The Instigator
DaethFromafar
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
JimmyBoJangles
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Does the Bible give (or is there any) Evidence for the existence of God

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
DaethFromafar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,124 times Debate No: 70251
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (53)
Votes (2)

 

DaethFromafar

Con

I will be using an argument map that i created for this debate

The website does not allow me to make it any bigger, here is an external website for downloadding: http://www.filedropper.com...

I highly sugest before opening any downloaded file you always do a virus scan. You can use one of the many free website which give have this feature just do a google search for: "scan file for virus".
JimmyBoJangles

Pro

Well what an excellent question Tim. I am incredibly pleased to be here today to have this wonderful chat. It is my personal belief that the Bible does give clear evidence that god exists. After all, they do say it.
Debate Round No. 1
DaethFromafar

Con

You did not comment on any of the points i provided in the argument map (in yellow/dark green) so i will restate a few of them, but please be sure to read the whole thing so you know all the arguments i made.

There are many beliefs believers have which are not supported by the bible, that they use as evidence.

1.You cannot understand the perfect of the word of god:
God = Perfect
Gods word = perfect
Your interpretation of perfect = not even one millionth of one percent of perfect;
Thus your interpretation of the word of god is not a full understanding and is only meant to guide you on your journey from the milk to the meat of the word.

2.The holy spirit in you does not give you a greater understanding than any other human (including non believers):
The holy spirit is not giving you any more understanding that any other human it will only help you to know what you need to in order to fulfill gods purpose for you, This means atheists may have a better understanding of the word of god than you do. The Holy Spirit is not in you to give you an authoritative understanding it is in you to guide you to god and help you to serve him.

Philippians 2

"Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.4 Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others."

Examples of non believers teaching/leading/prophesying in the bible; Balaam in numbers; King Cyrus in Ezra; false prophets in Jeremiah; Matthew 7:22; Mark 5:7; Acts 16;17; Pilates Wife Matthew 27;19; etc...

1 Colossians 14:
For everyone can prophesy in turn, so that everyone can be instructed and everyone can be encouraged.

4.Faith is a belief without evidence
As stated by the bible

2 Corinthians 5:7
"For we walk by faith not by sight"

This means when people propose "evidence" for their belief in god they are no longer living in faith (Refer to: Hebrews chapter 11 "by faith" chapter) but by human philosophy in the traditions of man. Not only this but in every debate vs. atheists I have seen the atheist point out the flaws in each of these supposed pieces of evidence by identifying their fallacies, so not only is your belief dependant on human philosophy, but bad human philosophy.

Colossians 2:8
8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

The bible even says you will not be given evidence/signs

Matthew 28:39

An evil an adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. (Foreshadowing the resurrection of Christ.)

5.Powerful Emotions are not justifications for believing it"s the voice of god guiding you (miracles/affirmations)
Even if you believe, the Holy Spirit will guide you the Holy Spirit does not make you immune from the influences of evil. Love, joy, and happiness can be used by Satan to guide you astray.

Thought experiment: Imagine if you had 10 extremely powerful positive emotions, 5 by Satan and 5 by god. Without the use of the word of god just by your own human interpretation, would you be able to identify the emotions caused by Satan every time? Of course, not!

Emotions are human and thus are flawed; you must always put your faith in something higher, which in this case would be the word of god and the teachings of Jesus. To give an example there was a women several years ago who thought she had heard and felt the word of god telling her to kill her children and she did, if she contemplated what she had heard and compared it with the teachings of Jesus she would not have been lead astray.

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

Creationism, Evolution nor the cosmological argument are supported by the bible... as it says

Colossians 2:8
8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

And in Exodus 20:4 and Deuteronomy 4 it is against the word of god to make any graven imagine of the heavens above the earth below of the water that is under the earth.

In conclusion, not even the bible itself supports the claims that any sign or affirmation are any form of evidence for God, and specifically demands your belief be based on faith which as defined by the bible is a belief without evidence.
JimmyBoJangles

Pro

Tim, l don't think you read my first argument thoroughly enough. The bible says that there is a god. However, you and many other people happen to believe that there is no god, which is ludicrous. Of course there is. How else would we be here today? If there is a god then of course the bible says so too.
Debate Round No. 2
DaethFromafar

Con

My name is not Tim,

Using the argument "the bible says so..." is a begging the question/circular reasoning fallacy.

Example:
The word of Zorbo the Great is flawless and perfect. We know this because it says so in The Great and Infallible Book of Zorbo's Best and Most Truest Things that are Definitely True and Should Not Ever Be Questioned.

like... The Bible.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...

a Fallacy is a logical flaw in an argument which invalidates it.

Neither logic, science, not even the bible itself supports the contention that because the bible says so it is evidence of it being true. The bible demands faith.

This is an example of a subconscious flaw, conformation bias.
JimmyBoJangles

Pro

Mike the question was whether or not the bible says that there is a god. It does. How about you read it sometime.
Debate Round No. 3
53 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
Toxifrost. 5 points to Pro (arguments & sources). Reason for removal: failure to explain sources point.

Reasons for voting decision: Pro did absolutely nothing to actually present a valid argument or refute cons arguments other than saying "The Bible says there's a god therefore there is a god."
Posted by KonstanBen 2 years ago
KonstanBen
Chill out Jerry. So what if he finds it necessary to assign names to people?
Posted by JimmyBoJangles 2 years ago
JimmyBoJangles
I called this guy Tim. And I have explained that in almost all of my debates.
Posted by BblackkBbirdd 2 years ago
BblackkBbirdd
Why do you keep calling people MIKE?
Posted by Philocat 2 years ago
Philocat
We have people from the whole range of ideologies - from militant atheists to creationist fundamentalist Christians, from communists to facists, from pro-life to pro-choice, from conservatives to liberals.

There is no disproportionate bias here that I can see. The simple fact, JimmyBoJangles, is that you didn't give any rational arguments for your position. Heck, I disagree with DaethFromafar's opinion but I've got to say he did give better arguments.
Posted by JimmyBoJangles 2 years ago
JimmyBoJangles
People on this site seem to be very biased.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
KonstanBen's Vote Removed. It doesn't provide a legitimate reason for awarding argument points.

["Reasons for voting decision: I'm changing my vote from earlier as it seems as though the loser quit his account in rage. Although conduct is usually only worth one point, I'm going to give pro 3 more for this outrage by con."] [5 points to Pro (arguments, S&G, and conduct]
Posted by KonstanBen 2 years ago
KonstanBen
@purple_potato
Saying "loser" was not an attempt to insult. As I did not know his/her name, I was referring to him/her as the one I thought lost. I'm sorry for any confusion.
Posted by rextr05 2 years ago
rextr05
missmedic, Your, "Faith does not allow for questions only belief." Since when? Since faith is a belief in something that doesn't require definitive proof, where does it say faith cannot be questioned? Or perhaps a derivative of faith is supposed to be questioned as to the validity of our belief to have that faith. So, I think you'll have to define your idea of faith & then I can see why you said what you had.

Your, "... their claims cannot be considered valid." By whose standards & who gave you the ultimate authority to deem your statement as fact, cuz billions believe it isn't 'superstition,' & a small minority think it is. Just cuz you say something is so, it doesn't qualify for being an authoritative source of truth.

Your, "Reason is used to discern the value of evidence ...." Once again it depends how the word is used, but I'll give you that one.

Your, ".... Faith pretends that evidence for or against an idea is irrelevant." You frame your definitions to fit your perception of faith & limit them substantially ....... of course in your favor. So, am I to believe all evidence is the exact same thing for everyone?

Your, "The second is faith. It is when one accepts a statement as true without evidence for it, or in the face of evidence against it." So I guess you're saying that no one uses any manner of evidence when they use faith to believe in anything right? Funny, then why to we search for whatever it is to believe in something b4 we have faith in it? That searching process is where we obtain our evidence to have the faith to believe in it.
Posted by Purple_Potato 2 years ago
Purple_Potato
@Konstanben, is it really necessary to call anybody a "loser"? Disliking someone is by no means a reasonable grounds to change your vote. You should vote based on who displayed better debate skills, not on who you like/dislike. Try to minimize your bias.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Purple_Potato 2 years ago
Purple_Potato
DaethFromafarJimmyBoJanglesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provides clear and legitimate reasoning that goes unchallenged by Pro, who simply drops Con's arguments. Con also dismantles Pro's argument by noting it's logical fallacies. Conduct to Con because Pro dropped arguments. Although Con deleted his account, a win is a win and Con definitely won. Pro should not get the win, because he lost the argument.
Vote Placed by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
DaethFromafarJimmyBoJanglesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made no attempt to actually answer Con's arguments, instead merely mocking Con by calling him by the wrong name and chiding him to read the Bible. Con raised arguments, such as that the Bible demands faith based on no evidence, that were not responded to. Arguments to Con because Pro made no attempt to argue. Conduct to Con because Pro was simply trying to bait and annoy Con.