The Instigator
Stephen_Hawkins
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
R00TiX
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

God is real

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/18/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 645 times Debate No: 18854
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Stephen_Hawkins

Con

Alright, I'd like to do this debate with someone. I'll try and be concise, and answer any other questions in the comments section. The debate says 5 rounds long, but in reality it is 4. This is for a) extra round if needed and b) so that the pro can make his argument first. The burden of proof is entirely on the affirmer.

God - The Judeo Christian God with the qualities of: omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, transcendent, immanent, personal, anthropomorphic, etc.

is - verb, from "to be". God is real. He is smart. Micheal is a mafia member.

Real - NOT AS IN A CONCEPT. As in the common usage of the word. Real as in able to effect the world in some format. Not as in the currency either.

Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed: "Julius Caesar was a real person". <-- That definition.

I hope that clears everything up.
R00TiX

Pro

Well, I thought that I'd be taking con for this one.. I really don't feel like debating pro, as I honestly don't believe in god. And there is ZERO evidence that he exists, besides some dusty old book. So is there anyway I could forfeit the debate?
Debate Round No. 1
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

Stephen_Hawkins forfeited this round.
R00TiX

Pro

R00TiX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
R00TiX

Pro

R00TiX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
R00TiX

Pro

R00TiX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

VOTE ORANGE! mmmm.... oranges.
R00TiX

Pro

R00TiX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Ah, ok, I'll just start randomly debating people where I have the burden of proof just to appease you.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
I don't have a problem saying that theists have the burden of proof in general... but it is kind of a cheap tactic to only propose debates where you don't have burden of proof. Basically it's saying "Post an argument that I don't have to do anything but cast doubt on."
Posted by unitedandy 5 years ago
unitedandy
RA. I've done 7 debates as Pro on various questions taking the atheist side, with 4 as being Con. Also, as the instigator said, the debates over the existence of God tend to sort the theist as Pro (and arguably, this is justified).
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
I honestly don't see how people can fail to read the description TWICE.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Because it is a negative. That's like saying "Why do people never pose the question "Santa is not real" and say they have burden of proof?". It's ridiculous, and unreasonable. Also, there are no defensive Christian arguments, the 5 main ones are offensive, not defensive.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
Why is it that Atheists never propose this question as Pro? Is it that they are unable to prove the reality of their truth claim?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
Stephen_HawkinsR00TiXTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by jm_notguilty 4 years ago
jm_notguilty
Stephen_HawkinsR00TiXTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 4 years ago
Lordknukle
Stephen_HawkinsR00TiXTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF