Debate Rounds (4)
NOTE: Do NOT forfeit. If someone forfeits a debate, the debate will quit updating. If you do forfeit, the other person will automatically 'win'.
I won't post my argument this round. I'll wait and see what you have to say. I would like to define a few words just so it's clear upfront:
God: "the perfect and all-powerful spirit or being that is worshipped especially by Christians, Jews, and Muslims as the one who created and rules the universe" http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Exists: "have objective reality or being." (googled)
Objective: "(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts." (googled)
Perfect: "having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be." (googled)
I look forward to debating you on this. I am agnostic so I think this will be interesting as you seem to be religious based on your other debates. Good luck.
1) Everything that begins to exist must have a cause
This Point's self explanatory. The Universe could've only began to exist, as the next point explains. God has always existed, so he doesn't need a cause.
2) The Universe began to exist
Under these points, the Universe couldn't have always existed:
2a] Time Regression
Assuming the Universe has always existed, time itself would have had to exist. If the Universe always existed, time would be infinite, therefore now couldn't happen, and we couldn't stand here on November 18th, 2015, since time would be at "-999999999999", and even further had it always existed.
2b] Usable Energy would run out now
Ignoring Time Regression, let's assume we could be here if the Universe always existed. According to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, we are running out of usable energy. Had the universe always existed, energy would've been out by now.
2c] the Universe is expanding
In 1929, Edwin Hubble made the discovery that the Universe in indeed expanding. "When he plotted redshift against relative distance, he found that the redshift of distant galaxies increased as a linear function of their distance. The only explanation for this observation is that the universe was expanding." http://skyserver.sdss.org...
The universe is expanding, therefore it has been a small point millennia ago, which we call the "Big Bang".
3] Therefore, the Universe has a cause.
Because I've proven premises 1 and 2 to be correct, the conclusion is true. Now, what caused the Universe to exist? There is but only 1 logical conclusion, a being which always existed, unaffected by time, and powerful enough to break physics: God.
If Con concedes, please keep attending the debate anyways, because it'll stop progressing if you forfeit a round. May we see Con's rebuttal.
Again, I am so sorry. This was a shock to everyone. Thank you for your time.
My opponent has said the same thing in another debate of hers. I hope you get better soon. If you concede, that's fine. Until then, my arguments do stand. The universe has a cause, which said cause is God.
Toretorden has posted a pretty good counter reasoning to my argument in the comments. Here's the 1st half of it.
"The argument that there must be a god because "everything that begins to exist must have a cause", shouldn't that mean there must be a cause to god as well? It sounds like there should be an endless line of Gods causing eachother to exist. But, you seem to contradict your posed "everything" rule by making a special exception in God's case. But if you can do this in the case of God, couldn't you also do it in the case of the universe?"
I will defend my case, of course. (Even though comments aren't really a real argument. But I might as well explain.)
"shouldn't that mean there must be a cause to god as well?"
I've shown that the Universe indeed has a cause. God, however, doesn't need a cause. He always existed. Anything which begins has a cause, not everything in existence has a cause. If everything which ever existed must have a cause, then how would we even exist? This is why an "exception" must be made for a being to create the Universe, aka God.
"But if you can do this in the case of God, couldn't you also do it in the case of the universe?"
You most likely misinterpreted the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Again, I've listed reasons showing that the Universe began to exist.
I'll probably leave it at that for now, since it was just a comment, and not a debate argument. If toretorden wants to debate me, go ahead. Until then, Pika!
I understand if my opponent would like to take this debate as a win for himself. If that is the case, I encourage voters to vote for him as I can not adequately present an argument at this time.
After the funeral I would be willing to challenge you to a debate on the same topic if you're interested.
queenmary forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wipefeetnmat 11 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||5||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro advanced all arguments. I give my condolences to Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.