The Instigator
byanb17
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bullish
Con (against)
Winning
11 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...
Bullish
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/22/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 587 times Debate No: 62121
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

byanb17

Pro

God exists, based on the scientific evidence of the universe having a beginning. IF the universe had a beginning and the universe came from nothing as the big bang theory states, what created the universe had to be spaceless, timeless, immaterial, personal, and out of nature (supernatural) space less, timeless and immaterial because that qualifies as nothing. out of nature because nature is something and therefore cannot be nothing. personal because it choose to create. This is what God sounds like to me. A supernatural being that is personable. Also, there is no evidence for Darwinism being truthful. If you think there is please give some and your source of information. Also to deal with morality. everyone knows that right and wrong are, we may not always do the right thing. Let me give an example, is killing and eating babies for fun wrong? How do you know this is wrong? Because there is an objective standard written on your heart. Other wise, what Hitler did really wasn't wrong, it was just his opinion.
Bullish

Con

Hello.

Pro argues that God exists, and he has the burden of proof to show that God exists. I wll be doing miainly rebuttals.

Since Pro did not define God, I shall define it. Pro has taken a "personal god" aproach in his R1 argument, and I will define it as follows.

God - A perfect, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and personal being that created the universe and humans.

========

The universe was not created by this and that

My opponent uses a variant of the Kalam cosmological argument for his first argument. He states "IF the universe had a beginning and the universe came from nothing as the big bang theory states, what created the universe had to be spaceless, timeless, immaterial, personal, and out of nature (supernatural) space less, timeless and immaterial because that qualifies as nothing."

There are many things wrong with this. First, the Big Bang Theory does not state that the universe came from nothing - it only states that the unverse had a beginning, and that beginning was a rapid expansion from a tiny space of matter that could be called a singularity. So, in the "beginning" of this universe, there was not "nothing," rather, there was the Big Bang, and there isn't necessarily even a "before" when referencing the Big Bang.

Second, the entire paragraph is a set up for a non-sequitor spilt in the middle by a comma. Because a thing has a beginning, doesn't mean it was created.

Third, even if the universe was "created," it is completely without support to attach the adjectives to how the universe was created. More over, those adjectives are contraditary to each other. While everything else describes what "nothing" does not have, "personal" is simply not something that "nothing" does not have.

Fourth, the response is simply pushing "creation" further back. If the universe was created, then what created the creator?

There is simply no support given for the proposals in this statement, and indeed the statement contradict it self.

There is neither evidence nor probablistic for the following statement

"This is what God sounds like to me. A supernatural being that is personable"

None was given, and that's because there just isn't any.

Evolution of organisms is most likely true

My oppenent states that "there is no evidence for Darwinism being truthful." By this he probably means that he does not believe that life evolved form simpler organisms. On the contrary, there is a massive amount of evidence for evolution, in fact, I owuld argue that evolution has the most diverse source of evidence of any field of study.

Fossile records tell scientists that organisms change over time, and when those slight changes accumulate of millions of years, life forms adapts to their in different and complex ways, creating both the diversity, complexity, and unity of life today.

This article is a source for the evidence of human evolution [ http://humanorigins.si.edu...;]. Studies of fossiles, genes, and radiometric dating provide clear evidence for the occurance of evolution.

Morality is independent of an all-powerful source

As I argued in my previous debates, morality's actions' values is completely subjective to the species that use it. "Killing and eating babies for fun" is wrong because the net utility for killing and eating a baby is probably negative. The net utility for arbitrarily killing 11 milllion people is probably negative.

The "objective standard written on your heart" are out of reason, not something aribtrary, like the claimed god.
Debate Round No. 1
byanb17

Pro

byanb17 forfeited this round.
Bullish

Con

I have nothing to rebut.
Debate Round No. 2
byanb17

Pro

byanb17 forfeited this round.
Bullish

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by LiThiuM 2 years ago
LiThiuM
Yes. Well stated, Bullish.
Posted by Bullish 2 years ago
Bullish
Sniiiiiiiiiiiiiipe.
Posted by LiThiuM 2 years ago
LiThiuM
All that the universe having a beginning proves is that it had a beginning.
Just because it begun doesn't mean a supernatural "being" created it? Where did that being come from?
It doesn't EXPLAIN anything. Even if it was a "God" why would it be your god of 2700+ known gods and deities? If you are an evolution denier I wont bother debating you because I have been there before many times and cognitive dissonance is always what your having for dinner. Good luck in this debate if you get someone eager enough.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
byanb17BullishTied
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: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by ldow2000 2 years ago
ldow2000
byanb17BullishTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 2 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
byanb17BullishTied
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: full FF