The Instigator
Musibrique
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Ozzyhead
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

God (if real) can exist with no beginning nor end

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 416 times Debate No: 53179
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Musibrique

Pro

Can god exist without a beginning nor end? The answer is yes.

You must:

(a) oppose my argument

(b) no copying/pasting or trolling

Good luck, Con.
Ozzyhead

Con

Can such a rule apply to anything else? If not, please support, with evidence why a god can exist with out a beginning and yet nothing else can.
Debate Round No. 1
Musibrique

Pro

The question of who made god or how did he exist depends how you look at him.

Here's the thing: who created the universe? The Big Bang? Well, what caused the Big Bang if nothing was there? Better yet, what created the source that created the Big Bang? Obviously, the questions will keep on going and going until there's no tomorrow.

If god is real, then he has no beginning nor end just like the Bible predicts. Why? Because he's the creator of not just the universe, but time as well. Space and time are something we exist in. We see things in motion and the days passing by with the universe in order and unimaginable complexity that seem to overcome the assumption that the universe was made by chance alone. God, on the other hand, exists outside the realm. Space & time are his creation, not the universe. The universe doesn't own god and neither does logic in any other arguments from atheists.

Atheists love to point out that he is some invisible flying spaghetti monster that lives in the sky or somewhere else. Well, how can such invisible flying spaghetti monster exist if there's no space nor time? Exactly. There needs to be a necessity self-made source and that's exactly what the Bible means by having no beginning nor end.

Of course, you don't need to believe in the Bible in order to accept his existence. The logic makes sense if you think about it regardless if you're religious or not.
Ozzyhead

Con

It is likely that the universe was a constant. A ball of energy was rapidly expanding, and then eventually, it exploded. Now, if there if it is hard to accept that something in the universe is a constant, then any god has the same difficulty. If you claim god can be a constant, then you must accept that anything could have been a constant, it evidence needs to be provided that only a god can be a constant. The order want created. We noticed it, and said it was in some sort of order. An imperfect order, too. Every single thousand years, an ice age occurs, which can easily kill us all. The bible is the claim. It is written, not as support for God's existence, but rather the rules and stories of that God. The flying spaghetti monster is something used by atheists because they are trying to point out that has as much of a chance of existing as a god does. If you fail to show evidence for something, then it is assumed to not exist. If everything that exists to our knowledge is defined as the, or a part of, the universe, and a god is outside the universe, then we can safely say that if a god exists outside the universe, then we can't tell the difference between not existing and outside the universe.
If God is a constant then evidence that can be observed must be presented. No, I can't disprove it. But it is impossible, and illogical, to disprove something that has not been proven.
Although this is not my responsibility, I have a quote from a website that talks about evidence of possible origins of the universe

"In 1982, Alexander Vilenkin proposed an extension of Tyron's idea and suggested that the Universe was created by quantum processes starting from "literally nothing", meaning not only the absence of matter, but the absence of space and time as well. Vilenkin took the idea of quantum tunneling and proposed that the Universe started in the totally empty geometry and then made a quantum tunneling transition to a non-empty state (subatomic in size), which through inflation (the Universe expands exponentially fast for a brief period of time which causes its size to increase dramatically) came to its current size.

Another idea is from Stephen Hawking and James Hartle. Hawking proposed a description of the Universe in its entirety, viewed as a self-contained entity, with no reference to anything that might have come before it. The description is timeless, in the sense that one set of equations delineates the Universe for all time. As one looks to earlier and earlier times, one finds that the model Universe is not eternal, but there is no creation event either. Instead, at times of the order of 10-43 seconds, the approximation of a classical description of space and time breaks down completely, with the whole picture dissolving into quantum ambiguity. In Hawking's words, the Universe "would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE"
Please refer to the website for more information (http://curious.astro.cornell.edu...)
Debate Round No. 2
Musibrique

Pro

Musibrique forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Musibrique

Pro

Musibrique forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DocG84 2 years ago
DocG84
Pro asked for no copying and pasting in first round. It is ok to site sources, but please do not copy and paste directly as outlined.
No votes have been placed for this debate.