The Instigator
RetroRanter
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Burls
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

God is not real

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
Burls
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/7/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 312 times Debate No: 89299
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

RetroRanter

Pro

Im for God is false
Debate Round No. 1
RetroRanter

Pro

Well im gonna bring out the most basic of paradox's. Does god know what sinful lust is like, if he does then he is all good, but if he doesn't he isn't all knowing. You give me a short one, ill give short answers. The bible contradicts itself several times, including God having different personalities, and funny enough he is like the civilization that writes about him, and how he's so on there side. Plus Durteronomy, probably a misspell, is just absolute bullcrap.
Burls

Con

The opposition's case rests upon the assertion that the Bible is other than God's word; a position I happen to agree with, and propose that the record, whether entirely false or corrupted by lusts, is nonetheless intriguing and provoking enough to inspire argument and perspective, the satisfaction of which can lead one's opinions on to further conclusions.
Debate Round No. 2
RetroRanter

Pro

Kinda suppose to tell me how God is real. :/ THIS is what this debate is kinda about.
Burls

Con

Ladies & Gentlemen;

The question before us today is whether or not God exists; And to that effect the naysayer has offered one piece of evidence, to whit 'The Bible is rationally unbelievable'.

In weighing the pro's and con's we participate in rational enquiry and with insufficient evidence to the contrary we grant "The benefit of the doubt" to the contender, which in effect supports a premise that God does in fact exist.

(bows) Good-day (bows)
Please save your flowers.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Macdaddy4sure 8 months ago
Macdaddy4sure
ViceRegent, you must be referring to Rationalism and Empiricism. Which do you prefer?
Posted by ViceRegent 8 months ago
ViceRegent
Wow, does pro not know there are different type of knowledge? This debate is what you get when ignorant children try to sound intelligent.
Posted by canis 8 months ago
canis
Yep. Same is true when we talk about Santa...Same thing. Different presents..And no hat.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ssadi 8 months ago
ssadi
RetroRanterBurlsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The resolution was a fact-claim that God "is not" real. Therefore, BoP was heavily on Pro to prove this claim.. Pro barely asserts that Bible has contradictions etc. and doesn't even sufficiently explain how that would affirm the resolution even if it was true. Other than this none provided any argument to affirm or negate the resolution. Since BoP on Pro was heavier to prove the fact claim they made and since they didn't provide any convincing argument, I vote for Con for arguments.