The Instigator
Forever23
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
amg_daddy
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 3 votes the winner is...
Forever23
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/1/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 655 times Debate No: 84454
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (3)

 

Forever23

Con

R1- Acceptance
R2- Arguments
R3- Refutations
R4- Summaries

I look forward to a great debate!
amg_daddy

Pro

I'd like to start by saying, that we have no idea if a god exists in our realm of existence, at this present moment. There IS no tangible evidence that proves the existence, right now, but, there also isn't any evidence to claim that there isn't one. That's the burden of proof fallacy. But, i would like to mention the creation of the universe and how a powerful entity created it. At one point, there was absolute nothingness. I claim that, in the sense that the if there was a beginning, there must have been a starting point and something to start the Ultimate Clock. Since there "was" nothingness, the non-physical body of consciousness, or free will in itself, has the right to create itself. There are no laws of nature or physics that say otherwise. Consciousness, therefore, can create something from nothing.
As for this moment, I prefer to believe that although the same entity has no physical body, it lives within all life. The idea that living beings, on a smaller, insignificant scale can move, think, and act freely, is this entity taking a physical body, it's own creation. We have the choice to manifest into the closest version of this entity as we possibly can, although, we are only human.
Debate Round No. 1
Forever23

Con

PRO AUTOMATICALLY FORFEITS ALL THE ROUNDS DUE TO RULE BREAKING. ROUND #1 WAS ACCEPTANCE ONLY! CON AUTOMATICALLY WINS.

God- The being written about in the bible.

In this debate, we will only be discussing God as described in the Bible.

The arguments I will introduce right now will be the only standing arguments in this debate due to forfeiture by the proposition.

Contention #1- God and Omnipotence

God is omnipotent as it states in the Bible.

Omnipotence- Having the ability to do anything.

Observation #1- If God is alive, he is blatantly omnipotent

Observation #2- That means that God can do anything

Observation #3- There are many things that God is not able to do

Conclusion #1- If be definition God is omnipotent and there are things he is not able to do, God does not exist.

So, to clarify observation 3

Observation #1- Someone who is omnipotent is able to make a boulder that he can not push

Observation #2- If an omnipotent being can create the boulder it can not push, he is not able to push it. If he can not push it, then he is clearly not omnipotent.

Observation #3- If that omnipotent being is not able to create the boulder it can not push, it is not omnipotent.

If he can not push or create that boulder, then god is not omnipotent. My opponent has admitted that God is omnipotent.

If god is not omnipotent, than he is not God.

Therefore, God does not exist.

To proceed:

Observation #1- Since god is omnipotent, he is able to be evil.

Observation #2- As my opponent and the Bible state, god is omnibenelovant and omnipotent

Observation #3- Being omnipotent and omnibenelovant is impossible since someone omnipotent can be evil.

If God is omnipotent, he can not be omnibenelovant.

If god is not omnipotent, than he is not God.

Therefore, God does not exist.

Some self contradictory pieces from the Bible:

"For nothing will be impossible with God." Luke 1:37


"Great is our Lord, and abundant in power; his understanding is beyond measure." Psalm 147:5

Contention #2- God gave us Free Will

The bible explains that God gave his people free will. However, it also states that he is omniscient. If he is omniscient, he knows our future. Therefore, our future is predetermined. If our future is predetermined, we do not have free will.

Observation #1: If God is existing, he gave us free will

Observation #2: If the God exists, he is also omniscient

Observation #3: Someone omniscient knows our future

Conclusion #1: God must see what we are doing and know what will happen to us in the future

Conclusion #2: There is a paradox here

Conclusion #3: The god does not exist.

If god did not give us free will, or if he he is not omniscient, he is not God

If he is not God, God does not exist

Bible verses that prove this: "Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD" Psalm 139:4


"He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name. Great is our Lord and mighty in power; his understanding has no limit" Psalm 147:4-5

To provide some clarification

Clarification of Observation #3: This is contradictory. Lets say that god knows that a man is going to get into a car accident 100%.Is there any doubt of the man getting into the car accident? No. God knows that the man will 100% get into the accident- that is omniscience. The man getting into the accident is not able to change the situation. Therefore, the man does not have free will which the god apparently gave us.

Omniscience and giving free will to the people is impossible.

If god did not give us free will, or if he he is not omniscient, he is not God.

If he is not God, God does not exist.

Contention #3- God never Caused the Big Bang

Observation #1: There was nothing before the universe was made

Observation #2: Our universe was most probably created by the Big Bang

Observation #3: God never created the Big Bang

Conclusion #1: The Big Bang caused the creation of the universe

Conclusion #2- God never caused our universe to happen

Conclusion #3- Since god never created the universe, the whole Bible is disproved.

If god did not create the universe, he is not the God we know.

Therefore, he is not God.

Demonstration of this arguments: The universe has no energy due to the fact that it is being cancelled out by both positive and negative energy - ie. matter and gravity (1). That means that thee is nothing. (5). This is what there was before the big bang happened. Since there was nothing at first, it is not possible to show that God took part in this, (3). Quantum fluctuations because they are not anything. The instability has allowed energy to be displayed. The proportion of energy to the universe however, is huge, That caused the Big Bang to happen.

Thank you, vote con due to forfeiture by pro and the arguments brought up in this speech.


[1] http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com...
[2] http://astrogeo.oxfordjournals.org...
[3] http://physics.aps.org...
amg_daddy

Pro

amg_daddy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Forever23

Con

Extend...
amg_daddy

Pro

amg_daddy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
amg_daddy

Pro

amg_daddy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jt5542002 11 months ago
Jt5542002
Btw.... to the rock question. Can god create a rock he can not push? Yes. He simply turns himself into a rock.
Posted by Jt5542002 11 months ago
Jt5542002
The notion that there is not a god based on the biblical account of god in itself is not an Accurate assessment to the question of God's existence. God may exist independently from religion, but religion can not live independently without God or atleast a belief in God. God could very well exist and not give a hoot what we do. The first question is, does God exist? the second, is what does he expect of us? (Religion)

God can not be evil. As such wouldn't be God. But, there can be no god without his opposite. How can we know perfection if we have never seen imperfection? But, people will argue against anything. So, what would it take to make one believe? Seriously consider that question.
Posted by TheRealGod 11 months ago
TheRealGod
Are people trying to figure out if I still exist or not? I am right here.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 11 months ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Actually, his breach of the rules along and your advocating a total FF by him seem to cancel each other.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 11 months ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
And note that, as you did not mention so in the OS, as well as your opponent not agreeing with it, a full FF of debate by Pro is rather unrealistic. He may lose the conduct point for breach of rules, but not the whole debate.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 11 months ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Good Lord.

I could tear your arguments apart right now, Con.
Posted by Forever23 11 months ago
Forever23
Note: Breaking any of the round rules leads to automatic forfeiture by the rule breaker.
Posted by Xiao135 11 months ago
Xiao135
Just a question, as Con are you saying that God does not exist? As in, is the burden of proof for this debate shared? You have to prove God does not exist and the opponent has to prove God exists? Or is 100% of the burden on Pro?
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 11 months ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
You are a Catholic Christian, but you are on the Con side for God's existence?
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 11 months ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
And, yes, so you don't get trolled grammatically, define keywords in the resolution -- all if necessary.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 10 months ago
lannan13
Forever23amg_daddyTied
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: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by donald.keller 10 months ago
donald.keller
Forever23amg_daddyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: The opponent FF'd, dropping all of Con's points. I can give Con an assessment of her points if she'd like..
Vote Placed by Hayd 10 months ago
Hayd
Forever23amg_daddyTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro broke rules by posting arguments in R1, when it was acceptence only. Pro also ff repeatedly, so conduct to Con. Pro dropped all of Con's arguments and made none of his own, thus Con wins arguments.