The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Can there be a god?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/29/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 443 times Debate No: 84390
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (29)
Votes (0)




"God is an ever shrinking pocket of scientific ignorance" -Neil DeGrasee Tyson.
Religion was created as a way to explain unexplainable events. As we have become better able to explain these things with science and reason and logic, we have had less and less a need for deities. First were gods made of nature itself that explained life and growth. Then came gods that represented and influenced various forces of nature that explained the weather and the cosmos. Science has effectively eliminated the gods down to 2 main gods; Yahweh/Elohim/Adoni, and Allah. Both serve to give answers to the supposed last great unknown; that of death. People who believe in either of these gods are nearly as atheistic as atheists, as they have a lack of belief in only one less God than atheists. They have ceded that science has rendered the existence of the other thousands of gods obsolete. Even religious individuals must acknowledge the absolution of the potential of knowledge from science, yet they continue to follow given ideas and beliefs instead of asking and doubting an questioning and testing until the truth is found. Because the truth is not what is peaceful or pleasant or even what you have CHOSEN TO BELIEVE because it sounds right. The truth exists despite anyone's belief in it, therefore the only true way to find the truth is not to accept what you've been told, but to question everything until you can no longer. Only then if it holds up can it be true. You cannot know there is a god until you have entertained and fully exhausted atheism and science.


Let me simplify this:

From 'reason' - tell me, if God doesn't exist, how did the SPERM know that there are FEMALE ORGANS it should stimulate to in order of the importance of human reproduction?
and how did the FEMALE ORGANS know that they should be stimulated with SPERM in order of the importance of human reproduction?

This pattern of the SPERM and the FEMALE ORGAN manifesting into a human would have 'never' have started without there being at least an intelligent outside interference who started it.

Who gives conscience?

If you believe God doesn't exist, then you should have no problem with a rapist man raping a baby girl. Yes, you should have no problem with a brutal rapist raping a baby girl.

But no, you do care, since you have a conscience.
Can't you see that you have something godly in you, conscience! You know that what's wrong and, you know what's right!

If we evolved from animals, i.e. monkey, we would still have no conscience (forever not knowing right from wrong). But no, we were made in the image and likeliness of God, men is far much more superior. Let evolution not be the only way for you to go with suppressing the irrefutable truth.

God created you
God is for you
And you are for God

Debate Round No. 1


Neither the sperm nor the egg are at all consciously aware of each other. If they were, every attempt to become pregnant would be 100% successful every time. Not only that but every egg would be fertilized by a sperm if they were looking for each other. This is not the case. Not every attempt works. It takes some couples a long time to become pregnant. If you put a sample of sperm on a table with a sample of eggs just an inch away, they will never meet. You have to mix the samples and hope that a sperm wanders into an egg. So yes, there absolutely is an intelligent interference. The man consciously gives the woman his sperm in an environment where it will be mixed with the eggs and have the best chance of fertilization.
Human conscience comes from empathy. Empathy is a chemical response to external stimulus triggered by seeing an external source that in some way resembles you. It's why when he hear about tape occurring to another human, we feel for them. It's this same feeling of empathy that keeps us from DOING these things to another human being. It's the reason we don't feel as strongly about killing animals as we do humans. It's why we feel closer and can relate more and feel more first to our families, then people who we can connect to, our friends, then the rest of humanity. They resemble us less and therefore trigger less of a response to our empathetic system. This is where logic comes in. Logic is the other part of conscience that continues to work where empathy is unable. I might not feel empathetic towards a Forrest that has been cut down, but I can reason that it is wrong from imperial evidence that shows it is damaging to the environment. And while you may not feel for the trees, you may feel more for the animals who lived in them, and you'd feel even more if humans were in them as they were cut down. This is all why feel terrible when we see rape and murder and theft. We feel for them chemically, then reason logically. Psychopaths aren't crazy. Not at all. They were simply born without a functional empathetic system. They feel nothing for other people. Not all psychopaths are murderers. Some still use that other half, logic, to reason that if they commit murder, they would be imprisoned or executed or otherwise made unable to be free. They don't feel another's sense of property, so theft is easier. They don't feel for another's sense of fear or terror, so they are able to commit horrible acts of violence. Has God begrudged them this sense of conscience? He would not. Because according to gods plan, we were all made to have the ability to choose right from wrong. These people are literally, measurably born without this chemical system.
We did NOT come from monkeys. We and monkeys share a common ancestor with a species that resembles both of us. And in fact, as we ARE related, modern monkeys as well as their relatives and many other mammals DO have empathy. It's why they don't kill each other for no reason. It's why mammals work together better than any other animal group. Dogs are the best species in the animal kingdom at empathy across species. They are the best at reading human emotions and have the same chemical response and feel their emotions with them and attempt to help them. When you hear a cow scream in pain, you still feel something because it is eerily similar to the way humans express pain, but you'll feel less than when you hear a human scream. If you've ever heard a dog cry out in sadness, you've heard how much it sounds like any family members cries and it hurts you. This is very simple and calculable and observable. We feel for others chemically and can therefore make a logical decision to not do something to harm them.
I have told you exactly how this works naturally. And as I said, science currently explains everything God used to, except disproving the existence of an afterlife. However, if creation and conscience work without God, as we now know they do, God is made irrelevant, and if God is in any way irrelevant then he cannot be.
I grew up in a very religious home. I loved it. I still admire the hope and happiness it gives people. But along the way, I allowed myself to think and search. Before this, my whole belief system was given to me. That's what faith is. You re told something, and you choose to believe it instead of being wary and questioning it first to find its truth. These ideas are excepted because they are pleasant and make you happy. However the truth isn't what makes you feel good, it is what it is, the good, the bad, and the neutral. I've always found that in any argument for or against religion, the religious defense for any argument is the suspension of disbelief, or plausible deniability, or just simply faith. This is unreasoned untested ideology. You believe because you simply believe. And you resign yourself to be without questions or answers. You don't test God, because you have been told not to. But if you haven't tested something, you cannot be sure that it is real. Science is constantly tested. It's why the ideas have changed despite passionately believing in them before. It's why we used to believe the sun revolved around the earth but now now it's the opposite. Religion encourages accepting given beliefs which means the beliefs will never change and no growth will occur and no real truth can be found. Science tests everything until the truth is found and has created all the growth mankind has ever had. I appreciate that you love your faith but I implore you to test it further. And to go through the rest of this debate thinking objectively and without any predetermined decisions that you are absolutely right and will not have your mind changed. I in turn will do the same. If you can bring me to a different understanding of a god that can make me see he is possible, I would much rather believe I can live with my family forever rather than believe I will rot in the ground until the sun swallows the earth and the sun is swallowed by a black hole. For this reason, I will be receptive to your ideas, so long as they lead to the truth. Good or bad.


Have you ever put yourself in God's shoes?

(If you even ever tried, you would certainly perceive that HIS FOOLISH IDEAS of how mankind should live outweighs even the MOST BRILLIANT IDEAS presented mankind - of how mankind should live.

***Disagree with me?
Present YOUR idea of how God should take care of mankind if He truly exists and, if your idea is better than God's idea. I would certainly praise and reconsider my belief.***)

Give me one good reason of why God should be seen by us for us to believe in him?

Because according to me, (Before God created the world) - God's idea for people to worship him even without seeing him and loving us by sending His only begotten son Jesus Christ to die for our wrong deeds while we were still his enemies.

That, is that best ever plan according to me!

So for the last time, I beg with you please, let the fairytale lie of evolution not be your Good News because the true Good News is that Jesus Christ descended on earth and died for all of us even while we were still sinners so that we may share the glory of the promise given to our ancestors, the land of milk and honey.

Debate Round No. 2


TheObjectiveTruth forfeited this round.


Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
I think the particles the universe is made up of could very well be "eternal". There are atoms in everything but the elements that make up the Earth are not all of the elements that exist. We don't even know what dark matter completely is yet, and there are even more kinds of particles we have yet to find or define as well.

Saying that because the earth isn't eternal means the universe can't be eternal is not sound argument.

I don't know the universe is eternal and i don't know if there are multiverses. Hell some have even thought there are white holes somewhere that are simply the "other" side of the black holes we have seen in our universe. Essentially passes matter between each other, not creating new matter but giving the allusion that new matter is being created or destroyed.

I think it is more than fair to assume the universe could be eternal or at the very least created itself by the chance.

We can sense the universe in a very simple way. Look up and see the stars at night. That alone shows us there is something that both us and all of those trillions of stars are a part of at the same time.

I'm not interested in carrying on this debate any longer. At least not in the comments section that is about to expire.

IF you want to continue then set up an official debate and i'll oblige. As far as my link goes i would just read it over and see what you can refute and what you cannot. It can never hurt to study the opposition's arguments.
Posted by Jt5542002 9 months ago
Regardless is the big bang happened over and over, the materials that were contained in the singularity are the same as the materials before. It's not like the singularity threw out old material for new. And, we have carbon dated our own planet. So we know this planet isn't eternal, and if this planet is made of the same original materials as the singularity, then how is the singularity eternal? Or science is wrong about the age of the earth and it's materials.

You say you can sense the universe around you. But senses are subjective. How can you say that I havent sensed god, when you can't even prove that you sensed anything?

5000 years from now, people will view us as idiots. So, an argument of superior intelligence won't hold. Maybe the future views atheist as idiots.

Anyone who replaced god with education, never had a grasp on god anyway.

I read your link. There is alot there. Choose your favorite.
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
The argument can be used for the universe itself. There are MANY theories (not the scientific term) that could lead us to believe there are multiple universes. The death of one could lead to the birth of another, hence the big bang. THIS could be eternal. Not the universes themselves, but the process by which they "live and die"

At the very least we know that the universe exists, because we can sense it all around us. This can not be said for any god or deity.

You, if anything, have a hypothesis as to what and how this deity you believe in exists. With nothing to back it up. Literally nothing.

I would take what little we KNOW over knowing nothing any day.

The notion of god was made up when humans didn't understand what the sun was, or why it rained, or why there were natural disasters, or how plants grew.

The notion of god came from a time period where humans were literal idiots. MANY gods came from this, but all but 1 (for most people) have been replaced by new information through education.

There are again MANY arguments against god, but i really don't feel like typing every one out right now.

Here's a reference if you're interested in trying to refute any of them.
Posted by Jt5542002 9 months ago
I said God is eternal. That means he wasn't created. The unmoved mover.

No, you say, "I can use the same argument for the universe itself." No.. you cant. Because science has carbon dated our earth as well as attached an age to the universe. None of which have eternal lifespan. So, there is no way that the universe has eternal lifespan, or else science is wrong.

If science is right about the age, the the universe cant be the unmoved mover. If science is wrong and the universe is eternal, then what else are they wrong about?

But, it amazes me that the notion of god has been around from as early as we can date, yet you say there is no reason to believe. You some how know something that the entire history of man doesnt. Where did the first idea of god come from? Of you say someone made him up, then who? That burden of proof is on you.
And how did he think of a being called god? We can not grasp a concept of something we have never seen or heard of. He must have been a caveman genius. Lol
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
Ok i just wanted to add that you stated something cannot create itself from nothing. Yet this is exactly what is proposed with the idea of god.

Any reason you give to justify this i can simply attach to the universe itself. Making the argument pretty much a coin flip. EXCEPT for 1 thing. We know there is a "universe" because we are in it. We DO NOT know of any god or deity because we have no reason to believe there is one.
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
Not that it matters at this point, but i don't think you can just explain god to people who have never heard of the notion and expect them to accept it, let alone understand it.

The "holy" text were all written by man correct? Where said stories came from is where the confusion arises. I simply imply that the stories came from those very same humans, made up and written down for one reason or another.

People were always looking for control, for order. Religion would have been a good way to achieve that. Along with the belief in heaven and hell as well.

" I would think a question as powerful as god, you would make up your own mind, and not simply take a books word for it. "

I was simply using the words and ideas that other believers like yourself have used. Obviously they do not think the same as you or i for that matter.

See this problem of the burden of proof always seems to come up, and somehow people think it is the skeptics burden and not the one who holds the belief or position being debated in the first place.

I would like to know any reasons you have for believing in a god, because again, other than that feeling of content and hope that some people seem to gain from belief in god and an afterlife, i don't see many other reasons.

It's 3AM and i need to get up for work. I'll continue this tomorrow if you want to wait to respond. OR not up to you.
Posted by Jt5542002 9 months ago
Man did not stumble across a holy book. He wrote it. And he wrote it about god. That means the idea of god had existed before his pen ever touched the paper. God predates religion.

I would first familiarize myself with the native language. As to figure out what their word for creator is, as god is english. And I am sure they would look at anyone crazy who was speaking a foreign language. But once I explain what God or the creator is, every man will understand.

Without god thete is certainly no religion l. Please explain to me how the existence of god hinges on the existence of any religion?

You criticize the idea of god based on others interpretation of god. I would think a question as powerful as god, you would make up your own mind, and not simply take a books word for it. That go's for any knowledge.

You still haven't explained why it should be obvious that God doesn't exist.

The only reason to believe that God has expectations of us, is a holy book. But there are many reasons to believe without the book. The book assumes you already do believe.

I can invoke a creator, and you haven't given one reason that refutes my theory.

I said unmoved mover. That is my reason to believe. You say the singularity could be god, but we would have to assume that the singularity was eternal. But, the same scientists who claim the big bang happened, will argue that infinity doesn't exist. But, it has too. Until you can prove, the singularity is eternal, you have proved nothing.

Something can not create itself from nothing. That defies logic.

Logical absolutes. There is another good argument for god. Lol
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
But that's the thing. If there weren't religions to share the idea of god, then god wouldn't exist in anyone's minds.

Ask an african child who has never come into contact with a bible or a koran if god exists and they'll look at you like you're crazy.

Without religion there is certainly no god. With it i still argue that there is no reason to believe in a god, just a reason to have the notion of god in your head.

Similar to the Odyssey and the greek gods. Sure there were other books that mention greek gods of course, but if all of them were never written no one today would have any idea that those gods were ever even a thought at all.

So yes, i criticize belief in god based on certain holy books because that is the only context which you can do so.

There is no need to criticize belief in god WITHOUT a holy book because it should be obvious to someone that there is no god in such a case.

The ONLY reason to believe in a god is because of the "word" that is in each of the hold books. People take those things literally and i would say wrongfully so.

You can't just say god did something because you don't know how said thing was done. There is no need to invoke god in anything.

If you believe in a god for any reason OTHER than that sense of hope, or comfort or whatever, then you need to explain that and give REASONS why you do.

Faith is not a sufficient reason, and neither are any of the holy books.

The Universe could have formed by itself for all we know, just like we suspect life on earth did.

The universe could have come from the death of another universe and we could be part of a multi-verse as we speak. We don't know, and we may never know, but that is no reason to invoke god into the conversation.
Posted by Jt5542002 9 months ago
Santa is charged with the creation of the universe.
And Santa and god are not synonymous.

The proof of the creator is that which he created. Just look
If you want to call my beliefs false, I would direct you too any time frame in the history of man. Both present and past that say their is a god.

You criticize a belief in God based on the teachings of a holy book. You point to errors In the bible as proof that God doesn't exist. As if god needs religion to exist. No, religion is the rules that were defined after a belief in God had already been established. If you don't believe based on some religous text, then you don't understand god.

You don't know that you only have one life. That is faith

If you have never been to space, then you don't know anymore than anyone else.

Science is always changing from a conclusion they once thought was fact. That is the whole point

What in the bible has been proven wrong? (Just curious)

There are many documentaries and books you can read from those who have done the research into the moon landing or conspiracy.

Your biggest error is thinking that because science can figure out how it works, they can figure out were it came from. But, you already know what their answer is. "We just don't know." But you are 100% sure it wasn't from god. So, my question is, why do take the word of people that you are apparently smarter than?
Posted by electrivire 9 months ago
See when someone told me Santa was real as a kid a believed it. Likewise with god.

When i found out Santa was a lie, i assumed god was as well.

At the very least i had had "proof" of Santa, before the truth was given to me, in ways such as presents he left and foot prints or hoof prints outside.

I never had any "proof" for a god.

And still don't today.

Science offers explanations (often testable and provable ones i might add) to the vast majority of the questions we have.

If you want to call my beliefs false, then i point you in the direction of the thousands of scientists both from the past and from the present that agree upon them.

I don't understand why someone would believe in a god for any rational reason. I understand the belief comes with a feeling of hope and softer feeling about death, but that isn't enough for me.

I accept i only have one life and live to the fullest the best i can.

So no i have never been to space, but for intents and purposes of the word, I "know" that we did.

That's the thing about Science it is always changing because we are always trying to prove ourselves wrong in the hope that we find something new.

Religion has stayed the same for so long and has never once been correct. At least not fully. The beliefs of the people who wrote the bible for instance were dated for their time, and have sense been proven wrong.

If they came out and told us that we didn't land on the moon, and explained in detail how they "faked' it. Then maybe i would be inclined to believe that, but there is no reason to go against the notion that we did at this time.

Maybe back when the writers of the bible were living there was a reason to believe in a god. Whether people didn't understand natural disasters or the stars or what have you. They looked to god as the answer for those confusions.

The difference now is that we don't have those confusions anymore. Science has uncovered more than enough to get rid of the
No votes have been placed for this debate.