The Instigator
Senatus
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
PiercedPanda
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

Does a God Exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Senatus
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 620 times Debate No: 44773
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Senatus

Con

Do you believe in a deity? If you want to accept this debate, please specify you religion.

No god could exist, because one would interfere with human events even in our modern age. If a god hasn't shown up and proved that he exists, than we can't believe that he exists. Visions of a deity through holy person are not credible, so there are no good reasons that people should think that there is a god.
PiercedPanda

Pro

This is a difficult debate. I usually hate these, because this site is full oh atheist, so basically, their votes will automatically go in favour for con. I will begin by saying that I am a Christian. I believe in Jesus Christ. Since you made arguments in the first round, I will rebuttal them, and create my own arguments.

Rebuttals:

"No god could exist, because one would interfere with human events even in our modern age."

Perhaps he has, however it is lost in history. There are many things that disappeared in history. The bible explained how Jesus Christ came and made miracles. One of those miracles was his resurrection.

"He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again." (Luke 24:6-7) [1]

" If a god hasn't shown up and proved that he exists, than we can't believe that he exists. "

Jesus appeared on earth.

"Visions of a deity through holy person are not credible, so there are no good reasons that people should think that there is a god."

Many things are not credible, like evolution. Yet the modern age accepts evolution more than religion. If you are saying that religion is false, then many things are false, like evolution,

Arguments:

To this day, there were thousands of debates on if God exists. And people say that the bible is not a credible source. This is completely unfair. When you write about things like science, where do you get it from? A science book. Yet the Bible is thousands of years old, and it is also a book. When people write history books, they get most of their information from artefacts found. For example, when they see a pot with pictures on them, they assume that what is happening in the pictures is what really happened back then. The Bible is a miracle in it's own way when you think about it. It survived centuries, and to this day still survives. I believe it is just as a credible source as anything else, therefore I will be using it as a reliable source in my later round arguments.

First of all, Jesus was various writings from ancient times from a variety of people such as Lucian, Babylonian Talmud and Josephus. [2] They all wrote about their inquiries with Jesus, the living man Jesus. This is ancient proof of Jesus.

Secondly, he is preforming miracles as we speak. A woman with cancer gave birth to a healthy child. This is a miracle, but no one sees it. The reason society today thinks God is not there is because he does not make a big change. He makes thousands of small changes, that change someone's life completely. However atheist are too ignorant to admit it. God is making a change, he always is, but you will only realise if you are willing to accept it.

I don't want to make too many arguments, since pro did not make many.

sources:
1.http://www.biblestudytools.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Senatus

Con

My apologies for the unfairness of this debate because of the number of atheists on this website.

Rebuttals:
"Perhaps he has, however it is lost in history. There are many things that disappeared in history. The bible explained how Jesus Christ came and made miracles. One of those miracles was his resurrection."
My point was that God has not interfered in modern times. We cannot trust that people from 2000+ years ago are truthful.
" If you are saying that religion is false, then many things are false, like evolution"
Religion and evolution are not intertwined. We cannot say that one is untrue because the other one is untrue. This debate is not focused on evolution; because proving or disproving evolution
"Jesus appeared on earth"
Once again, I find no reason to believe that this is credible.
"people say that the bible is not a credible source"
It is not. Besides being an ancient text, there is no reason to believe that this is true. You say that we can trust drawings on artefact's, and therefore we should believe the Bible. People believe these artefact's because they show reasonable things; even if they are not true, they are somewhat believable. A deity does not appear to be possible within our knowledge, making it hard to believe the Bible.

The miracles of this Earth are sometimes attributed to divine intervention, as you have argued. Are we to say that some of our most trained scientists who have provided us with theories creating sciences such as genetics, are wrong? A woman with cancer may give birth to an unhealthy or a healthy baby. Part of it depends on genetics, but parts also rely on their environment [1]. Geneticists tell us that these traits are random. How could a God interfere here? Even if one could, why would it allow babies to be born that are unhealthy? Does he choose "favorites"? If so, what happened to the forgiveness of the Lord that the Bible (and other holy books) preaches[2]?

Arguments

Jesus, one of the main reasons why many people believe in a God today, likely was not as much of a Godly figure as many think of him today. He could very well have existed, maybe as a healer or a great scholar, but there is no evidence that he was actually the son of God. As many know, stories that get passed along change. This has been shown time and time again. The healer Jesus could soon become the son of God if enough people passed along the rumor.

An existing God would not allow such tragedies as the Holocaust, either of the World Wars, or Sandy Hook. The divine has not intervened. If one was to claim that because of humanities evils, God has abandoned us, it seems that the God is simply nonexistent. If one were to claim, as you did, that God is still present and interfering and "is performing miracles as we speak", than it seems only natural to ask why. The Bible has shown many times that this God punished humans when they were led morally astray [2]. This could explain our modern tragedies. Then, of course, we ask why God is also performing miracles as we speak? Are we to attribute things that go right, everything that goes right, to a God that is also trying to punish us. From your source, the Bible, we can tell that he did something drastic, like flooding the Earth, or forcing the peoples of the Earth to be forever separated by the boundary of language. He is contradicting himself by performing miracles when he also has shown that he means to punish us. I, and many others, cannot accept that there would be a divine being who would do this.

Would a God be happy with the way the world is today? The God of the past wanted all to worship him, for if he truly was the Creator, all would worship him [2]. Why would this God then, allow worship of other Gods, all of them supposedly false. Furthermore, why would those gods allow this? If a god truly does exist, it would be only natural for them to prove themselves to humanity, yet none of the many that have been worshipped have. If the God(s) have actually made a presence in the past, why won't they now? It seems to be one of the worst times for humanity from any God's perspective. He, according to the Bible, split us into multiple languages on the past[2], to prevent sin. Now the world is coming together. Why wouldn't he interfere?

Sources:
[1] https://cpmc.coriell.org...
[2] King James Edition Holy Bible
PiercedPanda

Pro

I'm sorry, I didn't really have time to respond to this debate. I apologize that I accepted this debate when you could have had a better opponent. When I argue against your arguments, I will not quote the whole thing, giving me more characters to write.

"It is not. Besides being an ancient text, there is no reason to believe that this is true. You say that we can trust drawings on artefact's, and therefore we should believe the Bible. People believe these artefact's because they show reasonable things; even if they are not true, they are somewhat believable. A deity does not appear to be possible within our knowledge, making it hard to believe the Bible."

To explain this, I will once again relate things to science. In science class, you learn about things, and you get most of your knowledge from a book. Even when the teacher teaches you, she gets it from a book. Now ask yourself, have you actually seen the things in the science book happen? Have you actually seen particles move faster, and eventually heat up with your own bare eyes? Maybe you have. The same goes for people who have seen Jesus. They have seen Jesus, and the Bible showed them the way to find him. They read it in a book, and eventually tested it, and met him. So why do you believe that people who read science books and tell you facts more than people who tell you they saw Jesus? (sorry this is kind of off topic) The Bible gives us facts, but for some reason, only those who truly believe in him see proof. So if you try to "experiment" and try to follow the Bible, there is a possibility you will meet him. The Bible is fact.

"Jesus, one of the main reasons why many people believe in a God today, likely was not as much of a Godly figure as many think of him today. He could very well have existed, maybe as a healer or a great scholar, but there is no evidence that he was actually the son of God."

It says so in the bible " And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35) [1]. And as I have explained earlier, the bible is a valid source of proof, considering you used it as well.

"An existing God would not allow such tragedies as the Holocaust, either of the World Wars, or Sandy Hook. "

God has a weird way of doing things. All of these happened for a reason. But we don't understand it just yet. Consequences must be made, so God must punish us. God gave us freedom. So if we misuse this freedom, we should be punished.

" Why wouldn't he interfere?"

Because he promised us freedom. And he already is giving us signs, as you have mentioned earlier. The Holocaust, World wars, it is a sign to come back to God. Yet our selfishness and greed still won't accept it.

Arguments:

Thousands of people have claimed to have seen him. And their lives have changed a lot for the better. There must be a reason. He is blessing them, and making their life better. Also, they never get pulled down. True believers stay true to their faith, and there must be a reason. God is with them, which is why you can't change their minds.

Now I tell you this, I am expecting to lose this debate. I just wan't to talk to you, talk to everyone on this website. God loves you. And I know I lost this debate but I wan't to share my thoughts, I wan't to let God talk to you through me. Believe in him or not, he will be there beside you. He is real, believe or not. But he will always love you. So one day, if you are lucky enough to meet him, be glad. I thank my opponent for this debate, and apologize that I am not a good opponent.

source:
The bible :D
Debate Round No. 2
Senatus

Con

Rebuttals:

"And as I have explained earlier, the bible is a valid source of proof, considering you used it as well."
I did use the bible as a source. I was trying to find contradictory information. I am not completely familiar with all of Christianity's tales. Therefore, I used the bible to find some of these stories, keeping in mind that they are stories. These may have been changed from edition to edition of bible. They could have been exaggerated from the real Jesus.

In response to your science reference, I will say that some of that is able to be tested. If you put ice in a solid container and freeze it, the container explodes. From there you can tell what is happening. The Bible is obviously not testable. Most Christians have not met Jesus, even after reading the Bible.

"God has a weird way of doing things. All of these happened for a reason. But we don't understand it just yet. "

The only thing I can ask of this is when does He plan to appear? Does he not wish us to know what we have done, and why he is punishing us?

Arguments:

Would someone be fine if someone were to continue the scriptures? Would, if there was some miracle like you said, Christians allow someone who had seen God to write the next part of the story. If someone like the Pope (applies mostly to Catholics) were to write the next part of the Bible, would people allow it? Some might say that that person had no right to do so, would that mean that we have reached the end of religion? Can Christians only believe in the Bible because it was far enough in the past to not be proved wrong?

My last argument of this round is that God could not possibly sit quiet while Atheists like myself say that he is not real? Did he not guide the lost souls back to Christianity? I, and many other Atheists, have not seen him. He doesn't appear to those who do not believe in him already. This doesn't seem like the God of the Bible.

Thank you for participating in this debate, even though you have had some time constraints.

PiercedPanda

Pro

I am very sorry. I no longer have any time to continue this debate. I forfeit, but still keep my beliefs, and hope for now you keep yours. I would very much like a rematch. My sincerest apologize.
Debate Round No. 3
Senatus

Con

Okay, that is fine. A rematch would be good in a couple of weeks or so. Thanks for participating in the debate.
PiercedPanda

Pro

No problem, please do not vote on this debate, because we will be having a proper one later.
Debate Round No. 4
Senatus

Con

I think that people should still vote on this debate; you did forfeit. I do want to have a rematch anyway.
PiercedPanda

Pro

Bummer, my first loss. Thanks for the debate.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by The_Scapegoat_bleats 2 years ago
The_Scapegoat_bleats
In a few hours from now, PiercedPanda will win this due to the vote of "urapai", which is most ikely a fake account created by him to win all of his debates. Check it, he won all by those.
Posted by DudeStop 2 years ago
DudeStop
I'm so voting.
Posted by PiercedPanda 2 years ago
PiercedPanda
I believe this is more of a discussion than a debate, and it is really hard for me to respond. I may not get the time and forfeit, so my sincere apologize if this occurs.
Posted by Senatus 2 years ago
Senatus
Although I do not share PiercedPanda's beliefs, I do respect them. My purpose in this debate was not at all to convince people to become atheists; I dislike anyone who tries to force their beliefs on others in that manner. My purpose in this debate is solely to have an interesting and thought-provoking debate.
Posted by PiercedPanda 2 years ago
PiercedPanda
Thank you.
Posted by Nels4Tats 2 years ago
Nels4Tats
@PiercedPanda I personally am an atheist, however i want to commend you on your great conduct! I don't necessarily agree with you but your courage to stand for your views even against the odds is truly noteworthy. You are awesome man! Anyways, concerning the argument, I do not believe in a God or have any religious affiliations, but I will not condemn a Christian for believing in what he/she believes. And I personally hate it when people try to force their views on someone for any religion including atheism. I hope that you do not condemn PiercedPanda for having a different belief @Senatus and Good luck in the debate! Both of you!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 2 years ago
KingDebater
SenatusPiercedPandaTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: f
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
SenatusPiercedPandaTied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Five round debate, pro had three separate chances to respond to con's R3 arguments, with all those points fully dropped there is no way to still award pro arguments... By my standards I call this a concession, as they had to step out of the argument, but were polite about it (as opposed to the red text forfeits seen in other debates), this gives them conduct but their opponent arguments. S&G were equal or close (neither had Jar Jar speak to distract us), SOURCES were in con's favor having THE BIBLE (sorry, making fun of another vote), but not by enough to take the point.