Does the Christian God exist?
Debate Rounds (3)
I've noticed Christians will use the bible as evidence for God. Then to prove that the bible is reliable they will use the bible to say the bible is reliable. This gets the debate nowhere and does not help prove Gods existence.
Why I do not believe in the Christian God:
I used to be Christian, I was born and raised as one. However I couldn't stop questioning the flaws in the bible and the hypocrisy in it. Whenever I would ask about it, everyone seemed to either give an excuse or avoid answering.
There is rape, slavery, genocide, sexism, etc. in the bible and Christians often ignore it and only pay attention to the good things the bible says.
Evil is not only in the Old Testament, it is in the New Testament as well.
I will also see the argument that if there is no God then there is no objective morality. Everyone please know, there indeed is no objective morality.
"Objective morality is the idea that a certain system of ethics or set of moral judgments is not just true according to a person's subjective opinion, but factually true."
There is no good or evil, there is no fact on what right or wrong. It is all a matter of our personal opinion.
Abortion isn't factually wrong or factually right. We have separate opinions.
Homosexuality isn't factually wrong or factually right. We have different opinions.
The Nazis were not factually evil or factually good. We have separate views.
If there was objective morality, we would all agree on what is good and what is evil, we would all agree on what is right and what is wrong. But there is no objective morality. We have subjective morality which is when our morals come from how we personally feel.
Christians will argue that atheists have to disprove God. This is not true. The one who makes the claim has to have the evidence to prove and support it. If you claim God is real, you have to prove it. No using Russell's teapot (shifting the burden of proof onto someone else ("I don't have to prove it, you have to disprove it))
Christians will use the God of the Gaps argument as well (I don't know, therefor God did it).
Science can't explain how the universe was created, therefor God did it.
Science can't explain how life was created, therefor God did it.
Just because science can't explain something yet, doesn't mean that it's the work of God. It just means we can't explain it yet, and we'll continue to look into it and we will find out answers.
Pascal's wager will sometimes be used as a persuasive argument (believe in God, or you take the risk of possibly going to Hell). 3 things are wrong with this argument.
1. What if you believe in the wrong God?
2. Wouldn't God know who believes in him out of faith and who believes in him out of fear of going to Hell? (Pretty much believing just to stay out of Hell, not truly having faith)
3. Argument appeals to emotion.
Lastly I see Christians use the Ontological argument (God is perfect and is possible to exist, therefor he must exist). Utopia is a perfect society that doesn't exist. You can use whatever you wish for this argument. A perfect car, a perfect animal, etc. but it doesn't mean it exists. Things can only be proven to exist through observation.
We have disproven parts of the bible. Now Christians all take the bible differently. Some take some parts as literal, others see them as metaphors. Usually that take it literal at first, then when proven wrong or when society morally accepts something the bible says is morally wrong, they say its a metaphor. Take homosexuality as an example.
We've disproven Creation of the Earth, Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, and Noah's Flood. Now if you're a Christian that takes these as metaphors, then this doesn't change anything. However its different if you take them as literal.
If we can continue to disprove the bible, I think it'd be safe to say that the Christian God is not real.
We have disproven creation of the earth because we know how planets are created, and we know that stars come before planets. The bible however claims the earth was created first, then the sun. That is wrong.
We have disproven Adam and Eve through genetics, and evolution.
We've disproven Noah's Ark by simple logic. The ark could not of possibly held 2 of each animal of each species that lived on the earth, plus the animal feces that would've been dropped, and the food that's been needed to feed all the animals.
Flooding of the earth we've disprove through the water cycle. Also if all the world was on earth without the water cycle, the water would only rise 25-50 ft. The entire planet would not be flooded.
Again if you don't take these as literal, you don't have to worry about these. But if you take them literal, it's different.
There is more evidence against God than there is for God. Majority of what is used as evidence for God is either scientifically explainable, or is an argument that has been disproven many times, such as the ones I mentioned above.
I hope to have a friendly and fun debate.
First, I would like to say that I can see your point when saying that every Christian goes back to the bible. Most people do yes, but like you I have also questioned the bible, and it's teachings. The first thing that I thought of when I was thinking of the bible was this: how could there be somebody out there that can make things the way that he did for us? Think of this, the earth, is the perfect distance from the sun, science can tell us that. Just a fraction more away from the sun and we would freeze to death, a fraction more twords the sun and we would burn to death. Although scientists believe in the "big bang" things could not have been that perfectly placed without the work of some other type of force, or god.
So the question is, does God exist. I would strongly debate yes. Our galaxy, the milky way, is in almost perfect order, our world is the perfect round shape, and even the best scientists can't answer this question: Why is it that everything in the universe is so orderly and perfect? Why is it that life goes on every day and for the most part, nothing changes? The earth has perfect 24 hour days, and perfect 365 day years.
Now before I go, I can understand that there are things that point away from God and him creating everything on this planet and in the universe but, think of how perfect everything is l, and think about how almost evert hung is perfect for human survival on this earth.
Sorry I'd this was a bit out of order and what not, this is my first debate :) Thanks!
Okay so it seems that you say God exists because everything seems so perfectly made for us, and scientists can't explain it. I have to side against you with that for many reasons.
- Over 90% of the water on this planet is not drinkable. It's dirty and places like Africa have a hard time with clean water.
- World hunger
- The sun will eventually go super nova and kill all the planets around it. This is when a star dies.
- Black holes
- Children with mental disabilities
- Sink holes
- We are vulnerable to solar flares, meteors, and asteroids
Must I go on? Those show no intelligent design. Those are all hurtful towards us.
Next you were mention about the earth being perfectly round and scientists can't explain it. That is false. We know how planets are created.
The timing of days and years were created by us.
There is lots of change. Seasons like winter and summer are always different. Some years are hotter than others, some are colder than others.
And last you said everything is perfect for human survival on earth.
Were you never taught about the Black Death? The Black Plague? The time when the human race almost died off?
Baby's born with mental and physical disabilities
The world and the universe isn't as perfect as you make it out to be.
Tyler5140 forfeited this round.
Posted by Mariodude34500
"You use the fine tuned universe argument. It's wrong plain and simple. For starters if the universe was created by god because it's so perfect and complex who created god? By definition god would have to be more perfect and complex and if complex things must be created then god must be created so who created him? But who is to say life couldn't exist if anything was different. why couldn't some other life exist that was better adapted to their conditions. This is what we call evolution. And you say the big bang couldn't have put the sun in the right place. Well that might be because it didn't. The star that is are sun was created my all the factors that created stars in the place it was in and the earth was created by the factors that create planets in a place near the sun so life evolved here and the type of life evolved to it's conditions. I'll leave wiki links to how stars and planets were created
You also say there is a perfect 365 days in a year. That's not true every year are year cycle is off by about a forth of a day that's why we have leap years to make up for the fact were are ahead by about a day. However even then that's slightly over compensating so every hundred years we skip a leap year to compensate for that and even then we are still not exactly correct so no perfect 365 day year.
Last thing about intelligent design.
Our food and air goes down the same pipe for a part of the way which is a serious choking hazard. About 3,000 adults die every year and 17,000 children are in the hospital because of choking. Who's idea of intelligent design is that?"
All I did was fix a bit of the grammar haha.
Tyler5140 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year 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:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
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.