The Instigator
atheismo
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Dylip
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

God does not exist

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 3 votes the winner is...
atheismo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,002 times Debate No: 30779
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

atheismo

Pro

I think God does not exist because there is no evidence for his existence and so there is no reason to think he exists. All religion was invented to control people and is actualy not the intervention of any gods. People often do not realize that they reject other gods saying things like 'that's a ridiculous myth' well I say the same thing to anyone who belives in God. I invite someone who beliefs in God to debate me on this topic.

Round 1: Arguments
Round 2: Rbeuttals
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Rebuttals
Round 5: Rebuttals
Round 6: Rebuttals and closing rebuttal
Dylip

Con

I will kindly defend my religion of Christianity, but I would like to inform my opponent that there is only 3 rounds in this debate.

So, this debate will be more like this.

Round 1-Acceptance/Small Argument
Round 2-Rebuttals/Argument
Round 3-Rebuttals, Ending Argument

I would like to let my opponent know that religion was actually not invented to control people, the first religion (well, I believe it's the first religion), the belief in Greek Gods, was invented to explain nature, death, weather, and so forth.

Christianity was built on the Miracles of Jesus Christ, God's only son. Despite the fact the Bible contradicts intself, it was made upon letters of people who witnessed the events.

I will not allow my opponent to make his argument (or elongate it).
Debate Round No. 1
atheismo

Pro

Well first I want to say that I used to be a religious Christian but now I'm not anymore, I have embraced physics and astronomy instead of being a sheep who believes in superstition and heres why.

First there can't be a god because god is sentient
Another reason why the KCA is invalid and refuted is because it can be expressed in a competing syllogism.
(P1) Everything that has sentience has a cause.
(P2) The Judeo-Christian God is said to have sentience.
(C) Therefore the Judeo-Christian God has a cause.
This syllogism can easily be ported to any god, since most, if not all gods, are said to be sentient in some form or fashion; and all referrals to reality, attest that sentience does not arise without antecedent causation.
http://rationalwiki.org...

Second there cant be a god because god is said to be all good when there isnt a reason to even think god is all good. Richard Dawkins said "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction. Jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic-cleanser; a misogynistic homophobic racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal"."
http://theatheistaltar.blogspot.com...

Third there cant be a god because god says to do bad things like kill your family. For instance in Islam there is a thing caleld "Honor killings"

Honor killings are the socially and religiously sanctioned abuse and murder of family members, most often women, who are seen as bringing disgrace upon the family due to perceived[1] behaviors of that family member. The "dishonors" can range from being seen talking with a westerner,[2] dressing inappropriately, kissing the wrong boy,[3] expressing interest in being educated, or simply stepping even slightly out of line of the community traditions.[4]
Honor killings are not new, and they are not reserved to Islam.
http://rationalwiki.org...

So no lol there is no god.
Dylip

Con

I am not familiar with the Judeo-Christian God, so I have no response to that argument.

In the Old Testament, Jesus had not died on the Cross yet, which washed everyone of their sins. And in the Old Testament, the people of Earth were much more sinful and vicious, causing God to punish them for their sins.

Lastly, Honor Killings were invented by the people to keep their families 'clean', it was not invented by Allah.

So yes lol there is a God.




VOTE FOR CON!

Dylip
Debate Round No. 2
atheismo

Pro

atheismo forfeited this round.
Dylip

Con

Dylip forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by atheismo 3 years ago
atheismo
the KCA makes no sense, both of the premise are unsupported, theres no rational reason to say there's a reason for somethings beginning. but there idoes have to be cause for sentience.
Posted by KeytarHero 3 years ago
KeytarHero
The anti-KCA debate is such a lousy argument, it's unbelievable that even Atheists would take it seriously. Especially as a "rebuttal" to the KCA (which actually makes logical sense).
Posted by Dylip 3 years ago
Dylip
It's impossible to elongate a debate in progress.
Posted by atheismo 3 years ago
atheismo
I cant make it longer now, help?!
Posted by atheismo 3 years ago
atheismo
I think I occidentally made this debate too short
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by zezima 3 years ago
zezima
atheismoDylipTied
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:24 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had better spelling, and saying God told you to kill your family doesn't mean he doesn't exist
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
atheismoDylipTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a hard debate to judge. First, Pro gave a terrible opening argument. Then Con gave an even worse response. That made me want to vote for Pro. But then then Pro forfeited, which made me want to vote for Con. But then Con forfeited, too! What the what? I balanced it all out in my head and gave Pro the win because his opening argument was better than Con's.
Vote Placed by thett3 3 years ago
thett3
atheismoDylipTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I didnt think this was a good debate, but Pro clearly won. Con only argues in R1 that since people claimed to have witnessed the miracles,they happened(while conceding that the Bible contradicts itself). I didnt find Pros case all that compelling, but his anti-KCA arg (which I find really problematic but whatever) and the POE vastly outweigh Cons appeal to the Bible. Con makes no real response.