The Instigator
republicantown
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DudeStop
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

God exists and is a real being

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 618 times Debate No: 45590
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

republicantown

Pro

U go first

God is thee creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
DudeStop

Con

Hello internet.

Warm welcomes to both Pro and the audience.

Anyways, I'll start off as Pro requested.

Contention 1: We have no need for one.

This argument goes as following:

1. In order to prove there is a god, there must be a need for one in order to explain the mechanics of our universe.

2. There is no need for a god to explain the mechanics of our universe.

3. Therefore, there is probably no god.

In order to support premise two, I'll show two ways the universe could have come to be and I'll show one way it could have turned out in order to support life. (On earth that is. Obviously we can't survive in space...)

Simultaneous causation:

LA Mitchels theory of Simultanious Causation:
Atoms a b and c, all having casual explanation, simultaniously cause each other. A causes B, B causes C, and C causes A, the idea is that the cause and effect are simultanious.

Why accept god over simultanious causation?


Retro-Causality:

This is the idea that the effect can happen before the cause. Such theory is seen here:

Why accept God over retro-causality?

Multiverse:

The multiverse is the idea that we had so many different universes, with so many different combinations, that it made the perfect conditions for us to live in.

Why accept god over the multiverse?

Contention 2: Pointless evils disprove god.

1. God is supposedly omnipotent, pure, and omniscient.
2. If god was pure, he would want to destroy all evil.
3. If god was omniscient, he could find evil.
4. If god was omnipotent, god could destroy all evil.
5. Evil exists
6. Therefor, a being with all of these traits cannot exist,

C. In extension, neither can god.

For evil, we can substitute pain and suffering.

I'll make more arguments next round, when it can get more of a feel to his arguments. BoP is mainly on him I suppose.

Thank you!
Debate Round No. 1
republicantown

Pro

Folks this is the madness that is atheism. I hope all can see. He first argument has to do with possible ideals of a universe with no being. But think bout it. First explaning the universe doesn't disprove God. Let look at his first ideal

Simultaneous causation:

The set of what is simultaneiously caused must needs be caused. You only explain three things on their own but the set would need to be caused. How did this act of causation come to be with no God? Sure yeah maybe three things on their own taking nuttin else can be explained but looking out from a holistic view all parts it is saying it came from nowhere.

Retro-Causality:

NO offense, but look at the madness. Come on, the universe wouldn't exist to bring itself into being. It would have to of already existed.....Dudestop and look at it.

Multiverse:

Who created this multiverse? Cant be infinite because than it would take an infinite amount of time to get to "now". Must be finite

Con2: Evils

This was duely refuted by Christian albert Einstien.

"Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

You see God will make the evil count for the greater good. Like the bible says it will. Only a temp suffering but for longer term goodness. This brings me to my argument bc evil proves God.

Self reflection

By self reflection you can come to the conclusion not only does God exist but hes a real being. We know evil is real. My opponent said so. We do bad things. Yes its true there is not one that does good. we have all had evil moments and thought bad thoughts stole something lied ect. Its human nature. But it only takes one lie to make you a lair. We would all be highly immoral the soceity would be an evil ruthless society without some counter balance. The counterbalance cant come from the world because this world is corrupted. It must come from a highly moral world from a moral being into this world. There must have been a perfect man to do away with our evils. This man cant have been all man because man is corrupt. It must be a man not of this universe that is perfectly moral. This being is clearly God. Not only God, but Jesus.

Self reflection of the mind

Consider mind. Its a tough subject. We exist. Because we think. Our minds must exist. Alvin Plantenga said if whats true for my mind is true for my body then we should be able to doubt the mind. We can dobut the body but not the mind. The mind is not of the body but the mind began. From an atheistic perective its impossible. How did the mind itself begin and become correlated with the body? God must have been in play.
DudeStop

Con

Thanks Pro.

"Folks this is the madness that is atheism. I hope all can see. He first argument has to do with possible ideals of a universe with no being. But think bout it. First explaning the universe doesn't disprove God. Let look at his first ideal"

I already conceded that it didn't "disprove" god.

"The set of what is simultaneiously caused must needs be caused. You only explain three things on their own but the set would need to be caused. How did this act of causation come to be with no God? Sure yeah maybe three things on their own taking nuttin else can be explained but looking out from a holistic view all parts it is saying it came from nowhere"

So he concedes that the universe could have come without god...

How it came to be earth at that point beats me.

"NO offense, but look at the madness. Come on, the universe wouldn't exist to bring itself into being. It would have to of already existed.....Dudestop and look at it"

No evidence given to suggest it's wrong... I hope Pro is still going to debate me. R

"Who created this multiverse? Cant be infinite because than it would take an infinite amount of time to get to "now". Must be finite"

Simultaneous causation and retro causality. Not a "who"...

"Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

"You see God will make the evil count for the greater good. Like the bible says it will. Only a temp suffering but for longer term goodness. This brings me to my argument bc evil proves God"

A greater good for who? The tortured victims? The raped children? The millions if not more of sick and or dying children around the world? You don't think god could think of a better way to achieve this "Greater good"?

This is clearly a contradiction. Con uses evil to attempt to prove god, yet he claims it does not exist. I already suggested evil should be defined as pain and suffering, which occurs regardless of "Gods Love". God is also supposedly omnipresent, meaning he is everywhere...

"By self reflection you can come to the conclusion not only does God exist but hes a real being. We know evil is real. My opponent said so. We do bad things. Yes its true there is not one that does good. we have all had evil moments and thought bad thoughts stole something lied ect. Its human nature. But it only takes one lie to make you a lair. We would all be highly immoral the soceity would be an evil ruthless society without some counter balance. The counterbalance cant come from the world because this world is corrupted. It must come from a highly moral world from a moral being into this world. There must have been a perfect man to do away with our evils. This man cant have been all man because man is corrupt. It must be a man not of this universe that is perfectly moral. This being is clearly God. Not only God, but Jesus."

Yet again, I point out the contradiction from his last refutation.

If Pro could clarify whether it exists or not, that'd be great.

"Consider mind. Its a tough subject. We exist. Because we think. Our minds must exist. Alvin Plantenga said if whats true for my mind is true for my body then we should be able to doubt the mind. We can dobut the body but not the mind. The mind is not of the body but the mind began. From an atheistic perective its impossible. How did the mind itself begin and become correlated with the body? God must have been in play"

Dobut? I don't know how it came to be, but saying that it is proof of god is an argument of ignorance. [1]

Why not assume fine tuning is the evidence for a multiverse instead of evidence of a God?
Also notice he didn't out a shred of evidence to support this.

So you see, my opponent conceded to almost all of my points about god, and when he actually made some points he contradicted himself and/or made logical fallacies.

Please, I urge you to vote Con.

Thank You.

[1] http://www.logicalfallacies.info...
Debate Round No. 2
republicantown

Pro

republicantown forfeited this round.
DudeStop

Con

When he challenged me, I expected a debate.
Debate Round No. 3
republicantown

Pro

Ok yes yes. Conduct goes to Con. Heres my responses

"So he concedes that the universe could have come without god..."

NONONO! I did not. I said the set must be caused. It still needs a causer.

"No evidence given to suggest it's wrong... I hope Pro is still going to debate me. R"

No evidence given. what ? Con is making a positve claim that the universe can come from retrocaused aspect. The eidence is on him. And yes i did give proof it was wrong. Its self contradictory. the universe would have to already exist to cause itself to exist. What? Then it didn't begin.

"multiverse"

"Simultaneous causation and retro causality. Not a "who"

Then your multiverse section is not relevant. It is base on your other arguments and than it doesnt even matter.

"A greater good for who? The tortured victims? The raped children? The millions if not more of sick and or dying children around the world? You don't think god could think of a better way to achieve this "Greater good"?"

Just because we don't know what the good is right now doesn't mean it doesnt exist. Con would have to be god to make the claim no greater good come about. But then Con would be concdedeing god exists. His atheism is self contradictory.

I didnt say evil didnt exist. I said it didnt exist in and of itself!! Not that it had no existence. Cold doesn't exist in and of itself but it still exists. Con didnt understood this

"Dobut? I don't know how it came to be, but saying that it is proof of god is an argument of ignorance. [1]"

No it contradicts a core assumption of atheism. that mind is just because of evolution and no god involved. If dulism is true God would exist. It would only be good for atheism if we saw many other immateral things. Con has to take the position that the mind just happened to come into being. What?

"Why not assume fine tuning is the evidence for a multiverse instead of evidence of a God?
Also notice he didn't out a shred of evidence to support this."

I never made the fine tuning argument. So i dont have to respond to this.

Con didnt understand my stuff

vote me

DudeStop

Con

DudeStop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by DudeStop 2 years ago
DudeStop
Oh look who it is, the man who converted me to atheism. This is one of my worse debates mate, shield your eyes.
Posted by Magic8000 2 years ago
Magic8000
Isn't the resolution a bit redundant?
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Heh...
Posted by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
"Folks this is the madness that is atheism" XD
Posted by chewster911 3 years ago
chewster911
@republican No evidence to explain the argument, typical "How could it come without "God"?"
Your arguments prove nothing my friend.
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
I think I have a headache...
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
This is going to be way easier than I expected it to be.

I honestly started laughing at those arguments...
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
So we're debating that god, or the Christian one? (Just wondering)
Posted by republicantown 3 years ago
republicantown
defined him
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Define god.
No votes have been placed for this debate.