The Instigator
Lukejones
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
marquis1212
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Creation vs religion

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 4 votes the winner is...
marquis1212
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/24/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 651 times Debate No: 57122
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (4)

 

Lukejones

Pro

If I told you I had a giant blue monkey in my pocket would you believe me?
No
If I wrote a book claiming I had a giant blue monkey in my pocket and told you some fanatic story's about how it got there would you believe me?
No
If a billion other people who had only revived the same information as you, told you I had a giant blue monkey in my pocket, would you believe them?
Obviously you would.
The whole idea of "god" and the bible is ludicrous, if the bible claims that god is in all of us then how come there is actual hard evidence that shows primitive tribes who never new about a god would kill weaker members of the tribes or steal from other basically commit every crime in the bible? It was there nature or instinct.
I understand why there is religion it keeps everyone in check and creates a harmonious life, "in theory". To go to the extreme of actually believing a god created us and listens to us, and that there is a heaven that we will go to when we die and sinners will be turned away ill laughable, the beliefs of a child, like if you misbehave Santa won't bring you any presents. My point is, if none one els believed on god you wouldn't either
You only believe because you can't think of any other explanation as to why/how we are here, well none that you like anyway.
A
marquis1212

Con

A belief in God is a personal choice to accept a fact without requiring evidence. Faith, in other words. One may choose to believe in nothing, God, giant blue monkey, or various other alternatives. Since beliefs are taken on faith, and do not require evidence or even rationale, they are fundamentally impossible to disprove. But, one can be persuaded to accept or reject a belief, and argumentation is a means of persuasion.

Your claim that "if nobody believed in God then you wouldn't either" is a bit of a tautology, but I think your point is that the only reason anyone believes in God is because they are told about Him. For a moment assume there is a God who wants you to love Him. If He wanted you to love Him, there would have to be a means for you to know Him, and for you to know Him, you would have to get the idea from somewhere, either from other believers, or one of their various canonical manuals. If He left evidence, who but the most ignorant and illogical wouldn't believe in Him. He wanted it to be a choice that everyone can make, something to be accepted on Faith, not evidence.
Debate Round No. 1
Lukejones

Pro

That's a good point if there was evidence there would be no test of faith,
What I don't understand is how can you follow such strict rules and have un questionable
faith in your religion when the world around us is so tragic,
I no the bible claims god gave us free will but how do you explain natural disasters the kill thousands of poeple or disease and famon, if god was truly watching and is presumably
A good creator why would he let it all happen, why wouldn't you choose to believe in a much more logical explanation that sience offers. Not to mention the bible constantly contridicks it's self for example
"You shal not kill" but then there's the tale of David and galiaf ? So in a modern day senario if a small kid was getting bullied by a big kid at school would it be ok if the small kid climbed up to the roof and droppe a big rock on the bullies head and killed him?
Or you shall be loyal to your master, even if your master wants you to commit sin?
Also if the bible really is gods will, how was it allowed to be changed from the old testermant to the new one, everything in the bible has been sculpted around what is social excepted I.e the old testermant says you can't eat pork because it was belived to be dirty, but the science proved it was safe to eat, and suddenly they change the rules, I'm shore in X many years time gay marradge will be allowed because socity will except it and they will change the "rules" again
It all seem so man mad there is both god like about any religion
marquis1212

Con

Everyone chooses their own system of beliefs and rules that determine right from wrong. Some choose to follow the law of the land, some believe the Bible tells them right from wrong, some people believe that there is no right and wrong. It is our task to determine which (if any) combination of beliefs influence how we conduct ourselves in the world. A belief in the words of Jesus may imply a belief in His greatest commandment: love God, and love your neighbor as yourself. Taken as an axiom, the golden rule is an enormously powerful moral compass. You are free to read the Bible, the (similar) words of Buddha, the Constitution, numerous alternatives, and arrive at your own conclusions. Or you can choose accept another person's interpretation of what is written. It is valid to question your beliefs, for example, to examine your personal views on The Young Earth, The Ark, and Jesus' Sacrifice on the Cross. Prioritize the beliefs that are the most important, and decide how important Goliath and pork are to you personally. You can choose to Love God, Love your neighbor, and if you believe in Heaven and Hell--or even that there is a chance that there is a Heaven and Hell--you can consider prioritizing a belief that reduces the probability of you ending up in the one you'd rather not end up in.

If you believe in the Fall of Man, then you believe that everything God created was good at one point in time, and at some time thereafter humans made a choice that resulted in the introduction of death into the world. Another alternative is to believe (as I do) that God created the cosmos and all of the mechanics that govern it, including the environment for life and death, and that all things came from God's intelligent design. God didn't appear to give us complete control over death, but it is something that we can influence. We can choose to follow the teachings of Jesus, we can choose to not trash this world He has left us in charge of, and we can choose what we do with our short life. God is good, not because He failed to create a world without death, but because He gave us our entire existence, a way to know Him, and the freedom to choose.

I won't be able to argue with you on gay marriage, since I'm fairly confident I know what Jesus would do: love them, unconditionally. If we (heterosexuals) would do unto them as we would have them do unto us, we would fight for their rights as equals.
Debate Round No. 2
Lukejones

Pro

Yes I agree with you that in a basic form religion is a great moral compass
For harmonious living, and it is apparent that you are one of the more open minded religouse people, unlike my catholic school teacher where lol, I just don't understand the poeple who take the bible very literal with out exception, if god have us free will wouldn he want us to use it? Instead of following ever detail of the bible if he is real I'm shore he would want us to follow our own moral code not somebody else's, personally I believe when you die it's the end, but the choices we make with in our live will influence weather we die happy or not.
Just so you no I'm not trying to disprove or change anyone's faith I just want to understand more about it.

I think that when religion is taken to literally it can have a very tragic effect on less intelegent people or kids for instance
Being told you will go to hell if you commite a sin and don't repent you will go to hell, it can have a major effect on people self esteem
marquis1212

Con

I can relate to people who take the entire Bible literally, because I used to be one of them. I held a particular interpretation of the Bible as self-evident for the majority of my life, and later I came to the realization that belief is a choice, and I chose to arrive at my own beliefs for the things that mater. I think extreme beliefs can be a dangerous thing, depending on what you've chosen to believe in. So I've chosen to consciously and deliberately select what I believe in. I kept what I accept as the "core" of my belief: that God created the universe, and He sent his only son Jesus to deliver a message of love and a way to know Him, He was tortured and executed at the hand of the Romans, and rose again to ascend to the throne of God where He awaits us, if we would choose to believe in Him. That's just about the only thing I believe. For everything else, I have a certain degree of confidence that depends on the supporting evidence. I have low confidence that the Fall of Man was the actual sequence of events that transpired, and much higher confidence that God created the universe 14 billion years ago and by His design we evolved (through a process that far predates humans that requires death as a fundamental mechanism) into beings with the capacity to love Him. I have low confidence that a man built an Ark and saved two of every species of animal from a great flood that deposited the geological layers in the sequence we observe today. I used to believe those things, and I extracted them from my unshakable belief system because they are ultimately irrelevant to how I should conduct myself and to the outcome of my immortal soul. I'm in awe of God's universe, and I think we can better understand Him by understanding His creation, and science currently represents our best understanding of His universe.

I probably don't represent the best adversary for your debate, since I no longer represent the extreme position of taking a particular interpretation of the Bible in its entirety and accepting it as my belief system. I wish more Christians would focus on Jesus' greatest commandment, and spend less time spreading the message that "if you don't believe X you will burn for eternity". I know my childhood would have been happier if I wasn't thinking about eternal torment all the time!
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by marquis1212 3 years ago
marquis1212
That is a fantastic explanation -- the idea that the Fall of Man describes the advent of human conscience, and that it does not necessarily imply that there was no death preceding the occurrence. It really resonates with me. It definitely feels like a figurative explanation, given that so much of what we observe in the universe contradicts that literal sequence of events. I'm always interested in entertaining discussions of how our observations could explain the literal sequence of Genesis , but I haven't yet found a compelling one.
Posted by WileyC1949 3 years ago
WileyC1949
Marquis... I had an AH HA! moment concerning the Adam and Eve story fairly recently. For years I had dismissed it as a simple ancient story of creation, but I now see it as one of the most profound stories in all of literature because behind the trivia of the story lies what I see as the entire purpose of life.

The center of the story is in the eating of the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil." What I had missed for decades was what that actually meant. It is a figurative way of saying that man became fully human when he developed a conscience. This rings true whether one accepts an evolutionary development or believes in an instantaneous creation. As a result of that man alone is not ruled by his instincts. He makes virtually all of his decisions on a moral basis of good/bad, he is aware of pain, suffering, toil and death. He has the capability of feeling compassion and sympathy towards others. As a result of that he can truly care for those outside of his social circle, the result of which is the capability of true selfless love, which is, in my view, the purpose of life. Love must be freely given .... it cannot be forced and remain love. Therefore God could not create us already "loving" Him... that would be a contradiction. Love is something we first had to learn, and because of the free choice necessary to learn to love we could not truly learn it while in the presence of God.

In as far as "Original Sin" it was not the act of disobeying God because this is precisely what God wanted. The original sin came the first time man used his conscience to do what he knew was evil. All who have inherited a conscience have inherited that ability.
Posted by marquis1212 3 years ago
marquis1212
Thanks, that was a good conversation. I don't really believe in the Adam and Eve story (the Fall) as a literal sequence of events... it's not something I have a definite belief about anymore. I'll accept that there is some non-zero probability that the story unfolded as described in Genesis, but I think it's more likely that it's an explanation for why death is part of our world and how God is good because his creation was entirely good before we came along and messed things up. That story doesn't sit well with me, because it implies God created our world with the foreknowledge at Adam would eat from the tree of knowledge and bring sin and death into it... but He decided to try it out anyway. It doesn't seem that fundamentally different than creating a world with death already in it long before man came along, so I have other reasons that I think God is good.

Oh I believe God created everything that is. I have pretty high confidence (but not 100%!) that there was a big bang about 14 billion years ago, and about 4.5 billion years ago the earth formed from our star's accretion disk. And what if the big bang wasn't even the beginning of everything? It's impossible to say definitively what happened before we were around, so it's not something I select a "belief" about.. just various theories with varying degrees of confidence, none of which ever reach 0% or 100%.
Posted by Lukejones 3 years ago
Lukejones
Good debate, that's a very reasonable belief system, so you don't believe in Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden it take it, do you believe god created the whole univers or just earth?
Posted by Lukejones 3 years ago
Lukejones
That's my belief yes, and the debate is my reasons why
Posted by CarlSaganT3 3 years ago
CarlSaganT3
So creation is correct and religion is not?
Posted by Lukejones 3 years ago
Lukejones
The title creation vs religion?
I believe in creation and my argument was
That basically religion is made up
Posted by CarlSaganT3 3 years ago
CarlSaganT3
Your*
Posted by CarlSaganT3 3 years ago
CarlSaganT3
What are you arguing? Your first round post doesn't make sense when paired with you title and stance. I can, of course, see what you mean but I'm just saying the title is bad, and misleading in a sense.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 3 years ago
Phoenix61397
Lukejonesmarquis1212Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument (and spelling) were far superior to pro.
Vote Placed by IceClimbers 3 years ago
IceClimbers
Lukejonesmarquis1212Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: i do not believe in religion although con debatable very also luke done a good job the problem is that you should of use sources there are many sources on your argument and not on con....
Vote Placed by neutral 3 years ago
neutral
Lukejonesmarquis1212Tied
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: Con, steady, imperious, and convincing.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
Lukejonesmarquis1212Tied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had horrible argumentation.