The Instigator
phucha117
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
johnathonwill65
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Does a 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/17/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 401 times Debate No: 35668
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

phucha117

Con

Before we engage, I must explain my position. My position is not "There is no god." My position is "There is no evidence for a god." I don't have much to say in the first round except your first argument should be evidence for a god. Please note, try to quote the bible as little as possible unless you can prove that everything in the bible is accurate.
First round is for acceptance only.
johnathonwill65

Pro

In my first round I would like to state than I am a freethinking christian and its nice to meet your acquaintance. I would like to readily concede you the fact that the bible is not infallible, however, this being said, no historical account are accurate, history is written by the victor and often distorted over time. However, here I do wish to lend credibility to several stories in the bible. Starting from genesis considering the story of Noah and the ark. You would be surprised by the amount of ancient cultures that have similar accounts of an enormous flood occurring. This also reaffirmed by scientific findings, this flood could refer to any one of the times that earth's surface has been covered by water. Later on in the book of Genesis there is the story of the destroying of the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah. In 1989 the ruins of ancient Mesopotamian cities Sodom and Gomorrah were found southeast of the dead sea. Archaeological ruins and excavation show clearly defined walls much like the ones described in the bible and many ruins scorched with balls of sulfur that presumably came from somewhere in the atmosphere. Archaeologists compare the destruction found in the ruins comparable to that of a nuclear bomb. This was quite obviously not attainable at the time. So where did this destructive power come from? Food for thought, more on that later. The last story I would like to attempt to validate is the story of the Resurrection. This is perhaps the cornerstone of christian faith. The church was one of the only establishments able to keep records at that time so they automatically become suspect. However, I shall press on, the English were the only ones to record American history and we still treat it ask fact. The church's records indicate that there was in fact a man named Jesus who was in their eyes a great heretic (at this time it was the Jewish church in power) The existence of Jesus is not widely refuted. The point more commonly stated is the fact that he was possibly just a madman. Yet there is a small bit of evidence to the contrary. After Jesus was publicly crucified the a large number of eyewitnesses saw him. This is more significant and more numerous a number of witnesses than the Boston tea party which everyone holds as fact.
The first part of this was to attempt to validate some parts of the bible and validate it as well as any other history book can be validated. However it does present some points that may allude to the fact that god is indeed real. This would be the conclusion of my first argument
Debate Round No. 1
phucha117

Con

It is a delight to debate with you as well. First I do want to note to the viewers of the debate that in the comment section, I allowed my opponent to use the first round as part of their debate. With that said, I shall continue.

"I would like to readily concede you the fact that the bible is not infallible, however, this being said, no historical account are accurate, history is written by the victor and often distorted over time."

My first point about this statement would be if you say that the bible is not infallible, how am I to know what you believe in and what you don't believe in. Essentially you're cherry picking from the bible. I don't mean that in any way of offense but you have admitted to the bible being wrong sometimes. So how am I suppose to know what is true and what is not?

My second point about this statement would be I don't agree with your point that history is written by the victor. Everything we know about the past has been cross-checked numerous of times with various sources, historians, etc. We do not simply take the story of the victor and accept it.

Moving on to your point about Noah's Ark. You say that there have been ancient cultures that have accounts of similar enormous flood occurrences. I don't see how that proves that your God exists. To my knowledge, there is only one story about a mass flood wiping the population of mankind off the face of the Earth except for one man and his family in the bible. Just because other cultures may have had "similar" occurrences doesn't mean that they were the same events and it certainly doesn't prove that your God exists. I also see no credible evidence that the flood took place and that Noah stuffed two of each animal into the Ark.

"This also reaffirmed by scientific findings, this flood could refer to any one of the times that earth's surface has been covered by water."

No it could not have. The bible is very specific about it being the time that the water was either above or at the highest peak on Earth. To my knowledge, nobody has demonstrated that a mass of water has ever approached the height of Mount Everest.

To your point about the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah, scientists have conclusively proven that the sites where the cities were supposedly located was actually the site of a meteorite impact. The debris from the meteorite drifted south into the cities. This would explain the "nuclear bomb" like destruction.

You are trying to prove that Jesus resurrected by saying that there were large number of eyewitnesses accounts of him resurrecting. However, these accounts only exist within the bible. There are no historical documentations of him existing let alone resurrecting.

Cherry picking from the bible will get you no where. Certainly there are truths in every piece of fiction including the bible. This does little to prove their actual credibility. If you believe in the Christian God, I am assuming you also think of him as "all-knowing", "all-powerful", and "unchanging". This then contradicts with your statement that the bible is not infallible since it is said in the bible that the original authors were directly inspired by God to write it. Also since the original bible was written in Hebrew, there have been many different translations and interpretations to the bible by questionable authors. This would be the conclusion of my first argument. On a side note I apologize for jumping around quite a bit in my points. I am new to this and it would be fair to say I have zero experience. Thanks guys and to my opponent.
johnathonwill65

Pro

"My first point about this statement would be if you say that the bible is not infallible, how am I to know what you believe in and what you don't believe in. Essentially you're cherry picking from the bible. I don't mean that in any way of offense but you have admitted to the bible being wrong sometimes. So how am I suppose to know what is true and what is not?"

Your first problem is in assuming I'm a regular bible thumping christian. I believe in one being that essentially rules the universe. I believe he has many names depending upon the culture you come from. I choose to call him by the judeo-christian name of God. However, I would like to point out that i'm not on trail here so what I believe in shouldn't be a point.In response to the accusation of "cherry picking" from the bible I would say you are absolutely right. Just like with any other historical document or account I do my research and only believe in the parts that can be validated for the most part. However, the bible is a historical document that record the events of a certain time period even though it is written from only one perspective. As for how you are supposed to know what is true and what is not, you would need to apply some thought as to the situation and possible evidence.

"I don't agree with your point that history is written by the victor. Everything we know about the past has been cross-checked numerous of times with various sources, historians, etc. We do not simply take the story of the victor and accept it."

I find this to be an extremely interesting viewpoint. It is true that humans attempt to fact check and find out the truth but we must realize that we will never know everything that really happened in the past. In order for historians to research ancient times they often have to use written records. In most times during history, such as the dark ages, the only people that were literate were people that had some position or power. History was written by the victors quite simply because the losers. Another example of this would be in ancient times during the conquest of Alexander the Great. The siege of Tyre begun in 332 BC. During the siege Alexander made a land bridge to the island and sacked it, killing absolutely everyone inside. In this case, as well as many other cases, history is written by the victor because there is nobody else to write it. Ruling authorities have changed history to suit there own ends since the beginning of time and while we may be able to prove some fallacies we must remember that historians can only do so much because they were never there. Plus, if it was truly covered up effectively we wouldn't ever know about it to ask questions.

" You say that there have been ancient cultures that have accounts of similar enormous flood occurrences. I don't see how that proves that your God exists. To my knowledge, there is only one story about a mass flood wiping the population of mankind off the face of the Earth except for one man and his family in the bible. Just because other cultures may have had "similar" occurrences doesn't mean that they were the same events and it certainly doesn't prove that your God exists."

Here is an abridged list of the number of cultures that include a story similar to the great flood mentioned in the bible. Cultures include Greek, (considered the birthplace of western civilization as we know it) Celtic, Sumerian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Masai (East Africa), Hindu, Korean,Zhuang (China),Southern Australian,Hawaiian, Kwakiutl (north Vancouver Island),Lakota, and Inca. These are major cultures from every continent except uninhabited Antarctica. Small differences are noted throughout all of them but the similarities are even more astonishing. You may disagree with the account given by the bible but to say that this never happened would also be refuting the historical record of countless major cultures throughout history. This list is just a fraction of the cultures that have a great flood story in them. I believe a similar story all around the globe where it is impossible that the story could have spread (from China to Peru for example) points to the fact that there is some truth in this story. One of the most notable other stories the flood is alluded to is in the "Epic of Gilgamesh" which is revered by historians as one of the oldest STORIES (not myths) known to mankind. Scientific soil core samples show that there was in fact a great flood of epic proportions that occurred in the Mesopotamian area around 5000 BC, which is estimated to be the time of Noah. The evidence is there if you choose to look for it. I could carry on however I believe I have offered enough evidence.

"To my knowledge, nobody has demonstrated that a mass of water has ever approached the height of Mount Everest."

First of all, Everest hasn't always been the highest point. Second of all, Everest,along with several other Himalayan mountains, are capped with a type of rock known as calcite which is commonly created by marine organisms. Fossilization only occurs with the rapid removal of oxygen and rapid burial which would indicate quickly rising and falling waters. Some hypothesize that these fossils and calcite are from when Everest formed by pushing up from the ocean floor. However, the process of mountain building is slow and it is impossible that these fossils and calcite layer would have withstood the weathering and erosion that occurs in the Himalayas for that period of time. (approximately 60 million years ago)

"To your point about the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah, scientists have conclusively proven that the sites where the cities were supposedly located was actually the site of a meteorite impact. The debris from the meteorite drifted south into the cities. This would explain the "nuclear bomb" like destruction."

You're right. The power did come from a heavenly body known as space. However, to the people in the cities and from the perspective of an author of the bible it would appear as the wrath of god, However, in your previous statement you provided evidence to support the theory that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are in fact real and that scientists discovered a meteor destroyed them. It sounds very similar to the historical account of the bible as well.

"You are trying to prove that Jesus resurrected by saying that there were large number of eyewitnesses accounts of him resurrecting. However, these accounts only exist within the bible. There are no historical documentations of him existing let alone resurrecting"

Your statement that there are no objective sources that proves Jesus's existence outside of the bible is a false one. There are in fact, several. Roman historian Tacitus wrote concernning emperor Nero
"Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . ."
Lucius was a Greek satirist that wrote this concerning Jesus
"The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . ."

These along with other allusions are sources and words taken from historical findings including letters, books, and other sources. However, none of these come from the bible and yet all three describe Jesus and his crucifixion.

Just because I chose three stories from the bible in order to give it some credibility as a source does not mean that I cherry pick for my liking. It simply means that I have neither the time nor the patience to research the entire bible for you.

I challenge you to present some of your evidence that points to the assumption that there is no god.
Debate Round No. 2
phucha117

Con

phucha117 forfeited this round.
johnathonwill65

Pro

I will rest my case until my opponent has a chance to respond to the last round of debate and answer my question as to what evidence he has to the contrary of god such as explanations in opposition to those in the bible.
Debate Round No. 3
phucha117

Con

phucha117 forfeited this round.
johnathonwill65

Pro

johnathonwill65 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
phucha117

Con

phucha117 forfeited this round.
johnathonwill65

Pro

johnathonwill65 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by phucha117 3 years ago
phucha117
@WheezySquash8 This is a debate website after all. I don't know why you would go to a debate website and argue that a certain topic should no longer be debated. If you don't want to see religious debates don't look in the religious section. The reason this is debated is because your beliefs impact your decision making and that could impact other people in the real world. Take for example gays. Religious people are the only reason that gays do not have marriage rights. Religious people also vote and in a massive Christian country, that will have an effect on our country. To say that we should all just respect each others belief and move on is naive at best. So contrary to what you might think, it is not pointless.
Posted by phucha117 3 years ago
phucha117
@WheezySquash8 This is a debate website after all. I don't know why you would go to a debate website and argue that a certain topic should no longer be debated. If you don't want to see religious debates don't look in the religious section. This reason this is debated is because your beliefs impact your decision making. That could impact other people in the real world. Take for example gays. The religious people are the only reason that gays do not have marriage rights is because the religious people will not let them. To say that religion doesn't affect others is naive at best. So contrary to what you might think, it is not pointless.
Posted by WheezySquash8 3 years ago
WheezySquash8
Lol. Every time I go on this website, I see at least two religious debates. Why do we do this? It's pointless. Why can't we all just respect each other for our beliefs and get on with life. I think that people are trying to prove their beliefs correct too much. It's really annoying.
Posted by phucha117 3 years ago
phucha117
@johnathonwill65 I have accepted. It's my first time too. No rules I guess. State your arguments and I shall state mine. Please note you can use the first round as part of your argument since the burden of proof is on you.
Posted by johnathonwill65 3 years ago
johnathonwill65
I've not yet been in a debate on this site and I dont know what your procedures are but I would love to debate
No votes have been placed for this debate.