God probably exists.
Debate Rounds (5)
The (notice the definite article - only God) omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omni-benevolent creator of the Universe that is described in the Bible. The rules are as follows:
1) First round is not for acceptance only, Pro must present opening arguments in round one.
2) Fifth round is closing statements only, no new arguments or refutes.
3) A forfeit of a round is an irreversible breach of conduct. If both players forfeit; conduct is "tied".
4) The BoP is on Pro. Con can give arguments to show that God probably doesn't exist, but that is not a necessary burden.
5) You agree with the definition of God as described above.
6) You agree to these rules by accepting the debate.
I believe that's all; if anyone has any questions, please post a comment. Good luck to all, and allez!
My opponent makes no argument at all, however, merely makes several fallacies. First, he proposes that the big bang theory created everything, which is wrong. First, if one wanted to be technical, the big bang didn't created me, you, the Internet, or cars, among other things. Second, if my opponent didn't mean "everything" when he said "everything" and he meant the creation of the Universe, that would be incorrect, too, because the Big Bang Theory describes the early development of the Universe, not its creation.
So, I'd agree that if I believed that the Big Bang created everything by definition or "everything" as I think my opponent meant it; I would have one heck of an imagination! My opponent then states:
"who created us.[?]" My opponent asserts that the Bible proves God created us. The Bible is the name given to a collection of books that, when put together creates the Holy Scripture of the Christian faith. My opponent has not given any proof that I am inclined to believe the Bible. The Bible makes claims that, while some may be true, others (such as the existence of God) cannot be verified. If they can, my opponent gives no evidence for this. I have thus far met my burden of refuting my opponent's suggestions.
I await my opponent's response(s)!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by NiqashMotawadi3 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro clearly doesn't know how to argue for his case. His attempts to make an argument were all refuted. Con seemed on the right track but he didn't offer his arguments for why God's existence is improbable, but he stills gets arguments because he was way more convincing.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.