The Instigator
aburk903
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
mendel
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points

God Is Omnipotent

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 6 votes the winner is...
mendel
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 888 times Debate No: 55928
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (23)
Votes (6)

 

aburk903

Con

I have made this debate short as it is fairly unpractical. I use it only to make a point. Today, we will be debating on the power of God. I assert that logic and reason are more powerful than "God's divine power". My opponent will forfeit both of his rounds in defense of faith, and only offer prayers to God. Unless God causes a miracle, I must win this debate. However, the Bible says with faith the size of a mustard seed you can move mountains.

The conclusion I'd like all voters to ask themselves is this: why is this so absurd? If Christians and other religious people truly believe God can do anything, why not this? He says he wants us to know him and that is the very reason for our existence. But I have a stronger faith that God will not interfere on my opponents behalf, and that I will by necessity win this debate.
mendel

Pro

Dear g-d, your ways are hidden from me but i accept your judgment for i am a mere mortal of flesh and blood, i was made from dust and to dust i shall return, all of my wisdom was bestowed upon me from you, my compassionate creator. Dear g-d who has no beginning and no end, and after all is over, shall rule for eternity. Thank you for everything that i have, you owe me nothing yet you gave me life itself. You owe me nothing, you have created me from nothing, yet you not only give me life, you give me happiness, you give me love, but most of all dear beloved, omnipotent g-d, thank you for giving me the gift of free choice, for I know that you are infinite yet you made a place for me, out of your love to your creations you have given me the opportunity to give you satisfaction by revealing your presence on earth. Master of the world, mighty, omnipotent g-d, creator of the universe, my rock and salvation, most beloved. I beg thy mercy upon myself and my family and on the whole world.
Debate Round No. 1
aburk903

Con

Thanks for accepting and complying, Pro. Although my introduction mandates forfeiture, prayer can be accepted as it is not truly an argument but just a statement of belief fused with requests for god's assistance. I do not intend to be rude or insensitive, but prayer does not truly influence the actions of man (as various studies comparing praying people of various religions and atheists would show). I have not coerced my opponent to accept this debate and to do so was an act of faith as set up in my first round. Therefore, it is your duty as objective voters to vote Con (at least on argumentation). Thanks, Pro. Best of luck.
mendel

Pro

mendel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
@aburk903 The proof you ask for I feel is present. I think some things are not convincing to some people. The funny thing I see is evidence for God is ignored when it is not in the most strict and scientific ways. And yet people make other decisions with a different standard.

If you went to a restaurant and you got sick, and you went again and got sick again, say you went 3 times total and got sick. You probably would never go to that restaurant again. That would be a personal experience that could be explained away by chance. But if your friends said lets go to the same restaurant and they never got sick. It would not matter to you would it? So personal experience is something that works in other situations just not when it comes to God?
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
@aburk903 I am saying if the prayer is for help in doing God's will than the answer will be yes.

But when prayer is tested it too often is if what a person wants is answered.
Posted by saxman 2 years ago
saxman
@Aburk903 I know this is not a popularity contest, but thats what you made it. By making your entire debate "a show of power" for yourself and your beliefs. So this was not a debate. A debate implies two people arguing with each other in order to try and prove their point. You set up a bully system. So no, in this case, you were not a debater, forcing me to give the pro all of the points by default. I said the "offensive part" just because you ticked me off.
Posted by aburk903 2 years ago
aburk903
Two flaws, Mykhiel. 1. That makes prayer nothing more than random chance. If it is equally likely to be yes, no, or maybe...why pray? 2. God demands in the Bible that Christians teach the gospel, so one would expect God to desire to prove Himself as at least real.
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
Just to give an analogy of prayer:

If my son comes to me asking for keys to the car, I'm under no obligation to give him what he wants.

But if I tell my son to mow the yard, ad he comes to me asking for fuel and a lawn mower, then I am responsible for providing him the tools to do what I ask for.

Prayer is like that
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
@ Mendel I think your prayer was right on. You did not once ask for g-d to make you win this debate. You simply offered thanks to G-d for G-d being who g-d is.

Which is what I believe is the right way to pray with faith. That if you pray asking for G-d's will to be done. It will be done. But if you pray for your own will or desires, it is frivolous.
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
RFD:

Con instigated and set parameter for him to only present arguments. BOP in my view is shared because of this.

1st Round: Pro offers prayer in accordance to rules.

2nd Round: Con states that the prayer is not an argument but a statement of faith. With this reasoning then the statement from Con's 1st round "I have a stronger faith that God will not interfere on my opponents behalf" is also not an argument. Leaving the statement "prayer does not truly influence the actions of man (as various studies comparing praying people of various religions and atheists would show)" to be the only argument presented.

Con did not define which god or whose god in the first Round. Nor does he reject the God Pro was praying to. Pro prays to a god he defines as "omnipotent g-d, thank you for giving me the gift of free choice" Pro directly addresses this g-d of freewill as the omnipotent g-d. So Con's statement is not in contention.

Con presented no arguments, despite the freedom to do so. BOP was shared so PRO gets argumentation. Pro shows great restraint and replies only with supplication, conduct Pro.
Posted by aburk903 2 years ago
aburk903
*to label my case as offensive
Posted by aburk903 2 years ago
aburk903
Saxman, I do not expect to win this debate but your vote is improper. To allege that I am not truly a debater is baseless and to label my case is prejudiced and does not address the content of the debate. This is not a popularity contest, this is a debate.
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
God established the natural laws by his word. IF God performed miracles by breaking the laws of physics then how could we trust anything else God does or says if god breaks his own laws? No clearly miracles are completed with in the reality we live in. Being omniscient and having established the natural laws, God may know a few loop holes man kind does not.

Second your premise for prayer is wrong.

1. assumes effective prayer is a person asking for what ever they want
2. assumes a God who gives man free will, is not capable of free will themselves
2a. Because if God has free will, god can refuse to grant the prayer
3. assumes an omniscient omnipowerful being is under any kind of obligation to grant the mortal, limited intelligent, limited power human being anything

Hence any experiment to discern the effect of prayer will be unable to account for the will of god.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by dairygirl4u2c 2 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
aburk903mendelTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: apparently con's logic and reason, or lack thereof, are not more powerful than "God's divine power". this could have proven to be a decent debate if con had any logic or reason to begin with.
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
aburk903mendelTied
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:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was condescending, however Pro did not make an argument, so I can only give him for conduct.
Vote Placed by saxman 2 years ago
saxman
aburk903mendelTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: The con is completely absurd and offensive with no forethought at all. He is not really a debater.
Vote Placed by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
aburk903mendelTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Lol at this debate. I think Con's logic and reason forgot to take into account the background effect of naturalism, that voters may vote against him despite the rules depicting as much. Loved the prayer, I take it this vote is a divine act towards Pro :-).
Vote Placed by Mhykiel 2 years ago
Mhykiel
aburk903mendelTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con instigated I feel shares burden of proof to prove Pro's prayers will not effect the outcome of this debate. First Round: Pro prays as asked for by Con. Con asks the voters questions and makes a statement of faith "I have a stronger faith that God will not interfere..." for his opponent to win.2nd Round. Con states the prayer is a statement of faith and does not count as argument. Con now claims "prayer does not truly influence the actions of man". It is clear from Pro's prayer that the God he was praying to is a "omnipotent g-d, thank you for giving me the gift of free choice" So this point is not in contention nor is it to the resolution. Con states there is studies that prove this, but cite none. Pro did everything that was agree upon in the first round. Con presented no arguments, just a statement of his own faith, and a unsourced statement That was in agreement to Pro's God. Con had the freedom to present an argument and did not. Conduct goes to Pro for abiding by the rules.
Vote Placed by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
aburk903mendelTied
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:34 
Reasons for voting decision: Only obligated to vote Con on arguments.