The Instigator
Flipbook
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Rational_Thinker9119
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Evolution

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 2 votes the winner is...
Rational_Thinker9119
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/13/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 684 times Debate No: 33664
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Flipbook

Pro

Is Evolution right or wrong? Is God real? Did God make evolution?
I believe that God made evolution. That science is what God did, but never told about. I believe that God did not make the world in seven days.
Rational_Thinker9119

Con

Believing God assisted evolution is as useful as believing invisible fairies assist gravity in keeping things to the ground. It is an unneeded assumption as the theory works without that assumption. Also, lets take a look at the two competing hypothesis:

(i) Atheism
(ii) Classical Theism

Atheism predicts that reality is not governed by a loving being. Theism predicts that reality is governed by a loving being. If we look at evolution, this process has lead to 99% of all species that have ever lived to go extinct and suffer deaths on a massive scale. This is easily explained under the Atheistic hypothesis, as we would expect reality to not be governed by a being who cares about his creatures. Thus, we should not be shocked at the mass suffering and extinction caused by the evolutionary process if Atheism is true. However if theism is true, then it is baffling to think a loving God would create life in such a cruel way, because this is not how loving beings usually behave. The theist would have to make excuses as to why God as to why he would allow this, making the theistic hypothesis as a very weak explanation for evolution as it has to pile up extra assumptions.

For the reasons above, I think the most reasonable conclusion is that a God is not responsible for evolution.
Debate Round No. 1
Flipbook

Pro

God made this world, but he made it for us. God probably wasn't behind the hands of Evolution, although he created it. Nothing humans have ever done says Evolution isn't true. Everything humans have done says its true. It has not yet been proved wrong. I beleive that Evolution has to be true. No one has proved it wrong. No one really understand's evolution. No one really know's science, unless they are a scientists. We don't have to burn a lamb on a golden table every time we say, "God-dam*it!"

The only way to tell if the bible is law and we have to obey it, is if it were written by god itself, and its not. God didn't write his workings into the bible, and what was never mentioned, is science. Science is a reality, and it governs our world. It keeps our very feet on the ground. Without knowing how science works, we would probably all be dead. If god were really here anyway, then by know he would have stopped evolution.

Evolution explains the world around us in the best possible way. How did the world get the way it was? With its fossils, and its rock, and its DNA. No one can prove that wrong. God would not put those their to make us sin, because he doesn't want us to sin. So how could they have got here? NEWSFLASH!!!!! EVOLUTION!!!!!! It explains the situation better than anything else, as a matter of fact, there isn't anything else. There is nowhere in the bible that explains that, I mean zero, 0, ZIP.

If the bible is the only thing that governs our lives, then why doesn't it say everything.

Anyone who says that Evolution is a sin, they don't know. As humans, we have the ability to expand our knowlege. We have total dominant control over our world. God can interfere with it, but its our world right now, and as humans, we have the right to expand. We can be curious. We are the the top. We have the right to explore the mind and workings of God. That is not a sin. And if that is not a sin, then god wants us to die. Andromeda is going to crash into us. The sun will burn out.

In the end conclusion, we have the right to explore the reaches of god and our universe. Evolution has to be correct, otherwise the world wouldn't make sense. The world has to make sense. Don't tell me thats a sin!

Excuse me, I have some science homework to attend to.
Rational_Thinker9119

Con

"God made this world, but he made it for us."

Bare assertion.

"God probably wasn't behind the hands of Evolution, although he created it."

Bare assertion.

"No one really know's science, unless they are a scientists."

This is not necessarily true. I have a fair amount of scientific knowledge but I am no scientist.

Regardless, my opponent spent the rest of his argument defending evolution and ignoring my argument in the first round. 99% of all species that have ever lived are no extinct. They suffered horrible deaths and this is due to the evolutionary process. This setup is not compatible with how loving beings act. This means the theist has to do some serious stretching to make this idea work. However, all of this dead and suffering fits nicely into an Atheistic universe without having to stretch anything. Therefore, Evolution not being grounded in God is the bets explanation.
Debate Round No. 2
Flipbook

Pro

My "Rational Thinker" opponent is trying to base on the fact that god loves animals, he doesn't have any proof that god gives any care for them, instead he made them for us. This is our world, you cannot deny it, God can take it away from us at any time, but its still ours.

This site below states reasons to believe in Evolution. I don't want to argue someone who won't give me any proof. Read this and rethink your ideology, "Rational Thinker"

https://www.apologeticspress.org...

99% Percent of all animals going extinct perfectly explains the Ideology of the fossil record. The fossil record explains Evolution very well. Explain to me what this site says as well:

http://www.agiweb.org...

See if you wont change your views
Rational_Thinker9119

Con

I am not arguing against evolution, so most of the last round is a Red Herring from my opponent. My argument assumes evolution, but argues against the idea that God is the founder. My opponent claims that I have provided no argument in favor of the claim that God even cares about animals.

Lets assume God does not care about animals.

If my opponent concedes evolution, then humans are animals! We are part of the great ape family of animals just like the Chimapnzee[1]. If God does not love animals then he does not love us which means he cannot exist, because that is a contradiction; God is defined as a being who loves us.

If Pro tries to pull a "separation" move, then it will be clear he is special pleading.

The resolution is negated.

Sources

Debate Round No. 3
Flipbook

Pro

My opponent says to counter his argument without pulling a separation move, (this is debate, not simon says) while his argument is completely bogus in the first place. So I get really offended when my opponent puts moldy cheese into my face, and expects me to counter it. Im done playing simon says.

My opponent says that evolution isn't true, by saying that god wouldn't create it. But no one can scientifically prove evolution wrong. No one has proved god right scientifically, only the bible can tell us that, and the bible is straight from the hands of god.
Rational_Thinker9119

Con

"My opponent says to counter his argument without pulling a separation move, (this is debate, not simon says) while his argument is completely bogus in the first place. So I get really offended when my opponent puts moldy cheese into my face, and expects me to counter it. Im done playing simon says."
You have given no reason why my argument is bogus, you just asserted it. I consider this a concession.


"My opponent says that evolution isn't true, by saying that god wouldn't create it."
Straw-man. I said evolution is true, but God did not create it.

"But no one can scientifically prove evolution wrong."
I never argued evolution was wrong. Evolution is right. I gave an argument as to why God most likely did not create evolution. Your rebuttal was self-refuting. Thus, the debate has already been won by me.

"No one has proved god right scientifically, only the bible can tell us that, and the bible is straight from the hands of god."
Using The Bible to prove God is like using Comic books to prove Batman. This argument from my opponent is embarrassing and is basically a concession.
Debate Round No. 4
Flipbook

Pro

Flipbook forfeited this round.
Rational_Thinker9119

Con

What a shame.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Rational_Thinker9119 3 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119
Sorry for all the typos in my second argument...Oh well, I was in a hurry.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by rajun 3 years ago
rajun
FlipbookRational_Thinker9119Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: ff, arguments to con for staying on the line instead of swaggering like pro. S/G goes to Pro.
Vote Placed by SaintMichael741 3 years ago
SaintMichael741
FlipbookRational_Thinker9119Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used his sources in his argument instead of just posting the link up to read. Conduct for con for the simon says comment and for forfeiting. Overall Rational Thinker did much better at arguing his point, while pro didn't stay focused on his point. I would love to debate with either of you : ) anythime you want a rematch flipbook im ready.