The Instigator
godsnumberis7
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
funnycn
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Christianity V.S. evolution

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 4 votes the winner is...
funnycn
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/11/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,493 times Debate No: 61565
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (31)
Votes (4)

 

godsnumberis7

Pro

I am for Christianity, you argue first
funnycn

Con

There is evidence of evolution.

One, dinosaurs. The earth can't be thousands of years old if dinosaurs are MILLIONS of years old.

Second there are skeletons of previous life forms more than 10,000 years old.

Third evolution has been slightly proven before. Whales have evolved from the Indohyus and Pakicetidae. The skeletons have been found in Pakistan.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
godsnumberis7

Pro

My first point is The word dinosaur wasn't invented until 1842 by Richard Owen and in the bible it talks about so called "Dragons" in Isaiah 51:9 - "Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. [Art] thou not it that hath cut Rahab, [and] wounded the dragon?" There have also been stories of "dragons" like after Alexander the Great invaded India he brought back reports of seeing a great hissing dragon living in a cave, so don't you think it's possible for the "dragons" to be dinosaurs.

Second of all Wikipedia is not a reliable source since people can add anything they want.

My third point is how do you know that the way we tell the age of things is accurate and what if the carbon dating made a mistake after all we are humans and we are not perfect nor our machines.

My fourth point is have you ever seen evolution occur with your own eyes and your answer is probably no, so you have to have faith in your evolution. Now you may ask if I have ever seen GOD create the universe and the answer is no and I have faith the same as you do but I have seen stuff that to the spiritually blind might not be anything but to Christians it is the work of GOD. For example, if someone says something like "oh god loves us" and starts proving it, to the spiritually blind they may think of it as nothing but there could happen to be a christian walking by who over heard it and may have been asking for proof that god loves us.

http://paleobiology.si.edu...
http://www.genesispark.com...
and the bible
funnycn

Con

I'm defending my points now.

First-How can you be sure Alexander actually saw a "draglm". Were you there when he saw the "Dragon". Also they are stories for a reason,

Second-Saying Wikipedia isn't reliable because it's added by random people isn't true. Wikipedia checks it's facts. Also the bible isn't accurate either, seeing as it discusses Jesus feeding thousands with a loaf of bread.
stupi

Third -We have advanced technology. Mistakes are common but not so common that it makes the scientific community look stupid.

Fourth-Saying I haven't seen evolution is the equivalent of me saying you didn't see god create the universe correct?

Now my argument...

Darwin went to the Galapagos islands and saw 4 finches each with different beaks and shapes. To further add, the finches colonised the island...however they diverged on the different islands with distance so breeding wasn't it.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...'s_finches
Debate Round No. 2
godsnumberis7

Pro

I didn't say he saw a "draglm" I said a "dragon".

Second of all I said it can be edited and what if someone didn't see the mistake. How do you know the bible isn't accurate and it doesn't say he feed thousands with one piece of bread it says he made a lot of bread to feed the multitude and Jesus is GOD so he can do anything.

Third, I didn't say it made the science look stupid and how do you know that the fossils are millions of years old, faith that scientists are right, right?

Fourth, I argued in my other argument if you read past the part where I say you need faith.

My rebuttal...

and your point is...
funnycn

Con

"I didn't say he saw a "draglm" I said a "dragon"." I typed that on my phone. Ignore that.

Anyways, you say he can do anything? Can you prove that? Have you seen him enact miracles on Earth?

How am I sure they are right? How are you sure the Bible is right is a better question. Seeing as it was written thousands of years ago and then changed over the years. At least scientists bring up tenable arguments and presumable pieces of evidence.

My point? My point is evolution has been proven more than creationism. You can't prove God said "Let there be light" because no one was actually there to record it. Also the Earth is not 10,000 years old. It's around 4 billion. Want sources? Here

http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov...

http://www.universetoday.com...
Debate Round No. 3
godsnumberis7

Pro

Yes actually I have seen some miracles that the only explanation is God and to you they may not be but you have to look at stuff different ways and the bible talks about Jesus performing miracles on Earth and Jesus is God.

Now The bible has not changed they have just made different versions where they word the words deferentially and Science has changed so many times that there has been so many different theories and they are just opinions of people not fact.

There was no one to observe the universe exploding either so you can't prove the big bang theory or any of evolution for that matter except maybe natural selection.
funnycn

Con

Bible hasn't changed? It has changed!

Also I don't believe in the big bang. Also what miracles have you witnessed? A child being born?

And Natural selection is a big part of evolution.

Are you hearing this, my opponent agrees with natural selection!
Debate Round No. 4
godsnumberis7

Pro

First of all, prove the bible has changed

Second, if you don't believe in the big bang then you must believe in a creator therefore you can not believe in complete evolution.

The miracles that I have witnessed are many that to you may not be but that's because you don't look at things the same way because you are what us Christians call spiritually blind, in other words you don't see God in stuff you just see it as a coincidence or luck. One of the specific miracles that I have seen is I was looking for where the bible says the Earth is round and I opened right up to Isaiah 40:22.

About natural selection, I don't agree with it the only thing that could be prove is that the strongest survive.

Now for my final argument...

You have never seen evolution occur and you have faith just like we do so show me the evidence that evolution is a fact and not just an opinion.

Which evolved first, male or female?
2. How many millions of years elapsed between the first male and first female?
3. List at least 9 of the false assumptions made with radioactive dating methods.
4. Why hasn't any extinct creature re-evolved after millions of years?
5. Which came first:
"the eye,
"the eyelid,
"the eyebrow,
"the eye sockets,
"the eye muscles,
"the eye lashes,
"the tear ducts,
"the brain"s interpretation of light?
6. How many millions of years between each in question 5?
7. If we all evolved from a common ancestor, why can"t all the different species mate with one another and produce fertile offspring?
8. List any of the millions of creatures in just five stages of its evolution showing the progression of a new organ of any kind. When you have done this, you can collect the millions of dollars in rewards offered for proof of evolution!
9. Why is it that the very things that would prove Evolution (transitional forms) are still missing?
10. Explain why something as complex as human life could happen by chance, but something as simple as a coin must have a creator. (Show your math solution.)
11. Why aren't any fossils or coal or oil being formed today?
12. List 50 vestigial or useless organs or appendages in the human body.
13. Why hasn't anyone collected the millions of dollars in rewards for proof of evolution?
14. If life began hundreds of millions of years ago, why is the earth still under populated?
15. Why hasn't evolution duplicated all species on all continents?
funnycn

Con

You want proof it changed?

This should explain it http://www.nola.com...

2. I don't have to believe in the big bang or a creator to believe in evolution. I believe there was a different beginning. What logic is that? Einstein didn't believe in the big bang http://guardianlv.com... or a God (or a personal one at least). Stephen Hawking doesn't believe in God (and says there is no need for one) and evolution http://www.dailygalaxy.com...

As for your long list of questions let me ask you some that you probably can't answer to most either.

1. Did you see God create the universe?
2. Did Jesus really go 40 some days without food?
3. Which rib did Adam give to God to create Eve?
4. How long did it take for God to create the universe?
5. Why doesn't God populate the Earth?
6. Why doesn't God have offspring like Gods like in the Greek pantheon(s)?

Also why do you continue to use the Bible as a source? It's inaccurate and it's changed (as mentioned above) so why don't you pull out RELIABLE facts from REAL sources?
Debate Round No. 5
31 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
Not evolution polls. Well one but the rest were the most recent.
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
what polls, evolution polls, thats basically cheating because they are all gonna vote for evolution and you know it
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
Cheat? All I did was post the link on a few polls. Still I didn't cheat, there's still hope for you.
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
and win
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
Id rather lose than to cheat
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
This "spamming" for votes is a two way street. He could actually get MORE votes.
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
When the debate is over, slander is the tool of the loser
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
oh so just because my arguments make the scientific community look bad means that my questions are foolish, not in a bad way or anything but that is what christianity is supposed to do when it comes to evolution because to us it is foolish
Posted by BblackkBbirdd 3 years ago
BblackkBbirdd
ABSTAIN, DEAR VOTERS:
funnycn is spamming for votes. He needs to be punished for his spam advertising by being ignored.
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
Your questions are foolish. They make the scientific community look bad.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
godsnumberis7funnycnTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro couldn't exactly build up his arguments in an effective way and had them rebutted. I mean, his miracle point was seriously weak.
Vote Placed by blackkid 3 years ago
blackkid
godsnumberis7funnycnTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: There are a number (too many) fallacies committed by PRO including Equivocation, Non-Sequitur, Argument from Ignorance, Begging the Question, and Red Herring so conduct goes to CON. PRO failed to provide sufficient evidence for their claims and specifically shifting burden of proof no fewer than three times therefore CON gets arguments.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 3 years ago
Mister_Man
godsnumberis7funnycnTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: Although both arguments were rather poorly presented, I have to give the edge to Con, as he had more reasonable arguments. Pro didn't even really present many arguments other than "you weren't literally there, you can't prove it." Although Con's arguments also weren't very well put together, he was at least able to back up some of his with sources (the Bible isn't a source), and presented farily better arguments.
Vote Placed by JasperFrancisShickadance 3 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
godsnumberis7funnycnTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gave more information than Con and Con never bothered to refute any of them. It's hard to win an argument when you're typing on your lil phone, funnycn!