UNCG Atheists debate “Does the Christian God exist”

The guys over at the University of North Carolina Greensboro just finished having a debate on whether the “Christian God exists”, and it’s available online if you want to watch this. Needless to say their opponents get a nice trouncing. You can check out the rest of the debate here.

Comments (8)

  • avatar

    A.P. Sullivan

    It was hardly a “trouncing.” Big time fails on both sides. My evaluation is here:

    http://fb.me/I3S0rN1E

  • avatar

    Bob

    I agree with Sullivan. I only saw the first four, but the atheists should not have started out with the Jesus never existed thing. Even if that is true, the current historical consensus is that he did exist and when you start out with a fringe position like that the rest is going to be hard to take seriously.

  • avatar

    Jacob Fortin

    I disagree. Where is this historical consensus coming from?

  • avatar

    Roger

    Christian’s self-proving twisted “logic” is fucking maddening…

  • avatar

    Bob

    Bart Ehrman said that there was a historical consensus. Richard Carrier also said that there was a historical consensus even though he seems to be going into the camp that Jesus might not have existed.

  • avatar

    Roger

    I agree with Bob, and I don’t think he’s trying to say there was a real Jesus or not – it’s just not the most relevant or strongest starting point. There are so many other more persuasive holes in the Christian “logic” to point out before trying to disprove a historical Jesus.

    Quibbling over the historical accuracies of the bible isn’t very useful. Many Christians “believe” in the Bible without taking it literally or as 100% fact. They view the Bible stories as allegory so allow it to be loose with the facts. And the ones who do take it literally refuse to acknowledge inaccuracies because the Bible is already “proven” infallible because it says so in the Bible.

    The Christians’ came out with their childish pseudo-logic in this video and that was their most obvious vulnerability in this debate.

    “Since logic doesn’t always hold, ice cream has bones and purple penguins says much, therefore God exists.” WTF? Uh, you are in some sort of a debate here sir. Even accounting for tongue-in-cheekedness, this is fucktarded!

    “We start with the pre-supposition of god because if you don’t your world view is reduced to absurdity.” That’s the theists’ most solid and serious logic? Talk about absurd!

    But I don’t think the atheists did such a great job of pointing this nonsense out. While I’m not anti-intellectual, I think the atheists should have reduced some of their arguments to more common sense language to reach the audience. Using meta-debating and discussing indefeasible reasoning, inductive logic or formal fallacies goes over most folks head and you lose your best angle. I’m not saying you drop logic, but make it understandable to the layman. Most of the audience weren’t in the debate club in high school and probably just lazily call all of it a wash and your opportunity is wasted.

  • avatar

    Nick

    It is quite obvious from looking at the evidence that while no-one can 100% say that there is no God (can’t prove a negative) if there is a God he/she/it/they certainly isn’t one of the Christian ones!

  • avatar

    CM

    I know the guys on the atheist side realized they got some things wrong and after the debate studied those more in depth. I am not sure the Christian side did the same. They might have, but the Canadian guy seemed way too smug and confident in his statements to even look back over them.

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top