The Instigator
STALIN
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Nzrsaa
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

God doesn't exist.

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 2 votes the winner is...
Nzrsaa
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/17/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,353 times Debate No: 40717
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

STALIN

Pro

First round acceptance only.
Nzrsaa

Con

I accept. Look forward to it.
Debate Round No. 1
STALIN

Pro

God doesn't exist! Never has, never will. So how did humans and dinosaur fossils get onto planet earth? Well, I'll tell you how they didn't: no god put them there.

Before I say any more, I would like to give the definition of "god."

Definition: "a spirit or being that has great power, strength, knowledge, etc., and that can affect nature and the lives of people: one of various spirits or beings worshipped in some religions." [1]

Many figures can be applied to this definition. In the 1930's and 1940's for example, Stalin could have been considered a god. In the 1950's and 1960's, Mao Zedong was a god to the Chinese people. [2] Kim Jong-un is a modern example of a god. Allah is an example of a god that is centuries old.

However I believe that the god we are talking about in this debate is the Christian god who is just as false as all the other gods that I listed above.

First of all, what proof is there that god exists? A piece of literature called the Bible. And what proof is there that the bible is the words of god? NONE! So is there a god? NO! God is a myth.

"The exact way in which the biblical authors were transmitting God's word remained debated..." [3] In other words, there is no proof that god wrote all of the garbage written in the Bible.

Facts that support god's nonexistence:
-Christianity is a religious beliefs that requires you to "dumb down" your mind in order to have faith.
-The "devil" was not present in religious texts until the nomadic monotheists ran into polytheists and borrowed the idea.
-Throughout history, Christianity has been used to control the masses, rather than enlighten them.
-"In the case of the Bible, often entire verses, stories, and anecdotes were falsified for the sake of making a point. Even the concept of the "holy trinity" is a fabrication created not by any god, but for political reasons by a zealot named Theophilus of of Antioch in 412 AD." [4]

In order to prove that there is no god, one must simply look for proof that there is a god.

I await my opponents replies.

Sources:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.wikihow.com...
Nzrsaa

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.

DEFINITIONS
My opponent gives the definition of God, and then says that many things can be attributed to this definition. But obviously, as he admitts, this would mean that God exists!
So In this debate, we are working with a monotheistic God, which I would define as a 'Maximally Great Being'. I would therefore say that none of my opponent's examples can be described as a 'God', or indeed anything close to it.

PROOFS?
My opponent says that the only evidence us Christians have is the Bible; but he is obviously not familiar with the work of Christian philosophers and theologians. So to attempt to show a few proofs to Pro, I will outline 2 arguments for God's existence.
1) Ontological argument
- It is possible that a Maximally Great Being (God) exists
- If it is possible that a Maximally Great Being exists, then it exists in some possible world
- If a Maximally Great Being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world (Considering the being's nature)
- Therefore it exists in the actual world (which comes under the group 'every possible world'
- Therefore a Maximally Great Being Exists

This argument follows modal logic, and so if premise 1 is true, then the conclusion follows logically and necessarily. And I think we have good reason to believe premise 1 is true.

2) Cosmological argument
- Everything that beings to exist has a cause. This is evident - out of nothing, nothing comes.
- The universe began to exist. This is supported by the Big Bang theory.
- Therefore the universe has a cause. The Conclusion logically and necessarily follows.
- This cause has to transcend space and time, and so be changeless, timeless, spaceless, personal and hugely powerful.
- Only 2 things come under these criteria - abstract numbers - so numbers, or sets - or and unembodied mind - so 'God'.
- Abstract objects cannot cause anything
- So the cause of the universe is God

I hope I have shown that we theists have some sort of evidence for God other than the Bible!

DO THESE FACTS DISPROVE GOD?
I will respond to each of them in order.
"Christianity is a religious beliefs that requires you to "dumb down" your mind in order to have faith."
Well, I am sure the likes of Iasaac Newton, Werner Heisenberg and Alvin Plantinga would disagree with you there, Pro. In fact, I'll give you a list of 'clever Christians': http://en.wikipedia.org...
Nevertheless, even if this were true, it wouldn't even begin to disprove God! It is commiting the Genetic fallacy - that is, by stating a belief's origins, it is attempting to disprove the belief. Even if it were true that belief in God required you to be 'dumbed down', it wouldn't even begin to disprove the existence of God!

"The "devil" was not present in religious texts until the nomadic monotheists ran into polytheists and borrowed the idea"
Well, the devil has nothing to do with the existence of God. Even if it were true (which it isn't), it wouldn't begin to disprove the existence of God. The devil and God are completely separate entities.

"Throughout history, Christianity has been used to control the masses, rather than to enlighten them"
Actually, I agree with this. I think that throughout history, Religion has been manipulated and used to carry out people's own selfish wants. But again, this wouldn't even begin to disprove the existence of God, and is again committing the genetic fallacy.

-"In the case of the Bible, often entire verses, stories, and anecdotes were falsified for the sake of making a point. Even the concept of the "holy trinity" is a fabrication created not by any god, but for political reasons by a zealot named Theophilus of of Antioch in 412 AD."

I'm not sure about the historic accuracy about the first statement, so I think some evidence is needed on Pro's side here.
As for the Holy Trinity, beliefs differ between Christians themselves - between Trinitarian belief and Unitarian belief.
The Trinity is a doctrine that was indeed established after the Bible was written, but all it is, is the three entities of God that we experience. It is more an issue within Christianity and it's doctrine - not for the existence of God. It doesn't begin to disprove the existence of God - rather, it may question how Christians interpret the Bible.

CONCLUSION
Hopefully, I have shown to Pro that there are indeed God reasons to Believe in the existence of God outside of the Bible, and that his objections don't disprove God's existence at all.

God Bless

Sources:
Alvin Plantinga: Warranted Christian Belief
William Lane Criag: The Kalām Cosmological Argument
Richard Swinburne: The Existence Of God
Debate Round No. 2
STALIN

Pro

"My opponent gives the definition of God, and then says that many things can be attributed to this definition. But obviously, as he admits, this would mean that God exists!"

What I was saying was that anybody can call themselves a god.


There simply is no proof that god exists. For centuries, Christians claimed that people were created by god but in 1859, Charles Darwin published a book saying that people were created through evolution. [1]


Now is there any proof that god created people and that god placed dinosaur fossils for people to have some sense of history? None of what you wrote in the previous round is proof of god creating people. And that alone proves that god doesn't exist.


In addition to this, I would like to point out that prayer does nothing. Because there is no god to answer the prayers then the prayers will never be answered. For example, if you truly believe in god then pray and try jumping off the top of a 20 story building afterwards. See if you survive. Whenever a prayer is answered then it is answered by what exists on this planet, not by god.


If god really exists, then why doesn't everybody believe in the same god? People believe in many religions. In 2010, there were 2.2 billion Christians (32 percent of the world’s population), 1.6 billion Muslims (23 percent), 1 billion Hindus (15 percent), 500 million Buddhists (7 percent), 400 million people (6 percent) practicing various folk or traditional religions, including African traditional religions, Chinese folk religions, American Indian religions and Australian aboriginal religions. [2]
There were and still are thousands of different religions. People do not believe in one single "Maximally Great Being." God would have made it so that people would believe in him from the time they were born just like god gave humans eyes and years according to the Christian religion.


All you need to do in order to prove that god does not exist is to take a look at the world. If god has any control over what happens on earth then why did he allow people like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao Zedong to kill millions?


The Bible is also false. In round one I asked what proof there is that the Bible is the words of god but Con never replied. The Bible is a complicated piece of literature, nothing else.


Throughout history, religion has done nothing except cause wars and waste people's time. I find it interesting, the Crusaders claimed that they were fighting in the name of god. The bible says only positive things about god. History shows many negative things about god. The Crusaders killed Jews, Muslims, and even other Christians during this series of Holy Wars. It was really the first Holocaust as entire Jewish communities were wiped out in Europe simply because they were not Christian.[3] God's work. I really don't know how anybody can worship such a god. Well the Crusades did not really start because god said the Muslims need to be killed, but because Christian countries became greedy and seeked to expand their empires into the Middle East.


Conclusion: Although Con did provide many facts, he did not prove that god exists.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Nzrsaa

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.
Firstly, I will respond to 2 statement Pro makes.

"There simply is no proof that god exists. For centuries, Christians claimed that people were created by god but in 1859, Charles Darwin published a book saying that people were created through evolution"

I have given 2 proofs that God exists. So in order for Pro to back up the statement "There simply is no proof that God exists", he has to refute my two arguments, and there has not been any attempt so far. My opponent then claims that Evolution proves that people were not created by God (or something like that). But in no way does evolution disprove the existence of God! In fact, there are many Christians and theists that assert that evolution and theism can easily coexist. ( http://en.wikipedia.org... ) If the argument pro is setting put is as follows:
1) Evolution happned
2) Therefore God does not exist
This is blatantly a non-sequetor. It simply does not follow. Moreover, there is no reason to think that God couldn't have divinely guided evolution as to give the end product of mankind. This doesn't at all go against theistic belief.

"Now is there any proof that god created people and that god placed dinosaur fossils for people to have some sense of history? None of what you wrote in the previous round is proof of god creating people. And that alone proves that god doesn't exist.

There is one big assumption in this statement - and that is that all theists assert Young Earth Creationism. But this is just not true. There are many, many theists that believe that the earth is old and that dinosaurs existed, and Pro does not take into account these considerations.
My opponent then says "None of what you wrote in the previous round is proof of god creating people.". No, it isn't! But if God exists, and we also exist, then it is evident that God created us! The argument is set out a bit like this:
1) If a Maximally Great Being (God) exists, then it created the whole universe and everything in it.
2) We exist inside of the universe
3) Therefore if a Maximally Great Being (God) exists, we were created by it

I have given evidence that God exists that is yet to be refuted, so it stands that God created people.

PRAYER
My opponent says that 'Prayer does nothing'. But in order to prove this is literally impossible - there is a huge burden of proof on Pro to show that during 2000 years of prayer, not 1 of them did anything. And what if I could show that prayer did do something? I will cite from my personal experience why I think prayer works. Because when I first started out as a Christian, my faith was very weak and shaky. I constantly had doubts about God and they troubled me very much. But I asked my Christian friend, "what should I do?" and she said "Pray to God for firm belief in him'. And that is exactly what I did; I prayed very hard and sincerely, I asked God for firm belief, and to stop all my doubts. Many prayers later, I am now a firm believer in the Christian faith. I think this alone proves that prayer does indeed work, and there is the testimony of billions of Christians to back it up.
In addition, it is very important to remember that God is NOT going to answer every single prayer everyone asks. Sometimes, the answer is simply 'no', or 'not yet'. God is entirely in his rights to do this. I think it is obvious that if someone prays for a pizza, God is not going to magic one into existence. There is no contradiction to this.
I personally think that God will ONLY answer prayer if we pray for the Holy Spirit. I think that is all he is going to provide for us, as it is all we need and should want from him. Anything else is unnecessary.

WHY ARE THERE DIFFERENT BELIEFS ABOUT GOD?
I think the simple answer here is that God has given us free-will. That is, God has given us choices - the choice to do what we want and whether to believe in him or not. We can choose what religion to follow which is why there are so many religions. The doctrine of free-will is essential to Christianity, and so Pro's statement "God would have made it so that people would believe in him from the time they were born" is certainly opposite to Christianity and any other theistic belief for that matter.

EVIL
Here, Pro cites the atrocities committed by Stalin, Hitler and Mao, and if God exists, then he would intervene. But again, the concept of free-will certainly comes into practice here. God has given all human the choice to sin. Stalin, Hitler an Mao chose to sin. For God to intervene would mean stripping humans of free-will, and this is entirely against God's Nature.

THE BIBLE
What proof is there that the Bible is the word of God? Well, beliefs about this differ from Christian to Christian. The more conservative Christians believe that God directly wrote the Bible though the authorship of men. The more liberal Christians believe that the Bible is an ACCOUNT of God's interaction with man. Both are feasible positions. But to provide proof that the Bible is the word of God, one might look to the fulfilled prophesies ( http://www.reasons.org... ), or the reliability of the Gospels ( http://www.reasonablefaith.org... ), that could not have happened if the Bible were not the word of God.

EVIL CAUSED BY RELIGION
I don't think that this is at all relevant to the existence of God. I have already stated that I agree that religion has been manipulated and used in order for certain individuals to exploit their power. But it really doesn't follow that God doesn't exist! Let me lay it out in argument form to show the fallacy.
1) Religion has been exploited in order to carry out evils (as with the crusades, inquisition etc.)
2) therefore God does not exist
As you can see, this just doesn't follow. The moral atrocities cause by religion doesn't prove the non-existence of God.

CONCLUSION
Overall, I have presented 2 arguments for God's existece, that have not yet been countered by Pro. If he is to successfully defend the motion 'God does not exist', then he needs to refute these evidences. I have also shown why Pro's arguments against God do not work, and so I think that it is entirely fair to say that God exists.

SOURCES
Alvin Plantinga: Warranted Christian Belief
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.reasons.org...
http://www.reasonablefaith.org...
Debate Round No. 3
STALIN

Pro

"I have given 2 proofs that God exists. So in order for Pro to back up the statement "There simply is no proof that God exists", he has to refute my two arguments, and there has not been any attempt so far. My opponent then claims that Evolution proves that people were not created by God (or something like that). But in no way does evolution disprove the existence of God! In fact, there are many Christians and theists that assert that evolution and theism can easily coexist."

So Con admits that god did not create people.

"There are many, many theists that believe that the earth is old and that dinosaurs existed, and Pro does not take into account these considerations."

Con is basically admitting that god did not create people.

"My opponent says that 'Prayer does nothing'. But in order to prove this is literally impossible - there is a huge burden of proof on Pro to show that during 2000 years of prayer, not 1 of them did anything."

So if one stays up all night studying for a test and prays to god that he will receive a good grade before taking the test, then receives a good grade then god answered the prayer right?

"In addition, it is very important to remember that God is NOT going to answer every single prayer everyone asks. "

Prayers are answered when something or somebody on this earth makes them happen. God doesn't answer them.

"Here, Pro cites the atrocities committed by Stalin, Hitler and Mao, and if God exists, then he would intervene. But again, the concept of free-will certainly comes into practice here. God has given all human the choice to sin. Stalin, Hitler an Mao chose to sin. For God to intervene would mean stripping humans of free-will, and this is entirely against God's Nature."

You seem to be using free will as an excuse often.

Con simply failed to prove that god exists. He talks about free will and prayer. However god did not give people free will if he created sins. Free will doesn't exist for Christians. Christians live their lives by the bible.

Anyway, Con failed to prove that god exists.
Nzrsaa

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.

"So Con admits that god did not create people." "Con is basically admitting that god did not create people."

How do I admit that God did not create people, Pro? How does evolution somehow negate the belief that God created people? I think it is entirely consistent to believe that God created people through the means of evolution, and this certainly doesn't mean God didn't create people.
I would also like to point out that whether God created people or not has nothing to do with whether God exists!

PRAYER
Pro asks if somebody prays to God for a good grade and ends up getting a good grade, whether God then answered the prayer. And the simple answer is, I don't know! And neither does anyone else - no-one is omniscient apart from God. But it is entirely possible that through the means of prayer, it gives someone the confidence and encouragement to study and do well on a test - in which case, it is entirely possible that God helped the person on a test.

"Prayers are answered when something or somebody on this earth makes them happen. God doesn't answer them."

Pro has now given himself a huge burden of proof here, and one which is entirely unprovable. He has shown no evidence to support this claim, and who's to say that God doesn't act through natural processes?

FREE-WILL
Pro says:
"You seem to be using free will as an excuse often."
Yes, I am! Because free-will is an essential doctrine in the center of the beliefs of Christianity! God created us as free creatures, so we can chose between what is right and what is wrong. So yes, I am using free-will as an excuse, because it is a vital property in any religion.

CONCLUSION
Still, Pro has not responded to my arguments, so they can only be assumed to be true, meaning God exists. I have explained that even if evolution were true, it would not negate the fact that God created human kind. I have explained about prayer, and he merely dismisses the central doctrine of free-will. Pro also does not respond to my explainations of Biblical accuracy and why there are different religions, so i can only assume that he concedes these points. I think that I should also point out that none of Pro's points are supporting the notion 'God does not exist' - rather, they are minor objections to the existence of the Judeo-Christian God. Even if Pro's points were true (which I have shown that they are not), they do not mean that a 'general God', or a deistic God does not exist.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.theisticevolution.org...
Debate Round No. 4
STALIN

Pro

"How does evolution somehow negate the belief that God created people? I think it is entirely consistent to believe that God created people through the means of evolution, and this certainly doesn't mean God didn't create people."

However evolution contradicted the beliefs of the Church who always thought the God created people.

"I would also like to point out that whether God created people or not has nothing to do with whether God exists!"

The Church and the Bible teach that God created people. If God did not create people then either god is a liar, or the Bible is simply not the words of god.

"Pro has now given himself a huge burden of proof here, and one which is entirely unprovable. He has shown no evidence to support this claim, and who's to say that God doesn't act through natural processes?"

Perhaps I cannot prove that this is true, however Con has not proven that it is false.

"Yes, I am! Because free-will is an essential doctrine in the center of the beliefs of Christianity! God created us as free creatures, so we can chose between what is right and what is wrong. So yes, I am using free-will as an excuse, because it is a vital property in any religion."

So god GAVE humans free will, they were not born with it. That's new to me.

"Still, Pro has not responded to my arguments, so they can only be assumed to be true, meaning God exists. I have explained that even if evolution were true, it would not negate the fact that God created human kind. I have explained about prayer, and he merely dismisses the central doctrine of free-will. Pro also does not respond to my explanations of Biblical accuracy and why there are different religions, so I can only assume that he concedes these points. I think that I should also point out that none of Pro's points are supporting the notion 'God does not exist' - rather, they are minor objections to the existence of the Judeo-Christian God. Even if Pro's points were true (which I have shown that they are not), they do not mean that a 'general God', or a deistic God does not exist."

This conclusion refutes my arguments however it does not support yours.

If god existed then people would know it. Just like the grass is green and people KNOW it. It is as simple as that. Free will refutes my arguments however it does not support Con's

Conclusion: although I understand that I have failed to prove that god does not exist, Con has failed to prove that he does exist. Con is a good debater however in my point of view he did not win this debate. Anyway, it was a pleasure debating with you.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://www.washingtontimes.com......
http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://www.reasonablefaith.org......
Nzrsaa

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.
Note: When Pro says 'God created people', I am assuming that he means what is essentially Young Earth Creationism, where God created the universe and then straight to Adam and Eve.

EVOLUTION

First, Pro says:
"However evolution contradicted the beliefs of the Church who always thought the God created people."

Sure, evolution contradicts the TRADITIONAL beliefs of the church, but the catholic church in particular has even accepted evolution in recent times: http://en.wikipedia.org... . The theory of evolution and belief in the Judeo-Christian God are entirely compatible, and no problem is caused through belief in the two.

Pro then goes on to say:
"The Church and the Bible teach that God created people. If God did not create people then either god is a liar, or the Bible is simply not the words of god."

I think for this statement, I think I need to point out that the Bible can be interpreted in several different ways. In Genesis, many Christians believe in the literal interpretation, sure. But there are also many Christians who believe in the figurative interpretation - that is, that the days are not 24 hour days, but rather stages of creation.
I think this is more of a debate withing the confines of Christianity - not within the confines of whether God exists.
So the Bible by no stretch teaches the literal interpretation - that is a matter of opinion. And so no, God would no be a liar if Genesis was a figurative piece, nor would it mean that the Bible is not the word of God.

PRAYER

Here, Pro says:
"Perhaps I cannot prove that this is true, however Con has not proven that it is false."

I mean sure. Given our lack of knowledge, we cannot draw a conclusion either way. But considering Pro is the one making this claim, he is the one who needs to provide evidence in this debate format, but unfortunately it is simply unprovable either way. We are not omniscient.

FREE-WILL

Pro says:
"So god GAVE humans free will, they were not born with it. That's new to me."

Sorry Pro, but I really don't think I said that! I said that "God created us as free creatures", and so it would be a mix between the two, I guess. God 'gave' humans free-will, but we are 'born' with the free-will that God gave us.

WOULD WE KNOW IT IF GOD EXISTED?

Pro says:
If god existed then people would know it. Just like the grass is green and people KNOW it. It is as simple as that"

I would say that yes, most people would 'know' that God exists. There would be a few people that freely rejected this God. And, that is exactly what we see. We see around 6 billion people on this earth that believe in one form of God or another. And, they do know that God exists - just like the grass is green or the sky blue. It is a reality for them. And so I agree with Pro, and we see the evidence before our eyes!

Pro then says:
"Free will refutes my arguments however it does not support Con's"

I certainly agree with this, Pro. And that was the exact point - to reute your arguments. I never intended to support my position with free-will; rather I intended to prove it with both the Ontological and Cosmological argument that I presented earlier.

CONCLUSION

Overall, I don't think that we have heard any serious objection to the existence of God, as i have hopefully shown. My opponent has concentrated his arguments to the Judeo-Christian God, as opposed to the general creator of the universe the 'God' would be defined as. Even so, many of his arguments centered around a general misunderstanding of Christian Theology.
As for the motion, I have given 2 arguments that have not been refuted, and so the conclusion follows that God exists.
Thank you for the debate!
God Bless

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.gci.org...
http://www.theopedia.com...
Alvin Plantinga: Knowledge of God
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
God does not exist Gohan. You will realize that when you get older.
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Your definition pro could give proof god exisist
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Your definition pro could give proof god exisist
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
God cannot be disproven in any way he is our mighty ruler who created us and if he did not create the world you guys think the big bang theory then if so who created the big bang theory and I am not talking about the TV show
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by chrimill 3 years ago
chrimill
STALINNzrsaaTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro tried arguing the Christian God as opposed to a generic God doesn't exist, made for a fractured argument. Con's argument was more focused and provided sufficient objections against the burden of proof placed upon Pro. Would have been more interesting if the debate was "Is belief in the Christian God rational?"
Vote Placed by johnlubba 3 years ago
johnlubba
STALINNzrsaaTied
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: Pro gave a definition of God that could easily be defined as existing, also much of Pro's argument were not met by any burden to show that indeed God doesn't exist, most of his argument's were rants and assertions.