Does God exist?
Debate Rounds (3)
I'm atheist at the moment.
He exists because it says in the bible however it could have been made to make people feel better. Also another thing is the 10 commandments. They could've been written to try and make the world a better place.
This is an interesting topic, however I must admit that your opening remarks seem to me a bit vague and do not provide me with a full understanding of the actual subject for this debate. I will attempt to deduce, from the information provided, the intent and scope of the subject, and leave it to you to provide any necessary clarifications in your round 2 remarks. In the meantime I will prepare my position to the best of my ability while operating under the following assumptions:
- By capitalizing the letter "G" in the word God in the title for this debate you are referring to the existence of a monotheistic god, such as those named in the Bible, Koran, etc;
- Your opening proclamation, "I'm atheist at the moment," is indicative that you have not always been, or do not always intend to be an atheist. You therefore can be assumed to have at least a cursory understanding monotheistic theology and traditions; and
- Since your references to "the Bible," and "the 10 Commandments," are not questioning the existence of those texts but merely the intent behind their creation, they are included as rhetorical questions only since said intent in no way supports nor invalidates the existence of "God."
One of the most interesting aspects of this subject is the virtual impossibility of proving that God either does or does not exist, and I must say that I admire your courage to take up the more difficult task of proving the negative. Your task is daunting but atheism has had some interesting champions in the recent years so I look forward to this debate.
One of the greatest dilemmas in theology is and always has been the very definition of "God." Mankind has wrestled with this question continuously for the last 6000 years, at the very least. Still today, we have on this planet hundreds of definitions and, I suspect, billions of interpretations on those same definitions. An individual's interpretation of any definition of "God" is subject to many variables, including but not limited to: cultural bias, education, curiosity, economic station, profession, age, gender, etc. However, if I may be so bold as to suppose a basic definition that I believe we can agree on it would be as follows:
"God." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 15 May 2014. <http://www.merriam...- webster.com/dictionary/god>.
1 capitalized: the supreme or ultimate reality: as
a: the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe
b Christian Science: the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit: infinite Mind
I would argue that we also need to add the attribute of consciousness to this definition for it to be complete, as in any "God" must be a conscious entity, however I will leave it to your discretion if you would like to accept my modification to the generally accepted definition reference above.
I mentioned earlier that it is virtually impossible to prove or disprove the literal existence of God, however that does not mean that it is impossible to discover clues and other circumstantial evidence that would be capable of tipping the scales of reason slightly in one direction or the other. It is important to note that even in a court of law, cases can be argued, won, or lost on nothing more than circumstantial evidence in the absence of so called 'hard evidence.' That being the case, I will endeavor to show that indeed a substantial and growing body of evidence exists today that points to the positive existence of a conscious, incorporeal divine Principle. I am confident that our powerful, though admittedly limited, human abilities of reason and perception will be swayed toward the acceptance of the existence of "God" by the sum of but a few key supporting arguments. I wish you luck in the debate, and look forward to round 2.
Debater456 forfeited this round.
Debater456 forfeited this round.
If consciousness is real and affects, alters, or even creates reality; and if this consciousness can be demonstrated and measured scientifically; then would logic not take us to ultimately accept the existence of the greatest consciousness? A consciousness so great and vast that it could affect, alter, or even create the universe as we know it?
I think that it does, and I bet if you think about it long enough you will too.
If anyone else would like to have a real debate on this subject, let me know!
Cya later and Godspeed!!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Romanii 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.