SueDoeNimm

  • **
  • 457 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2012, 11:13:39 pm »
Archsage wrote: I'll wait for a few more questions to be asked until to officially start the Q&A session (sorry folks, post-Christmas family and work stuffs have been keeping me tied up a bit).


Any update?


Before deconversion: Chop wood, carry water.  After deconversion: Chop wood, carry water.

1

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2012, 11:24:43 pm »
Well I was still waiting for more questions. But it looks like this is all the questions that are up. I suppose I should just finish this up now, the new year's already started.

Whenever the debaters are ready they can choose five questions for the opposite to answer, and they can just answer them all in a swift manner. This is all to build up clarity of the topics raised in their arguments and rebuttals during the more formal part of the debate. Now, I'll send out pm's so both Sparkling and Michael can be sure to respond.

For future debates, I'm going to do the Q&A differently. Watching the latest debate with WLC v Millican made me admire how that moderator handled the debate.

EDIT: Because there are only five total questions for Michael I'm limiting the questions to be answered to 3 for each debater. Other questions can be answered but they will be done outside of official debate time.

“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

2

Michael S

  • ***
  • 2606 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2012, 07:46:43 am »
It's been a week now, should we ask Noseeum or Hatsoff to choose the questions on behalf of Sparkling?
There are many things in life worth taking seriously. You and I are not among them.
The Dalai Llama walks into a Pizza shop and says "Can you make me one with everything?"

3

FNB - Former non-believer

  • ***
  • 4048 Posts
  • Do you REALLY make your decision based on reason?
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #18 on: January 07, 2012, 03:32:03 pm »
I say we let Michael solo it and put up signs on busses in Sparkling's town that say, "there probably is no Sparkling, so stop worrying and enjoy the rest of their debate thread on reasonablefaith.org"

4

Michael S

  • ***
  • 2606 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #19 on: January 07, 2012, 06:31:49 pm »
I don't mind being the only one to answer questions, but we'll still need someone to pick them out. I'm happy to defer to the judgement of our honoured host *cough*archsage!*cough* for this one.
There are many things in life worth taking seriously. You and I are not among them.
The Dalai Llama walks into a Pizza shop and says "Can you make me one with everything?"

5

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #20 on: January 07, 2012, 10:54:25 pm »
I sent Sparkling a final notice message -- it literally said "Final Notice"! -- nearly 11 hours ago, but he hasn't responded to that or any of the other messages. I will give him 13 more hours before we change anything.

If he doesn't respond by then, he cedes his part of the Q&A, and I'll let Michael answer the 5 actual questions proposed to him (Lion IRC's question, although I think the most entertaining one, doesn't count).
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

6

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2012, 12:43:14 pm »
bump...

emailestthoume wrote: I say we let Michael solo it and put up signs on busses in Sparkling's town that say, "there probably is no Sparkling, so stop worrying and enjoy the rest of their debate thread on reasonablefaith.org"


Yep. Sparkling's final deadline is passed, so this debate will end with Michael alone. Seeing that we are going to be lacking content due to Sparkling's unexplained absence, I'd say that Michael answer 2 additional questions alongside his required 3, which just so happens to be the exact amount of serious questions posed to him in this thread. Compiled, they are as follows:

(1) Choux: In your debate you mentioned "the  balance of probabilities". What exactly do you consider to be the  strength of those probabilities? The reason I ask is because there is so  much disagreement among Christian apologists on this issue. WLC says it  is more likely than not. Alvin Plantinga says it is somewhat more  likely than not as he explains that some have exagerated the probative  force of the arguments. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek claim it is  beyond reasonable doubt (highly likely). What do you say?

(2) SueDoeNimm: Your argument includes the proposal  of an unembodied mind.  Considering that billions of embodied minds are  known to exist and no unembodied mind has ever been shown to exist why  should your proposition be given serious consideration?

(3) SueDoeNimm: I found your characterization of the hypothetical unconscious cause as 'mechanism' as being pejorative and question begging. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to simply refer to it as the 'unconscious cause' rather than the loaded term 'mechanism'?

(4) SueDoeNimm: You imply the the faith even to fatality of some early disciples confirms the veracity of their belief.  ("The disciples clearly believed they saw him, and many went to their deaths...") Does the faith even to fatality of the 9/11 hijackers confirm the veracity of their belief?

(5) Saibomb: You said Jesus had to be either Lord, Liar,  or Lunatic. But, couldn't we say the things that were said about him are  untrue - or at least exaggerated? In this case, he wouldn't be any of  those things you mentioned. In general, there are many possibilities so  I'm just wondering why you have limited them to only three.

Michael vs Sparkling Debate: "The Christian God Exists"
Official Debate Discussion Thread
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

7

Michael S

  • ***
  • 2606 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2012, 05:23:07 pm »
I'm back at work now, though only two days a week, but this means that I'll have to try and answer these questions either when I go to lunch, tonight, or on Wednesday (which will likely be Tuesday afternoon/evening for many of you lot). Any issues with that?

Also, I presume I'll make a long post in the actual debate thread?

There are many things in life worth taking seriously. You and I are not among them.
The Dalai Llama walks into a Pizza shop and says "Can you make me one with everything?"

8

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Q&A Session: Michael v Sparkling Debate -- The Christian God Exists
« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2012, 05:36:42 pm »
Michael wrote: I'm back at work now, though only two days a week, but this means that I'll have to try and answer these questions either when I go to lunch, tonight, or on Wednesday (which will likely be Tuesday afternoon/evening for many of you lot). Any issues with that?

Also, I presume I'll make a long post in the actual debate thread?



Honestly, after how many times sparkling delayed the various portions of this debate, this request of yours is nothing much. So there's no issue from me.

And yes, you posting the answers in the actual debate thread would be best. Hmm, and the answers don't have to be too long, you only have to make sure that the question is answered completely.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal