The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

God is a figment of the human imagination

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: 3/16/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,309 times Debate No: 49207
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




In this debate we will be discussing the question of God. I will argue for him not being real. I want some convincing and good arguments; well thought up so please don't accept unless you are committed and will treat is seriously.
1) Acceptance
2) Creationism
3) The Old Testament
4) The New Testament
5) Conclusion
As much as 8,000 words may be written but please try to keep your writing in a concise, professional manner.
- iaminneedofhelp


I accept this very popular debate and wish to have a intelligent and well thought out debate.
I will ask my opponent to only use current observable evidence that cannot be disputed because I will do the same.
Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1


OK! Round 1!
So Creationism...
This is hotly debated topic and one which should be interesting to debate. When Darwin went to the Galapagos Islands on the HMS Beagle he discovered evolution. Using examples from finch"s beaks and turtle shells he discovered the random variation between the islands. We need to think back to many years ago when our LUCA (last universal common ancestor) was created. We have got significant proof of their being a LUCA, much more than that of Genesis being correct.
Cast your mind back to a million years ago when the Neanderthal"s were spreading themselves across the world. They communicated with simple grunts, pictures (shown by cave drawings etc.) and actions. Since then we have evolved into much more complex animals which create much more complex sounds which we now call speech. According to Genesis when we Adam and Eve were created we could speak like we can today. This is obviously a huge fault as we have only been able to communicate well for around 1 million to 500,000 years. And you can"t claim that Genesis was actually between those times because we have significant proof of there being dinosaurs 65 million years ago and Carbon dating can date to much longer before 500,000 years ago accurately.
My third point on Evolution is fish. I know this may sound weird but it"s got quite a bit of significance. Fish were are our ancestors. There"s, once again, significant proof of these fish being our ancestors. They had 4 bony fins and had lungs so could climb onto land. Since then how did we get from there? We have proof of these fish developing so they did not become extinct and they evolved into creatures which became solely land animals. God created everything in 7 days, he did not change what he originally put on this earth but we have evidence of change. Please, explain that?


You begin with Darwin and the theory of Evolution and continue to describe it through your argument. So I presume that you will not only be trying to disprove creationism but also defend evolution. You use the example of the finches and the difference in their beaks. I full agree with this kind of evolution, also known as microevolution. I disagree with macroevolution that is the change from one species to another, whereas microevolution is only changes within one species. Macroevolution is impossible because of the very large differences between species, particularly the number of chromosomes. If a mutation does occur where the number of chromosomes is altered (down syndrome) then the person is sterile and mentally retarded. Both things that cannot continue with evolution. You also use the argument of language. You claim the first humanoids communicated with grunts and pictures. Well we have always communicated with pictures, we still do. To answer your question about what language Adam and Eve spoke, I simply don't know. The bible was originally written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramic, so I can guess it was one of those.

And then theres the infamous argument about Carbon dating. In a lab enviroment it works flawlessly. But in nature, after about 10000 years, the ratio between Carbon-12 and carbon-14 is very fragile. The slightest, and I mean slightest, inbalance can lead to inaccuacies in the tens of millions and almost billions of years. Some hot ash after Mount St.Helens went off was carbon dated 3 times. These dates ranged from 100 years to over 200 million years. Similarly, a live turtle sample was taken and dated to be 10 million years old.
Your last point was on fish and their similarities to humans. A theory of intelligent design is also supportive of this argument as everything is in the same conditions. To answer your last question about the ability of change it goes back to the micro-macro point. Things adapt to their situation to survive, but speciation is impossible.

Now for my own argument. Since I was instructed to defend creationism, I will. But first let me define "creationism". The Universe and all life was created in 6 literal 24 hour days by an eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omnipowerful, non material, moral God. Since he is non material he does not have time matter or space, nor does he follow its laws, therefore he can create matter out of nothing. He created all of the kinds of animals and they later evolved into their individual species and subspecies over the last 7000-10000 years. Humans were created with Gods morality in their hearts, that si why we know what is right and wrong. The cave drawings you mention have been found with dinosaurs on them. A human foot print was found next to a dinosaurs footprint as well. But the images weren't the "cavemens" imagination because they were drawn besides other, very real, animals like cows and sheep. This just proves that humans and dinosaurs lived next to each other.

I look forward to round 2.
Debate Round No. 2


I will start with my rebuttal. Firstly if the world was created by God and mass was created by God, then why do we have strong evidence for the Higgs Boson? We have strong evidence that this event did occur and to prove that there has been recent findings of gravity which rippled across space seconds after the big bang. You may say that the Big Bang was created by God but how could it have been? If we have evidence for the Big Bang causing the earth to be a hot, potent planet for millions of years then how could God have created the animals and how could he have created Adam and Eve. Another point is that if God had created Adam and Eve then how come they were perfectly formed human beings from the start? Another point of rebuttal is that cavemen never lived among dinosaurs, that's a popular misconception and you're wrong. . They were, in fact, around 66 million years apart.

Time for Round 2!
We will argue the Old Testament in this round and we will have no conclusion if that's ok? You may do it differently if you so wish.
In Genesis 10 the floods occur and the world is divided up by segments, divided by language. But in the next section we learn that the world speaks the same language. There are many examples of this in the Old Testament and many Christians say, 'well that's the Old Testament'. They may say this but why in God's holy book has there been two stories written? You may say that the Bible was a collection of writings from different sources but doesn't that just mean the bible's less trustworthy? Also if Jesus had truly been the son of God surely he would have read the bible and corrected any mistakes. Do you not believe that religion has been twisted by the human mind? The Old Testament is a prime example of this where stories have been passed down through generations, and like Chinese whispers, the story has been twisted by the imagination and what humans want to believe.
So there it is. That is why the Old Testament supports my theory and I am looking forward to your rebuttal and Round 3!


I will start by saying most of your rebuttal was points that I discussed in my previous argument.

I will now offer my rebuttal against your argument about the old testament. Almost all of your argument is questions so I will number and answer them accordingly.

1. What language was spoken after the flood?
After the flood there was just Noah and his family. They moved apart and their language began to change. We see this in america today. Some would say southern language is much different from norther language. The confusion in the bible is because of the mass amount of times that it has been translated. Over time some interpretations will change among translators.

2. Does the bible contain errors?
No, the original bible contains no errors because it was written by God through people. You say the bible was twisted by man, no, only its interpretation. People pick out things and use them out of contex for their own agenda. Yes some of the material in the bible is not literal but symbolical, like revelations. This was because the author faced persecution if found writing about God, so he made it see like something else.

I don't know what I'm supposed to say for my argument since I am only defending Christianity and the Bible. But I will leave with this, the old testament was made to show us our sin and to show us that we cannot fufill the word of God. The new testament is to show us that we are saved through Jesus Christ.
Debate Round No. 3


iaminneedofhelp forfeited this round.


To keep it fair I will skip this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by wwwwh 2 years ago
Why does con have to argue as a cristian? The topic is " god is a figment of human imagineation" not " the cristian god is a figment of human imagination".
No votes have been placed for this debate.