The Instigator
bobmead1960
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
autodidact
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Can Prove the Existence of God and the Validity of the Christian Faith over other Religious Systems

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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,017 times Debate No: 31824
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

bobmead1960

Pro

To start, the existence of God is measure simply by our moral and reasoning minds. There is a belief amongst all people that I have encounter for the last 2 years when engaging in whether they believe in the existence of God. This is always the needed starting point if anyone is to have faith in any spiritual system. So, for those who don't believe in the existence of God, which is many because of their lack of seeking out the true God, I ask a simple question that has never been disagreed by any person in all of my encounters. I even tell them that before I ask the question so they can be ready to oppose the "right" answer. And the question is a three prong question. We normally can't find many to believe much more than 50% on any given topic. So the overwhelming agreement will CONTRIBUTE to the evidence of Creator, God. But still no one has said contrary to the "right" or true answer. So here goes the question "Is it right for you to kill, lie or steal?" The contributing answers have been obviously "yes." The answer as to why this proves the existence of God is not that we all have this consent agreement about these three areas of life, but that, it's overwhelming agreement is not just the moral agreement, but something much more. But for those naysayers that would say "We are taught these things from society." I would disagree on the most important one of the three. I was never lectured on not killing people. No classes in school. No lectures from my parents about how it is wrong to kill people. The proof of God is by the means that ring true to our soul. For as a child I was a thief and liar. If as adults we say this is wrong, than why do we do such actions. Because we are selfish!! Life evolves around our world and we want to displace having to obey the message or directions of others for much of our life. We seek personal pleasure, even at the expense and sufferings of others. But as our cognisant mind develops we know right from wrong. But why? The answer is the most profound book of all time. The Bible! Romans 2 says that God wrote his law on our hearts. That we deep down in our soul know the real difference between right and wrong. It is a matter of if we want to be obedient to such constrictions of our conscience or soul. An atheist woman, who was quite a popular blogger, just came to believe in a god because of this very reasoning. That because of our moral make-up there must be a god. And finally became convinced of this truth.

The existence of God is proved by General (nature) and Special Revelation. We can sense and feel (deep in our souls) the presence of a God by the very "finger prints" that he leaves on creation. Natural laws (eating, sleeping, blood for your body, gravity, oxygen) are just a few that all mankind must obey. There is no two ways about it, without conforming to these laws people will suffer or even die. I cannot decide to jump tall buildings tomorrow just because I decide to believe it with all of my "heart." Convictions or persuasions must and should be confirmed by credible evidence. God place "order" in the universe to show that he is a ONE WAY GOD. Our wanting to deny that things are most often done in a singular way is the only way to appease our mind that God does not exist. We want to believe in the notion that there are many ways to do things. Thus, many ways to God. This is a falsehood that is embraced by mankind. Denial, rejection or "your" believe will not change the truth of one God.

Not only is there General Revelation but also Special Revelation, which is something that is a proof of a divine intervention to provide such said results in our life. Special Revelation would be the Bible. I will prove that it is totally different than any other book written. To begin with the book was not named by "Followers of Christ." It was named by the Roman Empire, Bible means - "Book of Books" as a compilation of Books (many). Not to mention that Constantine, the Roman Emperor, who started the Gregorian Calendar. What does A.D. mean? "The year of our Lord." It was based on the birth of Jesus Christ. But back to the Bible. Here is the ONE proof of many to the validity of the Bible.

This is the main validity of the Bible, Prophecy and Special Revelation. Prophecy, is a declaration of truth and/or a revelation from God of knowledge that would not have been otherwise known. These are often future events that take place at a future time. Prophecy in the truth sense is "declaring truth" of what God deems as right or righteous.

So here is why the Bible is a book written so different than any other book, revelation of knowledge was an impression of an idea so engraved that it stayed there until he wrote it down. Understand that the Bible was written by about 40 "penman," they were not the author's of the Book, God was. They never got together to "exchange" notes and it was written over 1600 years. We can't agree on our Constitutional Rights and it is less than 300 mere years.

Suppose that I told you that you would be approached by the Mayor of your city on Friday at 12:30, and he could come to your house on March 29, 2013 with a limo to pick you up and take you to the best restaurant in town. Upon buying you lobster and steak for lunch he offers you a job to work for him for a salary of $155,000 a year. But would get the perk of your favorite car to drive around with all your family, friends or work. Now what if all of these things came true??? What would you think? I never spoke to the Mayor or had any second hand knowledge of his plans. No information other than from God. He reveals this to me. This is how the Bible was written.

Not to mention all the physical and historical evidence that abounds. Jericho was a city excavated in 1967 and found just like God said in the Bible. Don't take anything from the city and to burn it, and to never rebuild on these grounds. In 3500 years it has never been rebuilt. The city was burned like God told them to do, and guess what they found in the city - grain. Grain was better than almost anything. it was the substance to make food. Without grain there is no food to be grown. This is just a few of the examples of the validity of the Bible. Study how the richest and most powerful man in America got his wealth. It was by the reading of the Bible by one of his associates. Concerning the story of Moses and being placed in basket and put in the Nile. The basket was lined with pitch, and pitch is a form of oil. Rockefeller went to Cairo and made the empire of Standard Oil. The examples go on and on and is overwhelmingly in favor of a proof of God's existence. I am glad to be contacted and prove more of God's truths! God wants to spend eternity with you. You are that special! But you must come to terms with God on HIS TERMS, not yours.
autodidact

Con

I would like to thank Pro fro this debate.
For clarity unless otherwise noted quotes are from Pro's post.

It would seem Pro is as strong in his faith as others are in faiths that he sees as false. This leaves but one question, given that others who follow other religions declare the same sort of things as Pro how is a third party observer to figure out which claim is true and which one is false.
When it comes to morality Christianity is not the only religion that declares their god to be the source. Christianity is not the only religion to declare prophecy proves it book to be true.

"So here goes the question "Is it right for you to kill, lie or steal?" The contributing answers have been obviously "yes.""
I wonder if Pro meant "no" as the common answer. My answer to this is "it depends". I can think of cases where such actions would be moral and cases where they would be immoral.

I am an atheist. If god is defined as an all knowing all powerful god who is moral and just then this is not the christian god as described in the bible. When it comes to killing we find in the bible God orders the killing of children and events where God kills children himself. [1Sam. 12, 2Sam. 15]

So much of Pro's post is assertions of proof with out reasoning behind it.
example: "...but that, it's overwhelming agreement is not just the moral agreement, but something much more."
Pro does not say what this something more actually is and why it must be. it would seem that empathy and reasoning is enough of a cause of this "moral agreement" and no need to envoke the supernatural.

So I ask Why.
Why does {insert line from list below}prove the Christian God.
1 common agreement to morality question
2 Natural laws (eating, sleeping, blood for your body, gravity, oxygen)
3 the limitation of the physical world
4 the fact that the bible was named as such by the Roman empire
5 the fact that Anno Domini means "the year of our Lord" as named by Constantine, a believer
6 the existence of jerico
7 Rockefeller and Standard Oil

" Prophecy, is a declaration of truth and/or a revelation from God of knowledge that would not have been otherwise known."
Could Pro provide examples that Con can not prove knowable and possibly misinterpreted by Pro?

"These are often future events that take place at a future time."
What are we to make for the failed ones? Ezk.26 for starters.

"Jericho was a city excavated in 1967 and found just like God said in the Bible."
Have you heard of the spider man fallacy? [1] and of course I must point out the city of Tyre was prophesied never to found or rebuilt. A Google map search [2] proves this similar claim false.

"Convictions or persuasions must and should be confirmed by credible evidence."
I agree, Pro has given many examples he feels prove "the Existence of God and the Validity of the Christian Faith over other Religious Systems"
I hope that I am not the only one who fails to see any actual link between Pro's assertions and it being actual evidence for the Christian god. I look forward to Pro providing actual evidence that proves God and Christianity true.

On the question of morality proving God I must ask Pro, if I came across a man raping a child is it moral of me to do nothing?(if it matters i am 6'4" 320 lbs and fit enough to fight off hypothetical child rapist)

[1]http://www.urbandictionary.com...
[2]http://goo.gl...
Debate Round No. 1
bobmead1960

Pro

I will try to stay in the order of your counter discussion to try and amply answer your questions, disagreements or fallacies. I was wrong in making the statement that it was right for one to kill, lie or steal. The answer should have been "no." I wanted to make sure that was cleared up to begin with before going on in this debate.

1) You stated that "Christianity is not the only religion that declares their god to be the source." I have not taken on the point of discussion to prove any religion as being fully false or Christianity as being the only right. That was for a later debate. It is my conjecture that it is first needed to prove that God exists! Since you are obviously not persuaded on that point I must continue in this area of concern. I would like to take up a point by a Pastor Giglio on the super protein called Laminin. You see if the human body did not have a spine our matter would be nothing more than flat blob. Because water would just spread out as thin as possible. We could not formulate the human body as we know it now. You see Laminin is derived from the word Laminate, like the counter top most often in your kitchen or bathroom. It is made up of particles and formulated into a hard protective surface. This is similar to the Laminin protein in our body. You see if we did not have this our heart would not be in the shape it was. Neither would our kidney, bladder, brain or other organs in our body. See we were made in by God and he made us to "consist" or be "held" or "hold" together. This concept is derived and prove in Colossians 1:17 "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." KJV God clearly states that he is the provider of the "glue" to our bodily form. Without him we would not have come about. NOTHING WAS BEFORE HIM. He is everlasting and all powerful. It is clear the Bible was written in such a way - by God, that no men could ever construct such a book in all of their lifetimes. Only God can be the author of such teachings.

Quickly, how about mankind so disproving its science and medicine when the Bible was correct. Doctors practiced a means that they were certain would cure sick people, but all it really did was accelerate the potential and inevitable death. However, they continued this practice for some time, even though, the Bible taught clearly against such practices. Some were luckily taken off the doctors prescription and some survived. But vastly the masses suffered death from such doctors procedures. This was only practiced less than 100 years ago! How could doctors be so convinced and yet so wrong? This is similar to my point about Atheists, they I believe are good people who are just fervently misguided. The Bible gives clear means on how to approach and deal with this very issue, but it is easy to go away from its teachings with all of the best intent, to only be so woefully wrong. So the "cat" should come out of the peverbial bag. Did you guess what the practice was? It was using leeches to drain out the bad blood. The Bible says "life is in the blood." Leviticus 17:11

If God were to appear or do something miraculous it would likely be to rise from the dead themselves. Make something out of nothing. Make something into something else. These things were all done by Jesus Christ and some by his prophets. Let us see, Jesus rose others (Lazarus, girl child) from the dead and himself. He even healed leprosy. A disease man can't solve even with all of the great medicine of today. He created the earth by speaking. He made manna appear every day for 40 years for the approximate 2 million Jews in the wilderness. Let us not forget the birds he fed them daily also. How about turning water into wine, 2 fish and five loaves into feeding the 5,000 men, and on that note, when you have 5,000 men you usually have 5,000 women and a few kids here and there. They didn't have schools. Children spent their Jewish life going with their parents. So in all he easily fed over 10,000 people and had 12 bushels of left overs. The list goes on and on of the miracles of this God/man. Fully God and fully man, 100% of each. Elijah a prophet broght back a young boy to life. Pharoah's army drowns in the Red Sea. Not to mention the 10 plagues. Enough miracles to dissuade any atheist if they were fair and reaonsable to evidence. For if it were not true evidence would have been cast at its "doorstep."
God knew that man would be so obstinate and argumentative to not believe in him that he "tricked" them into leaving clues throughout the Bible. Let us try the account of Genesis and creation. Many people will say that it is a factual account but not in a literal way. Most likely you are not of that persuassion, but many "Christians" could be. I will disprove this fallacy. So on the fourth day God made the sun, moon and the stars. This made light that produced photosynthesis. On the third day though he made vegetation. Well vegetation could not live long without photosynthesis light. So some Christians have taken the fallacy of a "day" in the Bible meaning millions of years. So the account was placed in such an order to discredit such thinking, but God placed terminology that is found essentially no where else to tell time. You see God does not want us to have ignorant faith. He wants us to have the FACTS. Reason is more associated to men than women. We guys need proof. Women like the fellowsip, gifts and care from the Father. God made sure that facts were accessible if man would put forth the effort to find them. His verbage in Genesis was repeated after every day "the evening and the morning were the ______ day." He said this after every day. So God clearly put forth evidence of a 24 hour day. Just food for thought, but I have seen scientist date material less than 2000 years and can't accurately date the material. They use other historical evidence to properly date it. But we place more faith in carbon dating than in what God said. "Let us reason together saith the Lord" Isaiah 1:18 since you will most likely say that I am full of "hog wash" on the earths dating. Here is my logic to God's plan and clear definition, how were all the things that God created according to the Genesis account in one word? He made the fruit trees bearing fruit, he made the animals of full size, Adam and Eve were of full size, not child, infant, teenager, but man and woman. EVERYTHING God created was MATURE! AMEN (means "so be it") I believe that God made the earth MATURE.
Upon directing so many characters toward proving God's validity I must narrow the rest of my defense. 2) "Other religions claim prohecy" and who are they? Muslims say Muhammed had a revelation. Prophecy is much different. It is a clear message to be delivered to people in the here and now, or talking of future predictions. No other faith does that with the exception of Judaism, but they reject the very teachings that their book stated, their Torah is our Old Testament. 3) You questioned morality - other countries have customs and cultures which could diminish or influence ones morals, but take any child 4-6 and ask them the quesiton I asked about killing, lying and stealing and the answer will be the same. It is wrong to do those things. 4) Killing you questioned God and the morality of it - 1 Sam12 does command the destruction of a nation of people. You must first determine what killing is in Exodus 20 (it was to not take someones life on your own volition or choice), but wars or defending your life to kill is fine. God commanded war and killing of people many times. We do the same thing with "mad cow" disease or people with "the plague." No, we don't kill them but we remove them from contaminating others. God deemed these people so bad that they had to be totally destroyed. No hope for change. 5) "7 proofs of Christian God" - No I was using the Bible as proof of a God, these "bits" lead to ones belief in a God. 6)Rape - we should help
autodidact

Con

I know little to nothing about Laminin. The fact that Pro reads Colossians to be some vague reference to Laminin speaks more about his conformation bias.

So let"s see what I can find out about it. Pro has picked Laminin because drawn out in a diagram form it looks like a cross. The fact is there are several other molecules that play just as important a part as Laminin is ignored. Do you know what, I have heard about this before. In this first clip there is Giglio and all.....
"God clearly states that he is the provider of the "glue" to our bodily form."
I created the interwebs. I said it so it must be true. Also if that is a "clear" statement by God then I fear what a vague statement by god is. Pro takes "consists" and says it equals "glue"
Pro has fail to show that the existence of Laminin can only exists because a creator god made it.

It would seem Pro goes on to talk about bloodletting in part. I am unclear what other procedures or prescriptions he may be talking about it would seem as with Laminin that Pro is lacking on explaining this. Oh it is leeches. Too bad for Pro's argument that leeches are used in state of the art hospitals to this very day.[1] As for the bible verse any hunter or farmer of that age would learn quickly that an animal when bled out dies. It is not a divine revelation by any stretch.

Pro goes on to make claims about what supernatural things Jesus did. The problem is the lack of corroborating texts. I have no more a reason to think Jesus did what the bible claims as I do to think Mohamed rode a flying horse as the Quran says. As for the leprosy incurably to this day claim by Pro, it is false. There are effective treatments for it. It is found that a multi-drug approach is very effective at curing the infection and if caught soon enough most lasting damage can be avoided. [2]

Among some of the more humorous claims Pro makes is this, "Fully God and fully man, 100% of each."
AS I read it Pro is saying that Jesus was a mathematical impossibility, like giving 110% or manbearpig (1/2 man, 1/2 bear, and 1/2 pig)
All the claims of miracles lack one key part extra-biblical corroborating evidence.

Let"s get on to the next paragraph.
Pro says "So on the fourth day God made the sun, moon and the stars. This made light that produced photosynthesis."
According to the bible the light was made on the first day

"So some Christians have taken the fallacy of a "day" in the Bible meaning millions of years."
Pro confuses how the Christians he is talking about view genesis. Those that are of the old earth creationism or theistic evolution see genesis as a metaphor and that the actual day order may not be exactly stated in the bible.

Pro continues with some rather sexist comments that have no real bearing on this subject.

Yet another point pro bring up in this run on paragraph is he has issues with radiometric dating. There are cases where different dating methods will yield inaccurate results. These issues are well known and said methods are avoided because inherent problems. C14 for example is not to be used when dating things that consume carbon found in marine environments, due to what is known as the carbon well effect. Funniest thing about carbon dating, while young earth creationist complain about it being no good, the method had with in its error range returned an age for the dead sea scrolls that creationist agree with when less scientific methods are used.

"Muslims say Muhammed had a revelation. Prophecy is much different. It is a clear message to be delivered to people in the here and now, or talking of future predictions. No other faith does that with the exception of Judaism, but they reject the very teachings that their book stated, their Torah is our Old Testament."
I suggest the link below of Islamic prophecies. [3]
Also the Jewish peoples so not see Jesus as the messiah because of several scriptures they do not feel he fulfilled. [4]

"...but take any child 4-6 and ask them the quesiton I asked about killing, lying and stealing and the answer will be the same. It is wrong to do those things."
1 Corinthians 13:11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.
Even the men who wrote the bible were able to realize that what a child thinks has little bearing to what actually matters. If I ask any child 4-6 if Santa will bring them presents most will say yes as well. I don"t fault a child for not understanding that in cases like self-defense killing is acceptable. My guess is that they have not considered this moral dilemma.

"1 Sam12 does command the destruction of a nation of people."
Quite right, I mixed up the chapters with the books originally I stated "[1Sam. 12, 2Sam. 15]"
It should have been "[1Sam 15, 2Sam 12]"
"No hope for change."
In 1Sam 15:3 the order is to kill man woman child and infant cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys. If it was simply because these people were bad then why the animals? Also how bad can an infant be that id deserved to be slaughtered?
Pro notes that Exodus 20's prohibition on murder as "it was to not take someone"s life on your own volition or choice"
In 2Sam 15:15-18 by Pro's definition god murders. God decided to take the life of David"s son on his own volition.

" "7 proofs of Christian God" - No I was using the Bible as proof of a God, these "bits" lead to ones belief in a God."
All too often people of Pro's mindset use circular arguments. If we reread Pro's R1 post we see this statement "Understand that the Bible was written by about 40 "penman," they were not the author's of the Book, God was."
Essentially what is set up is the bible says that God would never lie and we know this is true because God wrote the bible, and it says god wouldnt lie.

when it comes to my question from R1 (On the question of morality proving God I must ask Pro, if I came across a man raping a child is it moral of me to do nothing?(if it matters I am 6'4" 320 lbs and fit enough to fight off hypothetical child rapist))
Pro answered "Rape - we should help"

So why doesn't God? See the second video

If I was in a position to stop a child rapist I would. It would seem to me that if we asked adults this question that they would as well. So if God is as described commonly by Christians then why does he not act? Now perhaps Pro would like to claim some sort of free will issue that if god acted he would violate the freewill of the child rapist, but then would not my intervention also violate the freewill of the child rapist and what about locking a child rapist up? Clearly that would violate his freewill also.

So as I see it Pro wants to prove the existence of a God that will kill a child for the actions of his father to which the child was no party of while the same god takes no actions to stop a person form sexually violating a child. A god who fed 2 million for 40 years but does not send manna to those children who are starving today. A god who made himself man to save all but ordered the Genocide of those he could not save.

This is the god Pro wants us to believe exists. The god that could do anything but stop a child rapist.

Pro says " I have not taken on the point of discussion to prove any religion as being fully false or Christianity as being the only right." Has Pro conceded the 2nd half of the proposition?

I hope Pro will soon provide evidence for the proposition.

[1] http://sciencenetlinks.com...
[2] http://www.wikihow.com...
[3] http://www.alislam.org...
[4] http://www.debunkingskeptics.com...
Debate Round No. 2
bobmead1960

Pro

Con's good intent, is taking a basic debate premise to "cast doubt" to dissuade you from believing the evidential and logical truth. Unless there is a clear personal confrontation with God, than everything else is not worth meriting a viable truth. Con has not been fair in his arguments against truths I have made in the "short" time I have to present. So let us look at the many "insults" that Con has presented: 1) "Prophecy in the Bible is false" - Tyre was rebuilt and he leaves the gps pictures of he city. He proved my point, they are the RUINS OF TYRE, the city is now Sour. God said the city of Tyre would not be rebuilt. He did not say to ever build on that land again. See his persuasive language is just like what Satan (the serpent) used to dissuade Eve from obtaining from the forbidden tree. Deception is the cause of most sins in our life Jeremiah 17:9. You see in round 1 he did not point out that Jericho had been rebuilt. IT HAS NOT, JUST AS GOD SAID! This is the theme Con Carry's out throughout this debate. I do not condemn him, but rather accuse him of being "blind" to truth2) The evidence of creation - He uses the "light" on the first day and say that it is already created before the fourth day. It clearly states that the first day was like a flashlight or light bulb, there is either light or darkness. On day four the sun, moon and the stars produce MORE LIGHT or LESS LIGHT and photosynthesis. Go read it!3) He states that "laminin does not have to be created by God" -amazing that we have all of the sophisticated technological advances and we can't create test tube life. But Laminin is just to supposed to "pop up" from somewhere, but not from SOMEONE4) Mature Earth -He wants to point out carbon dating as being so viable a means to date. Well it can only date for 5,730 years. And we have not experience such dating for long, since it was founded in 1940. NOT LONG AT ALL. Elements can be exposed to light, climate, preserved underground or in caves. Things break down quicker bases on exposure. How can this compare to dating things that are not exposed to the elements5) His questioning the "glue" that God IS but wants to discredit. Who did create everything than??? They say "big bang," but what caused the bang, and all of the universes matter was in the size of a pen head. That aces "insane" faith to believe in such a system. It leaves more questions than answers. It is a devoid and broken system. In my lifetime the "scientific system" has changed 3 times in my life. The universe was 1) shrinking 2)growing 3) and now we are a "bible" in a vast bathtub of bubbles. To answer why the universe is so big and GROWING (stars are being created) because they say things are so far away that must be "13 billion light years away," further than I can imagine. Could not the universe not be growing OUTWARD, just like a tree or star. It is capable of growing outward. If stars can be created and we see constellations being swallowed by other constellations (I put this in to pre-empt Cons weak arguments), but can not constellations have a universe that is FIRST created?6) Medical leeching - yes, I and we know that they do this today on extremely limited basis. I was provoking thought that the many or the masses practice something that is WRONGFUL to practice. And trys to cast doubt because it is practiced in a limited way today. The point was that "science" of the day was wrong and has continued to be wrong7) Just because our finite mind does not think that 100% of 2 equal parts are impossible, it is so. Con presupposes that our knowledge in FULL. That is not true. Even in the early 1900's civilization thought all things were created and no more "things" were out there to create. How drastically wrong. Does Con suppose that all knowledge has been obtained by man. That would be a false assumption to think that all knowledge is known by man. Technology, science and innovation are growing in leaps and bounds. 8) Genesis is not a 'Metaphor" or "allegorical" story. God said it, and that settles it! If the account is not in proper order as he states, than GOD IS A LIAR, and his character is imputed to be FALSE. That is not the case. Con can state "theistic" beliefs since there are so many. Why, because man screws up everything in due time. 8) To accuse me of baseless sexist statements is insulting beyond a blood pressure measurement. Bad Form!9) Saying that Jews claim that he has not fulfilled all of Messiah claims make Jesus void of being the true Messiah -Con does not preface that Jews do not view God other than a monotheistic being. A triune "blows" their mind out of the water. JESUS COULD NOT FULFILL ALL MESSIANIC PROPHECIES AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY. Yes, the disciples wanted him to set up a kingship, but we must remember what he came to earth to do. The Gospel of John 1 tells of the KEY reason for Jesus coming to earth in verse 29 "John saw Jesus coming to-ward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! Con focuses on Millennial Kingdom Messiah ship and not the "real" reason for His needed arrival to earth. It is just like this, I go to a hospital with a severe wound that needs immediate doctor attention and they only want to do administrative paperwork and making me comfortable in a room. The essence of the moment calls for a DOCTOR! Not paperwork. This is the theme that Con goes for in his debate. Without a means to obtain forgiveness of our sins from the Father, it does not matter what kingdom God sets up on earth!!10) Con wants to point out that rape is a means that God must intervene into our lives. Why?? He thinks it is unjust suffering?? Well many positions can be taken to overcome such erroneous thinking: 1) God must impede or stop WRONGS - how wrong do they have to be? Con can't compitulate that killing, stealing or lying are moral wrongs. But rape is, sounds rather contradictory in his positions. But says God should intervene in murders, rape, robbers, abuse or he is not a "moral" quality character. How can Con make such a judgment? Where does he have the right to call God out? God is in control and obviously not us. Since when do the peons tell God what is RIGHT? They cannot, because we are not in the same "league." My children don't tell me how to raise them. Employees don't tell the employer how to function or the tasks they are only going to do. Principals run schools not the kids. How dare Con attack God's character. You see this is the important point I want to add, God is only GOOD. Man is mostly BAD. God made all things "good" in Genesis. All things were perfect. Man and his FREE WILL made BAD come into the world. Con "blames" God for no intervening against BAD, but as I said how far does God go to stop bad? Does he punish lies, idol worshippers, foul language, covetousness, bad thoughts. See God wants man to come to him on God's terms and seek God freely. Love that is free is much better than love that is forced on someone. That is not TRUE LOVE, but Con will find some minuscule reason for this not to be right. Pure love that is mutual is the BEST! God wants our admiration, and when this is done it is mutual. God loves us in spite of all of our BAD! Just like I love my children who are far from perfect, just as I. God is not our cop, but in the millennial period we will be his cops for him.
I want to finish with another proof of God. I have heard of two profound accounts of people dying for an elongated period of time and being revived. Only to tell of entering heaven. I want to tell of a young boy, maybe 7, who tells his father that he saw Grandpa in heaven. Father shows a late picture of him because the son never saw Grandpa in his OLD stage. No recognition by the boy given. The father is curious an finds another picture of his father with a group of YOUNG comrades. The boy picks out the Grandfather immediately. Or the Pastor dead for 1 1/2 hours that should have died account. Of course Con disagrees someway.
autodidact

Con

autodidact forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
bobmead1960

Pro

Sad that Con did not respond. But I will carry on with the Point that ALL Religions are Wrong or ONE is right! There is the bumper sticker that says "COEXIST" and it is made up of various spiritual signs. It is with the belief that all ways lead to heaven and the concept is that just can't we just get along. We are progressing to a thinking in the US and world (somewhat) that believes it is ok to believe whatever you are comfortable with in your own personal life. We will deal with the inappropriateness of such a stance. Amazingly absurd that we don't appreciate or receive people that are free thinkers that oppose someone Else's thinking. We don't accept and often "hate" people who oppose our conceptual thinking. Instead of embrace them for their differences and look if their points are valid, we often "shoot" the messenger. Sadly, at 52 I am guilty of this very thing. I "railroaded" people instead of listening and letting people change on their own time, if they chose to because of finding truth. How can we prove that ALL MAJOR spiritual systems are wrong OR one is right in a mere 16,000 characters? Let's give it a try and say we did.
We will start specifically with figuring out the very core of why the five major religions are wrong? The most compelling reason is basically one or two reasons: 1) Because they are so contradictory they all must be wrong or one is right; 2) Basic laws of nature, science and life is that the "vast majority of things are done one way." But why does contradiction determine that they are all wrong? Can't they just be a "different" means of accomplishing the same end result? Let's focus our attention on what such GREAT CONTRADICTIONS do on the point of religious systems. It is not just that they contradict each others system by what they teach, but they VEHEMENTLY ATTACK and DISAGREE with basic concepts of other systems. But proving such a statement helps us clarify such thinking as being not just valid, but wholehearted truth.
The major religions are Hinduism, Buddhism, Muslim, Judaism and Christianity. Let's start with Buddhism and rule them out quickly. They are similar to the teaching of Hinduism with karma and reincarnation (which Buddhist call transmigration) with the ultimate goal of nirvana (heaven you might say). They hold the same core beliefs in doing good and is a "works system" (what your works are good/bad means you deserve good/bad). This is the main contradiction from the other 4 religions, THERE IS NO GOD. We are the gods in our universe. This is absolutely contrary to the other groups concepts. It gives no answers to a creator. No one who started life and our universe. So it is extremely clear that their religion which is about 3,000 years is a value system quite different and contradicts the theological teachings of the other four so violently. Secondly, is the Hinduism faith, and for brevity sake I am condensing their system into a much smaller description, but no less accurate. Hinduism had three main Gods, Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver and Shiva the destroyer, and some 33 or 330 million other gods, depending on what source your information is concerning Hinduism. This is also a "works" system that is based on rewarding good behavior and reincarnation (up or down) is the means of producing a soul worthy of Nirvana. So both systems get "do overs." Thirdly, is the belief system of Islam or the Muslim faith. It too is a "work" system that rewards those who are martyrs of Jihadist acts as the only SURE means to paradise, or a heaven type equivalent. You can practice and hold to every Islamic teaching 100% and Allah, their supreme God, is able to just denounce you and cast you out. This would be a system that is extremely unfair and lacks right or righteousness. They say that Jesus was prophet, but not the Son of God. They condone killing anyone that leaves the Muslim faith as being the only means of preserving that persons soul. For by killing them, you save them. Strange concept to say the least, and then, they choose to kill the in infidels (usually Americans or Jews) without any desire of seeing their soul obtain fellowship in paradise with Allah. It is blasphemy to claim that Allah, God, had supposed intercourse to produce a Son (i.e. Jesus Christ) or to claim he is anything more than a singular being. Their teachings are based on ONE man Muhammed who could not write, but enlisted his wife to write the scripture in Arabian, and yet the language was not brought to existence until the next century after his death. You could quite assuredly say that he was the leader of many men that destroyed cities for their "booty," wealth, and he received no less than 20% of that wealth, even though, he was not involved the fighting campaign. Man is not sinful, but needs a government that will enforce Sharia law that will "keep" them from sinning. They do not accurately portray free will of mankind. Of course another "works" based system, even though your destiny is left to one encounter with Allah after death. Fourthly, Then let's look at Judaism. They are looking for a Messiah, Deliverer and King to reign over Israel. Who claim that Jesus is not the Son of God. They believe that observing the customs handed down in the Torah or Old Testament Bible, they can obtain heaven by their belief in God and such "works" as sacrificing lambs for temporal forgiveness of sin. Christianity takes the backdrop of Judaism, Jehovah God and the need for a "Perfect Lamb," and points to Jesus Christ (name meaning Savior and Messiah) as his atoning work on the cross as the only means of salvation and ultimate heaven with the Trinity- Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Christianity takes three beings and says they are one, and visa verse. Similar only to the Hinduism belief of three main Gods. Christianity is the only belief system that does not base salvation, nirvana, paradise on "works." Rather, it is on the vicarious substitutionary sacrifice by Jesus Christ on the cross for all sins past, present and future. I cannot do anything to merit the grace and forgiveness of sins on my own. I receive, humbly and gladly, the works of Jesus on my behalf. Christianity is based on FAITH, being fully pursuaded that something I cannot see, touch or feel is something I am fully in belief and agreement on what the Bible states as God's breathed message, 2 Timothy 3:16. To be God breathed is of this mentality or thinking. If I ate an onion sandwich and came up to you and exhaled right in your face, you could smell exactly what I had just ate. You got the full "aroma." This is the way God delivered his message to mere men of God. He enveloped his spirit around their essence to write down his teachings. Some 40 men over 1600 years.
So let us draw out difference about the 5 different faiths: The overwhelming disagreement in the follow key issues are: ONE says there is no God; TWO say there is reincarnation; ONE says there is NO GUARANTEE of HEAVEN; ONE says their own separate God leads people to eternity: Jehovah, (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva), Allah or Jesus Christ's atoning work on the Cross; every ONE has their own BOOK of beliefs; Only ONE is a FAITH based system. The difference is not just their differnces in their belief, than one could possible conclude that each was still right. It was just "right" for them. But these belief systems go much further. Muslims believe that belief in any other God is doom to that person, eternal damnation. Christianity says there is no other God and other "gods" are called "idols," meaning NOTHING. Judaism says the real God has not come yet and are still looking for Him. There teaching is so clear to admonish and reject other teachings as false and a curse. And I cannot condemn to hold to such beliefs if they are TRULY RIGHT! So due to contradiction and how only one way is the right way in much of our life, we can conclude that all must be wrong or one must be right!
autodidact

Con

Sorry life sometimes happens. I guess I should do best to reply to the last 2 post by Pro.

It is clear I am doing more than casting doubt. For example Pro asserted agreements on morality were more than similar conclusions that they were somehow indicative of a god. In contrast I have noted the agreement on morality that if one had the ability to stop a child rapist t would be immoral not to and how the moral law giver Pro asserts and asserts has such power but I note fails to use it. By our moral standards, to which Pro asserts comes from his god, God is immoral

"Tyre was rebuilt and he leaves the gps pictures of he city. He proved my point, they are the RUINS OF TYRE, the city is now Sour."
Pro, lease read Ezk 26:21 I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign Lord."
About the name Tyre vs. Sour, Pro is trying to make something out of translation issues, it is the same city. [1]

"See his persuasive language is just like what Satan (the serpent) used to dissuade Eve from obtaining from the forbidden tree."
While I suspect Pro meant this to be an ad hominim, I will take it as an admission that I am being persuasive.

"You see in round 1 he did not point out that Jericho had been rebuilt."
Nor did I need to. Pro does not care for me not eating of the fruit that he cherry picked. Sure there may well be items in the bible that are historically true but unless we also search for that which untrue. Pro wants us to believe because the examples he picks out fit with some history that it all must. I am not challenging the Jericho claim. I haven't even bother to see if it was true or false, because it does not matter if the idea behind it is falsified. I am challenging the idea behind the claim that bible prophecy proves the existence of the Christian God. If Pro's assertion is true then their must not be any failed prophecies. Ezk. 26 contains predictions that are not true. Logic dictates that we must not use said claim as evidence for God. Furthermore Pro believes God is the author of the bible, given the failed predictions we find in Ezk 26 either God did write the book and is fallible or God did not write the book

"I do not condemn him, but rather accuse him of being "blind" to truth"
Accusations without evidence.

"It clearly states that the first day was like a flashlight or light bulb..."
Given that both things were invented recently, relatively speaking I find such assertion needs a source. Could Pro provide evidence that day 1 was actually significantly dimmer than day 4? A source that actually states "light bulb" and/or flashlight would be utterly remarkable.

"He states that "laminin does not have to be created by God" -amazing that we have all of the sophisticated technological advances and we can't create test tube life."
No, Pro you are incorrect I stated no such thing nor did I imply such. I find it dishonest that you would attribute words I did not write to me. Here is what I did say
"Pro has fail to show that the existence of Laminin can only exists because a creator god made it.
In other words you have yet to show that Laminin is necessarily indicative of your God. If abiogenesis and evolution are both true then Pro has yet to show why it is not possible for natural processes to allow for the evolution of Laminin.

Pro claim about carbon dating, "Well it can only date for 5,730 years." has no source to back up his claim. 5,730 is C14's half-life. Current technology means C14 dating is good out to about 10 half-lives, or nearly 60,000 years [2]

We don"t know as of yet why the Big bang started, but we know it did. As for growing like a tree. No. Red shift clearly shows the majority of things moving away in an expansionary manner. The great thing about science is it corrects itself.
"Just because our finite mind does not think that 100% of 2 equal parts are impossible, it is so."
No, but neither would you be in a position to logically claim it as true.
Clear up the math for me. Is it
100% man + 100% God = 100%
or
(100% man x 50%) + (100% God x 50%) = 100%
Only the second one is mathematically valid.

"Con presupposes that our knowledge in FULL."
Pro please tell us how you know what my thoughts are or are not? Your assertion if true would defeat the problem of solipsism.

"Even in the early 1900's civilization thought all things were created and no more "things" were out there to create."
Pro in an earlier point noted how people"s beliefs were wrong. Is Pro trying to both have and eat cake at the same time?

Jesus was a Jew it is by the Jewish/OT standards that we should consider. Jesus did not fulfill all that he should have.

"Con wants to point out that rape is a means that God must intervene into our lives."
I know what an Is Ought fallacy is and I dare not commit. It is a simple idea. If a being is in a position to stop child rape and if a being fails to act it follows that said being's action is immoral. Pro is trying to get in some special pleading.

"Where does he have the right to call God out?"
If I do not have the right to call the inaction of God immoral than logic dictates you do not have the right to call his actions moral. Pro can feign outrage all he wants if he wants to make a case for god being moral then I can make a counter case.

Con "blames" God for no intervening against BAD, but as I said how far does God go to stop bad?"
Pro there you go again making claims about things that you can"t know. I am an atheist I don"t blame god, but rather under the hypothetical that your claims are true I come to the conclusion that the being you describe is immoral

"I have heard of two profound accounts of people dying for an elongated period of time and being revived."
I hear that most NDE see nothing and have heard of others that see Mohamed

I will address selective points of R4 now in part because I have less than 2000 characters left and in part because I feel Pro has yet failed to prove the existence of the Christian God.

There is the bumper sticker that says "COEXIST" and it is made up of various spiritual signs."
I rather like this one http://www.obscenitease.com...

"How can we prove that ALL MAJOR spiritual systems are wrong OR one is right in a mere 16,000 characters? Let's give it a try and say we did."
I think Pro's number is a bit low, there are 33,000 Christian sects alone and add to this that Pro believe there is but one path and we are dealing with a problem.

But IF Pro could prove his to actually be true then logically all others would be false. The problem is Pro has yet to prove his god actually exist. To further complicate things logically we must reject the same type of evidence that Pro rejects for contradictory claims. People meeting Jesus in a NDE must be tossed out because other people have claimed seeing other being in NDEs.

"... with the ultimate goal of nirvana (heaven you might say)."
Um, that is not what nirvana is. [3] In simple terms nirvana is a state of mind that one cannot reach if one is trying to.

The major monotheisms are based on a guy named Abraham who has more in common with Jennifer Cisowski's of Palm City, FL than any founder of religions [4]

Perhaps Pro could discredit Jainism? [5]

"So due to contradiction and how only one way is the right way in much of our life, we can conclude that all must be wrong or one must be right!"
please see the video

[1] http://www.memidex.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
[4]http://articles.sun-sentinel.com...
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 4
bobmead1960

Pro

To make my final case, I shall point out scriptural truths that are contained in any other book to legitimize my continual and ever standing position that "God is a provable being, and that 5 religions are all wrong or 1 is right." Provable is not just tangible evidence of concrete provable evidence. Often it is an inner "sense" that reassures our position or thinking as correct. So many of my points will be somewhat of a repeat of some things but please follow throughout my case.
1) GOD CREATED MANKIND FOR HIS GLORY! God states this in the means that we know without Him there would be no us, and so, we are grateful for all that he has done for mankind. You might say as a child is to their parents, in a healthy relationship, a mutual respect and our children's admiration. Beings in heaven will ultimately praise him for creating them and dying for their sins, and he respects them for acknowledging their right decision to follow in His ways.
2) Even though God created us and gave a perfect environment MANKIND COULD NOT OBEY HIS WAYS. We sinned against the only rule that He instated, thus we were separated from fellowship with God. Our relationship could only be reconciled by someone SINLESS DYING for the sins of the guilty. Only GOD was capable of such an act. A sinless being taking on the sins of ALL mankind. God's picture of a blood sacrifice was shown to Adam and Eve IMMEDIATELY after their sin by sacrificing an animal for the skins to clothe them.
3) The Old Testament believer was instructed to make a TEMPORARY COVERING of their SIN by an animal sacrifice, ALMOST ALWAYS A SPOTLESS AND FULLY HEALTHY LAMB THAT WAS 1 YEAR OF AGE (ultimate type of Jesus). A great picture of this is the account of Abraham and Isaac with the ram (male sheep) as the substitutionary sacrifice unto God.
4) See as I described the crime of committing a murder and then getting out of jail, only to meet the family member that still knew I had not paid the full PENALTY for my SIN. God cannot just forgive our sins because he chooses. That would be unjust and not righteous. A punishment or penalty had to be exacted for the crime committed. But man could not pay the price because he would DIE. Thus, the God Son was to take up the means to bring this about for mankind to hopefully bring man and God together.
5)JESUS PAID THE PRICE ON THE CROSS and we see that the Father could not look on the Son because of him "bearing" the actual sins of mankind, so he brought about darkness in the middle of the day to show his "separation" from His Son.
6)Because of the progress of CREATION, MAN'S SIN, TEMPORAL SACRIFICE, A NEED FOR A PERFECT SACRIFICE, JESUS THE PERFECT LAMB. We come to the point that by Jesus being resurrected from the dead shows that God the Father was appeased from his wrath against man for sinning because of Jesus sacrificial work on the cross. Thus the way was provided to available a GIFT to mankind. Something they could not earn or merit on their own "good actions."
Nothing we do would justify forgiveness of sins.
7)This GIFT called salvation which is AVAILABLE to ALL mankind is by acknowledging our Sin, believe Jesus is the Son of God and that the Father raised him from the dead, and make God's ways our dictates in life. We give our will voluntarily to his commands and laws Romans 10:9,10. Of course we are not always obedient because we still are "caged" in our sin
natured body. Only our death will bring about a body that is spiritually corrected. This is difficult for men more than women due to our self sufficient nature and desire to "earn" what we get.
8)this is the hardest step for mankind, to HUMBLE ONESELF to know they are hopeless and helpless on their own. Their only means of RECONCILIATION is through Jesus Christ. Being HUMBLED is not our greatest quality trait.
9)To compound matters, it is not just us being reconciled to God, there is an agent that is working against this coming about. You see 1/3 of heaven, which was comprised of Angels, had a revolt against God and his name was Lucifer, we know him as Satan. So he is about trying to get as many people to spend eternity in hell with him so he is about trying to deceive as many as possible to have more suffering beings. You could definitely say "misery loves company." If others are going to suffer we would rather have them suffer, with us, than to do it alone. Satan's objective is to DECEIVE MANKIND. A regular "party pooper" you might say. Thus, we are debating the validity of so many religions and the existence of God. This pleases Satan to have CONFUSION and MISUNDERSTANDING.
10) FORGIVENESS is ETERNAL. God chooses to forgive all sins, past, present and future. He IMPUTES RIGHTEOUSNES (a banking term, like a credit card to credit righteousness to our account). God's judgment is based on MERCY (declaring innocent when all evidence points to guilt). So since this judgement is based on mercy and his desire to forgive, for the means of reconciliation to come about and we can spend eternity together.
11) DESTINIES ARE ETERNAL good or bad, heaven or hell. Since we are beings created "like" God, with a SOUL (eternal spiritual being), SPIRIT (emotional and mental characteristics) AND BODY (outward manifestation of functioning capabilities). You see God does not choose to send people to hell. They choose to reject Him and thus have no means to reconcile themselves to God. Thus, their rejection leaves him no CHOICE but eternal separation (which God terms as DEATH) Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
12) GOD IS ETERNAL and has the power to perpetuate all things forever. HIS power is beyond the human measure. He can transcend time forward and backwards. Thus, in reality there is no time.

His book develops and displays these concepts exactly. The only problem is that we choose to WORSHIP the CREATURE more than the CREATOR Romans 1:25. We look to replace God with ourselves.

But with this plethora of evidence he cannot see the existence of God because his heart is wrong. His heart is something contrary to being able to comprehend and accept God. His heart is "hardened." This phrase was used with Pharaoh in the Moses account found in Genesis. This is done by time and fortifying the concepts the concepts he chooses to confirm. When one confirms wrong so much the "layers" like an onion has to be pealed by to get to his heart. This can only be done through extreme questioning as to death and life issues. I will close on what Jesus said it would take to enter the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 18:3 says "And he said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like a little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." This statement is not only so profound and confusing but exact and precise. Unless we have child like faith and accept the teachings of God, our intellectual thinking will be confounded and confused by our self and Satan into a deception that brings eternal suffering and anguish. Look into your heart and ask if these things are not true.
No other spiritual system teaches such FAITH. The other four major religions teach WORKS, which seems reasonable to man. You get what you work for, God says we need FAITH to overcome our SIN and receive HIS GIFT. The logical system is to get what we deserve. God is willing to give us what we don't deserve. A picture provided by a father in a family to his children. Giving something the could never merit, but he willfully gives them instead PURE SACRIFICIAL LOVE. UNCONDITIONAL LOVE is where I am loved not for what I have done (good), but for who I am! He loves me because I am his creation and chose to reconcile our relationship by his ATONING WORK. Check out comment 1 about the facts about TYRE, and look up Acts 4:12.
Con tks for your challenge. I pray that I did not insult you. My daughter said I may have done that very thing, by comparing the Satan and deception issue. Please forgive me.
autodidact

Con

I am going to make this post short.

The proposition of this debate is "Can Prove the Existence of God and the Validity of the Christian Faith over other Religious Systems"
Pro has failed to logically prove the existence of the christian God.
Pro has asserted false claims as true. For example, Pro is of the belief that God is infallible and the author e bible. The bible contains some true claims me false claims. If the bible has false claims then its author could not be infallible.

The God Pro presents is not logically consistent. There is no reason to think such a contradiction exists.

The second half of proposition cannot be proven if the first half is not also proven.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by autodidact 4 years ago
autodidact
Sorry I missed my post deadline. Life happens.
That being said Pro has yet to meet his burden of proof.
Posted by bobmead1960 4 years ago
bobmead1960
Plus, the facts about Tyre being destroyed and never rebuilt are covered in this website:
http://www.apologeticspress.org...

"The article points out the main points of Ezekiels prophecy's hand to him by God: 1) The city would be attacked by many nation (7 are pointed out in history, more may have occurred); 2) the inhabitants and Tyre would be slain; 3) Nebuchadnezzar would build a seige mound against the city; 4) the city would be broken down and the stones, timper and soil would be thrown in the "midst of the water;" 5) the city would become a "place for spreading nets;" and 6) the city would never be rebuilt." from said above source.

The information prophecied by Ezekiel in 586 B.C. was of a city that was "impregnable" in almost everyone's eyes, a city over 2300 years old at the time of his "penning." The city was on a penninsula and had a great defensable wall of rocks to the north. The city was partially destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in by seige and the inland inhabitants killed (thus, two prophecy's fulfilled). Alexander took stones from the mainland city and used it to breach to the island. Thus, the city was under water and it was a place for throwing their nets (2 more prophecy's fulfilled). And it is a fair and logical conclusion when you have the ruins of the city today, it was never rebuilt. Yes, it was built upon, but the original city was not rebuilt. Checkmate! All prophecy's fulfilled. It was questioned by "higher criticism" critics in the last 50 said years that the prophecy's were so accurate that Ezekiel had to be their to observe this all happen. Well the seige of the city by Nebuchadnezzar took 13 years and it only fulfilled 2 of the 6 prophecy's anyways. Amazing how when history and the facts are put together that the Bible is ALWAYS RIGHT! So once again, "BAD FORM" for bringing up false accusations against the validity of the Bible. But thanks for helping learn more about the truths of God!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
bobmead1960autodidactTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Resolution fail... I advise next time starting with one of the two resolutions, such as "Christianity has more validity than other religious systems."