Are Christians losing or have lost the debate?

[Jagella]

Question for Debate Are Christians losing or have lost the debate with atheists?

Christianity is shrinking in developed nations including the USA. Creationism has lost almost every court battle it has waged against science. Intelligent Design's true agenda has been publicly exposed. The view that Jesus never existed is growing and more academics admit their doubts. The large majority of scientists are now atheists. The corruption in the Christian church is being exposed online and in the news. Christian apologists are becoming outraged as their arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.

Think about all that as you answer the question for debate.

[Realworldjack]

Question for Debate Are Christians losing or have lost the debate with atheists?

Christianity is shrinking in developed nations including the USA. Creationism has lost almost every court battle it has waged against science. Intelligent Design's true agenda has been publicly exposed. The view that Jesus never existed is growing and more academics admit their doubts. The large majority of scientists are now atheists. The corruption in the Christian church is being exposed online and in the news. Christian apologists are becoming outraged as their arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.

Think about all that as you answer the question for debate.

It should not be very difficult for anyone to understand why Christians are losing debates on these type of forums. I mean let's think about this for just a moment. This forum is filled with former Christians. Many, if not most of these former Christians, admit to not putting a whole lot of effort into thinking, in order to remain to be, or become a Christian well into their adult life, being convinced Christianity would be true, and dedicating their life to it.

This would necessarily mean, these former Christians, really had no idea what they believed, nor why they believed as they did, which would also mean, they would not have fared very well in any sort of debate concerning Christianity, because they really have not thought very much at all about it.

Much of the reason these folks did not think in order to be Christians, is because there are many Churches who do not appeal to the mind, but rather appeal to the emotions, which again should tell us that these sort of Christians, have no base to support what it is they believe, and could not possibly stand up to any sort of debate, as far as facts, and evidence goes, because their belief is not built upon facts, and evidence.

With all this being the case, we can be sure there still remain many, many Christians, who have not put a whole lot of effort into thinking about what they believe, and when, and if they were to show up on a debate site, it should not be shocking at all for us to see that they have no argument, since they have not put forth any effort into thinking. Therefore, all they are left with as far as debate goes, is to appeal to what they believe they have experienced, and, or, what they have been told by others, just like the many former Christians on this site did, when they were Christians.

So then, the former Christians on this site, debate these Christians who came to their decision to be a Christian in the same way in which they did, and they can now see the weakness in the arguments, which then confirms in their mind they were correct in rejecting Christianity, and this cycle simply continues over, and over, which demonstrates that there still is not a whole lot of thinking going on, on either side.

So then, what we have is, those who admit they were "weak minded" Christians at one time, debating weak minded Christians, and because they seem to be winning the argument in debate with these weak minded Christians, this somehow reinforces in their minds, that Christianity must indeed be false.

And to demonstrate there is still not a whole lot of thinking going on, let us simply take a look at the rest of what has been said,

The view that Jesus never existed is growing and more academics admit their doubts.

This is simply an appeal to numbers, as if the number of people who believe a certain way has any bearing whatsoever, on reality. This would seem to be no different than the thinking that one would have used as a "weak minded" Christian? The question would be, what sort of facts, and evidence do we have to support the idea that Jesus may have never existed?

The large majority of scientists are now atheists.

Again, an appeal to numbers, which sort of demonstrates one who continues to rely on the opinion of others, just like they did when they admit to being a, "weak minded" Christian, instead of attempting to think for themselves.

The corruption in the Christian church is being exposed online and in the news.

Which would not have a thing to do with Christianity being true, or false.

Christian apologists are becoming outraged as their arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.

I do not even know how you would be able to demonstrate this to be a fact? What I do know is, there are arenas filled with folks who come to watch these sort of debates, and I have attended many of them myself. There have been times when the unbeliever has won the debate, but there have also been times when the Christian has won the debate. In fact, there have been unbelievers who have admitted they understood the Christian won the debate at times, and the only way one can draw the conclusion that one side, or the other, has never won the debate would have to be influenced by, confirmation bias.

The point here is, there would be no way for any Christian to ever win the debate, if there were not facts, and evidence in support.

So then, when you admit to being a "weak minded" Christian at one point in your life, and you debate with the same sort of Christians online, it should not be a surprise to find, they are making the same sort of arguments you would have made when you were a "weak minded" Christian.

Think about all that as you answer the question for debate.

I think we just did.

[Bust Nak]

This is simply an appeal to numbers, as if the number of people who believe a certain way has any bearing whatsoever, on reality...

Off topic? This thread is about winning/losing debate, not whether the winning side is ultimately correct or not. Whether there are any facts or evidence to support the idea that Jesus may have never existed is irrelevant here. Appealing to numbers is a great way of deciding which side is winning, no? It is how official/structured debate is decided.

[Clownboat]

...arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.....

I have not seen that. Could you give one example of that?

"The belly of a whale or big fish is so toxic that no person could survive in the belly."
viewtopic.php?t=36713&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

The silence speaks for itself.

[Clownboat]

Question for Debate Are Christians losing or have lost the debate with atheists?

Christianity is shrinking in developed nations including the USA. Creationism has lost almost every court battle it has waged against science. Intelligent Design's true agenda has been publicly exposed. The view that Jesus never existed is growing and more academics admit their doubts. The large majority of scientists are now atheists. The corruption in the Christian church is being exposed online and in the news. Christian apologists are becoming outraged as their arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.

Think about all that as you answer the question for debate.

It should not be very difficult for anyone to understand why Christians are losing debates on these type of forums. I mean let's think about this for just a moment. This forum is filled with former Christians. Many, if not most of these former Christians, admit to not putting a whole lot of effort into thinking, in order to remain to be, or become a Christian well into their adult life, being convinced Christianity would be true, and dedicating their life to it.

Talk about poisoning the well!
I'm a former drunk in the holy ghost, street evangelizing, tongue talking missionary (out of the country 4 times).

To write people off like myself is dishonest. To attempt to lump all former Christians into one group of unthinking people is also dishonest, divisive and disgusting.

If you had a god helping you in debate, it would be obvious. What is obvious is that you don't when this is what you must resort to.

IMO, this is a perfect example of lost debate.

When the debate is lost, slander become the tool of the loser. - Socrates

[Jagella]

Talk about poisoning the well!

I'm being trolled. A long time ago--at least a year--RWJ for some reason latched onto something I said about my experience as a Christian. I said something to the effect that I was taught by Christians to limit my thinking, and ever since then he's been annoying me by persistently bringing up that subject. Post after post--month after month--he keeps posting it. It never ends!I think the idea is to be so obnoxious with me that I leave the forum.

I've had this kind of experience with trolls in forums more than once. I post something somebody doesn't like, and they keep hounding me about it. I suppose some people, realizing they cannot win an argument, resort to harassing anybody they know they cannot sensibly defeat in a debate.

I'm a former drunk in the holy ghost, street evangelizing, tongue talking missionary (out of the country 4 times).

I'm glad you got out of it.

To attempt to lump all former Christians into one group of unthinking people is also dishonest, divisive and disgusting.

I think RWJ's basic premise is that if you made some mistakes in the past and were duped, then your present judgment cannot be trusted. I think that this is a really stupid conclusion to come to. Just because you were wrong in the past doesn't mean you cannot be correct now.

If you had a god helping you in debate, it would be obvious. What is obvious is that you don't when this is what you must resort to.

If RWJ's faith is based in reality, then the Holy Ghost is a troll.

IMO, this is a perfect example of lost debate.

When the debate is lost, slander become the tool of the loser. - Socrates

It often occurs to me. I make some killer point in a debate against a Christian, and the crying ensues. I'm told how angry I am. In my view, anger can be good if it's directed at wrongdoing. Losing a debate and personally attacking the victor is never a good thing.

[1213]

...arguments are shredded by atheists in online debates.....

I have not seen that. Could you give one example of that?

Just check any of my threads.

Sorry, I dont think you have given any argument that would shred anything.

[1213]

Fewer and fewer Christians participate here

Fewer and fewer Christians start threads

Perhaps there is just too much repeating of same old questions. At some point, when you have answered many times to same questions, it can look pointless.

Fewer and fewer Christians give direct answers to OPs in my view.

Perhaps there is just too much atheistic preaching and straw man arguments/questions that it just doesnt seem to be worthwhile.

But, do you have some question in mind that has not yet been answered?

Absolutely NO Christians demonstrate here that their version of "God" is anything more than imaginary

Absolutely NO Christians demonstrate here that so much as a verse of Christian "scripture" emanated in any way from their version of "God"

Bible tells God is love. If you think love is imaginary, have you any idea who imagined it first? Do you know love?

He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8

We know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and he who remains in love remains in God, and God remains in him.
1 John 4:16

I think it would be good to understand, Christians are believers. They believe certain things. It is not same as to know absolutely. Person who claims to know something, could perhaps demonstrate that he has right knowledge, but belief is not same as scientific facts. Also, I think it is not possible for humans to prove anything from the past. Or do you think you could prove something that happened for example 2000 years ago?

[1213]

"The belly of a whale or big fish is so toxic that no person could survive in the belly."
viewtopic.php?t=36713&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

The silence speaks for itself.

Thank you. But how it helps, if you replace one belief with another belief? How many times you have spent time in a whales belly? I believe it is possible to survive there, but I have not tried it.

[Tcg]

How many times you have spent time in a whales belly? I believe it is possible to survive there, but I have not tried it.

How many times have you gone three days without oxygen? The answer is of course never.

• How long does it take to die from no oxygen?
  
  In general, the brain can withstand up to three to six minutes without oxygen before brain damage occurs, but this may vary from person to person. If the brain goes without oxygen longer than this, serious and often irreversible damage is likely to take place. After ten minutes, severe neurological damage has generally occurred. Very few people regain any cognitive function after the brain has gone 15 or more minutes without oxygen.
  
  http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=3643

Tcg

[benchwarmer]

"The belly of a whale or big fish is so toxic that no person could survive in the belly."
viewtopic.php?t=36713&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

The silence speaks for itself.

Thank you. But how it helps, if you replace one belief with another belief? How many times you have spent time in a whales belly? I believe it is possible to survive there, but I have not tried it.

This is a perfect example of what some theists will hold onto despite the obvious problems of reality.

How, pray tell, would it be possible to survive in the belly of a whale assuming it was just you that got swallowed and not you inside a modern device with enough oxygen to survive the ordeal?

Let me guess: God can do anything. If this is the answer, I'm not sure why you would bother debating anything. If it's not the answer, we all await your hypothesis. I'm not going to hold my breath though...