Debate Rounds (3)
i will give some examples and if you dont mind you can give some back why he cant exist.
1.) the creation of time and the universe.
2.) "evil" and "good"
3.) absolute truth.
1.) the universe has been proven by scientist of all sorts that the universe has had a beginning. (ill post citations later)
how could it have begun? how was it created?
2.) evil and good exist. please give me examples of how it cant.
3.) absolute truth can only exist with a god, and absolute truth exist.
Even if science can't prove a thing, that doesn't prove there is a God.
Proving evil and good doesn't prove there is a God.
Proving absolute truth doesn't prove there is a God.
You claim "absolute truth can only exist with a god" PROVE IT.
You already said God is impossible to prove. You have the burden of proof. I won the debate.
2.) Can you be wrong about anything you know? Can you know something for sure? Are you absolutely sure there is no God?
3.) Proving God is a matter of opinion. I could give some evidence to an atheist and he could believe me and then become a deist. Therefore I proved to him God exist. Now let"s say I give the same evidence to a different atheist. He doesn"t believe me. I failed to prove he exists. Listening to everything you said it sounds like you will never believe in God no matter how much "proof" you get.
The fact that you could be wrong shows that nothing is fully proven. If something has been proven, then that means absolute truth exist.
If there is no God, then 9-11, Newtown, and the Holocaust were not bad things. They were all justified. What were they justified by? The nature of man. With no God, that is the only law.
Everything we do is justified. There is no bad or good. Life is meaningless and we are nothing more than worthless animals. Love, life, family, friends, fun, caring, etc. were all accidents. None of them mean anything.
Why are you getting offensive? What I"m saying in your mind is meaningless? But you obviously do care. There must be a reason why you care. Why is that?
2.) Nobody can prove there is no God, but my opponent has the burden of proof that there is, in fact a God. Can my opponent be wrong about "knowing" there is a God?
3.) Only opinions based on facts can be considered rational opinions. Without facts, opinions are worthless. If someone has an opinion that a God exists and it is not based on facts, then the opinion is worthless.
My opponent claims "If there is no God, then 9-11, Newtown, and the Holocaust were not bad things. They were all justified."
Those events were only justified by certain people. the 9/11 hijackers considered what they did "good" while the rescue workers trying to help, considered what they did "bad". That proves my point that there is no God that sets what good and evil are as absolutes. It's how an individual person sees it.
My opponent still has not proved that God exists.
samurai forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 4 years 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: Forfeit. Also, spelling and grammar to Con because of Pro's lack of punctuation.
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.