The Prof. Craig-Mr. Hitchens Debate, 8.4 MN views. Who iyo won and why?

[Inkubus]

Debates don't determine truth.  There's a reason Christians debate.  It's misleading.  It's not probative.

Yeah, debates are about winning, not about getting the truth of the matter,

[Edible crust]

WLC has got one of those voices that makes being deaf seem appealing.
Who cares who won, it means nothing.

[Inkubus]

I guess nothing is impossible but the idea of a big giant invisible magical personality out there watching us, judging us.  It's dumb.  So much more honest to just say fuck no one knows what any of this shit is about.

I do. It's all shit.

[brewerb]

People believe in all kinds of psychological constructs that have no validity. The vast majority don't feel compelled to tell us about them for our benefit.

[Minimalist]

It could mean the points were not well argued for. Dr. Craig uses mostly the 5 same Arguments, with maybe slight variations, in most of his debates.

Yeah, thats the problem with him. His arguments get refuted, over and over, and he then pretends that nothing happened and is presenting them again. Thats probably why he never had more than 5 arguments in total, and never will. He is very similar to you, or vice versa, which is not surprising, since (iirc) he seems to be a role model to you.

There's another idiot named Habermas who has what he calls the "Minimal Facts Approach."

Habermas, associated with the jesus freak nuts at Liberty University...home of the Falwell klan.... claims that these are "facts" which are accepted even by skeptics.

The first is:

1) that Jesus died by crucifixion;

Presumptuous of the fuck to think that all skeptics accept this when a significant number of us don't even think there was any jesus to nail up.


But that is an example of the intellectual paucity of these apologist shitheads.

[AutisticWill]

Can we not get rid of Xavier?

Does he need to show his ass in photographic form before we can do anything?

Honest to god, I'm afraid I'll get banned from the forum for the way in which I keep calling for his banishment; that I'll trip up and break some rule I can't remember, like about 'All Caps.'

However:
The Admins are beloved (I like em anyway); I am also worried that they have too much to do at the moment, both IRL and online.

If so -- Xavier is taking advantage of us!

[Cavebear]

So Prof. Craig and Mr. Hitchens had a Debate on Christianity vs Atheism at Biola University some years ago. I give credit to Hitchens for showing up for the debate, unlike Mr. Dawkins who apparently was too afraid to debate his views on the subject at the time. That being said, however, even fellow Atheists thought Hitchens lost and badly lost the Debate to Prof. Craig.

For e.g. a website called "Common Sense Atheism", which apparently thinks Atheism is just "Common Sense", nonetheless admitted: "[color=#000000]I also came across this colorful and evenhanded account from a blog called Common Sense Atheism.

Naturally, your view would be that the theist won the debate by not utterly refuting atheism.  But mine is that Hitchens merely spoke the truth that atheists don't claim to disprove a deity.  We merely say that no evidence of one exists.  There is a difference.

This is a common mistake theists make.  You can't disprove much of anything non-material and atheists are really not that concerned with "disproving a deity" because you can't disprove a negative.  Rather, they are asking for evidence from theists to prove their claim is true.   The theist claim came first, so it is up to them to prove the claim.

And that matters.  Because no ancient person suddenly woke up one morning and said "there is no deity" out of nowhere.  The concept didn't exist.  Instead, some ancient person woke up one morning and decided there was a deity and started talking about the idea.  There was obviously no concept of "atheism" before  there was a "theism".  You can't be an atheist (not theist) before there is a theist to begin with.

There was certainly a time before theism (and therefore atheism) never existed in ancient human minds.  Neither concept occurred before the first person imanined the idea of a supernatural being.

So the claim of a deity came first.  Unproven, superstitious, and entirely from fear of natural events they did not understand.  And no actual evidence of a deity has ever been presented to this day.  

I think Hitchens explained that very well.

[Inkubus]

Double.

[Inkubus]

If so -- Xavier is taking advantage of us!

Trolls are sidewalk commandos (No Account Motherfuckers)  who choke the chicken while leaving intentionally provocative or offensive messages on the interwebz in order to get attention, cause trouble or upset someone.
A competent experienced troll can create conflict among forum members, and cause friction between members and site admin.* When that happens they consider it a home run. A win!

Our lad here ticks all the boxes. But then we all knew that from day one.



*If there are any.

[mordant]

Can we not get rid of Xavier?

Does he need to show his ass in photographic form before we can do anything?

Honest to god, I'm afraid I'll get banned from the forum for the way in which I keep calling for his banishment; that I'll trip up and break some rule I can't remember, like about 'All Caps.'

However:
The Admins are beloved (I like em anyway); I am also worried that they have too much to do at the moment, both IRL and online.

If so -- Xavier is taking advantage of us!

I am not sure exactly where the line is that invokes the ban-hammer here. Moderation has always been light-touch here, dare I say, a little light for my taste but far better to err in that direction than city-data where I also hang out ... there you cannot use naughty words (weirdly, "crap" is okay, "shit" is not), you cannot discuss politics in the atheism, religion or Christianity forums even when religion and politics are so intertwined that it has a chilling or limiting effect on a lot of discourse (that is in place mainly because one of the mods just doesn't want to deal with political arguments). It's illegal to accuse anyone of being a troll. I put up with all this nonsense mainly because there's a larger # of members / critical mass there to have interesting conversations, even within those ridiculous limits. And the mods, even if I don't agree with them, are decent, honest, consistent, mostly reasonable people, and actually are there on a daily basis.

(As an interesting side note, the "politics and other controversies" form over there is run by Trumptards and anything you post unfavorable to Trump will generally be deleted and if you really piss them off they will ban you from the entire site forever. Just lost one of our Atheist forum regulars that way -- most people stay the heck out of that sinkhole).

An interesting feature of the Christianity forum on c-d is that it is for the purpose of discussion of Christianity, it is explicitly not an echo chamber. So while there are a few minimal rules such as "don't say in this subform that Jesus isn't God", atheists are able to weigh in on topics there, and there are a lot of "spiritual but not religious" types with iconoclastic takes on Christianity, etc. I've actually had a few substantive and constructive and respectful debates in that space with Christians (mostly, liberal ones).

[Dānu]

Xavier is a spammy idiot. That doesn't appear to be strictly against the rules, much as we might wish otherwise.

[mordant]

Xavier is a spammy idiot.  That doesn't appear to be strictly against the rules, much as we might wish otherwise.

I think the ban-hammer has been used mostly for people who cross the line into trolling. Xavier is flirting with it but if that's the standard, I'd say he hasn't gone too far yet. The line is somewhat subjective but if there's no substantive discussion, just posting provocative statements to stir the pot, I assume that's where the trigger lies. Xavier may be deluded, but he's engaging with us.

It's one of the reasons we encourage people to hang out socially here, humanize themselves a bit, and not just engage in debate. Xavier hasn't done much socializing, but he hasn't done zero.

The other thing I've seen the ban-hammer used for is sock puppet accounts for people previously banned.

[SaxonX]

Xavier is a spammy idiot.  That doesn't appear to be strictly against the rules, much as we might wish otherwise.

He has not come for a substantive discussion  he is just mindlessly repeating talking points and making  provocative statements and mindlessly spamming those talking points.

[mordant]

Xavier is a spammy idiot.  That doesn't appear to be strictly against the rules, much as we might wish otherwise.

He has not come for a substantive discussion  he is just mindlessly repeating talking points and making  provocative statements and mindlessly spamming those talking points.

I think he honestly sees it as substantive. It's convincing to him. Yeah "at some level" he "knows" it's BS but he's too ego invested in his dogma and too afraid of being wrong to honestly consider counterarguments.

The reason I have "some" compassion for that is that I was much like him once upon a time. Lots of pseudo-intellectual arguments I had heard but never critically considered or evaluated.

The difference is I wouldn't (I hope) have doggedly kept at it even when logical holes you could drive a truck through were pointed out. My part in it was to NOT subject it to much outside scrutiny; I used these arguments to deflect from my own rational thoughts about it but I think I probably knew that it wouldn't stand the light of day.

Or maybe I flatter myself to think I wouldn't have doubled down on such indefensible rubbish. I'm just glad I found my way out of it.

99.9% of the time the Xaviers of this world do not change their minds, but, there's a rule of thumb that there are 100+ lurkers for every poster on a forum ... those people are usually trying to figure out what they SHOULD be believing. I write for those invisible folks. If there had been an internet in the 1980s I would probably have been one of those lurkers and I try to write in ways I would have appreciated back then.

[Dānu]

He has not come for a substantive discussion  he is just mindlessly repeating talking points and making  provocative statements and mindlessly spamming those talking points.

I think he honestly sees it as substantive. It's convincing to him. Yeah "at some level" he "knows" it's BS but he's too ego invested in his dogma and too afraid of being wrong to honestly consider counterarguments.

The reason I have "some" compassion for that is that I was much like him once upon a time. Lots of pseudo-intellectual arguments I had heard but never critically considered or evaluated.

The difference is I wouldn't (I hope) have doggedly kept at it even when logical holes you could drive a truck through were pointed out. My part in it was to NOT subject it to much outside scrutiny; I used these arguments to deflect from my own rational thoughts about it but I think I probably knew that it wouldn't stand the light of day.

Or maybe I flatter myself to think I wouldn't have doubled down on such indefensible rubbish. I'm just glad I found my way out of it.

99.9% of the time the Xaviers of this world do not change their minds, but, there's a rule of thumb that there are 100+ lurkers for every poster on a forum ... those people are usually trying to figure out what they SHOULD be believing. I write for those invisible folks. If there had been an internet in the 1980s I would probably have been one of those lurkers and I try to write in ways I would have appreciated back then.

Xavier has written that he has a goal of witnessing to some large number of people. This is prioritizing quantity over quality. The arguments are a result of his specific choices.

[Charladele]

The whole reason to come to an atheist forum is to screw around with people. To cause chaos. Otherwise, why not go to a Christian forum and support those who believe in the crap he's trying to sell? He's not trying to save us. He's trying to make himself look good in that..."but I tried to turn these poor heathens to the word of god because I'm so frigging "Christian," but it didn't work. But at least I get kudos for trying and I'm making sure I'm in line for those golden wings when I kick off. Cause godboy Luvs me!"

[Edible crust]

Xavier has written that he has a goal of witnessing to some large number of people. 

He's wasting his time here then.

[mordant]

The whole reason to come to an atheist forum is to screw around with people.  To cause chaos.  Otherwise, why not go to a Christian forum and support those who believe in the crap he's trying to sell?  He's not trying to save us.  He's trying to make himself look good in that..."but I tried to turn these poor heathens to the word of god because I'm so frigging "Christian," but it didn't work.  But at least I get kudos for trying and I'm making sure I'm in line for those golden wings when I kick off.  Cause godboy Luvs me!"

Could be. I don't see any chaos here though, so if that's a goal, he's not succeeding. I don't know how he'd even do that.

I think sometimes they can also come someplace like this to tune their arguments but it's like trying to see if a perpetual motion machine will drive a car cross-country; it doesn't need tuning, because it's not even a working design.

But sometimes with these guys, the delusions of grandeur are strong.

[Cavebear]

The whole reason to come to an atheist forum is to screw around with people.  To cause chaos.  Otherwise, why not go to a Christian forum and support those who believe in the crap he's trying to sell?  He's not trying to save us.  He's trying to make himself look good in that..."but I tried to turn these poor heathens to the word of god because I'm so frigging "Christian," but it didn't work.  But at least I get kudos for trying and I'm making sure I'm in line for those golden wings when I kick off.  Cause godboy Luvs me!"

I hope I can expect you meant "The whole reason [for a theist] to come to an atheist forum is to screw around with people".

[Cavebear]

Xavier has written that he has a goal of witnessing to some large number of people. 

He's wasting his time here then.

But people like him just sort of clog up the board with trash. Glad to see him banned.

[pattylt]

I’ve been on religious forums for years. I’ve seen a few Christian’s lose their faith but I’ve never seen an atheist become a believer. I’m sure it has happened once somewhere but I think a lot of Christian’s seek out religious forums to hold on to a dwindling faith and then go to an atheist forum before they get completely lost to their Christian belief…and they find out we’re right! Those are often the looky loos that never post or rarely.

Funny thing is, once they jump to the dark side, their former religious forums ban them if they find out. Keep it up Christian’s! Once they see how their former friends treat them, they’ll never go back.

[Cavebear]

I’ve been on religious forums for years.  I’ve seen a few Christian’s lose their faith but I’ve never seen an atheist become a believer.  I’m sure it has happened once somewhere but I think a lot of Christian’s seek out religious forums to hold on to a dwindling faith and then go to an atheist forum before they get completely lost to their Christian belief…and they find out we’re right!  Those are often the looky loos that never post or rarely.  

Funny thing is, once they jump to the dark side, their former religious forums ban them if they find out.  Keep it up Christian’s!  Once they see how their former friends treat them, they’ll never go back.

I suppose that the theist boards have some converts. I suppose that some atheists have become believers in some theism. But I've never met one myself. I mean what happens? An atheist wanders into a church by accident and he suddenly jumps up to shout "OMG I have seen the light; thank you [insert the name of any deity here] and I am SAVED".

Joke... "An atheist, a rabbi, and a priest walk into a bar for a serious deep discussion about religion. Two atheists walk out"...

[pattylt]

I’ve found that most Christian “conversions” are one branch stealing from another. I also think that any atheists that go to religion are likely in some crisis and think this may work. Religions love to grab the down and out. Stable atheists are pretty immune.

[Rhythmcs]

Zero sum recruiting for religions with zero sum beliefs. It's a match made in heaven, except for how they intend to make life hell.

[jerry mcmasters]

I’ve been on religious forums for years.  I’ve seen a few Christian’s lose their faith but I’ve never seen an atheist become a believer.  I’m sure it has happened once somewhere but I think a lot of Christian’s seek out religious forums to hold on to a dwindling faith and then go to an atheist forum before they get completely lost to their Christian belief…and they find out we’re right!  Those are often the looky loos that never post or rarely.  

Funny thing is, once they jump to the dark side, their former religious forums ban them if they find out.  Keep it up Christian’s!  Once they see how their former friends treat them, they’ll never go back.

I have a long-held theory that most of the "Oh so and so was an atheist and then became a believer!" (therefore you should pay attention to their opinion) are fake.  I think what's really happening is something like Cultural Christian moves into realm of agnosticism but not with serious thought and then for personal reasons boom Hard Shift to Fundamentalism.

If you're a real atheist, you ain't going back unless God himself comes a'knockin and even then you're going to be asking questions.