The Instigator
tejretics
Con (against)
Winning
69 Points
The Contender
talismanhero
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

God Exists

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 13 votes the winner is...
tejretics
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/29/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 632 times Debate No: 72556
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (13)

 

tejretics

Con

I say that God does not exist. Many people say that God exists, but then why do they say so? God cannot exist because there is no proof. I can believe what I want and I say God does not exist. God is "the omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent creator and ruler of the universe and the source of all moral authority." This does not exist. This cannot exist. Prove that God exists and I will accept it.
talismanhero

Pro

God is order. Without Him, there is chaos. Therefore, we should have no right or wrong. Yet we do. Nobel Prize winner, Richard Feynman once said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle." God is order. He established order in our universe through a complex set of "laws" that dictate how our universe functions. He made a sanctuary, Earth, that exactly meets our needs to survive. This is evidence that there is a god that is omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent creator and ruler of the universe and the source of all moral authority. Therefore, God exists.

You may ask "if God is omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent creator and ruler of the universe and the source of all moral authority, how come there sin, death etc.?" God gave us free will. Unfortunately, we have abused this and therefore caused sin, death, etc. Therefore, God exists. If God did not exist, we do not have a purpose. We are simply an accident. Yet everything around us had a beginning and a cause. Therefore, if everything that had a beginning had a cause, then we have a cause.

There is more evidence to come. Prepare to be blown away and finally understand that God does exist.

Debate Round No. 1
tejretics

Con

Definitions
1. God - the omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent being who is the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being
2. Exist - be actual in objective reality

Rebuttals
1. Pro asserts that without God, there is "chaos." Chaos is defined as "the property of a complex system whose behaviour is so unpredictable as to appear random, owing to great sensitivity to small changes in conditions." [1] This randomness and disorder is always present in any thermodynamic system as entropy. Via. the second law of thermodynamics, the level of disorder in a thermodynamic system never decreases; instead, it gradually increases. As the universe is a thermodynamic system, there is a constant rate of increasing disorder in the universe which defines the "arrow of time." Hence, time is the rate of cosmic entropic graduation. [2][3]
2. Pro says that morality exists on a cosmic scale, but does not
prove it whatsoever. Morality was most likely created by humans to help maintain social order.
3. Pro states, "There is evidence that there is a God that is omnipotent, omniscient and intelligent, and the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority." This evidence is not seen or provided.
4. Via. the causal premise, Pro says that everything has a cause. New evidence shows that the Big Bang was caused via. uncaused quantum fluctuations originating in a vacuum state and gravity, that created a singularity, a point in gravitational spacetime with infinite density and zero volume. [4][5] The uncertainty principle and mass-energy equivalence together show that the density of energy in the universe can increase or decrease based on the energy density of the Higgs field and the level of mechanical fluctuations. [6]

Arguments
1. No God is most likely to be true via. Occam's Razor, the simplest explanation is a priori most likely, viz. if x need not exist [i.e. all events attributed to x are explained by another verifiable source], there are other explanations for x, and x is unverifiable, then x most likely does not exist. [7]
2. Via. the Russell's teapot analogy, the philosophical Burden of Proof lies with the person making unverifiable but scientifically unfalsifiable claims. [8] Thus, I now shift the BoP to Pro.

References
[1] http://goo.gl...
[2] Carnot, Sadi. (1824).
[3] Halliwell, J.J. et al. (1994). Physical Origins of Time Asymmetry. Cambridge.
ISBN 0-521-56837-4.
[4] http://goo.gl...
[5] Hawking, S. W., and Penrose, R. (1965), "Singularities in Homogenous World Models", Physical Letters 17: 246-247.
[6] http://goo.gl...
[7] http://goo.gl...;
[8] http://goo.gl...
talismanhero

Pro

talismanhero forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
tejretics

Con

I extend all my arguments. The resolution remains negated.
talismanhero

Pro

talismanhero forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
tejretics

Con

I extend all my arguments. The resolution remains negated.
talismanhero

Pro

talismanhero forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
tejretics

Con

I extend all my arguments. The resolution remains negated. Vote Con.
talismanhero

Pro

talismanhero forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
Holy Crap you got everybody to vote for you.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
If I can't rebut it, yes.
Posted by Kozu 1 year ago
Kozu
Would you accept god through deductive reasoning?
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by G-g-ghost 1 year ago
G-g-ghost
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons round 2 was awe inspiring and refuted all pros round one claims and pro FF every round after
Vote Placed by Chaosism 1 year ago
Chaosism
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF by Pro. Con presented more solid arguments/rebuttals. Con cited the only sources.
Vote Placed by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
tejreticstalismanheroTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 1 year ago
FuzzyCatPotato
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 1 year ago
TheJuniorVarsityNovice
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff
Vote Placed by Theunkown 1 year ago
Theunkown
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Three forfeited rounds.
Vote Placed by Philocat 1 year ago
Philocat
tejreticstalismanheroTied
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 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: Forfeiture.