I've come to this conclusion after endless debates over religion on this board:Debating with Christians is pretty much like playing chess with a pigeon. They just knock all the pieces over. Then they shit on the board. Finally, they will strut around like they won.Even muslims have better arguments.
>>18690312You know you've cornered a Christian when they start yelling about muh metaphysics.
What's your rating. You're out here debating politics while being 600 elo.
>After years of focused effort I've landed on this milquetoast insult boomers used to crack
>>18690316Turns out it was true.
>>18690312>implying atheists ever win any debates on /his
>>18690312They argue like women. They'll act smug and condescending and tell you that you're wrong, but are totally unable to elaborate.If you press them enough on any issue the debate always terminates with the "mysteries of faith", or an admission that blind belief underpins their entire ideology.
>>18690327From the debate threads I've seen, atheists have won pretty much all the arguments on /his/.
>>18690348Two atheists walk into a debate, argue for three hours about what death, and then nothing happens
>>18690315I’m a gaytheist at 1800 lichess/1500 chesscum, I like jobava london/french/benoni usually, sometimes KID. I haven’t played in a while
>>18690312Islam really doesn't have better argument. Muhammad goes to split the moon in half and we just have to take his word for it because nobody else records it happening. Then again it doesn't have retarded contradictions like the trinity and has a more linear path towards their original quran
>>18690333>an admission that blind belief underpins their entire ideology.As is the cease with every ideology. Don't drink the kool-aid.>>18690348Were there any victories besides "but where's the God-videos?"
>>186903121.>I've come to this conclusion> like playing chess with a pigeon. This is not your conclusion. You didn't come up with "chess with a pigeon" analogy. Youre just repeating what someone else thought.2. The only reason why you shit on /his/ is because you dont actually have any scientific/historical knowledge, but you delude yourself that whinging about religion somehow means you're an educated intellectual.How about you learn about Punic Wars, and then talk about that, instead of destroying the whole board with your>if God is 3, then how is Bible hurr durrlow IQ posts.
>>18690586Those are the starting ratings you get before you play a single game, so congratulations on being 1800, you probably know every opening by heart, can visualize every square, analyzed a hundred positions in your head, and have never once sat across from someone and had to actually play.
>>18690314they get cornered even on that t b hjust a couple days ago there was a thread where a skeptic completely silenced the christian side on thomism
>>18690610The devil is the best looking and the most articulate and the most prepared and the most persuasive and the best theologian in the room and the best calculator and the one who always has a source and always has a counter and makes you feel stupid for disagreeing and is charming enough that you forget what you were defending and wins every debate and has never once been wrong on a technicality and is still completely empty the moment the conversation ends and still in hell.
>>18690608Are you this hysterical around your boyfriend as well?
Interacting with leftists and christians made me realize that insanity is more powerful than rationalism, lying is more powerful than telling the truth for the masses and that humans are in no wy rational beings.
>>18690636cope.why do you even try having arguments and do apologetics if you know you're always gonna lose because of "the devil"?
>>18690592An argument that christians often use agains islam is the islamic dilemma, that the quran says that the old testament and new testament are the word of God while contradicting it. I think that these christians are right about the islamic dilemma but I think that you could also make the case for a chrsitian dilemma with the contradictions between the old and new testaments and Jesus in the new testament saying that he didn't come to abolish the old law.
>>18690678The devil is the best framework builder who ever existed and he is in hell. People actually using the bible to push their little framework theory is the funniest and most predictable thing imaginable because the bible is the one book that explicitly warns you that the most cunning creature in the room will hand you a framework and call it wisdom. You cannot framework your way out of a framework, the only exit is light, and light is not a framework it is the thing frameworks were built to replace. Imagine actually using the bible to push your little framework theory. The devil builds frameworks, the devil lives in frameworks, the devil is the framework, and he is still in hell. People running biblical frameworks are doing the one thing the bible told them not to do with the one book that told them not to do it. You cannot out-calculate the best calculator who ever lost. The only way out is to follow the light and the light has no framework because it does not need one.
>>18690737ah, so the trve christian approach is basically being a retard who gets mathematically proven wrong about everything and still listens to the voices inside his head? based indeed
>>18690744Christians cannot be proven wrong by math, because math is a Christian concept. You are standing on our floor to argue against the house. Everything is under the cross, the numbers and the algorithm alike, including the order you trust to keep running without ever asking why it runs. Every picture and every sign points at one place and closes there.
I had a thought this afternoonGod is supposed to be good and stuff right? But bad stuff happens in the world all the time. So is God letting the bad stuff happen? He wouldn't if he was good
>>18690737>all apologetic is the devil’s craft>JUS BAWEEEEEEEVUr bullshitting urself
>>18690760Coo
>>18690760can you successfully argue for that or is "the devil" gonna win?
>>18690816I don't agree with anyone who 100% doesn't agree with me. love conquers all. Successfully? By whose definition, by whose framework? Nice try.
>>18690760>because math is a Christian concept. YouThat's absolute bullshit disproven by history but if we take the common christian argument that a scientist can't argue against christianity because empiricism is based on christian metaphysics or was developed by christians then we could also argue that an astronomist can't argue against astrology because astronomy developed out of astrology and that a chemist can't argue against alchemy because chemistry evolved out of alchemy and perhaps you could also argue that a doctor couldn't argue against the ancient greek theory of 4 humors.
not a single one of these supposed threads posted hereand if there were, it would be sockpuppetssage
>>18690312https://truthischrist.com/written-response-to-bryan-ross-criticism/
>>18690675"it's difficult to win a debate against a smart man but it is outright impossible against a stupid one" - someone, dunno.
>>18690312Confirmed for having never debated a Muslim on their religion.
>>18690312Well the entire point of theology is to teach people to to defend/justify investment in a supernatural fantasy. So you could say it's an advanced technology because it's an innovation, it has worked.
>>18690902Christianity wasn't invented it was uncovered. The math was already there, the geometry was already there, the pattern was already there. Judaism pointed to it, Islam mapped it, and Christ stood at the center of it before anyone named any of it. You can't debate ownership of a discovery.
>>18691148debating with "stupid" people was never a sign of intelligence
>>18690312Debate is fun.Develop self esteem and debate won't seem upsetting.
>>18691452If the certainty were real it wouldn't need a second person to sign off on it. Wanting the win means some part of you is still taking testimony, so the debate isn't confirming what you know, it's auditing what you suspect. The only honest reasons to argue are that you might be wrong and want to find out, or that a third party is watching and their belief is what's actually at stake. Everything else is paying attention to someone in exchange for a feeling that lasts about an hour. Which one was it
>>18691456The win is interal, Anon. It's a feeling.You'll know if you've won, because you won't be seething, man. It's why stupid dudes win debates all the time, outside of proper forensics.Debate is play, it's fun for dudes who read. Knowers. Practice a little beforehand and you are measuring your knowledge of a subject against someone else. Have research, and it's in a niche community, and maybe that debate pushes the entire field forward a nudge.It really is about self esteem. Enjoy the process, man.
>>18691459you say when you win you arent mad, but people fling poop to prove a point, so youre still trivially trying to get fed
>>18690312Shocker, it's the same with commies, muslims, and other leftists. Just commies thinking screaming means they win, muslims will just try to kill you if they get the chance, and the smarter leftists will lie and try to dox you thinking your life will be ruined before people find out they're lying.
>>18691464I said the win is internal, that it's a feeling. That isn't quite what you said in your refraining, so let's agree to use the original language instead of changing it?In forensic debate you throw down meanings immediately, right?>throwing poopAgain, this is a self esteem issue. You feel a sort of way because of how you feel about whatever you're feeling at the time. Debate isn't "flinging poop," that's just your take on it. See?I'm here because I have fun here Anon. >trying to be fedThis is, uh, one way of looking at anonymous socialization on an American culture forum. >>18691472>muslims will just try to kill youThe natural end to seething.
