The Instigator
brontoraptor
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
AWSM0055
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Atheism is illogical

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
brontoraptor
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/21/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 817 times Debate No: 88552
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (36)
Votes (1)

 

brontoraptor

Pro

I will be pro and argue that Atheism is illogical.

1st round: acceptance

2nd-5th rounds: anything goes
AWSM0055

Con

I accept the debate.

Since Pro hasn't provided any definitions, I will myself:

Atheism: "The lack of belief in gods OR the belief there is no gods"

To keep this simple, we will divide atheism into two categories:

Strong atheism: "The belief or doctrine that there is no gods"

Weak atheism: "The lack of belief in gods"

Let the debate begin.
Debate Round No. 1
brontoraptor

Pro

The Kalam cosmological argument states:

Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

The universe began to exist.

Therefore:

The universe has a cause.

From the conclusion of the initial syllogism, a further premise and conclusion based upon ontological analysis of the properties of the cause:

The universe has a cause.

If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful;

Therefore:

An uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful.

-----

Atheism is mathematically impossible.

Without God we get a regress in infinite causality. Meaning, we must accept infinite history, which is synonymous with the logic of saying everyone has a mother, but there is no first mother. We have history, but no first history. We have events, but no first event. We have intelligent beings but no first intelligent beings. We must accept that there is no beginning. There is no end. There are infinite you's, me's, and everyone else. There always has been a you. You were, you are, and you will be again, and infinitely into the past and into the future. There was no first you and no last you. There is no first or last anything. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Neither? This is paradoxial, illogical, unacceptable comprehensively, and 100% impossible mathematically.

----

Atheism is scientifically impossible.

The fact that anything exists or came from anything at all suggests someone beyond physics, mathematics, and philosophy must exist. Otherwise we must accept paradoxes that are beyond mythological in nature from around the board.

The universe/reality is finite or infinite. The door is open or shut. There is no in between. If the universe/reality is finite we must accept that the universe/reality exists literally inside of nothing. This is the equivalent of believing a basketball is sitting there inside of nothing. The entire concept is a logical fallacy. We must always ask,"But what is outside of the ball?" To say,"nothing" creates a full, 100% paradox. The point? For something to exist inside of nothing is completely uncomprehendable and illogical in a finite reality.

If the universe is infinite, we create a number (beyond measure) of paradoxes. In a carnal, physical world, the idea of an infinite "thing" is inconceivable. There are no " infinite things. No physical thing goes on forever. In our reality everything has a beginning. Everything has an end.

Even if we blindly forsake logic, physics, and mathemstics, and declare the universe/reality is infinite, we create many paradoxes including parallel realities, infinite you's, me's, infinite everythings. Everything that has happened has happened before and has never not been happening. We create a regress in infinite everything. Everything exists, and not only does it exist, infinite everythings exist infinitely.

--

How does this apply to the concept of God?

In a paradoxial finite universe/reality, we must ask who/what is outside of the universe/reality. If it is finite, logically something must exist outside of it. But for this to be true, we cause a regress of "infinite what's outside of thats?"

This concludes that the universe/reality must be infinite. If it is, all things exist. In infinite space and time, in theory, beings greater than us came to be, then greater than them, and greater than them, and even greater and greater infinitely. At some point we reach a singularity in which beings/a being of omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent consciousness and being "is". A singularity occurs at some point that puts forth a "master of reality as we know it. And in infinite space and time, this conscious being has always existed and cannot ever not exist within an eternal reality.

We can accept an omnipotent being through darwinian means in infinite space and time or we can accept an omnipotent being that "is" beyond physics, time, or our reality all together in the way that a computer programmer exists outside of the constructs of the programs or virtual realities he creates. He is beyond its laws, and is in no way governed, in being, by his creation's rules.

We cannot conceptualize the idea of an infinite "thing". Or can we?

There is only one way known to man to project an infinite reality without causing a paradox. A loop with the construct of a program.

Example: This game's world could go on infinitely.


What is a program loop?

AWSM0055

Con

Kalam argument

You give no reason to assume the cause of the universe is personal being. You also give no reason to assume that consciousness can exist without the brain. You can only have consciousness with a physical brain. You also give no reason to assume that consciousness can exist without a physical brain and exists outside the universe.
Thus, prove that consciousness can exist:

1. Outside the brain
2. Outside the universe

Mathematical argument

Pointless. The cause may be causeless. So what? This doesn't prove God exists, and it's certainly doesn't prove that atheism is illogical. Atheism doesn't say anything about the universe not having a cause or having an infinite amount of causes. This has absolutely no impact on the debate.


Scientific argument

Once again, you work under the assumption that the universe's cause is a thinking being. This is an invalid assumption, as, again, you give us no reason to assume that consciousness can exist with a brain and in an entirely different dimension.

Also, yes, there is an in between. As far as we know, the universe is expanding into nothing. Is there an infinite nothing to expand into? Maybe.

You also say that saying nothing exists outside a basketball (or universe) is a logical fallacy, but you don't say what that fallacy is or why it's a fallacy, and how it makes atheism illogical. Thus, your committing the fallacy fallacy (repetition meant). You also use an appeal to intuition fallacy by saying "For something to exist inside of nothing is completely uncomprehendable and illogical in a finite reality." Simply saying something is incomprehensible doesn't make it wrong.

You are also arguing on the premise that there is actually an infinite amount of things outside our universe. A more reasonable conclusion to draw from is that our universe simply ends past its boundary into a nothingness void.

I also don't really understand your paradox. What is paradoxical about existing inside of nothing?

So, in all, you've proven that an uncaused cause of the universe exists. You will now have to prove that the uncaused cause is a being, and that consciousness can exist outside the brain and universe.
Good luck.

My arguments

The topic of this debate was "Atheism is illogical". For atheism to be illogical, the disbelief of God would have to fly in the face of reality, and be against a large amount of evidence. So far, Pro here hasn't given any reasonable evidence that God exists (I.e. A Ultramundane being that created and rules the universe). The evidence for God is lacking sufficiently enough to conclude that atheism is not illogical. Thus, atheism is not illogical (thus far).
Debate Round No. 2
brontoraptor

Pro

Con says consciousness cannot exist without a brain. This is a false dichotomy. Namely because scientists themselves do not understand consciousness or how it exists. Seeing there must be an outside reality beyond our space and time, its a moot point. Seeing our reality was designed, our brain, an interpratory mechanism, is simply a created entity programmed to interpret and of no circumstance outside of our reality.

-----

Con says the first cause doesn't have to have a mind. We have established our reality works within an organized "program" of sorts in that reality is infinite and dna is a coded language. Only a cause with a mind could create programmed code.

-----

The illogical motives of the atheist-

An Atheist will often say,"There is no evidence of a god." But there is. Not only scientifically, but philosohically and prophetically. But atheists typically use strong confirmation biases to glaze past anything introduced to them because it simply does not fit in with their world view. Instead of neutrally examining the evidence and considering it, they dismiss it and usually resort to name calling, rage, or a number of other negative manifeststions.

-----

Atheism is illogical psychologically -

In psychology, 2 key elements of good mental health are finding meaning and purpose & having a positive outlook with positive beliefs.

I present to you an Atheist belief system.

Richard Dawkins-
"The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference."

This mindset is void of meaning and purpose, and is fully built on negative thinking and negative beliefs. It is so un-natural that the lack of these needs being met is psychologically destructive, unhealthy, etc.

-----

Psychology is illogical via Pascal's Wager.

Pascal's Wager posits that humans all bet with their lives either that God exists or that he does not. Based on the assumption that the stakes are infinite if God exists and that there is a definite probability that God in fact exists. Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss, whereas they stand to receive infinite gains, as represented by eternity in Heaven.

Con stated in this debate,
"Simply saying something is incomprehensible doesn't make it wrong."

Thus, Atheism chooses the worst of the 2 bets, which is illogical. It's like a starving man rejecting a plate of food for well...nothing.

-----

Richard Dawkins-
"We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."

-----

Mathematically Atheism is illogical. In infinite reality and time, all things exist, even the master of reality, gods, goddesses, etc.

If one claims a lack of evidence for God's existence, even if they were correct in this assessment, which they are not, it does not negate his existence and therefore Atheism is a logical impossibility mathematically, within the construct of infinity.

Atheism is a lack of belief in god(s), but in infinite time and space, everything has happened and exists, whether by Darwinian means or something else all together. But god(s) have existed, do exist, and will exist infinitely within the construct of infinite reality and time.

The Egyptian god "Ra" does not exist. Oh? In infinite space and time he does. Let us see in this link.

http://youtu.be...

The Egyptian god "Anubis" does not exist? Oh? In infinite space and time he does somewhere.

http://youtu.be...

Jehovah/Jesus Christ isn't real? In infinite space and time? He 100%, mathematically must exist, as must everything else. Every story you have ever heard or read has happened somewhere in infinite time and space. Within the constructs of infinity, all things exist, all things have happened, and all things have happened infinitely and eternally, meaning even the contents of this video are very, very real.

http://youtu.be...

-----

Atheists always say,"There is no evidence of god." Is this true? Nope. It's everywhere and anywhere.

In Revelation 20:4 it tells us that during the end of days Christians will be beheaded for their faith in Jesus.

This is happening all over the Middle East in droves, in particular in ISIS declaring a "war on the cross" consisting of beheading after beheading of Christians who will not renounce their faith.

In Isaiah 17:1 we are told that Damascus will be laid to waist, a heap of ruins and rubble. As of late Damascus looks like a ghost town, obliterated, destroyed.

In Revelation 17:19 we are told that Damascus will be brought to ruin, a heap of rubble. As of late it looks like a ghost town that has been obliterated.

In Revelation 20:10 it mentions the great "false prophet" who would come. In Revelation it says he renounces the deity of Christ. We are told of a great false prophet who worships an "unknown god" at the time. Allah had never been heard of. Muhammed declared in the Quran numerous times that Jesus was not divine or infallable in any way. Muhammed is the only great prophet of infallable authority that has ever existed that specifically renounces Christ, stands against his followers, and commands conquest and destruction of Christians and Jews by name.

In Revelation 17:4 it tells us specifically that those who follow the infallable great prophet will stand against Christ and his followers specifically. The Quran commands attacks on Christians and Jews by name repeatedly, specifically, beheading.

In Revelation 13:15 we are told the followers of the great prophet will "bow to an image". Muslims bow to the Kaaba cube 5 times a day, specifically to the black stone within its wall.

The point? I've just given you a few. There's not enough room to put them all on here in 5 rounds. But...that should be enough to make an Atheist ponder, hmmmm...maybe, maybe not. But it doesn't because evidence doesn't matter typically to Atheists.

You can point out that dna is an encoded language of complex and sophisticatedly organized information. You can point out the prophecies all day long. You can point out the philosophical conundrem they are in. You can speak of miracles, answered prayers, and any proof based concept, but it doesn't matter. If one wanted to believe, there is plenty of evidence to give reasonable way to belief, but the Atheist doesn't want it. That is the dilemma.

I have seen Atheists on this very forum start threads like, "God is evil", "Heaven would be boring", "who wants to live forever", and on and on. These are examples of making excuses to validate unbelief rayher than using logic to disprove existance of a creator. Denial of paradise? Ideologically motive driven. Denial of eternal life? Ideologically motive driven.



AWSM0055

Con

"scientists themselves do not understand consciousness or how it exists. "

Yes they do:

Consciousness: "the state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings."

To be conscious, you need AT LEAST the following:

A brain to interpret signals from nerves
Nerves to transport the signals
Senses to, well, sense your surroundings.

Without any of the above, you don't get consciousness. That is why a rock isn't conscious. That's also why we would'nt call a fungus conscious either. No false dichotomy. It's brain or bust. Besides, you still need to prove consciousness can exist outside the universe regardless.

"Seeing there must be an outside reality beyond our space and time, its a moot point.

Unproven assertion and ultimately irrelevant.

"Seeing our reality was designed, our brain, an interpratory mechanism, is simply a created entity programmed to interpret and of no circumstance outside of our reality. "

Exactly, and the only way to become conscious is with a brain, which is physical.

"We have established our reality works within an organized "program" of sorts in that reality is infinite"

No we didn't.

"and dna is a coded language.

Our universe can be likened to a program, but to say it IS a program would be just silly.

"Only a cause with a mind could create programmed code."

You assume the universe is a program. Prove it. Then you may have a point. You also assume that things don't just fall into place to create the universe without a mind, which does happen. Our own universe is one example of that, all of which happened (and is happening) without a mind. For instance, ancient people (and current day idiots) thought that the earth was specially designed by a deity. Turns out, a star exploded in a supernova, and the remnants clumped together to form our sun and solar system, all without a mind. The universe may have been caused in a similar fashion. We simply do not know.

"The illogical motives of the atheist"

Con here just complains about atheists not listening to his precious evidence for God but really we are. Just a typical theist complaining about nothing. Nothing special. Move along.

"Atheism is illogical psychologically "

Stupid argument based on an appeal to emotion. Another typical theist complaint. Move along.

"Pascal's wager"

Irrelevant. This simply argues that it is in the individuals interest to believe in God for his own gain. However, apparently God isn't too fond of such a selfish attitude, so it's self defeating. It doesn't prove God exists either. Moving on.

"Richard Dawkins"

Irrelevant quote. Moving on.

"If one claims a lack of evidence for God's existence, even if they were correct in this assessment, which they are not"

Ad Nauseum

"therefore Atheism is a logical impossibility mathematically, within the construct of infinity."

Non sequitur and nonsensical. WTF does construct of infinity mean? It's meaningless, that's why.

Also, I still have no clue what your trying to argue here. If I claim lack of evidence for God's existence, it does not negate his existence and therefore atheism is logically impossible mathamtically? I don't think I need to explain what utter drivel this is. You mention zero maths in this argument. I don't see what maths has anything to do with it.

"Atheism is a lack of belief in god(s), but in infinite time and space, everything has happened and exists"

Argumentum Ad Nauseum.

You still haven't proven time and space is infinite, which it isn't anyway. Your point is entirely void.

"Atheists always say,"There is no evidence of god." Is this true? Nope. It's everywhere and anywhere."

THEN SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE MOTHERF*CKER

"Revelation argument"

Everyone in the middle east is getting decapitated. Since Christisnity is the largest religion on earth, I don't see how it is ultimately surprising that Christianity has become a target of the other biggest (and most intolerant) religion on earth. Not very good evidence for God. Simply evidence that Muslims don't like Christians, which is bloody obvious for hundreds of years.

"Isaiah argument"

Could you provide a source stating that Damascus has been destroyed please? Thank you.

"Revelation 20:10 argument"

Bruh, why Islam? There are literally over 40,000 different religions and denominations worldwide. There are also other Gods than Allah which have existed since the beginning of religion all together (before Christianity was even thought of). Again, stupid argument. Even Muslims and Hindus are fighting in India and Pakistan. Muslims are notorious for being intolerant. It is not even infinitesimally surprising that they behead Christians.

You also provide no evidence that the Koran denies Jesus' infallibility. Baseless assertion, as usual.

Blah blah blah same thing, rinse and repeat.
Debate Round No. 3
brontoraptor

Pro

Pro says we understand consciousness. He's welcome to indulge us and let us in on all the secrets.

Here's are articles discussing the mysteries of consciousness.

https://www.theguardian.com...

"We do not understand consciousness"

http://youtu.be...

Here's one claiming plants show signs of consciousness.

http://www.scientificamerican.com...

---

Con stated "The only way to become conscious is with a brain, which is physical."

But... "A series of new experiments suggest this may be all wrong, and that part of us exists outside of the physical world."

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/science-spirituality-what_b_624292.html

The brain exists at all because of dna, a complex coded language.

"We assume there"s a universe "out there" separate from what we are, and that we play no role in its appearance. Yet since the 1920s, experiments have shown just the opposite; results do depend on whether anyone is observing. This is most vividly illustrated by the famous two-hole experiment. When you watch a particle go through the holes, it behaves like a bullet, passing through one hole or the other. But if no one observes the particle, it exhibits the behavior of a wave and can pass through both holes at the same time."

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/science-spirituality-what_b_624292.html

-----

This one asks if subatomic particles have free will?

https://www.sciencenews.org...

-----

Con supposes everything as physical, but nothing is "physical", including the human brain. Everything about us is subatomic. We are only energy in motion, essentially a ghost image of tiny subatomic particles in close proximity to one another. Yes consciousness can exist without a brain.

"Everything in this universe is made up of the same stuff. It is just present in different forms and shapes."

"There is a place where all things begin, a location of pure energy that simply "is"."

http://www.one-mind-one-energy.com...

-----

Con says,"You assume the universe is a program. Prove it."

DNA is a coded language of genetic information.

http://youtu.be...

Do we live in a simulated reality? Scientists and mathematicians think so. Even Albert Einstein thought it was an illusion.

Albert Einstein-
"If we think of the field as being removed, there is no 'space' that remains, since space does not have an independent existance. Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. Hence it is clear that the space of Physics is not, in the last analysis..."

Reality is composed of arranged computer codes.

http://youtu.be...

-----

Jesus Christ-
"Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."
(Matthew 17:20)

Jesus Calms the Storm-

http://youtu.be...

---
Con states, "Stupid argument based on an appeal to emotion. Another typical theist complaint. Move along."

Psychological point made.

---

Con says,"You also provide no evidence that the Koran denies Jesus' infallibility. Baseless assertion, as usual."

O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity" desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. (4:171)

And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right to say. (5:116)

The Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! (9:30)

---

Con asks,"Bruh, why Islam?"

The book of Revelation was ancient before Muhammed, Allah, Islamic beheadings, or Islam itself existed. It came first. It predicts.

Revelation declares this group consists of identifying qualities.

1)Great infallable Prophet that is anti "Jesus is the Son of God".

Hinduism and the panthera of other religions have no great prophet standing against "Jesus as the Son of God". No religion does or ever has...but Islam.

2)This group beheads Christians, specifically "beheads".

Who's beheading who these days?

3)This group hates Jews.

The Quran is a hate speak book towards Jews.

4)This group bows to an image.

Muslims bow to the Kaaba.

5)This group worships a god who doesn't yet exist when Revelation was written.

Allah came into existance near or around 700 AD.
AWSM0055

Con

"We do not understand consciousness"

Oh, YouTube video said it, and so did the guardian. Therefore it must be true.

Also, the YouTube video doesn't work.

And "showing signs of consciousness" doesn't mean they are conscious. And it certainly doesn't mean that they can remain conscious after being thrown into a furnace. And your sourcing a god damn magazine. Why should I take this even remotely seriously?

And again, your citing bloody "huffington post", which is itself just a blog by a guy who provided no sources for his claims or anything. If your going to give an example of something "groundbreaking", maybe source a non-magazine or using something more formal than a blog website? Thanks.

In the end though, this still doesn't prove that consciousness is independent and can exist outside the brain, so your points are pointless anyway.

"But if no one observes the particle, it exhibits the behavior of a wave and can pass through both holes at the same time."

The act of measuring something means that one has to interact with the particle, which might cause a difference when observed or measured. Pretty simple explanation.

"This one asks if subatomic particles have free will?"

The article seems to presuppose that God exists, which is begging the question in the case of our debate. It also doesn't actually give any evidence that particles have free will. It just asserts they do based on the fact that they are simply random.

"Con supposes everything as physical, but nothing is "physical", including the human brain"

Unsupported assertion.

"Everything about us is subatomic. We are only energy in motion, essentially a ghost image of tiny subatomic particles in close proximity to one another. Yes consciousness can exist without a brain."

Non sequitur.

"Everything in this universe is made up of the same stuff. It is just present in different forms and shapes."

Pointless.

"There is a place where all things begin, a location of pure energy that simply "is"."

No such thing as "pure energy". Meaningless.

"DNA is a coded language of genetic information."

So what? DNA is a code for organisms, not universe....idiot.

Also, appeal to authority fallacy. You also give no source for Alberts quote.

Albert Eintstein: "Wow, these Christians are stupid"

Also, please STOP doing the following:

1. Making unsupported claims

2. Supporting claims with weak source like YouTube, HP etc

3. Making a claim and then pasting the source. The point of a source is to show the source of your evidence. Not as evidence itself. Give evidence for your claim, and then paste a link to the source of your evidence. Don't just paste a link. I haven't got time to watch/read whole articles.

"Jesus Christ"

Don't care; irrelevant

"Quran scriptures"

Ok, so Islam directly says "Jesus ain't divine". Point taken...but, this is maybe the only correlation between prophesy and Islam. The rest of your points are ridiculous:

2)This group beheads Christians, specifically "beheads".

And gays and Jews and OTHER Muslims and pilots and Americans and women and...everyone...

3)This group hates Jews.

Jews are the most disliked people on the planet. It ain't surprising that intolerant brown middle eastern terrorist twats also don't like them. This is similar to point 2, really.

4)This group bows to an image.

So do Catholics and, like every religion since ever, lol.

5)This group worships a god who doesn't yet exist when Revelation was written.

Erm.....FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!!!

Also, there are been plenty of Gods invented after revelation such as, Norse Mythology and quite a few in the Germanic deities. In fact, there is still one commonly worshipped today called "Eostre".
Debate Round No. 4
brontoraptor

Pro

Atheism is illogical-
Con has become defensive and angry I see. It's interesting when an Atheist becomes bitter, negative, narcisistic, and wonders why we don't want any part of what they have. Nevertheless...
---
"If time travel is possible, then where is the tourist from the future?" –STEPHEN HAWKING
He is already here and must be by mathematical probability within infinite space and time...
---
I offered for Con to show us how consciousness works and enlighten us. He did not because he can not.
---
Con states, "So what? DNA is a code for organisms, not universe."
Exactly...
Con missed my earlier point that "Reality is composed of arranged computer codes". (Quoting Physicist James Gates, Scientific advisor to the President of the United States.)
---
Con says that many religions bow to an image, which is an ignoring of the prophecy alltogether. The prophecy tells us they bow to an image that SPEAKS.
In Islam, the image speaks.
"Thus Allah wrote this confirmation. And this stone has a pair of eyes, ears and a tongue and it opened its mouth upon the order of Allah (swt), who put that confirmation in it and ordered to witness it to all those worshippers who come for Hajj."
---
Con then says in reguards to them "worshipping a new god" and I quote "FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER". What a fine rebuttle. Anyone worshipping the spaghetti monster nowadays? Anyone? Nope? It's good to see Con is familiar with Richard Dawkins' work. Let's check out what Dawkins says.
Richard Dawkins-
"I am thrilled to be alive at time when humanity is pushing against the limits of understanding. Even better, we may eventually discover that there are no limits."
Really? No limits? Including this?
-"God created the Heavens and the Earth."(Genesis, Holy Bible)
---
In an interview with Ben Stein, Richard Dawkins said, and I quote,
"I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer."
---
Con states,
"Also, there are been plenty of Gods invented after revelation such as, Norse Mythology and quite a few in the Germanic deities. In fact, there is still one commonly worshipped today called "Eostre"."
And none of them match ALL or hardly any of these qualities.
1)Specifically denounces Christ
2)Execute by beheading still today in real life in 2016.
3)Have a great, infallable prophet.
4)Bow to an image that they believe speaks.
5)Are specifically anti-Jew AND anti-Christian
6)Their god comes into existance after Revelation.
7)Says "peace" but still yet destroys.
8)Is of the seed of Ishmael specifically.
9)Kills for apostasy or rejection of its god, specifically by beheading.
10)Literally declares war on Christianity.
11)AND Literally declares war with Israel.
12)Comes desiring to change times and laws. (Sharia for U.S.A.? Anyone?)
As a matter of fact, a religion popping into existance that meets all of these qualities is a complete defiance of mathematical probability. The odds are a quadzillion to one.
---
Everything about us is subatomic. We are only energy in motion, essentially a ghost image of tiny subatomic particles in close proximity to one another. Yes consciousness can exist without a brain."
Of which Con replied, "Non sequitur."
The entire concept is in relation to all other parts of the concept. Con is welcome to explain to us how this "non sequitur".
---
I stated,"Con supposes everything as physical, but nothing is "physical", including the human brain"
Of which Co replied,"Unsupported assertion."
Well let's support the assertion then.
Michio Kaku, Physicist-
"Physicists are made of atoms. A physicist is an attempt by an atom to understand itself."
Albert Einstein-
"Everything is energy and that’s all there is to it. Match the frequency of the reality you want and you cannot help but get that reality. It can be no other way. This is not philosophy. This is physics".
---
"‎By 2100, our destiny is to become like the gods we once worshipped and feared. But our tools will be science of computers, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and most of all, the quantum theory."
-Michio Kaku-
Aaahhh...and in infinite time and space, it has happened already.
---
Atheism is so illogical that of the 10 highest IQ's recorded, 8 are theists.
Billy Graham - God loves you (short)
Richard Dawkins-
"The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference."
And therein lies the issue of why Atheism is illogical. In the hierarchy of psychological needs within psychology, scientifically, we need for happiness and contentment:

1)Postive focus
2)Unconditional love
3)Purpose and meaning
4)Acceptance
5)Feeling safe

The point? Atheism satisfies none of this. With Atheism there is no good, no evil, just pitiless indifference. No meaning, no purpose, we are simply dna replicaters in a fight to survive. There is a negative, not a positive focus. The focus is, we will die, there is no one that cares, we are not safe, there is no victory, there is no point. The world and our children will suffer a cosmic heat death as the sun burns up or goes supernova. This is it. You have no hope. I have no hope. My children have no hope.

The Atheist mind is psychologically defeated at every turn. There is no victory, point, nor is there anyone to lean on in the final hour as the sand drizzles to the bottom of the vile.

But the Theist has hope, has purpose, has meaning, has unconditional love from above, has someone to lean on, has a positive teaching and belief to focus on.

I have shown there is plenty of reason to believe. There is plenty of logic in belief. Some of the smartest people on Earth believe. The fact is, Christianity offers you something. Atheism offers nothing, literally.

Logically, if you had a choice between an apple when hungry and nothing, you take the apple right? But Atheism has rejected the apple and chosen well...nothing.

Jesus said,"If you drink of the water I offer, you will never thirst again." Logic says,"Drink the water"...
AWSM0055

Con

AWSM0055 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
36 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by brontoraptor 8 months ago
brontoraptor
This debate used fulfilled prophecies that are by mathematical improbability impossible to have come true unless divinely driven. The Atheist will glaze over this concept. It's a confirmation bias. Ignore anything thatdoes not fit your world view.
Posted by Jjjohn 8 months ago
Jjjohn
"An Atheist will often say,"There is no evidence of a god." But there is."

Theists seem to confuse evidence of existence with the conclusion of a god.
Posted by brontoraptor 8 months ago
brontoraptor
So Islam is the antichrist religion of Revelation has been overused to refute Atheism? Lol
Posted by NoMagic 8 months ago
NoMagic
Create a debate subject "atheism is illogical" then introduce the same tired and refuted arguments concerning the existence of some god, never addressing the subject of the debate. I think that is how you lose debates.
Posted by brontoraptor 8 months ago
brontoraptor
Albert Einstein-"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
Posted by brontoraptor 8 months ago
brontoraptor
Based on? There are complete cultures who disagree with you. It's immoral to kiss or hold hands in public, or be homosexual to much of the world. Do you agree with their assessment? Are they moral or are you?
Posted by missmedic 8 months ago
missmedic
How is it moral to punish people for the sins of others?
Original sin is not just misguided. It is fundamentally evil. It is an inversion of morality.
Posted by AWSM0055 8 months ago
AWSM0055
BOTH OF YOU F*CK OFF AND PM EACHOTHER! Your clogging my damn notifications!
Posted by T-Hunt 8 months ago
T-Hunt
The one and only triune God cares more about our eternal souls in the next life than our lives in this world. According to your value system based on human reason a special needs child is much less valuable than a world renown scientist. God created everyone (including you) and he punishes everyone equally, "the wages of sin is death" "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Every person who has ever or will ever exist (except Jesus) is guilty of some kind of sin. (sin here referring to anything not perfect, in Gods eyes not mans.) As far as believing in other gods he is quite clear about that, "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing loving kindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments." (again "keeping commandments" does not entail successful completion but merely an attitude that wants to try with all it's might.)
Posted by missmedic 8 months ago
missmedic
It would seem to me that your god cares more about what you believe that how well you reason. Does your god punish nonbelievers the same as those who believe in a different god?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 8 months ago
dsjpk5
brontoraptorAWSM0055Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff a round, so conduct to Pro.