Can religion actually be debated ?

I am wondoring. In the case of lets say:

Atheism/Agnostic VS Christianity

Both parties argue with sources of information that the other usually disregards.

For example most Christian debators will use quotes from the Bible, passages, and over all scripture for thier points. Most athiests and agnostics will argue "I don't beleive in the Bible" thereby rendering the Christian debator's arguments meaningless and unseccessful.

At the same time, however, Atheists/Agnostics will often argue in terms of science, logic, reason, philosophy or a non religious source of information, and some Christian debators will argue "that is false information" or "its just theory" or "i dont beleive in studying that stuff" or "this is a religious forum....not a scientific one" etc.

How do EITHER of these parties expect the debate to go ANYWHERE when you only argue within your chosen realms of info ????

I find beleif systems, whether religious or non religious, to be mostly subjective. Ofcourse theres reasons to beleive what you beleive, but over all its "my opinion vs yours".....

I have concluded, however, that certain points stick to each party:

examples:

Athiest and/or Agnostics will reject the idea of Hell. It sounds too cruel, too hateful, and/or too imaginative for them to take seriously.

Most Christians keep Hell very much a large part of thier beleifs and do not only accept Hell, but believe in punishment and consequence indefinately.

Most Atheist/Agnostics will keep a more open mind, basing this on the fact they are open to the possibility that they may be wrong. They also admit most of the time, that they do NOT know everything. They admit to either be discovering thier own way, or being at refusal to conform.

Many Christians on this thread will keep a more closed outlook on the debate, since they will only see things through "Biblical Eyes". Christians will not say that they know everything, but will say they beleive that they seek to know all there is to know. And they also beleive that all the answers necessary will be found in thier Bible.

Both parties are guilty of resorting to insults when an argument takes too long or goes no where. How can this be prevented and more fruitful debates come about ?

Any thoughts on this guys ?

Its still possible to debate. People should use all sources though. To just use one is not credible. Its classic writing. If you want to have a credible point, you need to back it up as much as possible. There is plenty of outside the bible sources that support religion. There are plenty of passages in the bible that contradict religion.

Regardless whether you believe the toher sources are valid, a great majority of people believe they are valid. Since they have a significant cultural impact....

I think its possible 😎

Right, i understand you.

But for example, lets say me vs Punker69....

I don't think we will ever see eye to eye. I think he is narrow minded and ignorant, he thinks that im ignorant and dumb.

HE disregards any information that's not in his Bible, and I disregard any information from the Bible that cannot be applied to real life.

This raises a question: if you are engaging in a debate, why are you doing it? Are you just looking to win an argument or vent your negative emotions about religion and theism/agnosticism and atheism?

Personally, I have never - in any debate - resorted to insults.

I beleive you, but many people in this debate whether they be religious or atheist DO resort to insults...BECAUSE this is probably the most personal topic one can imagine...

I am trying to ask people in this thread if they can open thier minds to various sources of truth.

You can't downtalk someone else's knowledge if you do not know where they are coming from.

If i didn't know anything about the Bible, I wouldn't disregard it. Who knows...maybe i don't know enough about it as i beleive i do...but ive been a Catholic all of my life....i thnk i know a lot about the Bible to make judgements on it and disregard something that i feel cannot be proven by realistic fact.

The same goes for religious debators who feel that all the answers are in the Bible, therefore they will often disregard science, reason, logic and anything else that is of a non religious nature.

I am asking BOTH SIDES to open up to the possibility that you MAY be wrong...if not that, atleast RESEARCH someone else's information before you disregard it.

Punker69 feels that i am ignorant because i choose to disregard the Bible. He doesn't understand that i probably know as much about it as he does, if not more. He feels this way, yet when a Buddhist debator on these forums asked him to look up her information for CLARITY on her argument he replied " No i dont beleive in studying those things"

if that is not purposeful ignorant and close mindedness, i dont know what is

You talked a lot, but my question remains unanswered.

The problem is that all parties are absolutely convinced of their beliefs and take on the attitude that they could not possibly be mistaken (and yet still hold on to the idea that they are “open minded”).

Storm....thats exactly what i said. And i am asking people to open up to the possibility that they may be wrong..and if not ATLEAST research the your opponent's source of info, so you know where they are coming from, instead of disregarding it...

did you actually READ my post before? I'm not being rude here, but im seriously asking.

That is indeed what you claim, but I have the impression you' re speaking mere rhetoric, as the majority of your posts don' t lead me to believe that you yourself could be wrong.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen

At the same time, however, Atheists/Agnostics will often argue in terms of science, logic, reason, philosophy or a non religious source of information, and some Christian debators will argue "that is false information" or "its just theory" or "i dont beleive in studying that stuff" or "this is a religious forum....not a scientific one" etc.

These are actual facts that can be proven over and over, there is no if or but about it...

The Bible on the other hand is a piece of fiction, with no proof at all.

anything can be debated, the results might not be what you are looking for though!

Athiest and/or Agnostics will reject the idea of Hell. It sounds too cruel, too hateful, and/or too imaginative for them to take seriously.

Originally posted by Boris
These are actual facts that can be proven over and over, there is no if or but about it...

The Bible on the other hand is a piece of fiction, with no proof at all.

Originally posted by Boris
These are actual facts that can be proven over and over, there is no if or but about it...

The Bible on the other hand is a piece of fiction, with no proof at all.

If the bible was all fiction, then there would be less controversy. The problem is that there is some fact and some true history in the bible, but it is often distorted and myopic in it's view. There are some parts of the bible that are beautiful poetry, and some parts that are down right evil if interpreted literally. That is why the bible is so controversial, if it was all fiction, we wouldn't be talking about it. 😄

Storm, then you must be reading all of my posts, or perhaps you're lookin to deep into this one.

As for your question about my goal in the debate: My goals are as such:

1) Attempt to prove my opponent wrong

2) Attempt to make opponent question how much they actually know about the topic of discussion

3) Attempt to make opponent see where I am coming fron

4) Attempt to see if the opponent can convince me that I am wrong....

Ultamately these are my goals. I already admitted that i do not know everything. I only admitted that I do not accept the Bible as absolute fact when it pertains to certain matters i.e. gay marriage, gay rights, etc.

I beleive that the only argument I have been pig headed about is any argument concerning gay/ civil rights, ne thing of that sort AND/OR arguments pertaining to the concept of Hell.

When it comes to the topic of homosexality/bisexuality...what do i KNOW for fact and what do i not know?

1) Do i KNOW that people are born gay ?

Although many people claim that there is evidence to prove such, i have not found any, so No i dont know this

2) Do I know that being gay is not a choice ?

Yes...i know this very well. Being gay does not mean you have sex with people of your gender. Being gay means you WANT to have sex with people of your gender. The desire itself, your sexual attraction makes you straight/gay/bi. There are gay virgins....so how is being gay a choice? It's not and no one can convince me that it is. Sorry

3) Do I know that you can't change being gay?

No, I don't know. There are people who have TRIED and failed (Governor McGreivey for example) but there are also people who claimed that through religious effort and psychiatric effort they suppressed thier homosexual desires and insprired heterosexual thoughts to progress....i dont know what to beleive. But who cares? Ultamately, why should anyone have to change thier sexuality? IT WORKS for many people, so why change ? Because society says you have 2 ? Umm..no

ANd as for Hell.....i simply hate the idea of it. Hell a place of eternal torment....a place like this could rationionally only be for the most cruel and sadistic of people. Not for anyone whose basically a good and loving person.

Also Hell is tooooo similiar to Greek Mythos "Tartarus" and Egyptian Mythos "The UnderWorld"....i just dont beleive in it.

Personally, I debate online because it opens me up to more opinions that I'm more prepared to debate in real life.

Relgious views/Sociall acceptable views/modern views/Non-religous views are perfectly reconcilable. YOu just have to keep each in its own sphere where it belongs.

It is entirerly possible to debate religion or spirituality. But, usually it has no effect on either party, and everyone walks away mad. Even if someone starts out a debate with good intentions, they can end up continuing simply because they want to "win." Believe me, I know this from experience.

God, I hope so.

What i meant guys is can a debate between religous people and non religious people ever acheive success through opening the minds of the other party ?

I beleive that both parties never budge, or FAKE empathy only with the intention of getting the other person to see it "THIER" way.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
What i meant guys is can a debate between religous people and non religious people ever acheive success through opening the minds of the other party ?

I beleive that both parties never budge, or FAKE empathy only with the intention of getting the other person to see it "THIER" way.

Depends which is more important to either party: being right, or finding truth.

Yes, but you have to understand. MANY Christians beleive they ALREADY know the truth. That is why some of them would disregard ANYTHING that is not part of thier Bible or Faith.