Instigator / Con

Your attempt with me and atheism would be successful.


The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
Better sources
Better legibility
Better conduct

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Pro

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.

What could you say to me or to anyone that would make sense to convert to atheism?

What would be persuasive, convincing and or undeniable that I could see nothing else but the road or path to atheism?

Could I argue against your proselytization so to speak?

I don't know what you could argue. I guess there are quite a few things.It's not up to me to figure out. As long as it's consistent and valid, no problems there.

For questions or comments, comment or send a direct message.

Round 1
Your attempt with me to convert to athiesm will be successful.

Perhaps it will if this information can be of some help to you.

What could you say to someone like me to make it so athiesm is the undeniable way to go ?

What I would do or where I would start is getting to know exactly where my position is.

Some basic introductory questions such as my stance on God, theism, religion, morals, secularism, indoctrination.

It is from the responses that will indicate whether there are holes in the position that atheism would fill. If the position is rock solid , ironclad , airtight, well you have your work cut out for you.


Well, I don't debate as a rule, but I liked the look of the no pressure format....And voting on a religious debate is always likely to be subject to an inherent bias anyway.


If you are a formatively conditioned theist....That is to say, taught to be a theist from a very early age....Then changing your mind, really would be all about changing your mind. So I would definitely have my work cut out.

On the other hand if you are the unconditioned, floating voter type, then you are probably only nominally theistic anyway.....So which type of theist are you?...Or is this debate one big red herring?

I am a person that lacks a conditioned acceptance of a creative deity, though I do accept the principle of a GOD concept as a creative event.... Nonetheless as I see it (and I would suggest logically) a very naive, few thousand year old creation hypothesis is nothing other than what it is, and is also nothing more than the naive hypotheses that preceded it....It just happened to be a hypothesis that stuck....Although it has been variously adapted.

With regard to morals......Firstly I would simply suggest  that morals are what we make them to be.....And secondly, philosophically weaving morality into a GOD hypothesis is nothing more than what it is.....One can just as easily weave morality into an unassisted evolutionary process.

With regard to secularism....Well secularism or not, is all tied up in people and conditioning and nothing really to do with deistic worship per se....Menace is the stick and not the carrot, if you get my drift.

And indoctrination is another word for conditioning....Abuse of the mind or not?

As for belief...I do not believe anything that cannot be unequivocally proven....So can you unequivocally prove the existence of your personal choice of deity?....If so, then you will probably change my mind.

Your call.

N.B......A GOD principle should not be confused with a magical, floaty about bloke, that looks a bit like Gandalf.....It could just as easily be something magical, that goes BOOM every few billion years or so.

Round 2
"...So which type of theist are you?."

For the sake of this topic, let's say I'm a theist that believes in a God, Creator of all , non-denominational and have had this belief for as long as I can remember.

""..Or is this debate one big red herring? ""

No sir.

"So can you unequivocally prove the existence of your personal choice of deity?...."

If I could, at least to anyone else, I would no longer be a theist. I would just being a person that knows a god exists like the sun.

So the only thing I've gotten here is a lot of what you think. Do you want to tie that into how it would make atheism for me the irresistible path to take?

So, as I see it: 

You have a non-denominational BELIEF in a god creator and I accept the idea of a GOD creator...So other than semantics we are one and the same.

Therefore, by convention you are practically an atheist anyway....It really is all about labels and that dodgy word "BELIEF".

If you are non-denominational then you do not worship a specific deity.....You simply pay heed to the notion of a non-specific creator, which might be anything.

Unless you can unequivocally establish the source of creation, then I would suggest that you might as well ditch the word "Belief" and utilise the more appropriate word "Accept".

No work to do really.

I would also suggest that, within your own established database you retain a stylised, biblesque, childhood notion and image of a GOD....As do I....Though whereas I am able to readily dismiss such concepts as illogical and fanciful, you perhaps struggle.....As I stated previously "changing your mind" or re-ordering your established data base is not something that I can physically do.....You just need to come to the definitive, logical conclusion, that proving the existence of a specific, humanesque godhead is an unrealistic proposition.

Though I would further suggest that, if there is any seriousness attached to your proposition, then you are probably already aware of the illogic, in the myths that are the basis of  conventional modern religion.....You did stress that this debate was not a red herring..... And so I hold you at your word.

CONVERTING, as in you saying, today I am a Theist and tomorrow I won't be....Well, you might as well say that, today I am a lemon and tomorrow I will be an orange.
Round 3
Does this mean that I have been successful?

Though, I would suggest that my opponent already knew the answer to the riddle.
Round 4
"Does this mean that I have been successful?"

No sir.

CONVERTING, as in you saying, today I am a Theist and tomorrow I won't be....Well, you might as well say that, today I am a lemon and tomorrow I will be an orange."

So thus far , you continue to give me what you think. What have you got to say that will make  it undeniable for me to believe or accept that a god does not exist ?

Ah...Nice to see that my opponent is back on track.

So, as I've stated from the start...Me altering a conditioned and established database through this casual debate medium, is an impossibility.

And so my opponent  proclaiming conversion or not, is nothing but a whimsical dalliance.

How they choose to formulate ideas is just as arbitrary and whimsical as a biased vote will be....Such is the controversy of religion and the nature of scepticism.

Though given the nature of the human condition....I would suggest that a doubting Thomas, will always be a doubting Thomas.

So, Ding Dong Merrily......And which label will a voter stick on my opponents forehead?......Lemon or Orange.