Braxhunt vs. Will, round 2!

[Will]

Braxhunt messaged me the other day and invited me to have another debate with him, this time over Skype at 2 p.m. Pacific, Saturday, April 16. We're going to be arguing the same points, his point that theism is the most reasonable position and mine that atheism is, but it's going to be a bit less structured, and you'll be forced to endure our voices hopefully not talking over each other. Our last debate was really a lot of fun and I have to say Brax put up a hell of a fight.

Brax has graciously offered to record the discussion and I think it will end up on Youtube, which either he or I will post here in this post. We're still deciding on a date, but I assume it will be some time soon.

[Davin]

I remember reading a debate between you two when I first got here, it was a very good read. Also I think it's the only one on one debate in the One on One debate forum.

If I may make a suggestion; use the Batman from Batman Begins voice, it's very convincing.

Edit: The debate I was talking about.

[Will]

Since we're having it over Skype, I thought it might be fun for us to conference folks in to listen live during the debate. Anyone interested?

[braxhunt]

Hey Happy atheists! This sounds ok to me as long as their are no comments and mics are turned off so that the sound quality isn't affected negatively. Thanks!

[McQ]

I would agree that the only mics open should be the two holding the debate. No sending of messages either from the peanut gallery. And it would be interesting to listen in, schedule permitting.

[Will]

The debate went quite well, other than a few Skype hiccups. I didn't realize it until we had started the debate, but Brax actually has a podcast on iTunes, Trinity Crusades, he was recording the debate for. His previous podcast was about how to debate with an atheist, so I suppose I was unwittingly an example for his listeners. That said, I think we both did fairly well. Brax is very well versed in the cosmological argument and the fine tuning argument. I applied my favorite rebukes of each, and we ended up going back and fourth for about an hour and a half (instead of the 30 minutes we'd intended).

I'll post the link here when it's been uploaded. If it's been edited for time, I can post the entire debate for those interested in listening to the entire thing.

I asked Brax if he'd be willing to do further debates in the future, and he said he would like to.

[braxhunt]

Will, I really did enjoy the debate. Thanks for taking the time. I actually didn't realize that the podcast on how to talk to an atheist was the most recent one. It was more about individuals on a daily basis having conversations with their friends without using the rigorous theistic arguments so our talk was not in response to that. I won't edit the audio except to cut out our personal discussion of the skype problems. In listening to it, my voice for the last 10 min or so is garble and it's hard to understand what I'm saying, but you can kind of work it out from Will's responses. Nevertheless, I'm leaving it as is, garbled voice and all. I look forward to future conversations. For those who have not spoken to him personally, Will is a highly intelligent thinker who seems to be well read on these subjects and I think happy atheist forum is greatly benefited by his presence.

[Will]

I want to point out that Brax did mention this was for a podcast, and then I plumb forgot.  

[Will]

Here is the link to the debate:

http://trinityradio.podomatic.com/playe ... 0_09-07_00

It's quite long, but hopefully you'll enjoy it.

[joeactor]

Here is the link to the debate:

http://trinityradio.podomatic.com/playe ... 0_09-07_00

It's quite long, but hopefully you'll enjoy it.

Why, yes... yes I did enjoy it.  Good debate (both of you).

There were a number of times I wanted to jump in.

Liked the Occam's razor discussion, and the "our universe is a sample of one" tack in particular.

... in the end, I'm with you on many of the points - maybe I'm more Agnostic than Theist  

[AnimatedDirt]

Here is the link to the debate:

http://trinityradio.podomatic.com/playe ... 0_09-07_00

It's quite long, but hopefully you'll enjoy it.

I click on this link and all I hear is some music and then later some typing and someone breathing...odd.

[Recusant]

Here is the link to the debate:

http://trinityradio.podomatic.com/playe ... 0_09-07_00

It's quite long, but hopefully you'll enjoy it.

I click on this link and all I hear is some music and then later some typing and someone breathing...odd.

Skip ahead a minute or two (or more; there is a lot of music and "droll" sound-clips and "hail fellow well met" before they settle down to business).  Or maybe they've messed up the link since I checked on it. The podcast is titled "Debate with Will of Happyatheistforum.com" and is 1:18:37 long.

[braxhunt]

Its in stereo guys, so if you don't have stereo enabled or you have only one speaker functioning then you will only hear half the audio and one of the voices. Cheers!

[joeactor]

Its in stereo guys, so if you don't have stereo enabled or you have only one speaker functioning then you will only hear half the audio and one of the voices. Cheers!

... actually, I liked that - it was like you guys were talking on either side of me...

[Stevil]

That was interesting, you both represted yourselves and your side of the debate very well.
I thought Braxhunt was a lot better than Craig from the other debate posted on this forum. He presented the Cosmological argument a lot better. I still struggle to see how it holds any weight at all given that the conclusion is exactly equal to the assumption of the argument.

I really did see his side as nothing more than "god of the gaps" which you pointed out. We are only ever seeing/hearing focus on the gaps, where one side says "see, a gap, it must have been god" and the other side says "we just don't know the answer, let's not make assumptions". I would like to see theists provide positive proof/evidence based on information affirming god rather than derrived from lack of information on how the universe works.
As far as I can tell scientists have no idea how energy can be created. To assume it requires a cause and is not eternal or is not simply a necessary outcome of space is a mistake and confusion of the ideas of cause and effect. It has never been proven that the creation of energy requires a cause, therefore it has never been proven that the energy that our Universe is made up of requires a cause.

He said that god is constant and unchanging but if god decided to create the universe then making the decision indicates change. Nothing outside of time can ever happen, no sequence, no thought, no decision, no action. There is a real confusion between concepts and reality. Making out god to be described as a concept but also being real (without being bound to the constraints of reality, e.g. temporal, spacial, substance) is an unfounded, unproven twist.