Existance of God
Debate Rounds (3)
YOU: "people believe in god because they don't have another answer. In other words they follow a non-existent thing to compensate for their ignorance because they're scared of the unknown.."
ME: Your misunderstanding is not with the belief in God, but the definition of what "God" actually is. Many people focus on WHO God is, but neglect to understand WHAT God is. For more info and as a good primer you need to understand the basic hermetic philosophy teachings on God and "The All". The All is not logically debateable and to argue against the concept of the All is incoherent. The All is simply all that there is. You can call it God or whatever you want. Once you understand this, then you have to argue the existence of consciousness. This also cannot be denied if by no other reason than the fact that you are reading and understanding this very sentence. This would not be possible without consciousness. So where does consciousness come from? I would argue, as would Issac Newton, that energy (i.e. consciousness) is neither created nor destroyed, but rather, energy is only transferred from one place in existence to another place. In relation to The All, this is a zero-sum equation. Nothing is lost, nor gained. Everything is connected and The All is in all and The All is all there is. This means all consciousness is connected. The All is mind, and in the mind is all consciousness. However, in our ignorance we (humans) tend to anthropomorphise God (The All) when in reality, we are far more like God then God is like us, but we only see this and understand this from a very humanistic perspective. God is not human; we were created in God's image, not the other way around. First, you must understand the nature of God, then you can understand mysteries of life. Humans have been so wrong about this for too long. Jesus tried explaining this in simpler terms, but even His words have been quite misrepresented and misunderstood by the masses.
YOU: "why people push this on their children. Why not teach them all ways and let them decide what they choose."
ME: A loving parent will always teach what they believe is right to their children whether the issue is religion or something else. I agree all known options should be presented, but this requires much self education and research on behalf of the parents, which is hardly a common attribute among most parents these days. It far easier to not think after all. The concept of "not thinking" is also known as "Amusement" (i.e. amusement parks).
YOU: "God is something that lacks evidence and if your philosophy is that humans are so complicated that they must have a maker then who made the maker?"
ME: Your statement is incorrect because of your use of the word "evidence". Evidence exists, but is often debated. You are also assuming that there was a beginning. Remember The All? There is nothing else; there was no beginning for The All. However, there are many mysteries that we may never know in this life. This fact should not discourage but rather motivate intellectual thinking and scientific understanding. Don't ever assume you have all the facts, and always be willing to challenge your own understanding. In all your views and opinions remind yourself that you don't know it all, no single human knows everything. Never let pride stunt your intellectual and spiritual growth. Instead seek to stand on the shoulders of the great thinkers and philosophers of the past.
NathanaelsOption forfeited this round.
miller3317 forfeited this round.
NathanaelsOption forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.