Started by jorune, November 09, 2015, 05:00:16 AM
Quote from: shynes0086 on April 06, 2016, 10:52:45 PMYou can math debate.
Quote from: Baruch on April 06, 2016, 11:11:11 PMDebate on! Math = maths in England ;-) Which is more correct?
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 07, 2016, 06:51:49 PMA theistic type of God can't logically exist, due to the many incompatible properties it would possess.If it cannot logically exist, then it does not, in fact, exist.
Quote from: Nateswoodworks on April 09, 2016, 11:00:56 PMI have to admit I am confused and disappointed. I am confused as to why you have a debate section asking others to debate, believers and not; but then ridicule when the invite is accepted. I am confused on why bother declaring rules that one must agree to if those same rules will not be upheld. Most of all I am disappointed; if what I have seen here is a representation of what exists in the debates; than what is the point? Isn't the existence of a debate forum to invite and house debates; not to just mock and attempt to overwhelm? I ,like many, like to have intelligent and respectful debates; I hope that I am not alone on this.
QuoteWritten with truth, compassion, and kindness as a Christian wanting nothing more than to share the invite.
Quote from: Baruch on April 10, 2016, 08:24:48 AMThe format of "informal debate" is self-contradictory. Really if one wants to debate, it should be in the formal section.
Quote from: stromboli on April 10, 2016, 10:27:34 AMWould actually agree with that. We do a lot of "informal" debating that really isn't. I think that any one wanting to debate an issue with a particular individual should request it. As I said I'm not a debater, but it should be done in an organized way.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:12:00 AMAre you saying that it is impossible for the Christian God to exist?
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:12:00 AMAre you saying that it is impossible for the Christian God to exist?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk