The Instigator
ShadowHawk555
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
tim.ray
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

God is a causal agent

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 1 vote the winner is...
ShadowHawk555
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 820 times Debate No: 66475
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

ShadowHawk555

Pro

No sematics.
I am arguing that God is responisible for events and results.
I do not have to prove the existence of god, only that he is responsible for events and results.
Message me If you would like to accept
If you have any questions ask before the debate.
Good luck!

God a supernatural controlling entity
tim.ray

Con

Accepted. Let the games begin
Debate Round No. 1
ShadowHawk555

Pro

God is responsible for events. Let's say person a has a remarkable dream. In the dream god tells him to go and give money to the poor. If that person gives money to the poor as a result of the dream, it can be said that god was indirectly responsible. Whether or not god caused it or it was just a figment of his mind is unimportant. What is important is that it can be traced to what he believes is god. Since he believes that an entity is responsible and traces the action back to god, and since the existence of God cannot be disproven it therefor would make god responsible.
tim.ray

Con

tim.ray forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ShadowHawk555

Pro

I extend my argument
tim.ray

Con

tim.ray forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ShadowHawk555

Pro

I extend my argument.
tim.ray

Con

tim.ray forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ShadowHawk555 2 years ago
ShadowHawk555
Oh sorry I don't know how to change that. Well its okay. First round is acceptance. This is my first debate I may have messed up with my argument and the meanings or whatever. I will post my argument when I have the chance but I'm about to leave for church then dinner etc. So it will be awhile.
Posted by tim.ray 2 years ago
tim.ray
I went to message you but your profile said you're not accepting any new messages. :P
Posted by ShadowHawk555 2 years ago
ShadowHawk555
I would prefer to have been messaged before it was accepted... I'm ready to start though.
Posted by ShadowHawk555 2 years ago
ShadowHawk555
I used he to refer to him as one cannot know the nature of god. As for not having to prove gods existence I have a argument for that....
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
the thing is, plus can not exist without minus, therefore god can not have added anything without a minus, thus "he" never created a thing, its impossible
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
"I do not have to prove the existence of god, only that he is responsible for events and results."

Yes, because something that hasn't been proven to exist is responsible for events and results... that's silly. For anything to be responsible for events and results, it would have to necessarily "exist" in some capacity. You even go so far as to say "he is responsible" implying that God is a male. You most certainly need to prove such things before you can argue that he is responsible for anything.
Posted by ShadowHawk555 2 years ago
ShadowHawk555
Sorry I'm typing this on a phone so it auto corrected.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Oh... You mean semantics. Sorry, I was confused.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Schematics?
Posted by Vajrasattva-LeRoy 2 years ago
Vajrasattva-LeRoy
It's Causal, not Casual.
Everything is Natural, in that sense- nothing is "supernatural" .
L. Ron Hubbard pointed out in his basic 1950 book on Dianetics that
absolutes have to be considered logically unobtainable.
Pure causation cannot exist ...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
ShadowHawk555tim.rayTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture