How come when viewing debates bewtween 2 intellectuals about the existence of God, some atheists call the theist "stupid" unintelligent, and insane. They say this about people such as, John Lennox (Professor with a triple doc at Oxford) Antony Flew (ex atheists who they used to praise) William Lane Craig (One of the best philisophers who has never lost a debate on God) Alister McGrath (Also professor at Oxford) Are they saying that they are smarter than a professor at Oxford? They say "oh i wish i could debate craig i would crush him" REALLY? cuz so far no other atheist, atheists that are highly intelligent, have beaten him
31 comments
Lol Anthony Flew despite being a deist now, still says Christianity and all other religious are bullshit.
William Lane Craig has been CRUSHED in every debate I've seen on him. His moral argument goes like this "oh so morals are relative then that means murder and rape are OK." That's he mind of a child right there. Then there is all the youtube videos crushing him even more.
Never heard of John Lennox or care, have heard of Alister McGrath though. But still don't care.
Must I remind this idiot that the best scientists in the USA are mostly agnostic/atheist? And that's just in the USA. Never mind all across the world.
The thing about debates is that they don't prove anything. You can out-debate all the people in the world and still be wrong, because debates are all about how well you present an argument and not whether that argument is true or not.
Second, there are many people out there who would be smarter than an Oxford professor. I know so many university graduates who are dumber than dirt, it almost makes me shudder. The thing is that, just like debates, being a graduate does not mean that all your points are valid. In fact, more than likely, being a graduate means that you are simply really good at following rules and regulations and have not been taught to really think for yourself.
My apologies to any university graduates who do not fit this bill.
The truth is not decided by debate. While I acknowledge that some theologians are highly educated, the religious subjects they study aren't rooted in reality and are largely based upon conjecture and fabrication.
No one will ever conclusively prove to me the existence of a god or gods by argument. I need physical evidence and there is none.
First, who the hell are these people? And why should I care?
Second, a degree from Oxford (or any institution of learning) does not automatically confer demigodhood. That requires virgin sacrifice and running naked around campus by the conferee.
Guess what?
Now there's a theist calling you stupid too!
And here I go:
Tonr H. is a man mentally still in his single digits, and has all the logical ability of soft coral.
Not a sea sponge, mind you-those cells are pretty intelligent when it comes to recognizing their own.
Here, let me give you an analogy you'll understand:
I can have a Doctorate in knowing everything about Star Trek, A Law Doctorate in Warhammer and a Doctorate in Phillip K. Dick Novels. This does not make me a smart guy, this does not make all my opinions valid. I used examples of works of fiction because a doctorate in religion, theology or the bible is a doctorate in fiction.
Fun game...
1. Steer debate with fundtard to topic to morality. Wait for accusations of moral relativism.
2. Ask fundtard what evils he considers to be "moral absolutes". Rape, murder, slavery or incest will usually appear in the list somewhere.
3. Point out that all occur in the bible, hence the bible is an evil book and God is an evil being. Emphasise that these things are absolutely evil by the funtard's own admission, so there are no mitigating circumstances.
4. Wait the special pleading, backpeddling and squirming as they try to reposition their examples as moral absolutes that are somehow contingent on the circumstances.
5. Point. Laugh. Enjoy.
Best quote...
FT: "No, "moral relativism" means that nothing is right or wrong, I'm saying these things are always wrong except when circumstances dictate otherwise!"
Me: "So you're saying they are absolutely relative?"
FT: (big smile) "See? You're getting it!"
"How come when viewing debates bewtween 2 intellectuals about the existence of God, some atheists call the theist "stupid" unintelligent, and insane."
Because it is. Because the fundie can't prove the existence of their 'God' to the satisfaction of the Atheists. Because religion is just a delusion, a fairy tale. Therefore religion is stupid, unintelligent and insane.
Next question.
"How come when viewing debates bewtween 2 intellectuals about the existence of God, some atheists call the theist "stupid" unintelligent, and insane."
If you've been reading the submissions here you know the answer to that question.
How come when viewing debates bewtween 2 intellectuals about the existence of God, some atheists call the theist "stupid" unintelligent, and insane.
We shall leave aside the grammatical horror you committed with that sentence.
Theists are, by definition , insane. An adult hears voices and claims to speak with non-existent people or other beings, he is judged insane. Yet a theist does the same thing under the guise of religion it is considered not only tolerable, but in some circles (the Pentecostal church, for example) it is laudatory.
If you talk to your god, you are insane. QED.
He's pulled out all the heavyweights here except Behe but missed a key element to the claim of intellectual exellence. They all distort (lie about)scientific endevour and product and insist they have a right to call doubt without anything but assertion, and like priest refuse to answer questions about their faith and holy scripture.
I've watched many debates on YouTube, most of Hitchens outtings, he chews them up, the crowd is usually on his side by the end BUT in the comments come dozens of them claiming he couldn't dispute creationists or superior Christian morals in the end. Because we put our fingers in our ears and went LaLaLaLa everytime he spoke.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.