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

Does God exist, is there a creator of the universe?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,048 times Debate No: 71250
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)




This is an argument regarding the very nature of our existence, whether there is an omnipotent creator(which I will be arguing for) versus whether the universe created itself.


I accept the challenge with Philosophy123. Due to the lack of an actual opening, I will, likewise, simply state my side as he did to be equally fair. I will be arguing the universe and or dimension in which we exist in, was not created by a God. I wont argue fully that it created itself since in the complete aspect such a thing can not be fully argued and I will simply end that point now by saying, I, like many people, do not know exactly. It is a complete mystery to which as far as we can go, which would be the few seconds before the actual singularity of the Big Bang. This will be argued using what scientific means possible in the most philosophical rhetoric style I can.

I hope to accomplish not a win, but rather a thought in the mind of each reader. I do not make rhetoric statements simply to win people over, I want them to truly think it and put thought into it in their lives. I hope that the readers, and my opponent, can ask themselves this question that I am about to ask. For those who believe in a God, a God or Gods of any kind and stature, what would it take to shake your very foundation? what would it take for you to say you are wrong and that you would dismiss your belief in a God or Gods? What would it take? To answer ahead, for me, it is many things. I will keep it short and say empirical scientific evidence that can show, without a doubt, said being exist.

I will end this here and thank anyone who actually puts the effort to read this and our debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1


I apologize to Berend for my slow response and thank anyone who is reading this right now. First, I will give a disclaimer in saying that I think a Big Bang theory and Evolution works inside Christianity, despite what others might say. What I also believe though is that the Big Bang was created and enforced by God and that current theories of the origin of the universe are scientifically flawed and our current scientific position is not sufficient to explain the beginning of life without some God or some big assumptions. I also believe that evolution can account for only a tiny bit of biological complexity we see all around.

I will be using an argument I had formulated several weeks ago in an attempt to disprove atheism. I call it the Lottery Argument, I list all of the things that are beneficial to existence which could conceivably be different and the percentage of these things being created by random chance and carried genetically. I have(of course) heard the argument that the biological complexity that we have all around us is due to Evolution of DNA, but Evolution is only a sliver of the story. Humanity(even with evolution) could not have been so biologically perfect upon their creation(well not without intelligent design), having a heart, blood, arms, a cage of bone around our most important organ. It all seems quite suspicious from an atheistic standpoint, we could not have grown a heart or arms or legs by evolutionary process, these are things we have had since the dawn of creation. Here is my mathematics to prove that, I shall list everything amazing about the world that I can think of off the top of my head, saying that the chances of these things occurring as they did by a mindless Big Bang is one in a thousand(I think that is quite conservative, the chances of a heart randomly created and put in a perfect strategic position with a cage of bone around it and blood to pump is hardly one in a thousand but nonetheless I shall keep my percentage of 0.1 for all below phenomenon):
1. Eyes
2. Blood
3. Heart
4. Reproductive system
5. Arms
6. Legs
7. Lungs
8. Mouths
9. Bladder
10. Liver
11. Pancreas(modern humanity can live without one but in its primitive state we would not have a chance)
12. Cells
13. Kidney(same case as pancreas)
14. Bones
15. Nerves
16. Skin
17. Brain
18. Immune system
19. Muscles
20. Oxygen
21. Perfect gravity
22. Perfect electromagnetism
23. The sun
24. Water
25. Strong nuclear force
26. Ears
27. Fingers
28. Fingernails
29. Tongue
30. Stomach
31. Spine
32. Nose
33. The sheer quantity of elements
34. The ability of electrons to react with other elements
35. Plants
36. Animals
37. Ribcage
38. Feet
39. Earth's perfect position in regard to the sun
40. The quantity of fresh water
41. The fact that plants breath out oxygen
42. Light
43. Magnetism/electricity
44. Our blood cells which are able to fight disease
45. The earth's size
46. The perfect combination of gases in the atmosphere
47. Cellular respiration, food energy
48. Protons
49. Humanities ability to grow
50. DNA

Here we have fifty things which would not likely be caused by a random explosion of particles. If the chances of each of these phenomena is 0.1 percent(which I have already stated) then the chances of a universe this amazing(purely by random chance) is one in 5,629,499,534,213,120. It would be equivalent to winning the lottery(roughly one in 175 million), 3.22 billion times......In a row. Being a logical thinker(as I think you are after looking at several of your past debates) you must not be able to believe that an individual could win the lottery 3.22 billion times in a row(or having each of your 152.9 billion friends being attacked by a shark or having each of your 805 billion other friends being struck by lightning). It just could not happen. If you won the lottery that many times in a row, would you think that

A. You are an insanely lucky individual or
B. That the system has been hacked

If the answer is B then you of course must give a thought to theism.

The next argument I'd like to present is the First Cause argument, perhaps the most famous argument for the existence of God. It states that the universe could not have created itself because the universe did not have a cause to create itself. If its creation is just random chance, what force was there to make the universe expand so quickly? Forces cannot be created, unless you believe there is some innate force that just created itself but what force was there to create that force? As you know if you've had any background in physics, a force cannot create itself. Humans can create forces but that is because we have been created by another force which has been created by another force and so on and so forth. An effect cannot just create itself without a cause and therefore there must be an ultimate cause.....God. The Big Bang theory defies several laws of physics already making big assumptions that many of the laws of physics were created moments after the Big Bang.

And now, a series of logical statements which are able to prove the existence of God.

1. If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist.
2. The universe"the collection of beings in space and time"exists.
3. Therefore, there must exist what it takes for the universe to exist.
4. What it takes for the universe to exist cannot exist within the universe or be bounded by space and time.
5. Therefore, what it takes for the universe to exist must transcend both space and time.

Transcending space and time not only defies logic but also physics and science since something must take up some space for it to exist at all. All of these statements can be justified with further logic which at this time I am not going to use because I have more things to get to.

Here is another logical argument for the existence of God similar to the statements made above.

1. We experience the universe as intelligible. This intelligibility means that the universe is graspable by intelligence.
2. Either this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence, or both intelligibility and intelligence are the products of blind chance.
3. Not blind chance.
4. Therefore this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence.

I have provided four logical arguments why the universe must have been created by a God.


So, since we never had an opening statement I wish to use this as such. I do not think it will be much or hard to counter Mr Philosophy123. I think that if we are to argue a point, we should be clear in what we are arguing about, right? Clearly one side is defending that the universe in all we know was created by intelligence, but not just intelligence, intelligence of a God. My position is frankly more broad. An atheistic view is not the universe self creating itself, it could be that this is a simulation or a prototype or experimental universe, created by some alien species. That too is very much an atheistic view because atheism is the lack of a belief in a god or gods.

So, what would I be arguing? Well I can not argue the universe made itself because it would be a loaded question and debate if I was, the atheistic view has no set creation and neither does science. We all have the same facts, we just do not all like them or agree wit them, but they remain facts.

Star and Planet Formation

I wish to go by a few things many creationist and theist go by, and as such I wish to use some points my opponent made without actually discussing his exact argument while explaining the creation. There is one simple and very short answer on the creation, I do not know and neither do you. I do not know, nor can argue how the universe was created, it's impossible and a flawed question and topic. If you look to the sky now, likely better at night, you will see tiny lights, stars. You have rogue planets and rogue stars, you have solar systems and in fact we have both observed planets 'forming' and stars forming. About 450 light years off, there is a baby planet and a star forming a solar disk, making what we have here. [1] [2]

What does this mean? This tells us that we have objects forming, going through what our system did once. The thing is, Ladies and Gentleman, the universe is going on with or without us. We have completely little affect on what happens in the sense that it will continue forming even with us gone.

Random And Evolution, Intelligent or Just Is?

Is everything random? Both cosmic and biological evolution and the big bang? No, and the same likely can be said for the big bang. There is a mind experiment you can do with this one, and we see it with the universe. Everything is in a way, predetermined. It isn't yet is. There is no free will and because of this, things will happen accordingly. The universe is the same, as we are in fact the universe. If I were to drop a glass of water, an X amount of variables will occur regardless what anyone thinks. Let us say there are 2 variables, it lands perfectly flat and does not break and the water hits the sides one or two times. Now the other is it break on the left side. A simplistic view, but it's better to view it small than large. With those two variables, each one sprouting a set number of branches themselves. This goes on and on, only growing branches for variables that can happen.

If you study it perfectly and know it well, you will know there is really only one variable, because you know with all the things you are doing, only the aid outcome will happen. But not with our minds, no one really sees that, this is why we call things random. So when you dropped the glass of milk, it was already determined to have that thing happen, you brain works very much the same way, working and acting based on things occurring and what needs to happen with the things around. If you had the ability to know all outcomes, you could predict the future. This is mathematical probability. Because of this, we as humans would have ended up here, the 99.99% of species ever living on earth would have died and so on. We are not well designed, we are designed for the environment we are in, which is set by evolution by natural selection, working on that very theory I just brought up. So no, nothing is random and as such neither is evolution, cosmic and biological.

Time - Dr. Hawking

As we know, and can trace via observations, their was no time before the big bang, it came with the big bang.

The theistic argument normally goes cause and effect. Everything has a cause, therefore if the universe has a cause, God is the cause. That can be argued on God also. However, Cause and effect only work in time, there was no time prior to the Big Bang, therefore there was no time for God.

Dr. Hawking argues:

1) Causes must precede their effects in time
2) There is no time prior to the beginning of time (the origin of the universe)
3) Therefore, the universe cannot have a cause

His extension:

4) Theism requires that God be the cause of the universe
5) The universe cannot have a cause
6) Therefore, theism is false

[3] [4]

Well Designed

It can not be stressed that the universe is not well designed. It is argued that if you moved Earth from it's spot, we would all die. This is not true as with physics and mathematics you can move the planet closer or further from the sun and still be perfectly fine.

It is also argued that if gravity on a scale was tuned in other way, we would all die. This is also not true. We as humans evolved into what we are as did our ancestors and relatives (plants and other living beings) to the conditions of the earth and the universe, which is also flat. This can make delusions with people to think we are well designed as is the universe, but it isn't. 99% of the entire universe is uninhabitable for life like us. There are also billions to trillions of planets in our galaxy alone with billions upon billions of galaxies in the known universe, making easily sextillion planets in the entire universe. How is it the universe and out planet are designed but we can not live in most of it and there are other planets and galaxies clearly showing we are not the prime creation?

Sadly I am out of time, too many things prevented an on time and clear opening, but I leave these to explain the universe.

Cited Work:

1) Star Forming. &

2) Baby Planet and New Solar Disk, Discovery.

3) The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking.

4) Time, the Big Bang, and creation, Dr. Stephen Hawking.
Debate Round No. 2


Philosophy123 forfeited this round.


I forfeit this round to remain in equal time shared with opponent.
Debate Round No. 3


Philosophy123 forfeited this round.


I will end this debate, since my opponent did not reply. We do not know who created the universe, and most of what pro brought out was not real evidence. In fact, none of it is perfect, none of it holds any water on intelligent design, and as of now, we do not know and everyone who is interested should look into learning.

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Lewis_P 3 years ago
Pro that is the most convoluted argument from incredulity that I have ever read :)
Posted by ThiemaLu 3 years ago
Your 50 points dont prove an intelligent designer, they show your lack of understanding of biology and astronomy. You are just listing random things, without explanation. Your reply is just a very long argument from incredulity.

You list all these things, that you claim have some possibility of happening, as if there was only one possible outcome and ignore all the imperfections in our bodies and universe?
What about vestigial organs? Our eyes are not intelligently designed, ever heard of the blind spot? Our feet cannot grab things like our closests cousins can. Our immune system tends to overreact (allergies). Our ears/nose are awful compared to many other animals. Our brain is easily damaged. Our DNA mutates all the time, causing all kinds of cancers and deformations in newborns.
But all of that is explained by evolution and there is no evidence to suggest that at some point god messed with it.

What about natural disasters such as volcanoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, blizzards, tsunamis, floods, asteroid impacts, solar winds, droughts, plagues, parasites, etc.? Did god just miss these parts? Or maybe these things happen because our planet was not created by a loving god, but instead formed through well understood natural processes.
Perfect combination of gases in the atmosphere. Seriously? These concentrations have changed all the time over the 4,6 billion year history of our history.
And what do you mean by perfect gravity/electromagnetism...? Are you implying that there could not be life if our earth was more massive? It may have evolved differently due to the different environment, but there is no evidence to suggest that life could only arise on earth.

So, in conclusion you are just giving credit to god for random things without providing evidence that they were in fact created by god.

"And now, a series of logical statements which are able to prove the existence of God."
How do you get from step 3. to 4.?

"3. Not blind chance"
How do y
Posted by Philosophy123 3 years ago
The only thing I will define about God is that he gave intelligent design, beyond that I have no idea. If God is a programmer, so be it. All I know is that there must be some intelligence behind this world. I do not personally consider God plural but it is possible. And no, a quantum fluctuation is not intelligent.
Posted by NoMagic 3 years ago
If this universe was a very complex computer simulation, would the programmers be what you consider God? Also, if there were more than one programmer, would all programmers be considered God? Is the term God both singular and plural? Lets say a quantum fluctuation in a vacuum produce the universe, would the quantum fluctuation be what we would call God?
Posted by Philosophy123 3 years ago
We have already defined God purely as "The creator of the universe" in a previous conversation and for this debate I look at Him as nothing more, no omnipotence or personality.
Posted by Philosophy123 3 years ago
I mean to say that I am not debating the very nature of God but rather whether or not he created the universe. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that the definition of a God is one who created the universe.
Posted by SNP1 3 years ago
" I am not here to argue over the nature of God." Then debating god would be pretty much impossible. You could argue for contradicting things in each arguments.
Posted by Philosophy123 3 years ago
I apologize to Berend because my response will be slow due to other debates and a general lack of time.
Posted by Philosophy123 3 years ago
I define him as a definite being with a mind and a soul, not random chance. So the definition is, a person, possibly much greater than us, possibly not, who has created the universe. I am not here to argue over the nature of God.
Posted by SNP1 3 years ago
So god is defined purely as a creator of the universe?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture