Hopefully this will be my last post on this debacle. My first post on this told how some self-described “Servant of God” challenged me to come to Michigan and debate whether the Bible is reliable. At that point, he said:
If you can not handle a real debate let me know and i will find someone.else
It never ceases to amaze me how Athiest talk big but fear a honest debate.
He said this AFTER I had already accepted his challenge. Yet he’s still posturing! Then he said he had seen me destroy plenty of false Christians, but he had never seen me debate a REAL Christian. So I wrote a second post
talking about what he and I think a “real” Christian is.
Finally last night, I wrote a third post
, in which I accurately predicted how and why this debate would never happen. Because these things are so often insincere games of bluffing, puffing up and pretending to be brave: pretty much the maturity and psychology you’d expect from adolescents. Once he realized I was seriously going to do this, and that I wasn’t the least bit intimidated, the god-lackey jacked with the schedule such that I’d have to debate one topic for three hours on a Friday night followed by another ten hours, from 9:00 to 19:00 the next day, with a two hour break for lunch.
I told him no one would either participate in or watch the type of debate he suggested, and I laid out the standard format that formal debates normally follow. I and my readers as well as other professional debaters had already guessed that God’s boy had purposely set this up as such a tedious and bothersome confrontation that I’d have to back out–at which time he could pretend to have scared me off.
Just to confirm that we’d all predicted that correctly, this was his message to me today:
Aron also a debate that we want is one where the facts are honestly dealt with. I have never heard of a discussion like you would like this to be, called a debate. I can understand why you would not want to debate formally,, in a discussion you spout your opinion, In a debate you must honestly deal with the evidence your opponent deals out, and he must do the same with you. in a debate you must remain quite while evidence is brought forth and again He must do the same when you rebuttal his evidence, and when you give your evidence He must remain silence as you bring it forth, and then rebuttal, This is what we will pay for and nothing less. If your not up to the challenge or afraid of facing the awesome evidence concerning the reliability of the bible, do you have in mind a person of such skill and courage. Just saying if you do not feel you up to the debate, rather then a discussion, let me know.
again I say I can understand if you can not back up your faith and that is what it is. If it is not faith prove it.
Notice that none of these are mere “discussions”; they’re all moderated formal debates before a live audience, where each person takes their turn listening to the arguments and refuting them if they can.
You don’t have any factual evidence to show, and we both know it. That’s why I DO want a formal debate, but that is obviously not what you want. You want to concoct an unnecessarily arduous standoff to make sure that no honest debate could ever happen.
Now that I’ve given you a dozen examples of how professionals really do formal debates, should I hold my breath while you try to find even one example of a single debate topic lasting more than twelve hours and strung out over multiple days? Or any single debate session lasting more than six hours? To find anything that crazy, you’d have to go back in time and record the Nicene Convention.
I have already proved that my position is not based on faith, but I am confident. I don’t need to bolster that confidence either, but oh boy you sure do. I can hear your knees knocking from here, twerp. So I’m not going to talk to you anymore. I will only talk to your champion, if he is even up to it; which I doubt since I accepted your challenge a month ago, but you didn’t tell him about it until today, and I’ve still never heard from him.
He and I will debate no more than three hours, following the standard format I described earlier, unless he wants to add a second hour of audience Q&A. I’d like that. I also require clarification that we’re only debating whether the Bible is a reliably true source of accurate information, however that could best be worded.
One more thing, this won’t happen until or unless I get an apology from you, admitting that I’m right and you’re wrong regarding how professionally moderated formal debates are actually held, followed by your promise never to question my fortitude or integrity again. Because I could never be afraid of debating you or anyone else. So don’t even pretend otherwise. It’s childish.