The Instigator
Pro (for)
10 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

If God exists as an emotional entity, it is not omnipotent.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 556 times Debate No: 63617
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)




Simple ping-pong debate. First round of Conis soley for acceptance please no debates in first round for Con.

Thank you so much for accepting in advance.

Fullest respect,



I accept the "debate" format although with just 1 round you realize you'll be well unable to rebut anything I say. Personally I think you should have made this longer to serve as an actual debate, nonetheless I find the subject intriguing enough that I accept. :) Per request I will reserve my arguments for the 2nd round.

I will however point out, simply in advance, that I define "omnipotent" simply as having all power that exists, not all powers that might exist, and that this does not necessarily imply omniscience (which is a separate concept). God can be all-powerful without being all-knowing in regards to the future.

That being said, I await Pro's response.
Debate Round No. 1


The only way to experience emotions is via a physical brain that is capable of producing hormones such as dopamine.[1] In addition, the physical hormones of estrogen and testosterone have opposing effects on one's experience emotions,[2][4] the difference is most seen in proneness to anxiety and worry.[3]

Now, the fundamental reason that God is labeled as 'he' rather than 'she' or 'it' is because it is seen as being fundamentally less emotional and more rational than any human being ever could be. It's also due to 'it' being seen as too rude, not because an 'it' feels no emotion but because an 'it' is not truly considered consciously capable of rational thought. The more you come to respect a species, or entity, the less you refer to them as 'its' and the more you refer to each one as a 'he' or a 'she'. Nevertheless, God is an it, at the end of the day as it has no physical presence. The reason that the top ranking demigods of Hinduism are male is also to do with men being less emotional and having more control over them. There is only one god named "Brahman"[5] in Hinduism that has no gender. It has many demigods, not gods, this is a fundamental misunderstanding that non-Hindus have.[6] An alternative interpretation is that each "demigod" is one of many spiritual paths to Brahman.[6]

The important thing to realize about emotions is that they are primarily instinctive.[7] They are also evolved actions learned throughout time[8] (regardless of it you believe in cross-species evolution, micro-evolution within a species is a genetic fact that you cannot deny). Those who didn't feel the right emotions at the right time were either socially rejected to pure isolation and thus couldn't mate to pass on their genes or were killed off for not feeling angry enough in a fight or being too angry to the wrong person and beating them up and having the victim's friends and family gang up on them for revenge. In fact the only reason anyone ever needed to feel emotions to begin with was in order to judge a situation correctly, God does not need to judge any situation correctly for misjudging it would not harm his omnipotent non-physical body in the slightest (so regardless of omniscience, emotions are not required whatsoever).

A point that Con may raise is that God would want to feel pleasure and has the power to do so. I am now going to explain why this is like the "square circle"[9] issue regarding God's omnipotence and would immediately make God powerless against the whims of his pleasure centre if he were to enable this. If God was to be able to feel pleasure, or pain, of any kind whatsoever he would immediately be rendering himself as a slave to these feelings. There is no such thing as an emotion that a person can voluntarily feel. The 'regulator' of emotions that humans can voluntarily use[10] is a physical aspect that inherited mental diseases such as bipolar disorder make people less capable of controlling.[11][12] Since to have physical presence would make God potent as physical things have limitations on size, strength, shape and all inevitably will come to an end at some point in some way, God cannot simultaneously be experiencing things on a physical level while remaining entirely omnipotent. Either he sacrifices his omnipotence and produces a brain out of thin air capable of experiencing emotions that gives other elements, or physical objects potency over or he remains omnipotent and incapable of feeling any emotion of any kind, as they are all physical which was proven earlier on.

In conclusion, the only possible reason that an entity would need to feel emotions is to produce the right hormones at the right time in order to help them survive against forces, or rivals, superior to themselves in some way. Also, since the only emotions that have ever been discovered have both 100% physicality in how they are felt and controlled God must either create a physical control and experiencing mechanism that he submits to (as all emotions inevitably have power over the entity experiencing them) that would already render him less powerful than his emotional control center, or he doesn't do this and remains omnipotent. In addition to this, any mechanism by which God could possible experience emotions would temporarily render the physical mechanism able to be both destroyed by other physical forces or objects as well as be restricted and enslaved by the need for his body and/or brain to be physically present in order to 'feel' them. If he is restricted by things, he has no power to overcome them whatsoever and is not omnipotent.

Thus, God is either capable of feeling emotions and not omnipotent, is potent and can feel emotions, is finitely potent and cannot feel emotions or is omnipotent and cannot feel emotions.




Jzyehoshua forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 2 years ago
Missed a day accidentally, and the short round format got to me. Very interesting argument, wish I'd had a chance to refute it.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
God has emotions. But one thing he never does is make decisions based on emotions.That is very good advice for us to follow also.

Faith is what moves God, not emotions. And it would be wise for us to know that. You can kick and scream and throw dirt in the air and God will not be moved to deliver you.If you take promises in his word by faith, then he will move in your behalf.

The bible is not a revelation of the power of God, but his love for man.He uses his power to deliver those who seek and ask him. But if you ignore him, he has no choice but to ignore you.
Posted by user_name 2 years ago
entity capable of feeling emotion
Posted by zmikecuber 2 years ago
wtf is an emotional entity? Like an entity which gets upset easily and has strong emotions?
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
In order to accept this we must believe God is only an emotional entity?
Posted by user_name 2 years ago
I apologize for this but I refuse to follow your advice.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Interesting setup. I do advise making it three rounds, as currently you are waving your ability to refute anything con argues.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Imperfiect 2 years ago
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit. I suggest a rematch.