesn't remind us why we're here to debate.

I hope both theists and atheists will agree.

Prime Zombie
September 12th, 2009, 09:35 AM
No, no it isn't.

Wow. The "nuh-uh!" card. Great.



This, assumes we think you are losing.

And? I also assumed that we would be using English for the purposes of this debate. I mean... you are still a Christian, right? Which means you think we are 100% wrong. If you really thought our side was winning... you would have joined us, no? I mean, I think Christianity is wrong, that is no secret. Hence, I think you are losing because you are debating from a false premise, i.e. Jesus is god, bible is the truth, etc.

What substantiates our side is that we are winning debates. This is not "Online Chat Network" or the "Online Conversation Network". This is a debate site. We are all here because we have beliefs that we view as true, right?

So please, without sarcasm or your attempts at humor, do you think atheists are right or wrong? Do you think we are losing or not?

If you think we are right and/or you think we are winning, why are you still a Christian?


This describes the kind of loss you are looking for.

When a solid rebuttal is given, and it is ignored, even after asking nice for a reply, what would you call that? A tie? So could I start a thread like, "The Earth revolves around the Sun" and have no replies, and have it be anything other than a win and/or the truth?

All you are (still) doing is playing semantics. And what worries me is that I honestly can't tell if you are being willfully obtuse or if you really don't get it. So what then do you call a logically sound solid rebuttal that does not get a counter from the opposition? And save me the whole "too busy" ********, because I just ain't buying it. There are plenty of Christians that play the too busy card only to be posting inane/trivial posts in STB, blue room, etc.


I responded to that kind of win. Where it exists, for Christian or Atheists it is meaningless IMO.

I honestly have no idea what you mean here.


It seems now that you are content do "abandon".. "leave without reason".. that line of reasoning for another, different than the OP, stance.


...again, I have no idea what you mean here either. :huh:


I am not aware of any threads where an atheists hasn't posted.
In fact, I'm not aware of many threads actually started by christians.
I think Apok has the only one on the first page of the religious forum.

Great. Now seeing as you've gone out of your way to be "witty", I am not sure how to take this. So are you serious or not? If you are serious, why don't you and the rest of the Christians do something about this situation? Or if you can't answer our questions and challenges... why are you still a Christian?



Wonderful examples by the way.
I would say the verdict is(*L*... inside joke)... Christians are losing, we need to be more focused and do a better job of laying out the overall debate. (AKA, I concede your win)

So, I think you guys have won. (which would make your OP a bit of a strawman).

What do you say... best out of 3?
Can we get a rematch?
A Mulligan?
A do over?
Come on, give us a chance to win our marbles back.



Ah. Funny stuff. You funny man, you.

I think at this point it is safe to say you are not going to be providing us with what the OP asks for.

KingOTE:


Rant rant rant... I honestly find no need for these such threads and if someone is to disagree, then please point out any positives and constructiveness that can come out of them or that will further spark anything of our previous debates. Rant rant rant...

Look, I am getting sick of this. This thread and Trend's thread are intended to be proactive and constructive. I was under the impression that these are important and meaningful things we are differing about, i.e. Christianity = True or not. What better way to facilitate progress, learning, and the pursuit of truth than to sit and reflect on how debates relevant to Christianity? This gives both sides (the atheists in Trend's thread, and the Christians in this thread) the chance to submit their trump cards, their ace in the holes, the cream of the crop, etc. In turn, this gives the opposition a chance to review and reflect on the examples (if examples are given, that is) and encourages them to jump back in and prove their side is right/true.

I hope I have not been rude. I don't think I have been. But if somehow some of you feel that way, then I am sorry and I say for the record that my intent was never to be rude. My intent was never anything other than an objective review and reflection on debates regarding Christianity in the past.

Many people have said it, and I will say it here again: we are repeating ourselves a lot. There is a lot of cutting and pasting going on. Why not stop and figure out what bases have been covered? If there is a base that has not been covered, let's try and cover it. I keep waiting for someone to actually post a link of a solid debate so that we can talk about what happened and which side came out on top. I thank Aspo for being the only one to attempt this, despite her example ultimately not sufficient for reasons already discussed.

It's not my fault that there are all these threads that Christians have bailed out when the going got tough. It's not my fault that there are supposedly more atheists than Christians, or that your life is so darn busy. In the past I have had a short temper and have been guilty of flaming and being crass. I will be the first one to admit it. But I have tried to learn from my mistakes and have gone out of my way to try and be constructive and objective. For you older members who will remember me from when I first joined, I hope you have seen concrete growth of character from my side. I can say with a clear conscience that I have really, really tried. To go from getting neg reps from members that disagree with most or all of my beliefs, to getting pos reps from them later on, I'd say is one example.

The way many Christians and Theist have treated me simply for debating them has been absurd and I am sick of it. From the spam to the sarcasm to the nasty PMs to the unmerited neg reps to the way this thread has been going. Go back and take a look at the Christian replies, and then look at the atheist ones, and tell me who's being more positive and constructive.

Enough is enough. If no one is going to actually address the OP, I am not going to bother to reply to all this ranting and red herrings and sarcastic ******** anymore.

KingOfTheEast
September 12th, 2009, 10:45 AM
Look, I am getting sick of this. This thread and Trend's thread are intended to be proactive and constructive.

In what way? And if so, why are Christians getting the idea that these threads are becoming provocative and rude? Show me how this thread will not lead to a slug fest and more bitterness by the end, (and probably lead to this thread being locked like the other one was).


I was under the impression that these are important and meaningful things we are differing about, i.e. Christianity = True or not.

They're meaningful in the proper forum and in the proper manner. However, this thread isn't about discussing whether Christianity is true or not or about reflecting on the wonderful debates we had. It's about (or at least that's how people are perceiving it to be) exploiting the weaknesses of Christians in debates and questioning us to "prove" how we're not losing this "war". I find this thread nothing more than provocative and I know many Christians do to. Just look at your first comment: I suggest you give us a blow-by-blow summary of a debate, or provide links to theological debates where the atheists have all abandoned and/or played the "too busy" card or any other similar cards that you Christians play all the time. How on Earth is that anything but provocative? How on Earth does that suggest you want to "progress" the debate and how is that anything close to constructive? Do you believe that's constructive in any way when that's how you're starting off a thread that you claim to be progressing and constructive?

But it's pointless. What will it achieve in the long run and what's your true motive? How can we leave this thread knowing that we've progressed and added positively to past debates when that's certainly not happening here?


What better way to facilitate progress, learning, and the pursuit of truth than to sit and reflect on how debates relevant to Christianity?

If your intent was really to reflect on the debates, you could've made a good thread without provoking Christians by asking: "Which threads showed great arguments on both sides of the debate and which threads can be progressed"?

Look at your OP. You talks about Christians getting pwnd in past debates. Is that really facilitating progress, learning and the pursuit of truth?


This gives both sides (the atheists in Trend's thread, and the Christians in this thread) the chance to submit their trump cards, their ace in the holes, the cream of the crop, etc. In turn, this gives the opposition a chance to review and reflect on the examples (if examples are given, that is) and encourages them to jump back in and prove their side is right/true.

Here is what you said in the OP: You (the Christians) were asked to provide us with an example of Christians pwning atheists in Trend's big, ugly monster of a thread that I don't think I need to link to. You were also given blow-by-blow summaires of debates of Christians getting pwn...err... I mean abandoning debates, playing the "too busy" card, etc.

I mean honestly...how can you possibly say this thread isn't provoking when you have clearly hinted that Christians were given a "blow by blow" summary of debates where Christians were getting pwnd? Do you honestly expect a serious and progressive debate out of YOUR OWN THREAD when this is how you describe the debates that Christians and atheists have argued in? Don't give me that crap man! Fess up and admit that this thread is about us "conceding"...it's not about us "reviewing our past threads" and making progress.

But as I said previously, we'll give you guys the win based on form and rule. But how does that achieve anything and how does that progress the debates and make them more constructive? And where do we go from there? Are the religious debates simply for one side to say "okay...we concede everything. You win!"?


Enough is enough. If no one is going to actually address the OP, I am not going to bother to reply to all this ranting and red herrings and sarcastic ******** anymore.

I'm just giving you a reason why I'm not addressing the OP (because I'll speak for myself in this case). It's because this thread will not add anything to the past debates and spark anything new. It's just going to provoke us into saying "we lost" which falls short of constructiveness. And until you actually admit it, and we actually get rid of all this "winning war and losing wars ********", only then will the debates become enjoyable as they once were. Where did this bitterness from both sides ever come from? It's certainly not needed, and it CERTAINLY will NOT progress the older debates or eliminate the bitterness. I can guarantee that.

So say what you will, and you can say that I'm "coping out" of the proposal in the OP. I'll be more than glad to agree with you but I refuse to take part in our (the Christians) own abuse. Re-word the OP differently in a way that doesn't appear to provoke bitterness and hostility, and I'll pick many threads in which their were great debates from our side. Until then, I'm pretty much done with this.

Prime Zombie
September 12th, 2009, 12:36 PM
Fine. I concede that the OP might be misconstrued because of my tone. I've already apologized in my previous post for anything that may have come off as rude.

But let's not get crazy here man. It was a joke. A joke derived from internet video game slang, hence, not to be taken seriously. So get over the idea that it is the cause of all the spit and vinegar here.

I even went on to clarify, and I will not apologize for what I view as a fair and objective summary of the trend of Christian debaters. You guys do bail out of debates often, and I have already given examples. So get over the idea that this is adding to bitterness or whatever else you ranted about. I refuse to be demonized simply for pointing out the big white elephant in the room here.

And now look where we are. Yet another distraction from the OP. It just isn't worded properly and/or nice enough for you? Come on.

Look, tell you what, how about YOU start a thread where we go over which side has a stronger debate. You can write it however you want to suit your needs. I'm not going to waste my time writing another thread to fit to appease your sensitive demands. I mean do you want me to give you a backrub too while I'm at it? You act like I insulted your mother or something. Calm down.

What you are doing is so transparent, you can't even help but put a disclaimer on your request of "coping out". What's the big deal here? Find a strong debate for your side. I can and already have given plenty of debates for you guys to chew on. It took me all of 5 minutes to search for a good problem of suffering debate to counter Aspo's example.

Just another method of avoidance. I doubt I could have written anything that could have met your requirements to participate, because I don't think you actually want to participate. If you did, you (and the rest of the Christians) would have done so by now.

Aspoestertjie
September 12th, 2009, 12:38 PM
I agree with you that the thread kind of sucked. It was crass and full of shock value to strike up an emotional response. It was doomed to die, and I think Zhav knew this too, but I won't speak for him. It just comes across like he wanted to take a jab at Christians, which is no surprise coming from Zhav.

But on the other hand, take this thread, which deals with the same issue, which is the problem of suffering:

http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php?t=16602

By the very same guy, a worth-while thread. And look what happens in the thread. The Christians along with Perv (who was not really staying on topic anyhow, no surprise there) are taken to task, as usual. While you might point out that Chad's contributions to the thread are left without any rebuttals, note that his post need no rebuttal. He himself says admit that there is no way to substantiate his claims:

I laud Chad's honesty and rare display of humility. But it does nothing to answer the question of why and all knowing all loving god lets suffering go on the way it does. Because no Christian has presented a satisfactory answer to that question that I know of, this one goes to team atheist.

I think that in of itself is enough to not believe in the Christian god, and it is but one of many solid reasons.

Trick question. Kind of like having a 12 year old beat a MMA champion at a fighting video game. Yeah Hyde got in the last word, I will give him that. But whoopie. The thread was not a good debate, nor was the OP even very serious. Even if Zhav intended for it to be serious, which I don't think he did, it's a lackluster shocker and that's that.

The thread I link, however, is another story. We see Christians abandon left and right, we see MT play the (as Dio paraphrased it) "cuz Gawd sayz so" card, AKA the trump faith/know it in my heart card. Which of course is... sorry, I just can't sugarcoat it... ********.

Then look at the atheists. Dio, Allo, Trend, and yes even Zhav make some very solid posts and rebuttals.

Okay, I am glad you agree that the debate Zhav started was in bad taste. We agree with that.

I do however disagree with you about whether he actually was serious about it. Let's be honest PZ, Zhav created an analogy which was in bad taste. To me it came across as him being serious.

I will be honest. Even with this debate I linked, you can't really claim that the Christians have won the day. It was basically to show you that Atheists too can abandon debates, just like Christians to. I agree that Christians might abandon debates more regularly though. :)

The thread you linked, sure is a good example, but is not more serious or less serious than the one I linked.

I will agree with your assertion that Christians failed in that debate, and at least, like you mentioned already, there are Christians big enough to actually admit it. Which is commendable, like you also agreed.


Ha. Again with the existentialist crisis card. :grin:

Not really. :) I am simply stating that I think this whole exercise is a waste of valuable energy.

What I suggest is that religious debates be judged as a rule.

Maybe even make it a rule from now on. That way we can all have a say in who were better and who just sucked?

I think that will do a lot for this community and might even make Christians and Atheists to actually think before they post.

In fact, I think my idea is so cool, I should recommend it to Apok.


I will ask you the same questions I asked several others that have played this card. What is worth the effort, time, and energy? The blue room? Shootin' the Breeze? For me to take such a reply seriously, would take someone that literally never posts in any non-serious debate threads, and even then I would have my reservations. After all, we all could be out feeding homeless people and writing symphonies.

I can't deny this. I have learned many new things from going to the Blue Room :P

The nature of religious debates, IMHO, is downright depressing. Sorry for saying this, but to me it is.

I think that is probably why many Christians do not feel the need to actually take part in those kind of debates too. Sometimes they might feel that they don't want to defend their religion, which is IMHO a very difficult thing to defend.

Killing logical facts with faithful beliefs are not an easy task, and I think you will agree too?


And frankly, I respectfully challenge your assertion that you could find "many" threads out there where the atheists get stomped. You've only found one, and I've already explained why I don't take that examples very seriously. I will admit that Zhav did suck in that thread, and that perhaps that thread should not have been made at all.

Well, I take that example very seriously, but I am sure I can find more.

I just need more motivation. :P


The same could be said of the other side. One could also argue that claiming that there is disrespectful atheists is simply an excuse for not engaging in challenging opponents. In the above counter-example I provide above, I don't think team atheist is being disrespectful. I can't wrap my head around the idea that Christians in general are oversensitive. That just does not hold water. I think it is just another method of avoidance.

I will be honest and will agree that Christians too can be very disrespectful. I think however the better Christian debaters here on ODN, like Chad, doesn't cross that line. The same can be said about many Atheists too.

I have witnessed quite a few Christians coming to ODN as new debaters, and being disrespectful as well.

So yes, I concede, it goes both ways.


Many examples have already been provided in Trend's thread of debates devoid of ad hom attacks. I am not saying that atheists don't also fall into ad hom attacks, but this is simply glossing over the issue here. It is simply false to say that the problem is that the atheists are in general attacking the person.

See above.


You will of course have to support both of those claims, if you are being serious that is.

Sure I think there are lots of great Christian debaters on ODN. But the Christian debate in general is lacking to say the least.

I will agree and concede that many Christians are lacking.

I will still claim that the better Christian debaters felt discouraged by some things that were said in the past during debates.

I think, what most Atheists at ODN does not realize, is what Christians are struggeling with in a debate.

I have debated Christianity before, and I promise you, it feels like you are being fed to the lions. Not only can you count the good Christian debaters on ODN on one hand, but they became very inactive at some point. Sometimes they would log in, but will not even get into a debate about religion. On the other hand, when a religious debate starts up, you will find 3 to 4 Atheists attacking that 1 Christian. That is seriously very intimidating, especially for a new debater. I know this, because I was there. I know how it feels. I know how it feels to be left alone to try and defend Christianity in a debate all on your own, with Atheists punching holes in your debate left and right.

Special pleadings, fallacious reasoning, all of this comes to mind if I can recall correctly.


Whoa. Give me a break, Aspo. Are you really trying to suggest that the numerous examples that have been provided are arguing? And that everyone does not feel welcome to give their point of view without being ridiculed?

Because I thought that me and the many other atheist debaters that I respect (and that have even earned the respect of Christians too) WERE debating and not arguing.

And I guess my definition of ridiculed is much different that yours is. Because I don't really see it going on in the solid blows of debate being given left and right to the Christian side.

And this thread has run it's coarse if the Christians can't provide any solid examples of the atheists getting the same kind of smack down laid on them.

I will be the first one to admit that such a post is what it is when I see it. I might even jump back into such a thread and try and set things straight. Us atheists seem to be better about abandoning debates without good reason.

I think I addressed that above already.

I will see how I feel about getting more examples of such debates. Will go into the archives for that. ;)

Allocutus
September 12th, 2009, 12:58 PM
I will be honest. Even with this debate I linked, you can't really claim that the Christians have won the day. It was basically to show you that Atheists too can abandon debates, just like Christians to. I agree that Christians might abandon debates more regularly though. :)


It's highly debatable who won that debate, Aspo.

But one thing we can say for sure is that atheists didn't abandon that debate. The second to last post was by an atheist. And that atheist endorsed the thurst of the OP. The last post in the thread was by a person who considers himself "other" in terms of religion. And he also endorsed the thrust of the OP.

While I agree that you've pointed us to a particularly bad OP that was started by an atheist, you haven't actually pointed us to a thread that was abandoned by the atheists.

And (this is beside the point because the atheist argument won the day anyway, as above) isn't it the case that Zhav got banned at that very time and THAT'S why he didn't reply to the thread?

Aspoestertjie
September 12th, 2009, 01:02 PM
It's highly debatable who won that debate, Aspo.

But one thing we can say for sure is that atheists didn't abandon that debate. The second to last post was by an atheist. And that atheist endorsed the thurst of the OP. The last post in the thread was by a person who considers himself "other" in terms of religion. And he also endorsed the thrust of the OP.

While I agree that you've pointed us to a particularly bad OP that was started by an atheist, you haven't actually pointed us to a thread that was abandoned by the atheists.

And (this is beside the point because the atheist argument won the day anyway, as above) isn't it the case that Zhav got banned at that very time and THAT'S why he didn't reply to the thread?

I am not sure Allo. That might be the case, but why didn't any of the other Atheists actually rebutted Hyde's position point by point?

Just Me
September 12th, 2009, 02:28 PM
I'm pretty sure I am going to piss several of my fellow atheists off with this post, oh well :)



Wow. The "nuh-uh!" card. Great.
MT, gave you a legitimate reply to your post but instead of replying in a civil manner once again sarcasm was used.

MT's response that you quoted here was just denying he was shifting the burden of proof, but yet sarcasm had to be used instead of pointing out HOW he was shifting the burden of proof.





And? I also assumed that we would be using English for the purposes of this debate. I mean... you are still a Christian, right? Which means you think we are 100% wrong. If you really thought our side was winning... you would have joined us, no? I mean, I think Christianity is wrong, that is no secret. Hence, I think you are losing because you are debating from a false premise, i.e. Jesus is god, bible is the truth, etc.
Whether MT thought atheists have been correct in the religious debates does NOT mean that he would have to swap sides. IF MT, thought atheists have been correct, it simply could have made him rethink and exam his beliefs, not that he has to jump on the atheist band wagon. (Do realize, I do not know if MT actually thought atheists were correct and his own beliefs were incorrect , I'm just saying...)
And the bold section above could also be said against atheists. We are not 100% sure that the bible is not true and God does not exist, so by you thinking the Christians have lost based on you THINK they are debating from a false premise, could be said for atheists. Christians could THINK atheists are losing because they THINK atheists are debating from a false premise since atheists do NOT know 100% that Christianity or any other religion for matter is not true.


What substantiates our side is that we are winning debates. This is not "Online Chat Network" or the "Online Conversation Network". This is a debate site. We are all here because we have beliefs that we view as true, right?
MT, also asked for clarification of what you mean by 'winning'. Which to my knowledge you have not. Only keep responding to him in a sarcastic manner.


So please, without sarcasm or your attempts at humor, do you think atheists are right or wrong? Do you think we are losing or not?
Maybe I am blind, but I did not read sarcasm in MT's post. Maybe I just know him better then you and I can tell when he is being sarcastic or not. But how many times does the man have to answer that for you?


If you think we are right and/or you think we are winning, why are you still a Christian?
To my understanding of MT's post, he stated that atheists have been winning based on specific terms, such as:


MT:
There is no doubt in my mind that Atheists are winning the debate based on rule and/or form. There are a lot of you guys, and well you simply post last.
So I for one, concede to the case you have made.

You have MT (a Christian) concede that Atheists have indeed 'won' based on specific circumstances, but YET that is not good enough. Since MT conceded that part he obviously has to only be saying that to be sarcastic. My gawl, you had a concession for ****s sake..




When a solid rebuttal is given, and it is ignored, even after asking nice for a reply, what would you call that? A tie? So could I start a thread like, "The Earth revolves around the Sun" and have no replies, and have it be anything other than a win and/or the truth?
If the opponent says that he is not going to respond because he CAN'T rebut the post then you can consider that a win, imo.. If you reply in the thread and said opponent does not reply just send a friendly PM asking if they will reply to your post and IF they say when they get time, give them time. If they never reply to the thread or PM and they have been on and visited the thread, then yea, maybe you can consider that a win, imo. If you create a damn good solid rebuttal and said opponent gives you a neg rep without responding to the post, then yea, you maybe able to consider that a win, imo.



Great. Now seeing as you've gone out of your way to be "witty", I am not sure how to take this. So are you serious or not? If you are serious, why don't you and the rest of the Christians do something about this situation? Or if you can't answer our questions and challenges... why are you still a Christian?
I am atheist, and I can not answer all questions that others have about atheism/evolution whatever.. Should I convert to Christianity or another religion?
Sarcasm will keep many members from replying in a thread. Yes, the sarcasm and mockery goes on by both Christians and atheists, but from what I have seen the atheists are more hard core with the mockery/sarcasm in religious threads. Just as both Republicans and Liberals use mockery and sarcasm but from what I have seen Republicans come more hard core with it in political threads.


Ah. Funny stuff. You funny man, you.
LOL Loved the **Inside Joke**
PZ, MindTrap conceded. What more do you want? Him to provide the threads you are asking for as well as concede? What will that prove? Once someone concedes they do NOT have to provide any type of support.
Now, whether you think that MT is sincere or not with the concession, is your problem.


I think at this point it is safe to say you are not going to be providing us with what the OP asks for.
Why should he? He already conceded that atheists have 'won' and Christians need to bring their game more and better by being more focused and lay out their debates better.
What more do you want?


Many people have said it, and I will say it here again: we are repeating ourselves a lot. There is a lot of cutting and pasting going on. Why not stop and figure out what bases have been covered? If there is a base that has not been covered, let's try and cover it. I keep waiting for someone to actually post a link of a solid debate so that we can talk about what happened and which side came out on top. I thank Aspo for being the only one to attempt this, despite her example ultimately not sufficient for reasons already discussed.
Maybe, in order to get somewhere with this, you need to clarify what you think winning consists of :)


It's not my fault that there are all these threads that Christians have bailed out when the going got tough.
Sarcasm and mockery (two of which I have seen most Christians complain about) will cause a member to lose interest in the thread. It just is not worth it.


The way many Christians and Theist have treated me simply for debating them has been absurd and I am sick of it. From the spam to the sarcasm to the nasty PMs to the unmerited neg reps to the way this thread has been going. Go back and take a look at the Christian replies, and then look at the atheist ones, and tell me who's being more positive and constructive.
Karma's a bitch isn't it :grin:


Enough is enough. If no one is going to actually address the OP, I am not going to bother to reply to all this ranting and red herrings and sarcastic ******** anymore.

Wait, you are complaining about sarcasm when YOU yourself have been sarcastic in your posts? :idiot2:

You had a Christian CONCEDE that atheists have indeed won. He explained how he thought atheists have won and what Christians need to do to make a come back.
But, for some reason, you do not believe MT and feel he is just being sarcastic.

What exactly do you want from Christians? You obviously will not accept a concession explaining how the member came to that conclusion an he what felt Christians needed to do about it.
Maybe you should spell out what it exactly is that you want in here. Because I for one have thought that if a member concedes the argument then that's that.

So to sum all this up here...

1) You complain about sarcasm but yet use it yourself.

2) You had a post explaining what you asked for (excluding links to posts), but that was not good enough.

3) You claim that Atheists are 'winning' but have yet explain what you are defining 'winning' as. You did however say that Christians bail on debates. MT asked if you were coming to the conclusion that 'winning' means last post, to which you said "No" about (unless I misunderstood you). So what exactly determines a winner? Lack of response/last post? Or what?

4) MT conceded to you that Atheists have 'won' and what Christians needed to do better, but that was not good enough.


For ****s sake, what is it exactly you want? Why can't members forget about what label each member has stuck to them and actually debate the damn argument without being sarcastic and using mockery? How old are you people? Grade school kids who feel the football team is better then the baseball team and have to go to the locker room and pull out a measuring stick to see who has the biggest equipment? Give it up already... (That goes for both atheists AND Christians) damn!!!!!!!!!!!!

Allocutus
September 12th, 2009, 02:53 PM
I am not sure Allo. That might be the case, but why didn't any of the other Atheists actually rebutted Hyde's position point by point?

Because there was no need to. Hyde specifically denied that God was omnibenevolent.

CliveStaples
September 12th, 2009, 04:09 PM
Here's my take on who's winning the Christian vs. Atheist war:

Who cares?

I'm not keeping track of points. I don't care who's ahead in the polls, or which side has won more converts. I care about having constructive, intelligent debates about philosophy and theology. As long as we're having good debates, I don't particularly care how many people agree with me and how many disagree.

This entire discussion is facile.

Talthas
September 13th, 2009, 03:38 PM
I just hopped on this thread (which I had been avoiding) because I wanted to see what Aspo and Allo thought was worth responding to.

What I found was no less than a self-aggrandizing, all-out verbal assault that treated all comers from the Theist camp with absolute disdain, even past the point where one of the debaters actually conceded, but even this wasn't good enough. It was *so* bad, in fact, that one of the atheists had to call shenanigans.

I'm sorry... this whole thread is ridiculous, and I stand by my assertion that this whole idea of "winning and losing" is an utter waste of time. I also stand by my assertion that I wish I could use up all my negs for the next week on this thread alone. The antagonism and contempt that PZ has shown in this thread for everyone who gives their time (though I can't possibly fathom why, if he debates like this) to discuss religion and philosophy with him is astounding.

I say again.... extremely bad form.

Apokalupsis
September 16th, 2009, 10:21 AM
This thread shouldn't have been closed. Like another thread, I suspect it was to prevent unnecessary bickering and in-fighting, so good intentions...but it should always be announced when a thread is closed and a brief explanation as to why must be given.

It's extremely rare that a thread is ever closed here at ODN. It's a last resort. This thread has not warranted a closing.