It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Debate Challenge for Religion, Faith, and Theology.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I have been itching for a debate for a while now, and I was wondering if any of the theists on here would like to put forth a topic for us to debate over in the debate forum.

I'm open to all sorts of questions, though we might have to haggle over how the question is phrased to fit it into the rules of the debate forum.

Hope someone is up for the challenge.




posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Sure, I might put in a topic but I dont know that it should be debated ...That would be LOVE ...peace



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   
debate the account of the destruction of the tower of Babel. and why god destroyed it, and whether he should have or not. big pivitol moment in history.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by the2ofusr1
 


I would decline that topic, as it's more of a philosophical issue and isn't a religious one.

reply to post by Myendica
 


We could debate whether or not it happened instead, seeing as I'm not exactly one who believes in it myself.





edit on 9/13/10 by madnessinmysoul because: zoned out while writing, realized a grammatical mistake



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 
Did you not read the first commandment ? Not a lot of words in it ,and it seems to roll off our lips quite frequently.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by the2ofusr1
 


Which version?

"I am the Lord your God"
"I am the Lord your God/You shall have no other gods before me"
or "I am the Lord your God/You shall have no other gods before me/You shall not make for yourself an idol"

Are you saying we should debate monotheism?



posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Does nobody really want to accept my challenge?

I'd really enjoy a nice, spirited and cordial debate about nearly anything related to Religion, Faith, and Theology.



posted on Sep, 14 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 
Madnessinmysoul,

Such a debate might be profitable if anyone could gain anything from it. How can the finite mind comprehend the Infinite. Example, space there is no end, go straight out in any direction for eternity and there is no end, there is no wall to run into and if there was what's on the other side. But creation is seen also endlessly, no end. It is not emptiness out there. All we can do is marvel. You want me to bring God into this, I see no use, I don't rail and throw darts at people who won't agree there is a Great God Who proclaims He is Spirit. I might ask a question, what is life? They can't create it even from scratch. They also must come up with the scatch. Neither can and will happen, if it did we all better run cause it probably would eat them and start on us.

Anyway nuff said.

Truth is the only way to go.

Truthiron



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthiron
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 
Madnessinmysoul,

Such a debate might be profitable if anyone could gain anything from it.


Well, I'd hope to gain a lot from it.



How can the finite mind comprehend the Infinite.


How can a 5 mb file contain the plans for a 1 tb harddrive?



Example, space there is no end, go straight out in any direction for eternity and there is no end, there is no wall to run into and if there was what's on the other side.


13.75 billion light years across...so if you go about 10 billion light years in any direction you'll probably just run out of space.



But creation is seen also endlessly, no end. It is not emptiness out there.


Well, it's mostly emptiness.



All we can do is marvel. You want me to bring God into this, I see no use, I don't rail and throw darts at people who won't agree there is a Great God Who proclaims He is Spirit.


Yes, but you keep making a claim that such a being exists and must be subject to different capitalization rules, yet you have no proof for this claim.



I might ask a question, what is life? They can't create it even from scratch.


Recreating the conditions found when life first started is insanely difficult and recreating it enough times to make life happen is probably impossible. The Earth had billions of years to develop life, don't expect scientists to do it in 100



They also must come up with the scatch. Neither can and will happen, if it did we all better run cause it probably would eat them and start on us.


Well, those are ridiculous claims. Amino acids and the like are found all over. Organic molecules are quite common in the universe, so the scratch is easy to get. And they can happen, it probably will happen, but I don't see how a single celled organism could 'eat' a human...





Anyway nuff said.

Truth is the only way to go.


And in the search for truth you seem to wish to stay locked in your personal ignorance and leave it unchallenged.



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


I know you weren't responding to me...but I'm going to chime in anyway because you have abandoned your other thread apparently. So I'll join you in here.


Well, I'd hope to gain a lot from it.


What exactly would you as an atheists be hoping to gain from it...unless you are saying you are hoping to be convinced to believe in god...which I doubt.


How can a 5 mb file contain the plans for a 1 tb harddrive?


Because they are both FINITE...and the size of the file would be dependent on the size of the harddrive. How big would the file have to be for a 2 TB HD? 10 TB? 100 TB? 1000 TB? How big would it have to be for a harddrive with infinite space?

It's a poor analogy because the original question was about the FINITE understanding the INFINITE...and you gave an example of two FINITE things. He didn't ask how can something smaller understand something bigger...he asked about FINITE and INFINITE. There is a very large difference in the concepts.


13.75 billion light years across...so if you go about 10 billion light years in any direction you'll probably just run out of space.


I'm a bit rusty on my astronomy...but I do believe scientist think that it is still expanding...or stretching. So how do you "run out of space" while it is continuing to expand? Also this is assuming that we currently hold a complete and accurate understanding of the universe...which I doubt we do. But by current scientific understanding...you seem to be going against it.


Well, it's mostly emptiness.


Would you like to defing "emptiness"???

Because I'm pretty sure except for a few pockets of black holes...there are photons almost everywhere.


Yes, but you keep making a claim that such a being exists and must be subject to different capitalization rules, yet you have no proof for this claim.


From what I've seen in this thread...he never did such a thing. Unless you are speaking of a different conversation...you are just putting words in his mouth.


And in the search for truth you seem to wish to stay locked in your personal ignorance and leave it unchallenged.


And you end with an insult...how fitting.





You are making some rather EXTRAORDINARY claims so far (space is empty, the infinite can be understood, you'll "run out of space" if you go to far)...and with little to no proof. Seems odd for an atheist to do.



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I know you weren't responding to me...but I'm going to chime in anyway because you have abandoned your other thread apparently. So I'll join you in here.


Not everyone has the appropriate amount of time to tend all of their threads. I do have a life outside of my room that is currently quite hectic.




What exactly would you as an atheists be hoping to gain from it...unless you are saying you are hoping to be convinced to believe in god...which I doubt.


At the very least? I'd hope to gain a bit of insight and understanding into the mind of a person with a different opinion.
And as I've stated repeatedly: I am open to the prospect of the existence of a deity if provided with adequate evidence



Because they are both FINITE...and the size of the file would be dependent on the size of the harddrive. How big would the file have to be for a 2 TB HD? 10 TB? 100 TB? 1000 TB? How big would it have to be for a harddrive with infinite space?


5mb file could make a 2 - 1000 TB hardrive. In fact it could theoretically make a 2 - XXXXXX TB drive just as easily as the basic schematic wouldn't change, merely the parts.



It's a poor analogy because the original question was about the FINITE understanding the INFINITE...and you gave an example of two FINITE things.


Well, the infinite doesn't seem to exist. It's a pure concept. I can't really see any proof of the infinite being real. However, a 1 TB hardrive is many magnitudes greater than the 5 mb file. A 5 TB harddrive has a million times more data storage capacity. The same size file could be used to create any size of drive so long as the materials were appropriate to increase storage space.



He didn't ask how can something smaller understand something bigger...he asked about FINITE and INFINITE. There is a very large difference in the concepts.


Here's a different point: Why must we understand the whole thing? I mean, shouldn't we be able to understand a portion of the infinite through discovery? Just a little bit, a fleck of truth from it? At the very least we should be able to establish its existence, shouldn't we?



I'm a bit rusty on my astronomy...but I do believe scientist think that it is still expanding...or stretching. So how do you "run out of space" while it is continuing to expand? Also this is assuming that we currently hold a complete and accurate understanding of the universe...which I doubt we do. But by current scientific understanding...you seem to be going against it.


Of course I am, I posited travelling 10 billion light years in a human lifetime. A more accurate analogy would be found here where it basically describes the universe as a balloon. It keeps getting inflated, but you can still travel on it. If you were to keep travelling faster than the rate of inflation you'd eventually run out of room and end up where you began.


Would you like to defing "emptiness"???


Lack of stuff.



Because I'm pretty sure except for a few pockets of black holes...there are photons almost everywhere.


A black hole is the exact opposite of emptiness. It's a place where there is so much matter that nothing can escape due to the gravitational pull from this matter.
A photon is indescribably (without the aid of mathematics) small. The spaces between those photons out in deep space would probably be quite vast. Remember, space is massive and photons are small. There are bound to be pockets of varying sizes of empty space.



From what I've seen in this thread...he never did such a thing. Unless you are speaking of a different conversation...you are just putting words in his mouth.


He claims:


Originally posted by truthiron
You want me to bring God into this, I see no use, I don't rail and throw darts at people who won't agree there is a Great God Who proclaims He is Spirit.


That seems like as good of an affirmation of a deity as any. If someone states others won't agree on something it's pretty concrete that the person believes it themselves.



And you end with an insult...how fitting.


I'm not insulting, I'm pointing out that those who actively avoid discourse are shutting themselves from truth. If you stay away from other opinions how do you know they're false?





You are making some rather EXTRAORDINARY claims so far (space is empty, the infinite can be understood, you'll "run out of space" if you go to far)...and with little to no proof. Seems odd for an atheist to do.


Already showed you that they aren't extraordinary.

Anyway, if my claims are so extraordinary and you seem so confident in your abilities to refute anything and everything I say, why don't you engage me in a formal debate on a topic of your choosing (obviously I can make reasonable objections, I won't agree that wanton destruction for fun's sake is a good thing in a debate)?



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 





"I am the Lord your God" "I am the Lord your God/You shall have no other gods before me" or "I am the Lord your God/You shall have no other gods before me/You shall not make for yourself an idol"


You forgot one.

"I am the Lord your God/You shall have no other gods before me" because I'm an envious God

The tower of Babel was definitely real IMO. It is also the third time in the bible and the second time God speaks in plural, as in gods.
The next question is ? United mankind can fulfill their imagination. Why stop this from happening ?

1. He was afraid we would turn on them, when the time comes.
2 He decided we were not ready to fulfill our dreams.

IMO God and his angels are aliens. Pure speculation from my part tho.


I'd like to know how and why people that say they follow Jesus Christ.
The guy that teaches to :
1 Turn the other cheek
2 Do not do to another, what you do not like an other to do to you.
3 Love your enemy, like you love yourself.
4 Forgive
5 Help those that are need of it.
6 Love

Still do the exact opposite.
Hate, harm and ignore those who need help.

I know... Not everybody does.But still...



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


i am currently enrolled in the debate tournament. the sign up for this debate tournament ends tomorrow. (the 17th).
So You Wanna Fight? ATS Debate Tournament: Sign Up!

Due to this being my first participation in the structured debates with Socratic Debate Rule being in effect.

i'm not sure when the debate tournament is set to begin, but the debate tournament is scheduled to last about 2 months, with each debate lasting one approximately one week.

madnessinmysoul,
After this tournament has ended, i may be interested in accepting your challenge to debate aspects or some specific aspects of theism, or monotheism.

I notice your avatar does not hold the title of "fighter".

I was wondering if you have experience in the debate forum or have engaged in the structured debates in that forum in the past?

thank you,
et



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



We could debate whether or not it happened instead, seeing as I'm not exactly one who believes in it myself.


I wouldn't suggest that approach. Archaeologists have discovered the foundation stones of the tower in Iraq.

You'd lose the debate in your opening statement.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



How can a 5 mb file contain the plans for a 1 tb harddrive?


Umm, 1 tb hard drive is still "finite", no??





posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Yes, because the found the foundation stones of a tower in Babylon that proves that we were all speaking the same language at that time and then a deity god angry about us trying to build a massive tower and made us start speaking different languages from there on out.

reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Answered already



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Historians and Linguists have already discovered the world spoke a single language that originated in Mesopotamia.

What's the next excuse?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



Not everyone has the appropriate amount of time to tend all of their threads. I do have a life outside of my room that is currently quite hectic.


Well then maybe it isn't rational to start so many threads if you do not have the time to do all the things you are doing.


At the very least? I'd hope to gain a bit of insight and understanding into the mind of a person with a different opinion.
And as I've stated repeatedly: I am open to the prospect of the existence of a deity if provided with adequate evidence


It doesn't come off that way...you push too hard to try to prove your stance or disprove others to make it seem like you are open to anything else.


5mb file could make a 2 - 1000 TB hardrive. In fact it could theoretically make a 2 - XXXXXX TB drive just as easily as the basic schematic wouldn't change, merely the parts.

Well, the infinite doesn't seem to exist. It's a pure concept. I can't really see any proof of the infinite being real. However, a 1 TB hardrive is many magnitudes greater than the 5 mb file. A 5 TB harddrive has a million times more data storage capacity. The same size file could be used to create any size of drive so long as the materials were appropriate to increase storage space.


Well clearly I don't think you have an understanding of what you are talking about...maybe you aren't being clear in your explanation.

What I thought you were talking about is a 5mb file containing the memory location mapping ( "the plan") for the hard drive...is this not what you are talking about?

But now I think you are talking about the 5mb file holding the manufacturing instructions for a hard drive...which still I don't agree with your claim. The larger the hard drive...the more complex it will need to be...and "plans" for a working hard drive would still need the memory mapping included for it to function. So as you increase the size...the "plan" would still become more complex.

And since you can't map to infinity...now finite size file would be able to hold the "plan" for an infinite hard drive.


Here's a different point: Why must we understand the whole thing? I mean, shouldn't we be able to understand a portion of the infinite through discovery? Just a little bit, a fleck of truth from it? At the very least we should be able to establish its existence, shouldn't we?


Who says we don't? But would you recognize the "whole" by only knowing a "part"???

If someone who knows nothing of cars is shown in detail a spark plug and how it works by itself...do they now understand a full functioning car? If they see a car...would they even recognize it as being the "whole" of the spark plug? If that same person is shown a windshield wiper...would they connect it to the spark plug?

You seem that you aren't satisfied with not knowing it "all"...and if you can't know it "all"...then it must not exist. I don't have that thought process.


Of course I am, I posited travelling 10 billion light years in a human lifetime. A more accurate analogy would be found here where it basically describes the universe as a balloon. It keeps getting inflated, but you can still travel on it. If you were to keep travelling faster than the rate of inflation you'd eventually run out of room and end up where you began.


Well now you are changing your position...first you said you would "run out of space"...and now you are saying you would end up where you began. Those are two very different concepts.

Besides...your own article reference says the Universe is "probably" infinite....because they don't know...which is why they say "probably". So why do you pretend to "know" the Universe is finite???

Can you at least state that much...that you really don't know if the Universe is finite?


Lack of stuff.


Define "stuff".


A black hole is the exact opposite of emptiness. It's a place where there is so much matter that nothing can escape due to the gravitational pull from this matter.
A photon is indescribably (without the aid of mathematics) small. The spaces between those photons out in deep space would probably be quite vast. Remember, space is massive and photons are small. There are bound to be pockets of varying sizes of empty space.


I think you misunderstood my reference to a black hole...it had to do with photons...not matter. In the area of a black hole...there are no visible photons.

So you are suggesting that the amount of photons is small in space? So we shouldn't be able to see in space...since our eyes or even cameras are just photon detectors...right?

I disagree...light...or photons...is everywhere. We see photons from distant stars everynight...enough photons for everyone to see them...they are literally everywhere...and in large quantities.

To be truly empty wouldn't there have to be the absense of everything...even photons?




That seems like as good of an affirmation of a deity as any. If someone states others won't agree on something it's pretty concrete that the person believes it themselves.


There is a difference in believing it and claiming it as fact.


I'm not insulting, I'm pointing out that those who actively avoid discourse are shutting themselves from truth. If you stay away from other opinions how do you know they're false?


We are both actively discussing it...you just don't approve with they way we see things...so you don't believe we are actively seeking knowledge.


Already showed you that they aren't extraordinary.

Anyway, if my claims are so extraordinary and you seem so confident in your abilities to refute anything and everything I say, why don't you engage me in a formal debate on a topic of your choosing (obviously I can make reasonable objections, I won't agree that wanton destruction for fun's sake is a good thing in a debate)?


You are correct in that I am just questioning your arguments...so why don't you pick the topic. I have made no claims that I am desperately seeking approval of...so there is no topic that I would choose to debate myself. But if you bring up a good topic...I would consider it.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Well then maybe it isn't rational to start so many threads if you do not have the time to do all the things you are doing.


The recent chaos in my life started a bit after I started these threads.



It doesn't come off that way...you push too hard to try to prove your stance or disprove others to make it seem like you are open to anything else.


Skepticism is my position. I did grow up in the "Show Me State" after all. If I see a problem with something I currently hold as my own stance I attack it as aggressively as I attack the positions of others. Being skeptical means the willingness to question not just the beliefs of others but your own as well. If someone tells me there is a deity I simply would like some sort of reference.



Well clearly I don't think you have an understanding of what you are talking about...maybe you aren't being clear in your explanation.

What I thought you were talking about is a 5mb file containing the memory location mapping ( "the plan") for the hard drive...is this not what you are talking about?


Mainly manufacturing processes.



But now I think you are talking about the 5mb file holding the manufacturing instructions for a hard drive...which still I don't agree with your claim. The larger the hard drive...the more complex it will need to be...and "plans" for a working hard drive would still need the memory mapping included for it to function. So as you increase the size...the "plan" would still become more complex.


This complexity would still do little to pad file size and there are other considerations .



And since you can't map to infinity...now finite size file would be able to hold the "plan" for an infinite hard drive.


Skepticism alert: I already claimed to doubt the infinite. Please show that it exists.



Who says we don't? But would you recognize the "whole" by only knowing a "part"???


No, but a part of an infinite divine being would be quite dissimilar from anything in the physical realm, would it not?



If someone who knows nothing of cars is shown in detail a spark plug and how it works by itself...do they now understand a full functioning car? If they see a car...would they even recognize it as being the "whole" of the spark plug? If that same person is shown a windshield wiper...would they connect it to the spark plug?


No, but if that person had never been exposed to such technology they'd have an understanding of something new. The concept of 'spark plug' would be aberrant in their minds as something entirely different from the world around them.



You seem that you aren't satisfied with not knowing it "all"...and if you can't know it "all"...then it must not exist. I don't have that thought process.


I don't want to know it 'all' but I'd like to know a hell of a lot of it. I want some reasonable rational basis for beliefs as extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (in the words of the late, great Carl Sagan).



Well now you are changing your position...first you said you would "run out of space"...and now you are saying you would end up where you began. Those are two very different concepts.


I was being overly simplistic in my haste. I was essentially stating that the universe was finite in the simplest and quickest way possible.



Besides...your own article reference says the Universe is "probably" infinite....because they don't know...which is why they say "probably". So why do you pretend to "know" the Universe is finite???

Can you at least state that much...that you really don't know if the Universe is finite?


How about this: the portion of spacetime in which we inhabit that is currently known as the 'universe' is finite. This a position held by many astronomers, astrophysicists and the like.



Define "stuff".


Matter/energy, the two are interchangeable. What else would I define as 'stuff'?



I think you misunderstood my reference to a black hole...it had to do with photons...not matter.


Photons are present in a black hole, they're all just heading towards it instead of towards our eyes so we lack sight of the black hole itself.



In the area of a black hole...there are no visible photons.


Photons are invisible. We only see because of photons that reflect off of surfaces and directly into our eyes. We don't actually see the photons, we register their presence. If we were able to 'see' photons any room lit by a lamp would be blinding.



So you are suggesting that the amount of photons is small in space? So we shouldn't be able to see in space...since our eyes or even cameras are just photon detectors...right?

I disagree...light...or photons...is everywhere. We see photons from distant stars everynight...enough photons for everyone to see them...they are literally everywhere...and in large quantities.

To be truly empty wouldn't there have to be the absense of everything...even photons?


What I'm trying to get across is that photons aren't omnipresent. There are portions of the sky that lack of photons, those little dark spots. There is a conceivable portion of space that is devoid of photons.

Or are you saying that the universe is absolutely saturated by photons? Can you provide evidence of photon saturation in the universe?



There is a difference in believing it and claiming it as fact.


True, that difference is between being gnostic in your belief or agnostic in your belief. Knowing vs not knowing. However, I've yet to meet someone who believes in a deity and is uncertain if that deity exists. When you live your life in a manner in which you regularly affirm the existence of a being to yourself, you are claiming it as a fact. To say there is an all-powerful creator is to state it as fact. It's a reality claim. It's not like I'm saying "I believe that the best type of cake is chocolate" which is obviously an opinion. The proposing of an all powerful being is a definite reality claim on which you would predicate the entirety of the universe.



We are both actively discussing it...you just don't approve with they way we see things...so you don't believe we are actively seeking knowledge.


Well you are actively discouraging the use of reason and rationality, so I don't know how I'm supposed to see things.



You are correct in that I am just questioning your arguments...so why don't you pick the topic. I have made no claims that I am desperately seeking approval of...so there is no topic that I would choose to debate myself. But if you bring up a good topic...I would consider it.


I'll try to come up with something, but I'm still quite busy so it might take a while



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Historians and Linguists have already discovered the world spoke a single language that originated in Mesopotamia.


Are you honestly expecting me to read a 7400 word transcript of a television program? Please cite the adequate proof from the transcript because I'm honestly not taking that much time out of my day to read a 13 year old transcript.



What's the next excuse?


No excuses, only counter-evidence.
Primarily that the field of linguistics still has yet to reach a conclusion as to the origin of language. There are plenty of references in the wikipedia entry if you don't want to just look at the short descriptions wikipedia gives.

Another quite obvious question is that the NOVA program probably doesn't say anything about all languages spontaneously developing overnight. Nor can you create a link the ancient tower you provided a link to without another piece of evidence.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join