CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:31
Arguments:20
Total Votes:32
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Just wondering - please answer atheists! (20)

Debate Creator

_deleted0_(850) pic



Just wondering - please answer atheists!

An atheist believes what has been proved existing.

A christian believes in the bible.

When a christian comes with a bible verse proving his point, the atheist ask for evidence. And if the christian can't, somehow the atheist just won the debate.

Which I think doesn't make any sence at all. How can you win a debate, by showing the person against you something he or she doesn't believe in?

If an atheist shows a christian an evidence, and the christian asks for a bible verse, and the atheist can't - well that didn't change anything? The christian doesn't assume that he one the debate, just because the other one can't find anything he doesn't believe in, to prove his point.

What I mean is, that you can't ask a person to tell you something you don't believe. To ask a christian if he/she has evidence, proving what they believe is real, is just like a christian asking an atheist if he/she has a bible verse, proving what they believe is real.

Add New Argument
3 points

It's simple really, to read scripture from any religious text without any scientific proof backing the extraordinary claims falls in the category of belief, atheist believe that in order for something to be true it has to be proven by fact not belief, although saying for certain that god does not exist is in fact a belief in itself, which is the reason I personally hold the stance of the agnostic point of view, I cannot prove nor disprove the existence of a god based on the scientific methods we have today, so both saying there is a god and there isn't a god are two opposite ends of the spectrum because both those assertions are based on belief.

However when a Christian tries to convince me that the earth is 6000 years old I then can say that is false because science can prove that is not true, science however can not prove that there is no god.

3 points

Who wrote the bible.. Scriptures? Why would you believe what they wrote? If they said there was a flying omnipotent marshmallow who was benevolent and created the world in 6 days would you believe that? There is no more evidence to prove the marshmallow theory incorrect than there is to prove god or Allah or any other god that has ever been suggested exists. I have nothing against the religious community and I'm sure many atheists don't, we just don't want to base out existence on a book some scriptures wrote a long time ago. There are too many scientific facts which dispute religious teachings. To say the earth is less than 6000 years is absurd. What about fossils, dinosaurs, dendrochronology and many other dating techniques.

So let me make this clear. Because atheists ask Christians for real evidence that proves their fantasy land, Christians should be allowed to ask atheists for Biblical (fantasy land) evidence to prove reality?

2 points

Arguing that elves exist by quoting The Lord of the Rings is nonsensical.

Arguing that something is true because it's in the Bible requires that the Bible be true. So, the real point is whether or not the Bible is a valid source of information for whatever it is your are discussing. Often, you can find self-contradictions and contradictions with history / biology / morality, etc., which is why it's not a valid source. The least valid use of Biblical quotes is to show that the Bible is valid, which is obviously circular and useless reasoning.

They didn't "win" the debate, they dismissed it because it's not meaningful. If there was a debate over the validity of the Bible--that a person claimed it was valid without having any reasons to, and they pointed it out, then they won THAT debate, however.

2 points

Maybe I haven't had enough to drink to make sense of your point.

Are you saying theists don't believe in evidence? Then why believe in anything at all?

_deleted0_(850) Disputed
1 point

No, I'm saying theist don't need evidence to believe something, just like atheist don't need bible verses to believe something.

IronManic(54) Disputed
1 point

Okay. But that doesn't make these two things equivalent. If we are asking you to provide evidence, we are not asking you to believe in something you don't believe in, just something you think you don't need. And again, why believe in anything if you don't need evidence?

2 points

Which I think doesn't make any sence at all. How can you win a debate, by showing the person against you something he or she doesn't believe in?

Because debate is not about belief. Debate is about logic and reasoning.

The atheist or non-theist would win the debate because a Bible verse is not proof of anything. If you want proof, show proof that relates to the scientific method, which is totally governed by logic and reasoning.

Because quoting the Bible to prove God is like quoting Peter Pan to prove fairies. You can believe in God or fairies, but if you cannot prove their existence with logic and reasoning, then you have no business asserting that they are factually real.

2 points

An atheist believes what has been proved existing.

This is getting rather annoying... Atheists don't generally "believe", if it is proven existing they know. What is the point of believing something if it is already known to be true?

1 point

Because millions of people devote their lives to this religion. For many Christians it is the most important thing in their lives. And to base your life around something there is no logical/physical proof of, and possibly doesn't exist..? Well, i think that's why they loose the debates! Because where as an atheist has a reason to be so, they have proof (e.g. Science ) a Christian has none! How not having any proof of something you base your life round, doesn't make sense to you, I don't understand!

1 point

"An atheist believes what has been proved existing."

What? Not sure what this is trying to say, but atheism is simply a lack of belief in the existence of a god/gods. That's really the only thing that connects atheists. Otherwise, they have a million different stances on a million different topics.

1 point

I suppose the invention of the atomic bomb was just magic, because a lot of theoretical science supposedly went into its creations. You know, table of elements and all. None of which are in the bible.

If you don't accept science there is no point in having a debate with you.

1 point

When someone uses religious scripture to defend their argument, they are positing a belief. When someone uses science, evidence, and/or reason to defend their argument, they are positing a thought. You cannot prove anything using faith because it is definitionally not something which can be proven, only believed in. In contrast, you can prove arguments using scientific or evidentiary processes because they are things which can be known and do not rely on subjective personal belief.

1 point

I could quote from Darwin's origin of species- that'd be one of the first atheistic texts? Possibly our bible?

1 point

When a christian comes with a bible verse proving his point, the atheist ask for evidence. And if the christian can't, somehow the atheist just won the debate.

When a LOTR fan comes with a verse from the story, trying to prove something to be actual in the real world, the skeptic asks for evidence. And if the fan can't provide any, somehow the skeptic just won the argument. Exactly the same.

In any argument those who proclaim something of which their peers are dubious have the onus of proof. This is not specific just to religion, it applies to anyone making any kind of claim.

Put simply, atheists don't have to prove them wrong, theists have to prove that they are correct.

And, by the way, a Bible verse is not proof of anything other than that Bible verse.

I'm agnostic but I have to say, the Bible is a source of evidence, its not absolute evidence and its not by any means 100% fact, but never the less, it holds some weight.

Jace(5222) Disputed
2 points

Evidence for what exactly? What weight could it possibly hold? It is book that was originally written by humans, and has been rewritten over and over again to suit the needs and interests of subsequent people. Saying that the Bible is a source of evidence is like saying that Harry Potter is a book of evidence.