God is man-made
Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 6/8/2017 | Category: | Religion | ||
Updated: | 10 months ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 943 times | Debate No: | 102954 |
Hello and welcome, This is my first debate that I have set up on this site so I have much to learn. My history with religion was simple enough. I was raised a Southern Baptist and after High school I joined the military. After serving in the military I went to college and concluded that God must be man-made. I plan on presenting the same arguments that lead me to this conclusion. About the debate: I will be taking the Pro side of the debate that God is man-made. Simply put that God did not make humans that it is much more likely that humans made all Gods. Since there are many Gods in the world I will pose my arguments against mainly the Christian God though If my opponent wishes to debate another God I am open to do that as well. Con: My opponent should expect to take up the side of God not being Man made. It will be my opponent’s decision on exactly how he/she wishes to present this and defend that position. Rules of the debate: Round 1 - Introductions and acceptance Round 2 - Main argument presented Round 3 - Rebuttal to opponent’s argument. Round 4 - Rebuttal to arguments in Round 3 and Closing statements. No presenting new arguments in Round 4. All arguments must be presented in the previous rounds to allow your opponent a chance to respond. I set the Character limit to 3,000 as there is no reason to type a book when arguments should be concise and to the point. Plus, I think it will be more challenging to present the arguments with the evidence, while being limited on the Characters. I would be willing to lower this to 2,000 though please do not ask for me to raise the limit. I welcome this experience and look forward to a good debate. Please apply in the comments.
Thank you for initiating the Debate. The 3000 character will be a challenge indeed. Awaiting your arguments. |
![]() |
I would like to thank kwagga_la for accepting this debate and wish him/her luck. First point:
Fourth point: Conclusion: (1) https://en.wikipedia.org... (2) http://www.mapsofworld.com... (3) http://brilliantmaps.com... (4) http://www.businessinsider.com... (6) Patai, Raphael (1967). The Hebrew Goddess.
Rebuttal: First point: The presence of gods in different cultures does not automatically make them man made. You still have to prove these gods were in fact man made. Second point: It is recorded in Ezekiel that God was angry with the Israelites because they baked cakes to "the Queen of Heaven". Although they were Jewish, born in Israel, they were not orthodox believers and followed a different religion. Today many Atheists argue that if you were born in a Muslim country that you will be Muslim etc. It sounds very probable but only in recent History. In ancient times the Kaaba contained thousands of different gods that were worship. They also forget that you are either a Muslim or a dead rejecter of Islam. If Muslim countries did not kill those who reject Islam or made them outcasts then it is more probable that people would NOT necessarily become Muslims. I have heard many Muslims say they doubt their religion and do not even accept all the beliefs. They are Muslims because they are FORCED to be not because they are BORNED into Islam. The present situation was much different in ancient times and disproves the regional claim. Third point: I read the article but the article also states: "The Pirah" have also been cited as a counterexample to the common claim that religious beliefs are human universals. But there"s a problem with these arguments, and Everett himself highlights it: in his many articles and interviews about the Pirah", he reports that the Pirah" world is chock-full of spirits, including sky spirits, forest spirits, and evil spirits. Although they object to the Christian God they certainly do not reject the supernatural." (1) Fourth point: The Babylonians worshipped Nimrod, Tammuz and Semiramis also known as the "Queen of Heaven". "Queen of Heaven was a title given to a number of ancient sky goddesses worshipped throughout the ancient Mediterranean and Near East during ancient times." (2) The evolution noticed in some religions only proves that there was evolution. It does not prove that the ORIGINAL belief system was also man made. Again, the common thread found would indicate that ALL religions are not regional. The acceptance of different countries that had histories of opposing each other but worshipping the gods in similar fashion would indicate they believed the gods were not man made. It is hard to believe that you would accept your enemies gods if you knew they were inventions. Conclusion: Pro has to yet prove all the gods are in fact man made. ALL Religions are not based on region. The Pirah" do not reject the supernatural and therefore is not a very good example. Christianity has a 2000+ history. Orthodox Christianity did not change. I mention this to point out that Pro"s statement is more correct that SOME religions evolve and change. According to Pro"s conclusion that would be evidence that Christianity is the true religion. In all cases probable conclusions was given by Pro but also sufficient doubt pointed out to question the validity of the conclusions. 1. https://www.ibcsr.org... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org... |
![]() |
I find it odd that my opponent chooses not to present arguments for God not being created by man. Instead rebuts my arguments. First point: Second point: Third point: Fourth point: Conclusion: Last Christianity, only for the past 200 years or so went against slavery. (3) The LGBT community has only been accepted in the last 50 years or so. So I challenge the 2000+ years without change claim.(4) While this is single example I believe it to be relevant. I can remember growing up and being told Gay people will go to Hell by my church. Now many churches have changed their view.
(1) http://brilliantmaps.com... (2) http://www.businessinsider.com... (3) https://en.wikipedia.org...
Rebuttal: Israel made a covenant where they saw God in the OT. This covenant was repeated from generation to generation until even today. This is a generational eyewitness account handed down from father to son. The tradition has been unbroken since that time and the story have not changed over thousands of years. The love a father has for his children and the integrity and responsibility makes it unlikely that this story was a human invention. There is historic evidence for the Jesus Christ. He was God manifest in the flesh. Believers and non-believers attest to his person-hood and miracles and therefore make it unlikely it is man made stories. First point: Your options should also include that SOME gods may be real while at the same time SOME gods are not. It is not one or the other. In this case you may find SOME gods were man made and SOME has no evidence that they were ever man made. Most primitive religions include the spirit world and supernatural. That is not based on "natural phenomena" as defined by "so called science" today. Second point: Anecdotal claims are countered in that I mentioned "in recent times". Naming what Muslims told me is not the crux of the argument. You will not find a Muslim on any map before 600AD. That alters any modern claim based on region and the spreading of religion. Third point: Although Buddhist does not claim a single deity they do believe in the supernatural and afterlife. People tend to argue against a god of their preference. Humans have also been worshipped as gods. The Roman Emperors were worshipped as gods and death was the alternative belief. The God of the Bible refer to some rulers who could extinguish any life with the snap of his fingers as gods. There is also a god of this world in the Bible who is not Jesus Christ. There are different offices and natures that determine and distinguish gods. Some may have God like authority and therefore are gods. The Emperor of Japan is believed to be of divine origin. I have never heard of any atheist who has ever dared to go to Japan and tell the emperor in his face that he is a liar and does not exist. Christians died because they rejected the Emperors as gods. Fourth point: Spreading of religion do not necessarily support what you say. As pointed out, you have opposing nations who accept the same gods although they are at war with each other. If they knew the gods worshipped by their opponents were man made then it is very unlikely they would also worship them. Conclusion: I fail to see the difference between man made and man created. Drunkards go to hell whether they are gay or not. Opinions about certain aspects related to faith are not enough to claim a change of its original tenants. The main tenants of the Christian faith have always been who God is, how you get saved and where you go after you die for over 2000 years. |
![]() |
Since I have limited space I will mainly respond to the arguments presented. The Jewish tradition of passing down information as a tradition is equivalent of many other religions that have passed stories down from parents to children. The fact that it was passed down with care and the belief in the system does not add any truth to the validity of the stories. Then I must point out there is no evidence that the miracles claimed by Jesus ever happened. Plus to loosely quote David Hume, What is more likely that the laws of nature are suspended in your favor or that you are mistaken. Second point: Third point: Fourth point: Rebuttal of conclusion: Closing statements: I wish to thank my opponent for a good debate and thank you the reader for taking time to read over it. Please leave a comment if you have suggestions or wish to discuss any of the statements.
Rebuttal: Whether you believe the records about Christ or not is immaterial. It exists. Cosmological arguments necessitate that the "laws of nature" had to be suspended to explain how the universe began (a benzene molecule spinning without gravity? something out of nothing?). Either David Hume was a fool or Scientists today are fools. First Point: You include the option but reject it based on the spread of religion. Again, that only proves religion was spreading and not whether its origin was man made. Second point: You based your claim on a "global" view in round 1. This picture was the opposite of what it is today because there were no Muslims before 600AD. It does not support your argument because there were thousands of gods in the Kaaba before Islam took over. Which god would you have served if you were born back then? Can someone even identify the thousands that were there today? Obviously the one out of the thousands of gods you decided to serve was your CHOICE to serve. Religions not only spread but also die out. What does that prove regarding whether it was man made? Absolutely nothing. Your argument must take all of history in consideration, not just modern day examples. Third point: The article you quoted from also called your view in question. As for Buddhist, if everything is really an illusion then I would not take anything to serious they have to say regarding the existence of God. Gods or no gods in a society do not prove it was man made. Fourth point: Your statement includes you too; let me rewrite it to include you: Pro is thinking it was created and has nothing to do with if it was or was not created. Therefore, why even argue the subject? The counter to your argument was that the concept of god includes men who are also worshipped as god and even nature. Is nature man made? Rebuttal of conclusion: Certain sects within Christianity disagree. It is wrong to generalize Christianity as a single unit without making proper distinction. What you say may only be applicable to the Catholics. Closing statements: "There would be no need to spread" shows that you have a very limited view of god or who can be a god. But since there is limited space I will just point out that you have no evidence that in fact religion was man made. You conclude things that are irrational because many other equally valid options exist to explain the subject. Fish are regional, where they man made? Humans are regional, where they man made? According to evolution and the Bible, no man was "man-made". That alone refutes your theory. Thank you for the Debate! All the best to you. |
![]() |
That is a good question. If it was revealed that God did exist and was morally perfect then I think I would. Though so far all logic and evidence i have seen has pointed to the opposite conclusion.
If it was revealed to you that the Judeo-Christian God existed and was morally perfect, would you pursue a relationship with him to obtain salvation?
You state "Notice how. miracles seem to not be happening anymore?". I disagree, there are plenty of TRUE records of how people came back from the dead or how people were healed from blindness or who were crippled. Natural man did not intervene but when prayed for it happened. Yes there ae false claims but there are also claims that cannot be explained by "natural" means. Second, if you want to build a nation like Israel then you would be obliged to have men and woman procreate to build a nation. Have you ever noticed that a man and man cannot have children by themselves? That is obviously not the way to build a nation and men only having sex with men and ignoring woman is the same as KILLING a nation. Its common sense and also therefore logical that this type of lifestyle is against what is suppose to happen NATURALLY (I am talking about procreation if the point alludes you that I am trying to make).