 |
The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
Religious Debate Online, Need Some Help
Alright, here's the task. Recently some people on Facebook have been posting their views of religion in notes and claiming why they think Christianity is correct. Obviously this has sparked huge debates. I decided at first to not get involved, but the time has come where something must be done. Neither side of these debates knows how to argue their point properly and it's getting really frustrating. I've decided to write a note explaining why being agnostic or atheist is the most logical decision and why Christianity and other major religions are almost certainly wrong.
Since there is a size limit on these notes I need suggestions on the information about atheism I should include, information about Christianity, how the note should progress, etc...
Your help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Since there is a size limit on these notes I need suggestions on the information about atheism I should include, information about Christianity, how the note should progress, etc...
Your help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Danny on -
This has been up for almost two days now. I'd really like some help with this. If no one responds I won't bump this again.
-
Permalink Reply by Laura B-G on -
Why don't you just focus on why atheism is the logical answer and leave people to figure out what is wrong with religion on their own? If you feel the need to be antogonistic, point out the very real oppression of women which is rampant in all religions...including Buddhist and Hindu religions. Mysogyny is not sexy.
-
Permalink Reply by Rene Benthien on -
yeah I'd agree with Laura. Just explain the scientific method (characterise, hypothesis, predict, test), and why its the only method of understanding our shared reality. Then explain why the God hypothesis does not fit. Say you are open minded to it, but until someone presents verifiable evidence you are going to go with your current position.
Might help us if you re-post whatever it is that you are replying to.
-
Permalink Reply by Jezzy on -
I'd just whoop their asses intellectually, but be nice about it. Remain calm. If you attack people, they'll fight back. Simple.
I'd focus on mentioning the important harmful social example of religion while you're explaining the scientific fallacies. Mention the slaves, racism, bestiality, sexism, murder, etc. Use references. If you say "the bible is this and that" they'll just say "no it's not". Prove your point. Explain how it relates today, with the "traditional family" including subservient housewives, restrictions on gay marriage, etc. Find the best parts of the scriptures that cannot possibly be explained, such as living in a whale or flooding the earth; be thorough.
For example, Noah's Ark: We could prove a genetic bottleneck; physical features would all relate to the few survivors. You couldn't fit that many animals on an ark, especially aquatic, and the remainers would run out of light, and thus plants, and thus oxygen, if the earth flooded. Sea life would essentially die. There would be more lakes; the grand canyon would likely be filled with water. How about the ethics? Well, was everyone evil? The babies? Who created these people; made them what they are?
My sister has made a lot of very intelligent religious facebook notes. A family friend posted why gay marriage is okay, and a bunch of illiterate hacks from a Christian school came and threw tantrums. The world is full of morons.
Anyways, hope that helps. . .
-
Permalink Reply by Rene Benthien on
-
yeah that will help especially if people are posting things that uphold the inerrant biblical view. Where I'm from, not too many people still believe that ark stuff. If i were to attack that they'll say I'm attacking the straw man, not 'real Christianity'.
-
Permalink Reply by Nick in Tacoma on -
It makes sense to be an agnostic because there is no compelling reason why one religion should be held in higher regard than another. When all the arguments have been made, theists are always left hanging on to faith as the final word. Why should the faith of a Jew trump that of a Hindu? Why should the faith of a Muslim trump that of a Christian? Why should the faith of a born again trump that of a Roman Catholic?
One of the rhetorical tricks used by Theists is to start the discussion on a question such how do you know god doesn't exist which causes the agnostic/atheist to answer a broad question about the possibility of a god and then quickly move the discussion into one around their specific god.
It makes sense to be an atheist because there is no reason to believe there is a god, and even less to believe in a God, a Yahweh, an Allah or any number of other deities.
-
Permalink Reply by Mel on -
Hey, whereabouts on FB? Its so much easier to debate (or help debate) when the oppossing side has declared itself. Althought FB as debate medium? bleugh.
-
Permalink Reply by Danny on
-
The first note somebody wrote went on quite a lot about the literal interpretation of the bible. He made a claim about how people should live and then cited the bible verse that those beliefs came from. It was a really ridiculous note and the debate that followed was very long. It was mainly between one atheist and a ton of Christians. The atheist couldn't argue her points well and nobody got anywhere. The hardcore Christians in the debate mostly just quoted the bible to prove their points. The guy who wrote the note, who was also the most outspoken person in the debate, gave a link to a website that "disproved evolution". But after looking at the website it was just a Christian run website and they put the word science in the title to give it more credit. Unfortunately I can't find the link anymore. There wasn't much else said about science.
The second note was written by different person than the first note. He took a much more liberal view of the bible. He wasn't against gay marriage or most the stuff you hear the right wing Christians going nuts about today, but he still was a Christian and believed in God and Jesus and all that. The debate that followed that note though brought back all the same people that debated in the first note, so it went in a very similar direction.
What you all have said so far is helpful. I hope this info is useful to you to explain the situation to me. If someone could give me the links to some very credible scientific websites that would be great.
-
Permalink Reply by Danny on
-
I've begun writing my note with an introduction explaining my history with religion, clarifying that I'm not just talking about the three big monotheistic religions but using god to refer to any supreme being, and saying there is no way to completely disprove god but that atheists say there isn't enough evidence to believe. Give what I have a read and let me know what you think.
Religion is something that has always interested me. I was raised in a Christian Methodist house and attended church on a fairly regular basis throughout my childhood. From a very early age I questioned what I was taught. Though I believed in God and Jesus something in the back of my mind was always yelling that something wasn’t right. As I got older I started to learn about science, logic, and reason. Religion started to make less and less sense. I continued to read about and study religion and science until I finally concluded that there is probably no god and, it is not rational to believe there is one. I’m going to attempt to explain these reasons in this note. I hope that everyone who reads this note will seriously examine their beliefs. If you are a believer, please don’t immediately dismiss what I say, but read it and then do some serious research on your own. If you’re a non-believer, hopefully you’ll see there are more people like you since we are definitely a minority. With that said, let’s get into why there is almost certainly no god.
It’s important for me to clarify what I mean by the word “god”. I’m not just referring to the god of the Abrahamic religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. I’m talking about any type of supreme being. Now that the definition of god is clear I will be the first to say that, as of now, there is no way to completely disprove the existence of a god. Just like there is no way that a believer can prove that there is a god. Don’t start making comments like, “Well you can’t disprove a god, so therefore there is a god and the Christians are right.” The point of all this is not to disprove anything. It’s to show everyone that the odds of there being a god are very very slim and it’s not rational to believe in one. Atheists do not say that there is no god, they say that there is not enough evidence to support the belief in a god.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Howard on -
I like to use Hitchens quote. "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed in kind".
-
Permalink Reply by Michael on -
Tell the Christians it is too early to discuss morality, evolution, or whatever.
Ask them to:
(1) Describe the god they believe in
(2) Prove that he exists.
It is almost certain the Christians will try to change the subject in the first paragraph of their reply, but don't accept that ploy. Repeat your questions and insist on an answer.
If an answer is forthcoming, I go through it step by step and ask for explanations.
Usually the Christian just disappears...
-
Permalink Reply by David Agaybi on -
I've been on 2 debate based atheist forums before I joined this group and from my experience I would say the thing that really gets them is what parts of the bible do they believe is literal and what parts do they take as allegory. If they believe the whole book word for word, then you have a nut case on your hands and you could just sit back and make a fool out of him/her easily for all to see. If they pick and choose between allegory then you have more hope of bringing light into that person's perspective. You should always ask them questions to see how they think and then go from there.
Personally though I would avoid debate on forums specialized in debates because all they do is debate and nothing else. They have very strict and weird rules and the moderators will stop you in your tracks because they see the theist is getting hammered and want more balance so the debate can go on.
Good luck
 |
 |
 |
 |
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
Alexandros replied to Atheist Andrea's discussion Are you open about being an atheist or are you in the closet?
Ruth Anthony-Gardner replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Oligofructose and obesity in the group Diet and Exercise Support Group© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
