The Instigator
Normerican
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
purpleduck
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Can Evolution and God Work?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
purpleduck
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/26/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 356 times Debate No: 72365
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Normerican

Pro

Hello, there. This Debate is regarding whether or not Science and Religion can work together. I for one say yes, it can. If you accept the debate then you will be saying no.

The first round is acceptance, then, the second round you will have 10,000 characters to say your opening statement.

The third and fourth round will be rebuttals.

The fifth round will be closing statements.
Debate Round No. 1
Normerican

Pro

Throughout modern history, where Atheism is at it's high point and people are developing theories and scientific methods that go against what the Bible said. The most common question in the battle between science and religion has to do with where we come from. A lot of Atheists use the theory of evolution. They commonly think that evolution disproves that god is the creator.

Now, very little people think that Evolution can exist with God. It seems to be always one or the other, I believe that this is wrong. God is not some omnipotent being unless you make him an omnipotent being. Now, I may be going to hell for this, but I have a theory.

We simply don't understand the laws of nature. There's many things that we don't understand, and our brain is one of them. Since our brain is something that we don't understand, we are not fully aware of how it works. Now, if you've heard of the theory that if we used 100% of our brain then we would be super powerful.

The issue with this is, we use a good percentage of our brain. We just don't use it all at once, we use about 10% of our brain at one time. However, we still have used many parts of our brain. I feel like there's a certain way that we unlock these more complex part of our brains so our brain can use more at one time.

When we die, our brain goes down to the littlest quantum in our brain, they die last. Now the quantum is something that could give us those powers of creation. Now, that being said, when we die, the rest of the brain is dead and we can access it and control how it works even if it's involuntary.....

This could rebuild parts of the brain that allows us to make heaven and hell a reality and thus creating what we believed in a reality...Now, this would allow us to create a god, and there really would be a god.

Now, if this was the case, then the laws of nature still could work even if this was going on. My point is, our brain creates a god and when you die that is accessed and it becomes a reality, however, this doesn't effect the laws of nature unless you want it to.
purpleduck

Con

One of the most fundamental aspects of science is verifiability. To be accepted by the scientific community, a scientific theory, for example, must be supported by a substantial amount of evidence, lest be promptly and justifiably rejected. Evolution is a scientific theory, and is one of the most substantiated scientific theories in existence; scientists understand more about evolution than electricity and even gravity.

God, on the other hand, is not only unverifiable but also completely unfalsifiable. There is simply no evidence for any number of gods, and as such science cannot just assume the existence of one or many. This is why science and religion are not compatible at even the most fundamental level, as science is proof, and God is faith. Blind faith, to be exact, which really has no place in the evidence heavy world of science.

Evolution states that animals developed traits that allowed them to adapt to constantly changing environments through a process called natural selection, in which those with the traits that are most effective in a particular environment survive while the others eventually die; this trait proceeds to become the dominant trait until a better trait is mutated or the environment changes. It is quite understandable how someone could fit a god into this equation, but again, that would require the assumption that a god exists in the first place. To fit a supernatural being into this equation for no reason other than the fact that it would preferable is honestly quite stupid. If God is to be involved in the realm of science, there must be some sort of evidence that he/she even exists, assumption or faith does not and never will work.

Every religion has a creation story, and most of them are quite interesting and colorful, but the thing that most of them share is that Man was the first terrestrial being. Greek mythology, Biblical texts, Hindu scriptures, ect. all say that Man was created first. Which is something we now know to be completely and utterly wrong. It is possible that there are some religious texts out there that say that prokaryotes were the first life forms, and the only life form for billions of years, but I highly doubt that, as microscopic blobs of DNA floating around for millenia upon millenia isn't a very good story. However, lets make up our own religion that correctly details the origins of species. And lets have our god be a Hawaiian dude name Pablo. Now even though Pabloism accurately details evolution, it still is not compatible with it, simply because, as said before, there is no evidence for an omnipotent Hawaiian dude named Pablo who fiddles around with our daily lives. And there is as much evidence for Pablo as there is for the God of Christianity, the gods of Hinduism, the gods of Greek mythology, etc. That is, none.

Evolution and God are not compatible simply because one has been verified and proven time and time again, while the other's existence is simply unsupported, and to insert a personal belief into a scientific concept is simply a foolish self-gratification.
Debate Round No. 2
Normerican

Pro

Normerican forfeited this round.
purpleduck

Con

Until my opponent decides to come back, I will not be making any more arguments
Debate Round No. 3
Normerican

Pro

Normerican forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Normerican

Pro

Normerican forfeited this round.
purpleduck

Con

oh well, vote con i guess
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Mike_10-4 1 year ago
Mike_10-4
For those who believe in God understand that God created the universe and all its Laws. Therefore, the Laws of Nature is the handwriting of God and the scientific method is a way to read God"s handwriting. Example, our Unalienable Rights.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
NormericanpurpleduckTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff