# Atheists, why debate christians? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 30, 2011, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681 "2011-08-30T21:49:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/161 "2011-08-31T15:02:21Z")
> [@](#): > > And because of that, if they weren’t religions you almost certainly wouldn’t claim to be “agnostic” about them; you’d just call them wrong. Calling yourself an agnostic is giving religions special privileges, unless you call yourself an agnostic about every idea that can be conceived no matter how ridiculous. Are you agnostic about the claim that you are secretly controlled by an invisible, intangible rubber duck that lives inside your skull? That’s more plausible than pretty much any religion; if you are willing to be agnostic on religion, then you should be agnostic about Skull Ducks. Ok, perhaps I’m giving religions special priveliges. Blame my great affection for most of humanity. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/162 "2011-08-31T15:03:18Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And because of that, if they weren’t _religions_ you almost certainly wouldn’t claim to be “agnostic” about them; you’d just call them wrong. Calling yourself an agnostic is giving religions special privileges, unless you call yourself an agnostic about \*every \*idea that can be conceived no matter how ridiculous. Are you agnostic about the claim that you are secretly controlled by an invisible, intangible rubber duck that lives inside your skull? That’s more plausible than pretty much any religion; if you are willing to be agnostic on religion, then you should be agnostic about Skull Ducks. “Skull Ducks”. Great. If you’ve just started yet another internet religion, you are _definitely_ off my Christmas card list. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/163 "2011-08-31T15:19:14Z")
At this point I would like to take a moment to express my pride about being one of the original Apostles of the fastest growing religion on Earth – the Church of Daffy. Sure, you call us crazy now, and you call our church a cult, but just you wait! In a thousand years or so, no one will remember the origins of the church, or the facile and specious reasons for its existence, they will just know it as the the source of all the good things in the world. All Hail Daffy! ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/164 "2011-08-31T15:22:36Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You’re really missing the point. The point was not that gods can’t exist unless they’re worshiped, but to show you how weak your own argument against Daffyism was. Why couldn’t Daffy Duck have preexisted Tex Avery and simply “inspired” him at the time of his own Daffy choosing in accordance with his own Daffy plan. > > To simplify even further, the point is that any defense you can make for the existence of Bible God can be made for any other imaginary entity as well. The inverse is also true. Any argument you can make against Daffy Duck can also be made against Bible God. I didn’t miss the point and I already answered this. Assuming this to be true, you would have expected Tex Avery to mention something-- anything-- about it which, apparently, he did, though I can’t get anything which would corroborate this story even though Lobahan said (s)he had it. See the problem here there? No Christian argues like that. Christians point to textual analysis and historical sources. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/165 "2011-08-31T15:25:52Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > At this point I would like to take a moment to express my pride about being one of the original Apostles of the fastest growing religion on Earth – the Church of Daffy. Sure, you call us crazy now, and you call our church a cult, but just you wait! In a thousand years or so, no one will remember the origins of the church, or the facile and specious reasons for its existence, they will just know it as the the source of all the good things in the world. > > All Hail Daffy! Peath be upon him. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/166 "2011-08-31T15:29:23Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Peath be upon him. He’th not a god of peath-he’th a god of chaoth. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/167 "2011-08-31T15:33:04Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > See the problem here there? No Christian argues like that. Christians point to textual analysis and historical sources. _What?!?_ Do da term “blind faith” mean anything to ya? ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/168 "2011-08-31T15:38:23Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > _What?!?_ Do da term “blind faith” mean anything to ya? No, because Christianity is not based on blind faith. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/169 "2011-08-31T15:39:12Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m not sure that the Problem of Evil works against Daffy Duck… > > “If Daffy is good, than why does he let bad things happen to little children?” Because it’s children season. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/170 "2011-08-31T15:40:17Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > I didn’t miss the point and I already answered this. Assuming this to be true, you would have expected Tex Avery to mention something-- anything-- about it which, apparently, he did, though I can’t get anything which would corroborate this story even though Lobahan said (s)he had it. I wouldn’t expect Tex Avery to necessarily even be aware of it. Daffy could have inspired him in such a way as to make him believe he was only creating a cartoon character. We also have eyewitness testimony from people who have personal experience of Daffy appearing to them and talking to them. > [@](#): > > See the problem here there? No Christian argues like that. Christians point to textual analysis and historical sources. No, Christians argue _exactly_ as above. They don’t have any historical corroboration for anything. When you say “textual analysis,” you’ll have to be more clear about what you mean. Technically speaking, “textual criticism” refers to the study of physical manuscripts - the actual paper and ink, and stuff like handwriting analysis - to determine things like dates and establish lines of copy transmission. How do you believe that kind of study has helped make a case for the historical/supernatural claims of Christianity. There is also historical criticism (which, believe me, hurts the case for Christianity more than just about anything else), and literary criticism (studying the stories as stories - something which has little utility in proving historical truth or non-truth), and there are devotional approaches to study, such as hermeneutics, which are interpretive and employ _a priori_ doctrinal/theological assumptions, and are not empirically “critical.” Which kind of “textual analysis” do you believe makes any case for Christianity, and how is that text more credible than the text of the posts in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/171 "2011-08-31T15:41:22Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > No, because Christianity is not based on blind faith. Oh really? Show me one thing it’s based on that doesn’t require faith. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/172 "2011-08-31T15:42:57Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > No, because Christianity is not based on blind faith. Yes it does; it has no supporting evidence, and outright contradicts physical laws, historical facts, logic, and itself. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/173 "2011-08-31T15:44:25Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > All Hail Daffy! Never! I’m a Fuddite. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/174 "2011-08-31T15:47:58Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > I didn’t miss the point and I already answered this. Assuming this to be true, you would have expected Tex Avery to mention something-- anything-- about it which, apparently, he did, though I can’t get anything which would corroborate this story even though Lobahan said (s)he had it. I have a long and complex historical document of the [Most Holy Church of Daffy](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14202788&postcount=81). > [@](#): > > See the problem here there? No Christian argues like that. Christians point to textual analysis and historical sources. Okay, since you can’t understand stuff at this level, let me break this down for you. Yaweh - First written about by men ~three thousand years ago. Daffy - First written about by men ~60 years ago. Yaweh - No physical evidence supporting his existence. Except for a collection of writings asserting his existence. Daffy- No physical evidence supporting his existence. Except for a collection of writings asserting his existence. You are looking at two things of a kind and deciding that one of them is correct and the other is wrong, based on nothing more than which story most of the people around you believe. That isn’t logical. It isn’t smart. It isn’t useful. And it’s actually impacting your ability to reason, because it asserts itself as true regardless of what is happening. To the OP: This is why I argue against believers. Look at what toll blind belief charges. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/175 "2011-08-31T15:50:34Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > No, because Christianity is not based on blind faith. Of course it is. There is no evidence for any of the supernatural happenings asserted by Christianity. If I’m wrong show me. Cite the exact evidence there is for Christianity. Do it or retract your bullshit, please. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/176 "2011-08-31T15:58:29Z")
[http://www.venganza.org/about/](http://www.venganza.org/about/) Believe what you want and have been trained to. But there are options. This one is on par with the Mormons and scientologists. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/177 "2011-08-31T16:04:34Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Never! I’m a Fuddite. What a maroon! ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/178 "2011-08-31T17:01:21Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > “Skull Ducks”. > Great. > If you’ve just started yet another internet religion, you are _definitely_ off my Christmas card list. Excuse me. I believe you meant “Holiday” card list. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/179 "2011-08-31T17:03:44Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Excuse me. I believe you meant “Holiday” card list. Duckmas! ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681/180 "2011-08-31T17:12:33Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I wouldn’t expect Tex Avery to necessarily even be aware of it. Daffy could have inspired him in such a way as to make him believe he was only creating a cartoon character. We also have eyewitness testimony from people who have personal experience of Daffy appearing to them and talking to them. Here’s a simple question; if Tex Avery wasn’t aware of it, then how are you aware of it? Even if we were to accept your last sentence as being absolutely true, your first two sentences are nonsensical. Why wouldn’t you expect Tex Avery to necessarily be aware of it? What other figure inspired by a divine deity do you know of who wasn’t aware that they were being inspired by a divine deity? In fact, since the topic has veered to Christianity, what Christian figure would be analogous to Tex Avery? Is there even one? And yet, this doesn’t even begin to cut at what Lobohan said. > [@](#): > > No, Christians argue _exactly_ as above. They don’t have any historical corroboration for anything. None of the kings of Israel? None of the prophets? None of the apostles? Nothing? Are most of the people and places in the Bible completely fictional? > [@](#): > > When you say “textual analysis,” you’ll have to be more clear about what you mean. Technically speaking, “textual criticism” refers to the study of physical manuscripts - the actual paper and ink, and stuff like handwriting analysis - to determine things like dates and establish lines of copy transmission. How do you believe that kind of study has helped make a case for the historical/supernatural claims of Christianity. Would you be more likely to believe a text if it was written, say, sixty years after the fact (for the record, sixty years is remarkably fast), or six hundred years after the fact? Would you be more likely to believe a text written by, say, Paul, or someone writing in his stead as him? Rhetorical questions, of course. > [@](#): > > There is also historical criticism (which, believe me, hurts the case for Christianity more than just about anything else)… Why should I believe you? …Oh, wait. I think I see how this works. You’re an atheist and I’m a Christian so, apparently, you’re more educated than me. > [@](#): > > Which kind of “textual analysis” do you believe makes any case for Christianity, and how is that text more credible than the text of the posts in this thread? Now on a serious note, and ignoring the pseudo-display of intellectual superiority (yeah, because I don’t know what Biblican criticism is :rolleyes:), have you read the comments in this thread from those who, I’m guessing, would describe themselves as atheists? For example, and going back a point I made earlier, let’s take something simple, that being the idea that Tex Avery was inspired by some grand deity to create Donald Duck in that deity’s image even though Tex Avery himself made no mention of it. How would that be more credible than the idea of, say, Tex Avery being inspired by some grand deity to create Donald Duck in that deity’s image because Tex Avery said so himself? [QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] Oh really? Show me one thing it’s based on that doesn’t require faith. [/quote] Because, as we all know, faith equals blind faith, right? I mean, falling backwards off of a ten foot ladder and expecting someone to catch you without any reason to believe as much is the same thing as falling backwards off of a ten foot ladder and expecting someone to catch you when they said they said they would catch you, right? I mean, that’s what you’re asserting, right? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-why-debate-christians/594681.md?page=10)