|
Until you sign up you can't do much. Yes, it's free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | / / / Viewing Topic
|  |
|
|
|
|
 LiveWire Humor
|
|
|
|
|
|
exceedinglyrare
Delicate Thing
 Patron
|
     
That's really not the way things on this forum work...generally speaking, if you want some sort of atheist vs. theist, Lincoln-Douglas style debate, it'd be better for you to do it through e-mail with someone, if you don't want the interference of others. Also, generally speaking, participants of this forum tend to not care about a topic, once it gets taken over by duelists. Ergo, if you want the topic to be public and have people ooh and ahh...it's just not going to happen. That said, feel free to demonstrate your vast theological training in any of the other topics on this forum. I'm sure we'll all be astounded by your knowledge.
-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after
|
|
|
ul fan101
Novice
|
gronk - Richard dawkins is not in any way a prominent atheistic scholar in my own opinion, feel free to read Alvin Plantianga's review of the book. <p> And exceedinglyrare, why can noone understand that I only state that I had been in apologetics classes so that people would respond seriously? i'm not bragging, i'm sure there are people on here with more knowledge than me, I just wanted to let people know that I wanted a serious debate. All that has happened on this topic is people post about that, so IM SORRY that it came off wrong. <p> A moderator can close this topic, it isn't needed anymore. All that has happened is flaming for me saying that I would probably have more thought out posts than what i've seen from alot of people. What a great community you guys have here.
|
|
|
Asdkfh of Kisdfoguid
Novice
|
Quote: from ul fan at 1:05 pm on Oct. 22, 2008
 An Atheist who would go farther than "God doesn't feed people in Africa so he must not be real!!!!1"
This is the most valid, undefeated argument against theism, so I'm not surprised that you would seek to exclude it.
|
|
|
ul fan101
Novice
|
are you joking? o.0
|
|
|
ul fan101
Novice
|
by the way ul fan is now ul fan101, I change my name b/c I couldn't get into my other account
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Event Horizon
Connoisseur
Patron
|
Quote: from Soren Kierkegaard at 4:24 pm on Oct. 22, 2008
You do realize that livewire has a number of capable Theists already here on the scene, right? Barnabas, PoP, Forever Angel, exceedinglyrare, myself, etc. etc. are but a few all ranging in formal experience and/or education within Christendom entirely. You are quite welcome to post to your heart's content, but please do not expect others to kiss the ground you walk on solely from formal experience in exegesis and hermeneutics. Because if you continue to find yourself seeking shock and awe as a response to you informing others of your education, you will find yourself significantly outclassed by the wisest of those experienced enough not to boast otherwise.
I've been meaning to ask you and this topic seems fitting:
Do you actually agree with Soren Kierkegaard? If so, I'd say debating would be sort of silly for you to partake in, eh?
-------
Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful.It's the transition
that's troublesome. --Isaac Asimov
|
|
|
|
|
Event Horizon
Connoisseur
Patron
|
Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 12:20 pm on Oct. 25, 2008
Quote: from Asdkfh of Kisdfoguid at 10:50 am on Oct. 25, 2008
Quote: from ul fan101 at 6:40 am on Oct. 25, 2008
are you joking? o.0
Of course not. The existence of natural evil directly contradicts the idea of a benevolent God. You can't even use your "free will" excuse against it.
Why not?
1. Asdkfh: I would re-word your point.
a) if by natural evil you mean natural disasters, then I'd say stop being so human-centric. tidal waves and earthquakes are not evil, they are natural occurrences, and part of the obscurity and beauty of the universe.
b) Therefore, giving you the benefit of the doubt, perhaps you meant gratuitous evil --un-necessary, unprovoked evil. This is a pretty strong case against a benevolent god. 2. Regardless of that, you can't say "God is not good because there is suffering now". The suffering we are facing might be the way to a level of good unparalleled by anything prior to it. Our ignorance disallows the argument of "suffering exists now". Hell, Perfect goodness might be more torturous than the level we have now, you have zero idea on the matter. With that said, OP, saying "let's debate" accomplishes nothing. Perhaps if you'd pose a question, and it is specific enough to create a legitimate debate, several of us will jump in and start debating. From experience on here, discussions typically start out with several people, then by page two or three bog down to maybe 2-4 people actively and intelligently debating. If you want a one on one, go to PM. Just start a topic like most people, if the question is good enough for a legitimate debate [not a silly one like, "Is god omniscient?" that is so broad it is meaningless] then most of the people who you don't want replying, wont. It will simply be to complex or specific and not worth the time.
-------
Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful.It's the transition
that's troublesome. --Isaac Asimov
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Looking for something else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| / / / Viewing Topic | |
|
508 users online 
221629 members 
You have 1 new message.
