Instigator / Pro
3
1388
rating
32
debates
15.63%
won
Topic

Atheists and Agnostics can never convert to theism, ever.

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
9
Sources points
0
6
Spelling and grammar points
3
3
Conduct points
0
3

With 3 votes and 18 points ahead, the winner is ...

MisterChris
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
People
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
21
1709
rating
33
debates
86.36%
won
Description
~ 1,263 / 5,000

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Atheists looking for empirical, Practical, Observable, Solid scientific evidence for the existence of a god or gods will never ever but never become theists in that manner.

Atheists say their open to the existence of a god or gods by a vehicle of evidence. This means they cannot convert to theism or deism for that matter.

Likewise with agnostics, It's more clear cut with them as they say there isn't enough information or knowledge. They simply say we can't know anything in regards to the existence of a super natural being. So right there in that steadfast stance, There's no budging.

This challenge to refute points made in this topic is also encouraged/offered to the theists to take on.

For clarity or questions, Please send a message or comment prior to accepting debate.

Round 1
Pro
Atheists looking for empirical, Practical, Observable, Solid scientific evidence for the existence of a god or gods will never ever but never become theists in that manner.
Atheists say their open to the existence of a god or gods by a vehicle of evidence. This means they cannot convert to theism or deism for that matter.
Likewise with agnostics, It's more clear cut with them as they say there isn't enough information or knowledge. They simply say we can't know anything in regards to the existence of a super natural being. So right there in that steadfast stance, There's no budging.
This challenge to refute points made in this topic is also encouraged/offered to the theists to take on.

Aside from the debate, very amusing , enjoyable audience.





Con
Thanks Mall.

Resolved: Atheists and Agnostics can never convert to theism, ever.

OBSERVATIONS:

  • This resolution has duel claims.
Claim A: Atheists can never convert to theism, ever.
Claim B: Agnostics can never convert to theism, ever.

In order to win, PRO most prove both claims correct. On the other hand, if CON can prove even one claim incorrect, then they win the debate.

  • This resolution is absolute. If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 

  • PRO's case is irrelevant to his own resolution.
CONSTRUCTIVE:

RECALL: If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 

Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. 

List of converts to Christianity.

Islam.

Judaism.

Vote CON.





Round 2
Pro
"If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted."


Careful, careful, careful , you better go over that description again. Not just any kind of agnostic or atheist. The description specified very clear individuals with specialized views. Those are the ones that make the topic statement true. The logic behind it really has a lot to do with what religion is.

"Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. "

Let me ask. Do these individuals now rely on faith in the existence of a god or gods?

Very simple here to follow once you see what I'm talking about. One thing I never mentioned was the word "all". I described a specific nature of non-theists.


Con
Thanks, Mall. 

Two responses.

1. Firstly, the description never mentions anything that would substantially change the resolution's meaning semantically.

It especially does not point to a "special" kind of atheist or agnostic as it clearly says:


Atheists say their open to the existence of a god or gods by a vehicle of evidence
This is a universal statement applied to all atheists.


Likewise with agnostics, It's more clear cut with them as they say there isn't enough information or knowledge.
Same idea.

2. The resolution is never defined by the description. It is vice versa, as the resolution is the place from which the entire debate flows 

Wikipedia states: "a resolution or topic is a normative statement which the affirmative team affirms and the negative team negates."

Extend and RECALL all points.

OBSERVATIONS:

  • This resolution has duel claims.
Claim A: Atheists can never convert to theism, ever.
Claim B: Agnostics can never convert to theism, ever.

In order to win, PRO most prove both claims correct. On the other hand, if CON can prove even one claim incorrect, then they win the debate.

  • This resolution is absolute. If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 

  • PRO's case is irrelevant to his own resolution.
CONSTRUCTIVE:

RECALL: If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 

Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. 

List of converts to Christianity.

Islam.

Judaism.


Vote CON. 


Round 3
Pro
"Atheists say their open to the existence of a god or gods by a vehicle of evidence"
"This is a universal statement applied to all atheists."

Can you prove this? Do you know my views? How do you know I'm not an atheist that rejects this?

Remember an atheist is one without a god to believe in or without a belief in God. No God in the equation. It doesn't tell you A THING about what each atheist is open to or not. That's why I never said ALL atheists just like not saying ALL people. It's called broadly speaking.

"Likewise with agnostics, It's more clear cut with them as they say there isn't enough information or knowledge.
Same idea."

You have to prove you know what every single person thinks on the face of this planet. Where's your evidence that can account for every single thought process in the world?

What tomfoolery to ever say "all" in this matter. We're individuals with our own minds. I can go from atheist to agnostic. If I'd become agnostic, I would personally have to define my personal experiences. You don't have the right to dictate what applies to my thinking. Whether I'm an agnostic that believes we can't know anything or there isn't enough information right now to decide on the existence of God but perhaps later, those are two different views in agnosticism.

""Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. "

Let me ask. Do these individuals now rely on faith in the existence of a god or gods?"

IF YOU DON'T ANSWER THIS QUESTION THIS TIME, YOU CONCEDE. THIS CHALLENGE ISN'T FOR ONE TO DIP AMD DODGE QUESTIONS ON.



Con
Thanks, Mall.

"Atheists say their open to the existence of a god or gods by a vehicle of evidence"
"This is a universal statement applied to all atheists."

Can you prove this? Do you know my views? How do you know I'm not an atheist that rejects this?
Yes I can prove it is a universal statement. "Athiests" is a plural form of the noun "athiest," which thus implies you are referring to all athiests with the above statements. 

"Likewise with agnostics, It's more clear cut with them as they say there isn't enough information or knowledge.
Same idea."

You have to prove you know what every single person thinks on the face of this planet. Where's your evidence that can account for every single thought process in the world?
I'm really not sure what PRO is even saying here. 

""Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. "

Let me ask. Do these individuals now rely on faith in the existence of a god or gods?"

IF YOU DON'T ANSWER THIS QUESTION THIS TIME, YOU CONCEDE. THIS CHALLENGE ISN'T FOR ONE TO DIP AMD DODGE QUESTIONS ON.
I don't know, you'd have to ask them.

Extend and RECALL all points.

OBSERVATIONS:

  • This resolution has duel claims.
Claim A: Atheists can never convert to theism, ever.
Claim B: Agnostics can never convert to theism, ever.

In order to win, PRO most prove both claims correct. On the other hand, if CON can prove even one claim incorrect, then they win the debate.

  • This resolution is absolute. If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 
  • This resolution is a falsism
  • PRO's case is irrelevant to his own resolution.
CONSTRUCTIVE:

RECALL: If even one person who was an agnostic or atheist converted to theism, then it is refuted. 

Here is a list of prominent atheists and agnostics who have converted to an unspecified form of theism. 

List of converts to Christianity.

Islam.

Judaism.

Vote CON. 

Round 4
Pro
Forfeited
Con
Extend and vote CON. Thank you.