The Instigator
KingDebater
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
nathanknickerbocker.9
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

God exists.

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 3 votes the winner is...
KingDebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 677 times Debate No: 31813
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

KingDebater

Pro

Me and my opponent will be arguing over the existence of God.

Definitions
God - A spaceless, timeless, and uncaused being who created the universe.

Structure
Round 1 - Acceptance
Round 2/3/4 - Arguments and rebuttals
Round 5 - Rebuttals

Rules
1. The burden of proof is shared.
2. No word play, trolling or semantics
3. No insults.
4. No making arguments in the last round unless those arguments are absolutely necessary to refute arguments made previously.
5. No arguments are to be made in round 1.
6. Failure to obide to the rules will result in a loss.
nathanknickerbocker.9

Con

I accept your argument but one question when you mean one burden of proof do you mean I can only use one point like god hates gays unfair
Debate Round No. 1
KingDebater

Pro

Notes
To clarify, the possesor of the burden of proof is on whoever wants to persuade, and we both want to persuade since this is a debate. When the burden of proof is shared, it means that each side has to give arguments to support their case. If only one person has the burden of proof, it means that only they have to give arguments to support their case whilst the other debater's obligation is to refute those arguments. To learn more about the burden of proof, please go here [1].

Also, I thank 1devilsadvocate for correcting my grammar mistake from the first round. I said "Me and my opponent", when it should've been "I and my opponent".

Arguments
The Argument from the first law of thermodynamics
(P1) Matter and Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
(P2) If matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed and the universe is composed from matter energy, then would make sense if the universe didn't exist.
(P3) But the universe does exist, so there must be some force that doesn't need to follow the laws of thermodynamics. The only being as described is a God;
(C) Therefore, God exists.

Justification of the first premise
This is a widely accepted scientific fact [2].

Justification of the second premise
Pretty self-explanatory.

Justification of the third premise
Pretty self-explanatory.

Justification of the conclusion
This is the logical conclusion following the three premises.

What are some properties of God?
So it's been clarified that God created all matter and energy and therefore is the creator of the universe, but what are God's properties? Well, to avoid an impossible infinite regress of events, God must be uncaused. If he is uncaused, then he is eternal. He must be spaceless because he existed before space and he must be timeless because he existed before time. Therefore, a God as defined in round one that this debating is arguing the existence over, exists.

The Kalam Cosmolgocial argument
The Kalam Cosmological argument is a cosmological argument popularized by William Lane Craig. It can be summarized as follows:
(P1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
(P2) The universe began to exist.
(C) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Justification of the first premise
In his book On Guard, William Lane Craig gives us three reasons to think that the first premise is true. I will present to you to of them:
- Something cannot come from nothing.
- Even if it could, there would be no reason why that thing came into existence and not something else.
Hence, everything that begins to exist has a cause.

Justification of the second premise
Without a God, if the universe never began to exist, then it is eternal and there is an infinite regress of events, which is impossible, as infinity is not a number as you cannot add to it or take away from it and so when the question "How old is the universe?" is asked, you'll have to come to the conclusion that the universe began to exist.

Justification of the conclusion
This is the logical conclusion following both premises.

Sources
[1] http://www.burdenofproof.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
nathanknickerbocker.9

Con

I'll ask the all important question that everyone would like to know if there is a God were is he? Where'd he come from? What you said contradicts itself you clam matter can not be created or destroyed then how was God made? like you said he couldn't have just appeared and if is real why has there been no sign of him sense people began to question he existence in the bible all of these stories take place of these great adventures were God spoke to man about his wishes why does he not smite the non believers? why would he let his child be beaten,stabbed, crucified?( I apologize for spelling error I'll try not to make any) Why has he NEVER made any other universes? why would he hate gays if he loves all of his children? Why...why....why Every religion has a god Muslims (Ala) accepts everyone why can't Catholic's and Christian's God Doesn't. With their almighty God who tells them to kill EVEN THOUGH the ten commandments do say THO SHALL NOT KILL they went on crusades (Catholics and Christians) All of these questions and more go unanswered why does a God not answer simply he doesn't excite. Now granted there is no direct proof he excites but think about this without Religion (God,Pope etc.) would there be as many wars? No,because with a God the people at war have someone to blame for the war not that they are greedy and corrupt and foolish. If there was a God would he let people Starve and die and get raped and worse? Just so that they can join him in the "almighty heaven" with him yet he send people to Hell he makes people who do one bad in there lives and they suffer for it WOULD A GOD DO THAT? You have religions who fight one another American soldiers are in the Middle East fighting corrupt Muslims (Terrorist) would a god want this for his children to kill each other? I think not. If God made the universe WERE is he why does he not speak to us why does the church think that it knows every thing that is to be known.
Debate Round No. 2
KingDebater

Pro

Rebuttals
Con asks:
I'll ask the all important question that everyone would like to know if there is a God were is he?
God is omnipresent, but immaterial. We cannot observe him with any of our five senses.

Con asks:
Where'd he come from?
God didn't come from anything. He is eternal, timeless and the creator of time.

Con asks:
What you said contradicts itself you clam matter cannot be created or destroyed then how was God made?
God is immaterial, he is not composed of matter or energy because he existed before both.

Con asks:
like you said he couldn't have just appeared and if is real why has there been no sign of him sense people began to question he existence in the bible all of these stories take place of these great adventures were God spoke to man about his wishes why does he not smite the non believers?
Like I said, we can not observe him with any of our five senses, but that doesn't mean that we can't know that he exists. Your last point, about the bible, is not relevant here. This debate is not in any way, shape or form about the Christian God.

Con asks:
why would he let his child be beaten,stabbed, crucified?
This point is not relevant to this debate as it has nothing to do with the bible or the Christian God.

Con asks:
Why has he NEVER made any other universes?
Who knows? He may've.

Con asks:
why would he hate gays if he loves all of his children?
Again, this debate is not about the Christian God.

Con says:
Why...why....why Every religion has a god Muslims (Ala) accepts everyone why can't Catholic's and Christian's God Doesn't. With their almighty God who tells them to kill EVEN THOUGH the ten commandments do say THO SHALL NOT KILL they went on crusades (Catholics and Christians) All of these questions and more go unanswered why does a God not answer simply he doesn't excite. Now granted there is no direct proof he excites but think about this without Religion (God,Pope etc.) would there be as many wars? No, because with a God the people at war have someone to blame for the war not that they are greedy and corrupt and foolish.
None of these points are relevant to this debate. This debate has nothing to do with religion or any specific God, as long as he is uncaused, spaceless and timeless and he created the universe. This debate also has nothing to do with the destruction religion may or may not be responsible for, and even if said destruction was the fault of religion, that doesn't make religion any less true.

Con says:
If there was a God would he let people Starve and die and get raped and worse? Just so that they can join him in the "almighty heaven" with him yet he send people to Hell he makes people who do one bad in there lives and they suffer for it WOULD A GOD DO THAT? You have religions who fight one another American soldiers are in the Middle East fighting corrupt Muslims (Terrorist) would a god want this for his children to kill each other? I think not.

This part of Con's arguments says that there can't be a God because of all the evil, but God doesn't necessarily have the property of being all-good, so Con's points about evil aren't relevant here.

Con says:
If God made the universe WERE is he why does he not speak to us why does the church think that it knows every thing that is to be known.
Churches are not relevant in this debate, but Con does raise a good question, "Why does God not speak to us?". I could ask the same question but reversed, "Why would God speak to us". The obvious answer that comes to mind to your question is that God never had the motivation to speak to us. Or perhaps, he can't speak.

Arguments
The Argument from the first law of thermodynamics
Con drops this.
What are some properties of God?
Con drops this.
The Kalam Cosmological argument
Con drops this.

Conclusion
-I have given three arguments to support my case.
-Con has so far given no arguments to support his case.
Con has failed to respond to any of my arguments.

nathanknickerbocker.9

Con

nathanknickerbocker.9 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
KingDebater

Pro

Unfortunately, Con has forfeited. I extend all arguments.
nathanknickerbocker.9

Con

nathanknickerbocker.9 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
KingDebater

Pro

Unfortunately, Con has decided to forfeit. I extend all my arguments.
nathanknickerbocker.9

Con

I apologize for my lateness WHAT? are you kidding me if god isn't matter he isn't energy how can he come before them explain this to me how can some thing not made of matter or energy create matter and energy itself? WHAT you want to debate gods exists every religion matters so what religion are you saying Jewish,christian,catholic,Muslim? if you don't clarify I can use any religion. You can not use god and not say it has nothing to do with religion I question that if he does excite why does he not PROVE IT.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by MattHarrison 3 years ago
MattHarrison
Con why didn't you make the argument that if god is not made of matter he can not exist. Pro can't refute this.
Posted by Argumentative9 3 years ago
Argumentative9
Both pros arguments are illogical. Everything must obey the law of thermodynamics, except god. Everything has a cause, except god. If the is one exception to every rule there can be lots of exceptions, rendering the rules invalid. If god doesnt obey thermodynamics then why cant there be some new particle that doesnt (human undestanding only extends to what we know). Therefore god invalidates the argument for his existence. This invalidates the rule. Anyway, in preuniversal reality there could have been a perfect vacuum with only energy. Energy has no mass and is therefore not matter. However if due to quantum fluctuations this energy converted into matter and with matter came mass, causing gravity to take effect and the gravity pulled energy and mass into a point of infinite density (singularity) this then exploded into the big bang.
Posted by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
It shouldn't affect the S&G points, but you wrote:
"Me and my opponent will be arguing over the existence of God."
I could be wrong, but I think it should be My opponent & I...
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
Danny, he defined God already.

"God - A spaceless, timeless, and uncaused being who created the universe."
Posted by dannyc 3 years ago
dannyc
Which God? Hardly want to argue the opponent to create arguments involving polytheistic religions or even the three major monotheistic religons. If it's a Diest God you are arguing for then that is quite a challenge, if it is a particular theistic God then you should probably highlight it.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by MattHarrison 3 years ago
MattHarrison
KingDebaternathanknickerbocker.9Tied
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 Checkmark--1 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: See comment
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
KingDebaternathanknickerbocker.9Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Con F.F. Until the final round (at which point pro can no longer reply). Con dropped pros arguments, and simply asked a bunch of questions, which pro answered. Most of Cons questions were religion specific, the debate was on the existence of god exists, not the validity of a specific religion.
Vote Placed by proglib 3 years ago
proglib
KingDebaternathanknickerbocker.9Tied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF