The Instigator
Khons
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Jxsten
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

God

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Jxsten
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 274 times Debate No: 95748
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)

 

Khons

Pro

The first round is just trying to see who will go against me. NO Debating yet!!!
Jxsten

Con

Okay, no debate this round, got it.
Debate Round No. 1
Khons

Pro

Okay lets start.
This could be something that is a little debate that i get my but kicked many times over again and again. But I think that telling each would be so hard to do, I can't prove that God is real. But I can show that even people who were in some deep crap in their life.
All I have to say is this book
48 hours in Hell
Jxsten

Con

Since you cannot prove he is real, why believe in it. I use to believe in "God" most of my childhood. Now I just question if he is real or not. Like think, people would apparently live up to like 400 or something (according to the bible). Now, back then, they had like no medicine at all. What made them live that long? We have more technology, medicine, etc. I don't want you to stop believing in "God" if you really believe in him. I also question, how could a bible be the same for many, many years. Also, people in other places believe in other things like "God". They do the same thing we do, believe in him/her no matter what. This is some reasons why I question if "God", is real.
Debate Round No. 2
Khons

Pro

I must say you have some valid questions that a 15 year old can not answer. So good job but believe what you want to
I would rather die believing in God and finding out there is not one, then die not believing God and finding out there is one.
Jxsten

Con

I do not disagree with you. And I am 13 years old, it must be insane how I managed to make questions you cannot answer. Now, I do hope you have the finest evening.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tonyrobinson 1 month ago
tonyrobinson
See the planets? unless you are actually at the planet you can not say what that picture truly is of? Pictures can be deceiving or just plain fraudulent. Nature itself is proof of the existence of God, the harmony and of it all and the way it all works together must be by intelligent design.
Posted by whiteflame 2 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Iacov// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters were very respectful and grammatically correct although I feel that no valid sources were provided. Also I feel pro did not actually make a argument rather he only mentioned a book and ceded con's argument. Con I believe also made a fairly weak argument as his point described one specific instance in the Bible, however seeing that it was the only argument provided points were awarded to con.

[*Reason for removal*] Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter needs to specifically assess arguments made by both sides. There is some generalized assessment of the quality of those arguments, chiefly on the basis of sources, but no specifics as to what the argument is that's being won in this debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by Blazzered 2 months ago
Blazzered
We have photographs and are able to see planets through a telescope and we can see the wind move the trees and feel the wind.
As for a god, there is no conspicuous nor tangible evidence.
Posted by tonyrobinson 2 months ago
tonyrobinson
I can not prove the wind exists, or other planets exist. They must not be real either
Posted by whiteflame 2 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Swimwithcats// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: It is clear here that Pro provided no elaboration on his points for the existence of God. It is also clear that he performed the fallacy of Ad Hominem by attacking Con for his age, a silly point. Pro is casting these debates without proper debating structure.

[*Reason for removal*] While the voter is allowed some discretion in their view of the conduct violation, the vote is nonetheless insufficient in its analysis of the given arguments. The voter is required to examine specific arguments made by both sides, and while a lack of elaboration by Pro may be sufficient, the voter is still required to assess Con's point or to explain why Pro's argument failed to meet his BoP.
************************************************************************
Posted by Khons 2 months ago
Khons
I know i just kinda gave up i was tired of typing the same things over and over again
Posted by Blazzered 2 months ago
Blazzered
This wasn't really a debate...
Pro pretty much just used Pascals Wager and recommended the book "48 hours in Hell". Pro's whole argument appeals to emotion...
Con made the statement "if you can't prove it, why believe in it" which is a good statement, and then asked many questions that raise the doubt of the god of the bible.
But overall there wasn't much of a debate here.
Posted by tonyrobinson 2 months ago
tonyrobinson
" Since you cannot prove he is real, why believe in it. I use to believe in "God" most of my childhood. Now I just question if he is real or not. Like think, people would apparently live up to like 400 or something (according to the bible). Now, back then, they had like no medicine at all. What made them live that long? We have more technology, medicine, etc. I don't want you to stop believing in "God" if you really believe in him. I also question, how could a bible be the same for many, many years. Also, people in other places believe in other things like "God". They do the same thing we do, believe in him/her no matter what. This is some reasons why I question if "God", is real. "

They also had far less disease and much better eating habits than today. No matter where you go or what time you look at most people are all basically the same. They wish to make a good living, provide for their family and watch their children grow up. Things that people found funny 3000 years ago are still funny today. We all have the same human emotions and feelings as people even in the beginning of time. God has never changed nor has basic human behavior. That is how the Bible is still relevant today as it ever was.
Posted by Khons 2 months ago
Khons
God of the Christian faith my faith
Posted by Tree_of_Death 2 months ago
Tree_of_Death
Which god?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Blazzered 2 months ago
Blazzered
KhonsJxstenTied
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: Pro basically conceded the debate from the start by stating "I can't prove that God is real". All Pro did was recommend a book, that isn't even proved to be credible. Con did good in stating that if someone can't prove a claim, why believe in it. Con then asked questions that bring doubt to the credibility to the bibles tales. Pro cannot answer Cons questions, and instead uses pascals wager as an argument, despite it being a logical fallacy by appealing to emotion. Since Pro could not answer Cons questions, and could not prove the existence of God, and conceded at round 2, I award Con points for convincing arguments.
Vote Placed by tonyrobinson 2 months ago
tonyrobinson
KhonsJxstenTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: There was some discussion but no real debate.