News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Looking for a 1-on-1 discussion.

Started by redsoxfan77, September 29, 2014, 02:49:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: redsoxfan77 on October 01, 2014, 08:23:54 PM
I'll concede it.  Though I only really hoped to show what you already concede, a slim, slim possibility of God's existence.

We can continue to debate on this particular topic, but I will be blunt in saying that this is not my area of expertise.  Still I'm up for learning what you have to say.   

Or we can move to another issue.  It's up to you.
I'm happy with this topic, and I think it's the only useful conversation you and I can have. Any other debate we had about your beliefs would come down to God no matter what, because at the end of the day every criticism I had of your beliefs would begin and end with, "Prove that God exists before defending the philosophy based around him."

As far as expertise: I'm not exactly a PhD myself. I have an AA degree that was heavy on the physical and social sciences, along with some philosophy, ethics, and humanities. Over the course of discussions like this one, I've gotten practice at some basic scientific journalism, which is to say I know how to do some fact-finding, how to determine if my source is reliable (and if it is indeed a source, which is a step many people miss), and how to turn that into something I can use in a debate format. So again, not an expert: I just know enough to be dangerous.

Since the purpose of a debate is to convince the audience and not necessarily your opponent, feel free to see this as an opportunity to test and improve your skills. You probably won't convince me in the span of one conversation (nor do I expect the reverse), but you will be able to identify the subjects that are important to your target audience, and by extension the subjects you need to improve your knowledge on.

For DunkleSeele
The topic is, "Does God Exist?" Redsoxfan77 will be arguing in favor of God existing, while I will be arguing against it. My opponent may specify the exact version of God he is defending in his opening statement, but must remain consistent in that regard: no last-minute "well perhaps God is actually [blah blah blah]" should be allowed. In return, I will not bring other Christian interpretations of God into the conversation, although using other religions' gods as examples for comparison is still fair game (including Islam and Judaism). Burden of proof may not be used as an argument in this debate: Redsoxfan77 must try to prove that God exists, and I must try to show that the evidence is insufficient or flawed.

So with all that said: DunkleSeele, would you please do us the honor?
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

redsoxfan77


Hijiri Byakuren

Still having a database error in One-on-One Discussion. Can we move it to Formal Debates in the meantime? See if the issue persists?
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

DunkleSeele

OK, I opened the debate thread here in the peanut gallery, so you two can start. It will be moved to the one-on-one section as soon as the databease error will be solved.

Please read my introductory post there before starting.

Hijiri Byakuren

Alright, well I'll get my opening statement ready while we wait for Redsoxfan77 to do the same. I'll aim my opening statement at a general reading of the God of the Bible so we can get the basic arguments out of the way, and save the specifics for my first rebuttal. I'm doing this for two reasons: to keep my opening statement from becoming a rebuttal, and to give Redsoxfan77 a chance to call out any strawmen he thinks I'm building.

I expect to have my opening statement done between late Thursday and early Friday. Early Saturday at the latest.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Johan

Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 02, 2014, 12:18:05 AM
Burden of proof may not be used as an argument in this debate: Redsoxfan77 must try to prove that God exists, and I must try to show that the evidence is insufficient or flawed.

Well this won't take long.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful

redsoxfan77

OK so to describe my faith I would describe it as being in accord with the Church. I'll try to simplify this as much as possible so isn't confusing.

1. I believe in God  the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. 3 persons in 1 God.
2. The Bible is important, but not the sole authority on matters pertaining to God.  There is also to the faithful Catholic the Magisterium of the Faith, and Church Tradition. So the Bible is only 1/3 of our view point of God.  This is different from all forms of Protestantism, which for many on this forum is the most common form of Christianity you will come across in the US.
3. The are many ways to understand the Bible.  Certainly literalism is one way to understand the Bible, but often it's makes the readings incomprehensible.  The Historical Critical method, I believe is better. For those who don't know the various ways to Biblical interpretation here is a good intro link. http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcinter.htm
4.God is more unknown than known.  We can know a lot, but much of what God is is still a mystery.  This is going to annoy many, but just as any learned discipline grows in understanding Christianity is no different.
5. I believe in Rahner's view of the Anonymous Christian.  Keep in mind when Rahner was writing this, he was not trying to upset anyone.  Try to understand what he says from his position. 
6. The Apostles' Creed is a good summary of the faith, but just that, a summary.
7. I don't find Science and Faith in God to be incompatible.
8.  Time is a construct.  Meaning God created time while being outside of it.  He has interacted within time on several occasions, i.e. the life of Jesus.  But still exists outside of time. Outside of time there is still a linear progression of events. Of that we know very little.
9. This is a woefully inadequate definition of my faith and the first time I've debated this specific topic.

Any questions?


Hijiri Byakuren

Something like that should go in our debate thread, not this one.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

DunkleSeele

redsoxfan77, the official debate thread is here. Please read my introductory post there and then post your opening statement. Thank you.

Desdinova

"How long will we be
Waiting, for your modern messiah
To take away all the hatred
That darkens the light in your eye"
  -Disturbed, Liberate

stromboli

I think Redsoxfan was looking tor the tea-and-scones-crowd and landed on the beer-and-pizza-after-six-hits-on-the-bong-crowd.

Solitary

Why is it that people that believe in a personal God need a Church or churches?
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

wolf39us

Sorry about the errors guys, I'm still working out some bugs.  The ones that affected this thread should be gone though.

redsoxfan77


Mr.Obvious

Well the debate's off to a confusing start. Talking in turn between two people is confusing though.
:popcorn:
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.