The Instigator
A-ThiestSocialist
Pro (for)
Winning
37 Points
The Contender
BigPlayer098
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

Does God exist?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,093 times Debate No: 324
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (16)

 

A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

I would first like to clarify exactly what my standard for this debate is, and provide some background for this discussion.

1st Observation: I am arguing for theism, that is to say a rational God does exist. But further I am arguing for an only for the Christian God, as revealed by the holy scriptures.

2nd Observation: The affirmative does not necessarily have the burden of proof, since a negative absolute is able to be proven in this debate by an analysis of the arguments current and prior.

3rd Observation: Presuppositions must be taken into account when weighing this round, that is to say someone who is a prior atheist will not be as easily persuaded as a Christian. Also, we have to take into account what each respective world view allows, and which each one can allow for.

4th Observation: All arguments must have a philosophical or empirical nature for this debate. We are arguing the ideas themselves, not just our beliefs, or who believes them.

Next I'd like to get to my 3 arguments for the existence of God:
1. The argument from abstract absolutes
2. The transcendental argument for the existence of God
3. The argument from moral foundation

I. The argument from abstract absolutes.
The existence of abstract absolutes proves God's existence. An abstract absolute is a concept that is not absolutely seen, but exists and is accepted. An example of this would be newton's laws of physics, or the law of non contradiction. (A statement cannot be true and false simultaneously) They are not dependent upon man, and man did not create them, man simply discovered them. The following proof explains:

1. Abstract absolutes exist.
2. Abstract absolutes would still exist if man kind were to disappear.
3. Abstract absolutes existed before man.
4. Abstract absolutes can not have been created by man.
5. Something besides man must have created abstract absoultes.
6. The atheist world view of matter in motion cannot account for these absolutes.
7. The only tangible cause of this is God.

Therefore, God exists.

II. The transcendental argument for the existence of God.
Although these two arguments are similar, they are not exactly the same.
The general premise of us even having this discussion, presupposes God's existence. By even arguing this, one is engaging in the laws of logic and argumentation, and the only world view that can account for this is the Christian one. Furthermore, this is proven by the impossibility of the contrary. Without God, it is impossible to prove anything at all whatsoever.

1. To prove or disprove God's existence requires logic.
2. Logic is perfect and absolute.
3. Logic is not conventional.
4. Logic presupposes God.
5. Arguing God's existence proves God's existence.

Therefore, God exists.

III. The argument from moral foundation.
An atheist has no moral backing to prove something is right or wrong. In a world that is matter in motion, a high five is as wrong as theft. The world view of atheism can not account for a differential between right and wrong. The only plausible explanation of something right or perfect would be God, since what is right is a reflection of God's character. The existence of these morals and absolute morals thus further reflect this.

1. Morals exist.
2. Morals are not conventional.
3. Absolute morals exist.
4. The existence of absolute morals does not comply with the atheist world view of matter in motion.
5. Only the theistic Christian God world view accounts for absolute morals.

Therefore God exists.

Thus through these arguments the only logical conclusion is that God exists, specifically the Christian God.
BigPlayer098

Con

BigPlayer098 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

my opponent forfeited i guess.... I wish he'd respond, ish?

I guess God does exist.
I need 100 charcters.
BigPlayer098

Con

BigPlayer098 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

My opponenet again fails to respond. I really wish BigPlayer actually debated. Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
BigPlayer098

Con

BigPlayer098 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lazarus_long 9 years ago
lazarus_long
I'd be happy to challenge you, but since the question was with respect to your arguments, it seemed that it would make more sense for you to challenge me, with whatever versions of those arguments you would care to offer this next time around - if not, then I'll simply start off with what you said this time.
Posted by A-ThiestSocialist 9 years ago
A-ThiestSocialist
Feel free to challenge me any time.
Posted by lazarus_long 9 years ago
lazarus_long
Well, as I said - if you want to take this one up again vs. someone who WILL post arguments, I'm volunteering. I'm fairly confident that each of the "arguments" you posted in your original "round 1" can be fairly easily dismissed. Care to see how?
Posted by A-ThiestSocialist 9 years ago
A-ThiestSocialist
wow people on this site are hilarious. They actually all voted for someone who didn't post an argument.
Posted by Dapperdan2007 9 years ago
Dapperdan2007
This is indeed interesting. I think I would like the con side in this debate as well
Posted by lazarus_long 9 years ago
lazarus_long
I'd be very happy to take up the "con" side if you'd care to repeat this debate. Your arguments are interesting (though not novel), but in each case I believe the flaws may be rather easily demonstrated.
Posted by arrivaltime 9 years ago
arrivaltime
I'd love to debate this if anyone wants to oppose me.
Posted by SperoAmicus 9 years ago
SperoAmicus
While you can prove the existence of an abstract God, I don't see that your argument makes the leap into the full Christian God. I'm not sure that one can without an appeal to something outside of pure reason, such as the circumstantial evidence.
Posted by A-ThiestSocialist 9 years ago
A-ThiestSocialist
korezaan, would you like to debate?
Posted by schoolglutton 9 years ago
schoolglutton
Korezaan, if you vote for Big Player as is, then you don't understand the concept of debate. I don't understand how your comment is relevant.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 11 months ago
KingDebater
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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 
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:40 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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 
Vote Placed by kenito001 9 years ago
kenito001
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by maxh 9 years ago
maxh
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by chrispy4 9 years ago
chrispy4
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by buckaroo54 9 years ago
buckaroo54
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by A-ThiestSocialist 9 years ago
A-ThiestSocialist
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by bizzyjudy 9 years ago
bizzyjudy
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
A-ThiestSocialistBigPlayer098Tied
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