The Instigator
albert_the_great
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Lazarius
Con (against)
Winning
25 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 5 votes the winner is...
Lazarius
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/18/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 432 times Debate No: 40805
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (5)

 

albert_the_great

Pro

1st round is for acceptance only
Lazarius

Con

I accept, and look forward to your arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
albert_the_great

Pro

if you have watched the video in "a monotheistic God exists", well, i use that as proof. also, i believe in big bang...
Lazarius

Con

I see that you have derived it from specific sources. Did you watch it to point out some of the minor/major philosophical flaws?

"Before that moment there was the infinite past"

Incorrect.

Past
past/
adjective
1.
gone by in time and no longer existing.
"the danger is now past"
synonyms:gone (by), over (and done with), no more, done, bygone, former, (of) old, olden, long-ago; More

That supernatural occurence has already past in time, though. So therefore, it is now part of the "infinite past".

What IS in between the past and the future?

The present.

"After that moment there was the infinite future"

Except for what has already past in time.

"Infinity has no beginning or end"

I suppose I'm with you.

"The fact that the Universe did not come into existence somewhere around the infinite past or infinite future is itself proof of intervention through decision"

Like I said, that supernatural occurence has already past in time. So therefore, it's now part of the "infinite past". The rest is part if the "infinite future" except for whatever else has already past in our time.

UNLESS

You are reffering specifically at that time during the birth of the Universe, then of course. That is just logic. It came into existence in neither, but rather in its present time.

"It is also proof that the laws of physics pertaining to the creation of the Universe, prior to its birth, either did not exist or weren't previously applied"

Incorrect.

If the laws of physics that were involved with the birth of the Universe either did not exist or weren't apllied prior to its birth, then otherwise, the creation of the Universe would not have succeeded.

"All of the laws of the Universe did not exist, because before that moment they were not there"

They did in fact, exist. They just weren't there yet. The Universe began as a tiny dense ball no larger than a molecule. And then suddenly, matter merged together and exploded, creating a never-ending Universe.

It can not create physics and energy, but rather, it could ADD it. For they were already there.

"in the abscence of God, there would be eternity of emptiness"

"It began as a tiny dense ball no larger than a molecule"

And that was finite until matter merged together and exploded.

Also, if God exists, why doesn't he intervene with the Earth's happenings?
Debate Round No. 2
albert_the_great

Pro

you may have exposed some of my flaws, but you are nothing. you can't prove sh*t. your stupid
Lazarius

Con

"your stupid"

Grammatical Error:

It is not your. It is you're. You're is a contraction of you are. Your is the possessive form of you. So therefore, judging from your sentence, you're is more appropriate than your.

And "trashtalking" doesn't get you anywhere.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Lazarius 3 years ago
Lazarius
Anyways, albert

We do NOT condone that type of behaviour.
Posted by TheSquirrel 3 years ago
TheSquirrel
dtaylor's vote is clearly a votebomb.
Posted by Lazarius 3 years ago
Lazarius
*Infinite
Posted by TheAmazingAtheist1 3 years ago
TheAmazingAtheist1
daf*k dtaylor? how the f*ck does pro win? f*cking stupidaaa

But Lazarius pointed out some very major flaws and managed to completely refute pros arguments.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Leonardo 3 years ago
Leonardo
albert_the_greatLazariusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Good spelling and arguments.
Vote Placed by MikeNH 3 years ago
MikeNH
albert_the_greatLazariusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was lazy, had no arguments of his own, and was childish. Con at least made an attempt and stayed mature.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
albert_the_greatLazariusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro insulted Con. Pro failed to make good arguments.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
albert_the_greatLazariusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for Pro's behavior--while Con remained civil, Pro decided he needed to become insulting. S&G for what should be obvious reasons. Arguments because Pro didn't really make any--he referred to one source, which Con actually apparently took the trouble to watch and demolish at least part of. Pro never presented a case. He had the BoP. An overall waste of Con's time, but he deserves to have his performance scored. As to sources, Pro merely referring to one without any actual argument is not sufficient in my mind to award sourcing. As always, happy to clarify anything in this RFD.
Vote Placed by PatriotPerson 3 years ago
PatriotPerson
albert_the_greatLazariusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Con, because Pro lost it with his remark "you can't prove sh*t. your stupid". S&G goes to Con because he noticed and corrected Pro on one of his many mistakes. Arguments to Con because he actually gave a legitimate one. I was not completely sure what to do for sources, but Pro mentioned a video, so I guess that counts.