I am challenged to a debate about once a month. Recently I was challenged to a debate by three people within the space of two days. So if you want to debate me then Hear Ye This! Would you like to defend the existence of the social Trinitarian God (versus an anti-social Trinitarian God) of the Bible (which had a long process of formation and of borrowing material from others) who never began to exist and will never cease to exist (even though everything we experience has a beginning and an end), who never learned any new truths, who does not think (for thinking demands weighing temporal alternatives), who is not free with respect to deciding his own nature, who revealed himself through a poor medium (history) in a poor era (ancient times), who condemns all of humanity for the sins of the first human pair, who commanded genocide, who allows intense suffering in this world (yet does not follow the same moral code he commands believers to follow), whose Son (the 2nd person of the trinity) became incarnate in Jesus (even though no one has ever made sense of a person who is 100% man and 100% divine) to be punished for our sins (even though there is no correlation between punishment and forgiveness) who subsequently bodily arose from the dead (even though the believer in miracles has an almost impossible double-burden of proof here) and now lives embodied forever in a “spiritual” human body to return in the future, who will return to earth in the parousia (even though the NT is clear that the end of all kingdoms and the establishment of God's kingdom was to be in their generation), who sent the 3rd person of the trinity to lead his followers into "all truth" (yet fails in every generation to do this), who will also judge us based upon what conclusions we reach about the existence of this God and what he has done (paralleling the ancient barbaric thought police), and who will reward believers by taking away their freedom and punish the dammed by letting them retain their freedom?
I've already made an opening statement in my book! Get it and read it. Our debate proposition will be this one: "The Christian faith should be rejected by modern civilized scientifically literate people." Now it's your turn. Get my book and respond to it chapter by chapter. You respond to it as you can on your blog or website.
Reviews of My Book:
Eddie Tabash Recommends it.
Norman Geisler Recommends it.
Christopher Hitchens Recommends it.
Andrew Atkinson was Led to Deconvert Because of it.
The Nature of Our Arguments.
When I was recently challenged to a debate I asked the challenger what exactly he wanted to debate. Here's what I wrote (revised slightly):
Interesting hypothesis, if so. This is such a large claim. The larger the claim is, the harder it is to defend it.