The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Does the god of the bible 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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/16/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 778 times Debate No: 29248
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I do not find there to be any evidence that the god of the bible or a personal god exists, which is why I am an atheist. If you believe that such evidence exists then please state it and be prepared to defend it. This is my first debate so I'm still figuring everything out ^.^


Standard Evidence used for proving god: (Using WLC's versions):

1. The Cosmological Argument from Contingency:

a) Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence, either in the

necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.

b) If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.

c) The universe exists.

d) Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence (from a, c).

e) Therefore, the explanation of the universe"s existence is God (from b, d).

Pro will probably challenge b, when doing so he should provide an alternative.


2. The Kalam Cosmological Argument

a) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

b) The universe began to exist.

c) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

d) That cause is god.

3.The Moral Argument Based upon Moral Values and Duties

Read more:

a) If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

b) Objective moral values and duties do exist.

c) Therefore, God exists.


4. The Teleological Argument from Fine-tuning

a) The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design.

b) It is not due to physical necessity or chance.

c) Therefore, it is due to design.

Examples of Fine Tuning:

If the initial explosion of the big bang had differed in strength by as little as one part in 1060, the universe would have either quickly collapsed back on itself, or expanded too rapidly for stars to form. In either case, life would be impossible. (As John Jefferson Davis points out, an accuracy of one part in 1060 can be compared to firing a bullet at a one-inch target on the other side of the observable universe, twenty billion light years away, and hitting the target.) (1)

A change in the strength of the atomic weak force by only one part in 10100 would have prevented a life-permitting universe. The cosmological constant which drives the inflation of the universe and is responsible for the recently discovered acceleration of the universe"s expansion is inexplicably fine-tuned to around one part in 10120. Roger Penrose of Oxford University has calculated that the odds of the Big Bang"s low entropy condition existing by chance are on the order of one out of 1010(123). Penrose comments, "I cannot even recall seeing anything else in physics whose accuracy is known to approach, even remotely, a figure like one part in 1010(123)."23 And it"s not just each constant or quantity that must be exquisitely finely-tuned; their ratios to one another must be also finely-tuned. So improbability is multiplied by improbability by improbability until our minds are reeling in incomprehensible numbers. (2)

Calculations by Brandon Carter show that if gravity had been stronger or weaker by one part in 1040, then life-sustaining stars like the sun could not exist. This would most likely make life impossible. (Collins 1999, 49.)[37](1)

More complex examples:


That's it for now, next round I'll get into some less conventional arguments.

Debate Round No. 1


Randwot222 forfeited this round.


1Devilsadvocate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


First I want to apologize for missing the second round. I had a family emergency and was gone for some time. Everything turned out for the best and now I'm back! Time to get on with the debate.

The first thing that I wanted to point out is that the Pro did not even mention the bible once in his statement. This is a debate on whether or not the God of the bible exists, not whether some being or little g god exists that created the universe. He is taking the William Lane Craig road in his arguments, which give interesting points, does not defend the personal God of the bible in any way. William Lane Craig says in many of his debates that they are not debating the accuracy of the bible because he knows he is not able to defend it. He does make good arguments for the case of a little g god or deist god. One that could have created the universe or at least kick start the process, but does not take any part in it thereafter. ( a non personal god like that of the bible) The only part of his argument that even relates to humanity is the one about morality. Now I will counter what the Pro has given me so far, but I need him to present some evidence from the bible or historical evidence that God (Big G) exists in this round.

Ok his number 1: The Cosmological Argument from Contingency

I agree with the first part (A). It makes sense and is logical

Now as for (B), just like what the pro says at the bottom, I disagree. My alternative for this answer is the that the Easter Bunny is the explanation of the existence of the universe. Both God and the Easter Bunny have the same amount of evidence for their existence and both are equally absurd to use as an explanation for the universes creation. Why insert God here for the cause of the universe? Why not throw in any other random, unexplained, unfathomable, unknown thing? It is a large leap to jump to a God in this case. Now my first stated alternative, the Easter Bunny, was of course a joke to show the silliness of the statement. I would in fact bring in Laurence Krauss to give you all the answer in the first video.

He is one of the leading scientists in his field and he gives a great explanation on how we understand what the universe is, its future, and its origin. Science does not have an definitive answer, but is getting close. Their work is a whole lot more trustworthy and dependable than just inserting a deity. Its the "God of the gaps" again. Since we don't understand fully how the universe came into being lets just say God.

Now for part 2:The Kalam Cosmological Argument

a) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

b) The universe began to exist.

c) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

d) That cause is god.

Pretty similar to the first part so you can reread my counter to that, but let me first expand on his list here.

e)god begins to exist
f) therefore god has a cause
g) that cause is BIGGER god
h)BIGGER god begins to exist
i)therefore BIGGER god has a cause
j)that cause is EVEN BIGGER god
k)Continue this line of reasoning until your sick of it

Part 3 (The only sudo argument for the God of the bible) The Moral Argument Based upon Moral Values and Duties

Here the Pro states that without God objective moral duties and values do not exist. I will take it a step forward and borrow from Mr. Dan Barker and say that Objective moral duties and values don't exist at all!!!!

Please start watching the second video at the 39 minute mark for what he says. I would encourage you to watch the whole thing, its a great debate, but that's the relevant part. In short Mr. Barker says that values are made in the brain, they are a function of it much like digestion is the function of the stomach. Once that brain dies out the values are gone. For something to be Objective, it has to exists outside of something and by itself. Once that brain dies the values of it are not just floating around. If you put another being there, they would not just inherit those values right away. Now you can have values that you objectively justify. Everyone does it. Mr. Barker explains it a lot better than I do, so I would refer to the video.

Now for that last one number 4 The Teleological Argument from Fine-tuning

My video of The Universe from nothing explained by Laurence Krauss already touched on this so I will go a different route. It all depends on what your definition of fine-tuning is. If you mean everything was made just so we could live, you might call that fine-tuning, but that would be incorrect. It was not fine or even tuned. It took billions of years to get to the point when life was even possible. Then so much life had to die (99.9% of all species on the planet) to get to where we are today. That is so wasteful and not fine-tuned at all ( unless you believe the 6 day thing which the Pro has not stated). Plus if something is fine-tuned for use should it not continue to be so? We live in the worst possible universe as stated by Mr Krauss. The future is lonely and bleak for us, so how is that fine-tuned? Just to throw in at the end, if we as humans are fine tuned then why do we have useless parts like the appendix and spleen?? Just asking.

Now I have gone through and countered the Pros current arguments and he is allowed to have a rebuttal, but I would like him to keep it short. He has not touched on the personal god of the bible at all. His arguments are mainly for some deist little g god that could of created the universe yes, but it is a large stretch to say such a being pays attention to our every prayer and wish. Please Pro stick to the theme of the debate, don't pull another Craig on me!



Con points out that my arguments didn't address the god of the bible.
It is common practice to 1st provide evidence of a god, once it is shown that there is some god who created the universe, it’s easier to show that it’s likely that he is the god of the bible.
(Another reason I did so is that many of my opponents have forfeited in the 2nd round, after I have worked hard on my arguments, I wanted to be sure that this is legit, before putting in the effort. (After pro F.F. R2, I assumed that happened, so I didn't bother continuing.)).

Why god over the Easter bunny?
Pro claims that both god & the Easter bunny have equal evidence for their existence.
1 reason that this is not true, is that there are numerous Accounts of direct personal experience of god (this is not to be confused with anecdotal evidence), as opposed to the Easter bunny.

He is one of the leading scientists...
All pro does here is appeal to authority, & provide a long Youtube lecture
He has not presented the scientific alternative.

god begins to exist...

Argument from morality:
Objective moral duties and values don't exist at all...start watching the second video...
Again I am not watching 1:30 of youtube lecture. If you wan’t to C&P an argument that one thing, (obviously you must give credit), but to make a 1hr + lecture your argument...NO.

The problem with moral nihilism is that few, if any, philosophers would claim to be nihilists.
The reason being, that our intuition tells us, that there is something wrong with slowly Torturing a child to death in the most painful way possible ... for no reason.
Reductio ad absurdum.

Moral nihilism is akin to the “Cogito ergo sum” thinking of René Descartes. Theoretically plausible, but not acceptable.

Teleological Argument from Fine-tuning:

Pro makes numerous fallacies here;

everything was made just so we could live
Strawman. The argument from fine-tuning, does not say that EVERYTHING is fine-tuned.
It shows numerous aspects of the universe that are fine tuned.

Con then makes numerous claims, with nothing more than appeals to authority, & long Youtube lectures.

why do we have useless parts like the appendix and spleen??
Welcome to the 21st cent.
Know it all science pointed to “useless parts like the appendix”, as arguments against god, only to find out - to their great ever lasting embarrassment, that they are not“useless” after all.

Function of appendix (1)
Function of the spleen - blood filter, & much more. (2)

God of the bible:

Argument from Accounts of direct personal experience:

This is not to be confused with anecdotal evidence where the evidence is anecdote, hearsay or represents a conclusion deduced from generalisation.
Unlike anecdotal evidence, the reliability of accounts of personal experience is normally capable of assessment for legal proceedings.

Kuzarian argument(3):

All religions begin with an individual revelation to 1 individual, who then convinced many other people. There are 1000’s of such religions/cults, the leader is a charismatic fellow, convinces others, & from there it goes. The exception to this is the revelation narrative at Sinai, this revelation was supposedly experienced by millions of people.
Why is this significant?
There is no plausible explanation of how the Hebrews would believe this from Moses unless it were true.
This is a very basic presentation of the argument, it is open to some counter arguments, which I don’t have space to preempt in this round. I will do so in next round if con brings them up.

Bible codes:
Then there are bible codes, I know a lot of people, don't like them, and I agree some are far fetched. But some of them are just too incredible.

Here is 1 of them:

Everyone is familiar with the Purim story / the book of ester. In which a Jewish woman saves the Jewish people from annihilation. At the end of the story the 10 sons of Haman (the antagonist) are hung. In listing the names there are 3 letters that are written small according to tradition, no reason is given for this tradition (4)

In 1946, 10 high ranking Nazis were hanged.
The Small letters are ת, שׁ, and ז, Rabbi Weissmandl pointed out that if you combine the three small letters together they form תשז, which in the accepted Hebrew notation for year numbers (using Gematria) corresponds to the Jewish year [5]707 which is the Jewish year that the 10 Nazi leaders were executed (October 16, 1946 corresponds to Tishrei 21, 5707, the day known as Hoshanna Rabba, the day of severe judgments for the nations of the world, according to the Jewish calendar). (5)

This is where Wikipedia ends, but there is more.

Originally there were 24 on trial, 12 were sentenced to hanging. 1 of which not in custody, reducing the # to 11.
A few hours before the hanging, Göring committed suicide, reducing the final # to 10. (6). Corresponding to the 10 sons of Haman that were killed.

If that's not enough, here's the really freaky part:
Julius Streicher, was one of those who were hanged. Let me quote for you a description of the hanging from an eye witness:

Kingsbury Smith. "Nuremberg News Article Oct. 16, 1946 – The Execution of Nazi War Criminals". University of Missouri-Kansas City.

The article describes in great detail the melodramatic scene of the streicher hanging, due to lack of space, I’ll just quote the most relevant part, it’s entirety can be found in the source I provide.

“Streicher was swung suddenly to face the witnesses and glared at them. Suddenly he screamed, 'Purim Fest 1946.' [Purim is a Jewish holiday celebrated in the spring, commemorating the execution of Haman, ancient persecutor of the Jews described in the Old Testament.]" …” (6)

Fulfilled prophesy:

Again there are numerous examples, in this round, I’ll briefly provide some, & expound in the next round:

In Deuteronomy 28-30 there is a prediction of what will happen to the Jewish people. It predicts conquest accompanied by wanton slaughter of the population: men, woman, children, old, young, and so on. It predicts an exile resulting in world-wide scatter (As opposed to the normal tax or kill approach of conquering armies) , and that during this period of world-wide scatter, Jews will have no independent government. Nevertheless, the Jewish people will survive, will never completely be destroyed, and will ultimately return to the land of Israel. It also predicts that the conqueror will speak a language that the Jewish people don't understand.

All this happened in the exile of the Jews by Rome, around 70A.D..

Leviticus 26:32,33 . Deuteronomy 29:21,22 Jeremiah 9:10 Ezekiel 33:28,29 all predict the desolation of the land of Israel. See Mark Twains' "Innocent Abroad or the new pilgrim's progress", vol.2 pp.216-359.
The return of the Jews is predicted in Deuteronomy 30:3-5.
Its following inhabiting and fertilization in Ezekiel 36:8-11.

The "Jews will be a light unto the nations" was foretold in Isaiah 42:6 end, ibid. 49:6, ibid.60:3 genesis 12:2.
Jews are the source of the 2 largest religions. & have made many huge contributions to civilisation.
Far exceeding what would be expected from such a small group. (.2% of world population, 20% of Nobel prizes(7). Modern psycology, Google, Times man of the century, etc.)


(4) Esther 9:7-10.
Debate Round No. 3


Randwot222 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


Randwot222 forfeited this round.


Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by morgan2252 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to pro because con FF's most. Spelling and grammar to pro because con has a few typos. Both arguments were even and equally convincing. Pro is the only one with sources.