ParkingPlaces and Death Over Life Debate Jesus Commentary

[Agamemnon]

Commentary thread for this debate.

[ParkingPlaces]

DoL and I are preparing for this debate. We will be at each other's throats soon. Watch for smoke on your screen and then you'll know it has started. 

ParkingPlaces

[Irish]

[TopolX]

As I am in a debating society at uni I'd like permission that at the end of each post I can give you marks out of 100. I will be basing it on style, control, damage and aggression (oh wait that's robot wars, it's style, content, delivery and analysis for debating) and then give general feedback later if you want it. Go on you know you want to.

[ParkingPlaces]

Sorry guys, the debate thread was probably set up a little quicker than expected, and we're not quite ready to go. (I made the mistake of thinking it would take awhile since there hadn't been any on the new version of WWGHA. One more reason why I didn't go into computer programming or database management) We're still making sure we agree on the limits of the subject matter, etc. Please be patient.

TopolX, its fine with me if it's fine with the mods. I'll ask DoL too. In any case, keep in mind that I had maybe two weeks of debate training in high school back in the 60's, and I forgot what I learned so quick I don't have to wonder how I forgot it now that I'm old. So expect all numbers ranking my contributions to be low. Unless I get style points for hitting below the belt  .

And Irish, how come you get all the good smiley's?

Edit: Misspelled "TopolX". Wrote it like it's pronounced  .

[Death over Life]

As I am in a debating society at uni I'd like permission that at the end of each post I can give you marks out of 100. I will be basing it on style, control, damage and aggression (oh wait that's robot wars, it's style, content, delivery and analysis for debating) and then give general feedback later if you want it. Go on you know you want to.

Sounds good to me for all of it!

Sorry guys, the debate thread was probably set up a little quicker than expected, and we're not quite ready to go. (I made the mistake of thinking it would take awhile since there hadn't been any on the new version of WWGHA. One more reason why I didn't go into computer programming or database management) We're still making sure we agree on the limits of the subject matter, etc. Please be patient.

TopolX, its fine with me if it's fine with the mods. I'll ask DoL too. In any case, keep in mind that I had maybe two weeks of debate training in high school back in the 60's, and I forgot what I learned so quick I don't have to wonder how I forgot it now that I'm old. So expect all numbers ranking my contributions to be low. Unless I get style points for hitting below the belt  .

And Irish, how come you get all the good smiley's?

Edit: Misspelled "TopolX". Wrote it like it's pronounced  .

But for the good news, I am almost done with my 1st post, so give it a couple days at most, and we should be kicking! The 2 weeks of debate training are more experience than me, so you will actually have the upper hand here.

The big thing is balancing work with real life and entertainment, so with all that, the researching has also caused a little delay, but I think I have some good sources and a few tricks up my sleeve.

In the mean time, just a couple days worth of patience, and you will probably witness as J.R. says: "A Slobberknocker!". If you can't wait, then I highly recommend checking out viking folklore and music. Nothing says fighting like some vikings getting ready to enter Valhalla! 

[Agamemnon]

Sorry guys, the debate thread was probably set up a little quicker than expected, and we're not quite ready to go.

No hurry. Take your time.

[jetson]

Sorry guys, the debate thread was probably set up a little quicker than expected, and we're not quite ready to go.

No hurry. Take your time.

Yeah, but hurry up about it! 

[sammylama]

'Scuse me . . . pardon me . . .

                . . . sorry . . . 'scuse me . . .

           Is this seat taken? 

                    Thanks.  Hope I didn't miss anything . . .



Nice seats, huh?  Yeah . . . sorry . . . I'll shut up.

[Death over Life]

I shall say this as my last post until tomorrow night. With all I need to reply to, I have at least gotten my reply to ParkingPlaces' 1st post done. All that is waiting, is for ParkingPlaces to post his' post. We both agreed that ParkingPlaces get's the 1st shot. When he does, I will post the reply within the 24 hour period (lest something shitty happens like a power outage, computer crashing, or computer gets struck by lightning).

Within all that I have seen, I think we are all in for a treat! \m/:)\m/

[TopolX]

First rating time!

Each catergory is worth a different amount which is as follows: style is 10 points, content is 50 points, delivery is another 10 points and finally analysis is 30 points (in speech debates it's a bit different but this is typed so more emphasis on what is being put forward). An overall score of 50 or less is generally diabolical, 75 is about average and 85 or more is exceptional.

So how did ParkingPlaces do based on said criteria?

Style:7, style was good, he kept it interesting and even threw in a few light-hearted statements which I think were well placed. Only issues might be a slight lack of persuasive language.

Content:31, As it's only an opening argument this was never expected to be too high, the content laid out some of the key arguments against a biblical Jesus and set out the foundations and course of the debate without becoming diluted. However it didn't deliver any knock out punches and I don't expect the reasons to remain really standing for long.

Delivery:9 Essentially the structure, it was very well done and in a way very similar to a speech. It laid out the topic first and the grounds which it's going to cover, then gave 3 points to back up ParkingPlaces' position. Little to fault it on.

Analysis:23 Although the first point (about the miracles) didn't get analysed in the depth I'd have liked to have seen (though it may be covered later so I accept there's probably reasons) the second was analysed very well and thus was definetly the strongest point. The third wasn't a major point but was also analysed well so I'm pretty impressed so far.

Overall score: 70, Pretty good and the scores will probably go up as the debate rages.

[Agamemnon]

Speaking of which, I have requested that post voting be enabled for the debate area.

[ParkingPlaces]

Thanks TopoIX. In today's lax grading atmosphere, that's an A, right? In my day, it would have been a borderline D, but we could count back then 

I wrote that a couple of nights ago before I knew I was going to be graded. I'll do better now that I know I'm being watched.

My next post will be far superior. I'm aiming for a 75 from you. That's an A+, of course. No need to do any better than that!!!

I'll wait for DoL to post his response. No need to pile on at the start of the game.

[screwtape]

I smell shifting goal posts ("So, even if you don’t believe in divine intervention, a miracle is still an extremely outstanding or unusual event") and I hear echoes of the four basic facts argument between kcrady and Fran.

[ParkingPlaces]

I smell shifting goal posts ("So, even if you don’t believe in divine intervention, a miracle is still an extremely outstanding or unusual event") and I hear echoes of the four basic facts argument between kcrady and Fran.

Screwtape. You have a point. I was new to the forum (I'd joined a bit over a month earlier) when the Fran/kcrady debate took place and either I didn't know it was going on or all the walls of text dissuaded me from watching. But I'm reading it now and wow, am I out of my league. There is no way to top that exchange. And I haven't even got to the end. Somehow I'm not too worried about the outcome though.

A reassessment of our efforts may be called for.

Anyone wanting to look at it can find it here: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,12276.0.html

And the commentary thread is here: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,12276.0.html

I'll get with DoL and see what he thinks. If he wants to continue, at least he'll know where Fran left the goal posts and he can start from there...   

Edit: In the interest of good sportsmanship, I added a smiley to the end of the last sentence to make sure that DoL sees that as a joke.

[screwtape]

Screwtape. You have a point.

My only points were, "why is DoL lowering the bar for miracles?" and "whoa, dejavu."

But I'm reading it now and wow, am I out of my league. There is no way to top that exchange.

You would be if you were debating kcrady.  But you are not.  You are debating DoL.  You just do your thing, your way and you'll be fine.  And Fran left the goal posts about 25 yards up his own keister.

Go get 'em, tiger.

[Petey]

In addition, with the claim, every NT Scholar who has researched the historicity of the resurrection, almost all of them have come to these 4 conclusions:

(1) Jesus' burial by Joseph of Arimathea, (2) the discovery of Jesus' empty tomb by some of his female followers, (3) the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to various individuals and groups, and (4) the original disciples' coming sincerely to believe that God had raised Jesus from the dead despite their strong predisposition to the contrary are historical.

Remember, not all of these scholars are Christians, nor did some of them convert to Christianity, however, they all agree with those 4 points, which none contradict, and instead compliment the Biblical testimony of the resurrection.

Ugh, not the WLC "4 facts" BS again.   

[Irish]

And Irish, how come you get all the good smiley's?

[ParkingPlaces]

DoL wants to continue. We're doing a little PM'ing to make sure we both know where we're going. I'm waiting for him to reply to my stuff. Don't want to get too far ahead. And I'll certainly take all the help I can get, so observations such as yours, screwtape, are appreciated. I'm not one to notice moved goal posts on my own. I'm blind as a bat without my glasses.

Of course I am reading the exchange between kcrady and Fran for non-spiritual inspiration. But I promise not to cut and paste anything. That's mostly because I'm so old I don't know how to do that. 

[TopolX]

Due to how quickly this debates' progressed and how ill I'm feeling (not that bad but not well enough to really think) I've given up ranking every post, I might manage an overall judgement though so could someone tell me when it's over? Looks good so far mind you with no-one reverting to childish name calling, flinging fecal matter (metaphorical or otherwise) or outright lying (in a debate? never!) 

[ParkingPlaces]

Due to how quickly this debates' progressed and how ill I'm feeling (not that bad but not well enough to really think) I've given up ranking every post, I might manage an overall judgement though so could someone tell me when it's over? Looks good so far mind you with no-one reverting to childish name calling, flinging fecal matter (metaphorical or otherwise) or outright lying (in a debate? never!) 

Thanks for trying TopoIX. I'm willing to debate at light speed but DoL is taking great care with his posts. In the meantime, there's nothing to see here.

[Death over Life]

Due to how quickly this debates' progressed and how ill I'm feeling (not that bad but not well enough to really think) I've given up ranking every post, I might manage an overall judgement though so could someone tell me when it's over? Looks good so far mind you with no-one reverting to childish name calling, flinging fecal matter (metaphorical or otherwise) or outright lying (in a debate? never!) 

Thanks for trying TopoIX. I'm willing to debate at light speed but DoL is taking great care with his posts. In the meantime, there's nothing to see here.

True, but at the same time, I am a very busy individual, and this is taking what little free time I have, so there are other contributing factors to my slowness overall on the forums.

Every post, whether here debating or even discussing, is like a game of chess. Each and every little peice is a move on the chess board, and concerning a debate, the more you move, the closer the game ends, but how you post, and what you post will reveal who get's the check, and who get's the check mate.

On a subject for Jesus, this is an extremely important discussion as it has the ability to cause either conversion, or de-conversion depending on the checks and the check mate and whom they are from.

[JeffPT]

Every post, whether here debating or even discussing, is like a game of chess. Each and every little peice is a move on the chess board, and concerning a debate, the more you move, the closer the game ends, but how you post, and what you post will reveal who get's the check, and who get's the check mate.

While other debates can be like that, I've never looked at the religious debate in that way in this particular forum.  I see it more like a game of Whack-a-mole at Chuck-E-Cheese.  The atheist stands over the theist with a big hammer called "logic".  When the theist pops his head up, he gets a face full of hammer and goes back down again, only to return half a second later in a different spot with a different argument, just to piss you off.  Over and over again. Whack, whack, whack! Eventually, the game ends you realize all the time you just spent smashing their head with logic cost you your time, effort, and 25 cents; and all you got was 3 lousy tickets, which won't get you any of the lame shit at the counters anyway.   

Post 1000 for me!  One of these days I guess I better do a testimonial.  I don't think I ever did one. 

[screwtape]

Whenever you make something that makes me need to think, it may take a little bit.

This is one of the things that makes me iffy about debates.  DoL has some tough things to think about regarding his religious beliefs.  I would like to think that he is taking in the information and reconsidering his superstitious beliefs.  And maybe he is.  But I think the debate settings does the opposite.  Instead, I think he is probably looking for ways to still "win".  He is looking for justifications, rationalizations and reasons to say he is right and PP is wrong.  That is the whole point of a debate, right?  To win?  So for DoL, the debate may be entrenching his beliefs further.  With that outcome, who wins?  Not PP.  Definitely not DoL.  Maybe some bystanders who were on the fence were persuaded.  I think that is unfortunately the best we can hope for.

[velkyn]

First, I wonder if we could create a sticky or add to the intro for Christians the sentence "This forum is for debate.  It *will* take up time.  Be aware of this and don't use excuses that you don't have enough time to avoid problematic questions."

Ahem....

It seems that there is some divergence on which "messiah" is being talked about here.  IMO, Jesus son of God is the only one to bother speaking of since that's what Christians believe in.  They simply *don't* believe in some itinerant rabbi who did nothing magical.  They will not agree that since there is evidence of believers for all the gods we can think of, that would also make those religions just as valid as theirs.  They also often claim that they don't think "all" of the bible is true, but they certain pick and choose which bits they think *must* be true, like the resurrection.  But there is no evidence for this and even the bible can't get the story straight (so much for claims of the gospels or bible being "highly accurate and historical") *and* no one has a clue where this "tomb" is, which one would think would have been important (same for the Ark of the Convenant but that's a different thread). Of course, cue excuses on why suddenly the tomb becomes unimportant just like the excuses on how details are suddenly unimportant.   

[naemhni]

First, I wonder if we could create a sticky or add to the intro for Christians the sentence "This forum is for debate.  It *will* take up time.  Be aware of this and don't use excuses that you don't have enough time to avoid problematic questions."

I've occasionally thought about putting up a few "rules" of my own for Christians who come here -- in an unofficial capacity, of course.  I think my first rule would be, "If you don't know who Blaise Pascal is, you might as well not waste your time at WWGHA.  The atheists here will tear you to pieces, then jump up and down on the pieces, and you'll never know what hit you."  But I don't think I'll do it.  Let 'em figure it out for themselves.