XnForums

And yet you have the time to post here. Lucky us.

Evolution doesn't even address the existence or non-existence of God. You have created a false dichotomy. It's like saying hamburgers have everything to do with the existence of God.

Oh. Excuse me for impugning your reputation. I see how not deleting a thread, but making it completely invisible to the rest of the world (*cough, cough* in violation of the rules you agreed upon) is so much better.

You fundamentalist Christians and your fine-tuned sense of defining morality so the same thing can be completely different. You didn’t delete it—oh, my, no! That would be wrong and bad and an improper thing to do! You merely made it invisible so no one can read it. That is fine and honorable and upstanding.

I get it: Deleting=bad. Making invisible=good.

Not to mention all the other posts you conveniently deleted. Er…or…uh…”made invisible” to fit the vernacular of the moment.

Do you actually see Judgment day:

God: Woffie—you deleted a thread after agreeing to make it public to all.
Woffie: I didn’t “delete” it, God. I “made it invisible.” See how I didn’t break the rules.
God: Oh…harrumph…I see. Hey, that’s pretty good. Neat way to get around a technicality. We say “make it open to all” and you define “all” as “those who can see invisible threads.” This way you don’t violate the letter of the law.

You think your God is impressed with such fine distinctions? Curious…



And yet you were still unable to address my four questions, unable to provide an alternative theory to Big Bang fitting just the three (3) proof listed, unable to provide an alternative theory of how life developed using the fossil record and microbiological evidence, and unable to demonstrate why an evolution-using God is impossible.

And unable to timely respond.

Imagine how bad it would have been if I HAD been interested in a real debate! The damage would have been catastrophic!



You really don’t talk to people who believe any differently than you, do you? Ever hear of the Catholic Church? Has a member or two, last I checked.

The real tragedy is that you don’t know enough about evolution to even talk about it, much less debate the topic. You don’t understand the science involved, the difficulties of proof, or the independent verification that has taken place.

All you know is that you think it “harms” your God, so you must argue against it. Blind. Irresponsible. Uncomprehending.

Sad, really. The debate over the existence of God can be dull enough without attempting to limit it to an anachronism. By using what we have, we possibly could have come up with some method of developing the topic, rather than repeat the same tired steps.

Logos says:

Gosh, I'm impressed.

You and Woofy should have a debate. You seem to be operating on the same level.

Pax!

Everyone knows that Woofie is a lying little weasel.

What is sad Ham, is that you knew he didn’t have a clue about debate but still agreed to debate him.

Woofie was trying to protect his god - what do you get out of it?

Maybe next time you should debate someone in your own IQ range? Or better still, if it is the fun of debate you are after – debate a pro-god argument on the atheist forum. That would be entertaining.

Think so? Really? But Woofy would lose again, based on biblical proof that's he's an abomination to the very god he claims. And you know what that means.

That is a good (and fair) question. The short answer: not what I expected.

Woffie came to me. He wanted a debate. He was…eager…for one. I didn’t go to him. I didn’t ask for it. This may surprise you, but this was the first (and only) formal forum debate I have ever engaged in.

My first inclination was to say, “No.” I didn’t want to commit the time or resources to the endeavor. I understood a formal debate to take far more commitment than I really wanted to do at the moment. (My blog suffered terribly. I suffered terribly.)

And…like you…I momentarily wondered whether Woffie was up to the task. But who am I to judge another? You may consider him a lying little weasel; but that is between him and you. I actually enjoy discussing with Woffie. I may come across a bit acrimonious and frustrated—that is just my nature.

Further, having never been in a debate, I wondered if I was up to the task. To put my position succinctly (scary when 5000 words is succinct! *grin*). Regardless of the depth of Woffie’s debate—how could I stretch my own mind and prepare an argument people could understand?

I pre-wrote much of what was written. Having seen a few such debates, listened to more on my ipod on the way to work, and read even more, I kinda expected what would happen.

Now a little secret. I noticed on Woffie’s forum he mentioned a “creationist debating an atheist.” “Creationist”?? When initially agreeing to the debate I never expected it would go to evolution vs. creationism.

Not my strongest subject. One I hadn’t studied in a while. So I started boning up. Hard. Got some videos, re-read some books. My youngest became interested in my studies (I was at the kitchen table) and started watching some videos of her own. I researched on-line (and pre-wrote) much of what I had to say on evolution.

[If there is anything you should be thankful for, I have 8-10 pages of pre-written material I never used. Things on Kalaam and Intelligent design.]

Going in to the debate, I was excited to see how well I could present myself, and what direction the debate would go.

That’s what I hoped to get out of it.

Now, what I DID get out of it. It is no secret I am currently unhappy with Woffie’s administrative actions in this debate. I expected better self-moderation. I started reading his posts with a bit of trepidation (“What arguments are here that I am unable to counter?”) and finished…disappointed. (“That’s it?”) Maybe you are right. Maybe I should have gone into the debate considering him an ignorant, untruthful fool.

I just don’t. I tend (all appearances to the contrary) to think the best of others.

I got out of it an opportunity to formally present my position on arguing against a God. I got a daughter that knows quite a bit more about evolution and is eagerly continuing to study the subject. I learned quite a bit more about evolution. I had a chance to have my debate reviewed by other non-theists and receive some instruction, some compliments and re-read an old theistic debate I thoroughly enjoyed.

Yeah—pretty selfish. All about what I got out of it. But if one goes into these debates with a feeling of “I want the other fellow to capitulate and that is the ONLY way I will feel better”—I think one will be disappointed. I learned with others and I consider that a good thing.

.sola, I swear to you on everything I hold sacred I didn’t realize, going in, that Woffie didn’t have a clue regarding formal debates. I expected something along the lines of iidb, and got…well……this. I wouldn’t have been so disappointed, if I didn’t expect better.



I have thought about this. The problem I face is that I think, in terms of argument, as to what the other side will argue. What will the other side say, and how will I address it? And I think along the lines of what their best argument would be.

I don’t have an answer to creating a method. I don’t know how to answer the very questions I put to theists—what method to use to make any determination about God. If I did enter such a debate, from a theistic position, all the other person would have to do is say, “What method do you use to determine anything about God?” and I am done in. I don’t have a response to it.

Maybe I am being blind. Maybe there is such a method. Maybe they wouldn’t bring it up. But I am not inclined to enter a debate when I see such a HUGE problem I am unable to address.

Again, it may be a huge problem to me, and not to others, but there it is.

I like the idea. I think it would end terribly.

Ham said:

Why? Is that a good thing?

Had you not noticed Woffie telling fibs before? Had you noticed and thought he had changed?

You should heed the advice of your President:

Great W quote!

Ham,
Anybody who has ever seen a real debate knows which one of you two was the honest one. Good Job.

The funny thing is.....Ham won the debate and Ham was wrong according to most people.

That's the thing about debate: the outcome has far less to do with the truth than with the skill of the persons in the debate.

There certainly is a God and that fact is accepted by the overwhelming majority of people on this planet.....to them, God is unquestionably received as a reality, even though that reality can't be proven OR disproven.

So.....it's common knowledge that God exists, the real debate among most of the population is about the nature of that God and the actions or non-actions of that God.

I personally favor the conclusions that the brilliant Ben Franklin came to at the very end of his life......check Fritz's "Christian Nation" thread for details.

Pax!

.sola,

I think it is a good thing to hope people are better today than they were yesterday, and will be better tomorrow than they are today. I hope the same for myself.

Ham,

Why is it good to hold that hope when it is not a reality?

I think people are pretty much set in their ways from when they are five years old.

True, most people are set. And most don’t get better.

But some do. I fear the alternative—expecting people to never get better—leads to mediocrity. If we never expect them to be better—why should they?

Further, if I never hope for people to get better, I may never give them the chance. What harm was it, to hope Woffie would do the correct thing and post on both forums? Not remove posts? If he did, I had hope-realized. An opportunity fulfilled for Woffie to improve. If he did not, I had hope-dashed. A disappointment, to be sure, but such is the way with hope. It doesn’t really allow for middle-ground.

Would you prefer no-hope to avoid disappointment, yet never gain a sense of satisfaction?

I guess I am willing to take the disappointments among the rare instances of jubilation. That’s why, to me, it is a good thing to hope. Even if it is only rarely realized in reality.

(I am starting to get this feeling I am channeling doc! Eeeekk!)

Maybe that's why I feel like I'm being drained and pulled somewhere else at times!

So cut it out, will ya? I got all I can do to hang onto what little sense I do have!

This is the most dishonest piece of bullshit I have read on here this year. But don't worry other posters - the year is young and you will have your chance.

Woofie is a lying little toad and that is okay - I don't feel superior to him because I too have my own faults. My happiness in no way depends on how Woofie acts and he isn't a disappointment to me. You just found in him somone by comparison you would look like Mr. Sunshine