The Instigator
Travisc20
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Discipulus_Didicit
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Is God 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Discipulus_Didicit
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 442 times Debate No: 75515
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

Travisc20

Pro

Now, I know this might be an overused debate, but I just want to get the feel for this website. Anyone who believes God is not real, please feel free to accept this debate, but let's keep it civil, so no calling the other person an idiot.
So, getting into the debate, I believe that God is real, and I believe that there is tons of evidence to prove that fact. First, I'll start out talking about how every creation must have a creator. There is an old story that helps prove this concept. This involves Isaac Newton. He had an atheistic friend who liked to point out his beliefs. What Newton did, was get a very well hand crafted replica of the universe. He left it on his table and invited his friend over. When his friend got there, he commented on the replica and asked where Newton got it. Newton replied that it had just appeared there that morning. His friend put on a confused look and asked what that meant. Newton replied that he had been sitting there that morning, and it had just appeared out of thin air. His friend told him that that was crazy and that something like that could not happen. Now, obviously, the model did not appear out of thin air, but it does show what I mean by every creation must have a creator. Now, you may say, you can't prove that, because there was no materials to create the model with out of thin air. That is true, so here is another story. A man bought a watch and took it apart. He put all the parts into a box and brought the box into the woods. He sat there for a while, and then started shaking the box. In the box, he had put all the parts of the watch, so after a while he opened the box and was surprised to see that the watch was still taken apart. Now, this story is even crazier than the third, but it also shows that every creation must have a creator.
Discipulus_Didicit

Con

I accept this debate, as I am also a noob on this site and think it would be unfair for either of us to have our first debates be against non-noob people.

I would also like to point out that I am not going to try to prove that god is not real, I am not sure if that is possible. Instead I will examine your arguments in favour of gods existence and explain why I believe them to be invalid.

Your first story, as I understand it, attempts to prove that the universe must have been created due to the fact that it is too complicated for any other possible explanation to be likely. I believe the statement 'every creation has a creator' is simply begging the question, as it assumes from the start that the universe is in fact a creation.

How do we know that the universe was created? there must be some criteria for identifying something that is created versus something that occurs naturally? I would ask that pro defines these criteria more clearly, due to the fact that a large part of their argument hinges on this distinction.

If in fact we assume that the universe has a creator simply because of its complexity as pro seems to imply,then we must also assume that any being we assign the title of creator to must also have a creator, because anything complex enough to create a universe must be complex enough to qualify as being created, if complexity is the only criteria for being a 'creation'. This results in an infinite regression, which I believe pro should be required to explain if this first argument is to be held as valid.

Therefore, either provide an explanation for this infinite regression, or provide us with some criteria other than complexity that is required for something to be considered a creation.

I will now address your second story, the one about the watch. To be quite honest I do not quite understand what this story was trying to say. If you are trying to say that the watches complexity and inability to magically reassemble itself is proof that it is too complex to have not been created similar to what you were saying in the first story then I would say my argument against the first holds true for the second as well. If I am misunderstanding your intent entirely then please forgive me and explain it more clearly in round two and I will address it then.
Debate Round No. 1
Travisc20

Pro

Travisc20 forfeited this round.
Discipulus_Didicit

Con

I was hoping for a bit more...
Debate Round No. 2
Travisc20

Pro

Travisc20 forfeited this round.
Discipulus_Didicit

Con

My oponents argument in rounds two and three are clearly superior to mine.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Discipulus_Didicit 1 year ago
Discipulus_Didicit
What I see as one of my least interesting debates has gotten far more votes than any other debate of mine with no advertising whatsoever on my part. This fact itself is interesting, to me at least.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by ooberman 1 year ago
ooberman
Travisc20Discipulus_DidicitTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Another person getting emotional about their religion, but with no ability to think properly about their emotions...
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Travisc20Discipulus_DidicitTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Travisc20Discipulus_DidicitTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit by Pro.
Vote Placed by Lexus 1 year ago
Lexus
Travisc20Discipulus_DidicitTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 1 year ago
salam.morcos
Travisc20Discipulus_DidicitTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff