The Instigator
Benshapiro
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Rain_Was_Here
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Belief in God is reasonable.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 3 votes the winner is...
Benshapiro
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 672 times Debate No: 66618
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Benshapiro

Pro

God is defined as the intelligent designer of the universe.

I'll give reasons as to why this belief is reasonable.

First round is for acceptance.
Rain_Was_Here

Con

Sounds fun. I'll accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Benshapiro

Pro

Thank you for your acceptance.

Remember, this debate is about whether or not *belief in God is reasonable*.

Our physical universe expanded from a zero point singularity of infinite density during the Big Bang. All space, time, and energy began to exist in this instant. There is no evidence that would lead us to believe otherwise.
http://science.nasa.gov...

The degree to which our universe caters to life is unbelievable. A multitude of narrow constants independently aligned in order to make life possible. The odds of such an occurrence by chance is greater than the amount of atoms in our galaxy.
http://www.discovery.org...

Somehow life began. At the cellular level we've learned that all life depends on information in order to function. The chemical sequencing of base pairs ATCG in DNA encode the instructions for cell functions. The very first life must have had a specific arrangement of ATCG, and not by any chemical necessity, in order for life to have been viable at all. The specific sequencing of these base pairs arising by chance is basically impossible.

"When we take the probability of creating a single protein of left-handed amino acids (1 chance in 10^301), and figure in the maximum possible reactions in the universe over 15 billion years (10^143), it will yield a probability of 1 chance in 10^158. We can conclude that the random chance of biological evolution to create a single protein anywhere in the universe over 15 billion years is essentially zero".
http://www.universitycad.com...

Fast forward. We find ourselves as conscious, intelligent, and moral beings. We live in a universe governed by natural laws. Nature exudes intelligibility and order. The universe as a whole is an interdependent and brilliantly self-contained and self-sustaining system.

We find ourselves questioning the nature of our existence by adherence to logic and reason. Logic absolutes, that are conceptual by nature, are a transcendent aspect of the physical universe. Logical absolutes are still true despite what human minds think.

Morality, or an idea of what we ought and ought not to do, is instilled in each one of us. We have a conscience that makes us aware of right from wrong. It's an innate moral sense of how we should behave. Humans intuitively know that certain things like killing or raping without necessary justification is indefinitely morally wrong. Humans have an intuitive and real sense of absolute purpose.

So all of this considered, why does this show that belief in God is reasonable?

The origin of the universe points towards a transcendent cause (spaceless, timeless, immaterial, powerful, causally-able agent), such as God.

The fine-tuning of the universe is highly probable if God exists, and highly improbable if he doesn't. The fine tuning of the universe supports the premise is that an intelligent mind designed the universe with a purpose in mind.

The origin of cellular information from mind is much more coherent than cellular information arising from unembodied chance.

The existence of logical absolutes presupposes a universal, conscious, and transcendent mind.

Knowledge of objective purpose from our moral compass is only coherent if humans had a real purpose to begin with. This would only work if humans were intentionally brought into existence.
Rain_Was_Here

Con

Rain_Was_Here forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Benshapiro

Pro

My opponent forfeits.

Extend arguments.
Rain_Was_Here

Con

Rain_Was_Here forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Rain_Was_Here

Con

Rain_Was_Here forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Jackninja5 2 years ago
Jackninja5
No it really isn't :P
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
-______________________________________________-

That.
Posted by Benshapiro 2 years ago
Benshapiro
What's all this talk about Coyotes?
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
BoP rests on pro to prove he's a coyote.
Posted by Pfalcon1318 2 years ago
Pfalcon1318
Prove that you are.
Posted by intellectuallyprimitive 2 years ago
intellectuallyprimitive
I would conclude that examining the probability versus the possibility of the notion is pivotal. Is it possible that you are a coyote and constructed this debate? Perhaps, albeit is it probable?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
BenshapiroRain_Was_HereTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
BenshapiroRain_Was_HereTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit
Vote Placed by That1User 2 years ago
That1User
BenshapiroRain_Was_HereTied
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: Forfeiture.