God is Irrelevant in Today's Life
Debate Rounds (3)
God is not needed for life in the twenty-first century. I would like to hear from someone on the Con position, but only if we can keep the debate calm and professional.
Second, humans evolved from primates- not monkeys. Monkeys and humans branched off separately from them over millions of years and evolved to the creatures of today. And to ask "why haven't today's monkeys evolved into humans," is like asking "how can we have been babies if there are still babies around today".
Finally, yes, the universe is expanding outward, called 'spatial inflation', which is just more evidence for the Big Bang.
My question to you: given the insurmountable evidence that earth is over 4 billion years old, and humans have only been around for a fraction of the time, what did God do in the interim? Wait 3+ billion years for humans to finally show up?
And time is a scientific metric measured by the number of times our Earth orbits the sun. Geologists use radiometric dating which has identified the oldest rocks at 4.5 billion years old. Or 4.5 billion orbits around the sun. Furthermore, based on meteorites and moon rocks, scientists have dated the universe at approx 13.8 billion years. They even have more evidence about what came before that.
So again, God is irrelevant. We don't need Him to understand our existence. And we don't need Him to understand morality. Anyone who 'acts' moral only to get into heaven is scum. A person who is really moral, like both of us, does so without any expectation of reward.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BackCommander 2 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:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con doesn't make an argument for their side at all. Pro's entire argument is that God is irrelevant in the modern era due to science answering most of Man's unanswered questions, which is never directly argued by Con. Con can not be awarded points for most convincing arguments either way, as they've failed to make one.
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.