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

Is God real?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,102 times Debate No: 32510
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




Is god real? (christian god)
I say no arguments next round.


I accept. God is real.

Both sides must provide some argumentation and reasoning. Just saying that there is no real proof is not enough for Con to win.
Debate Round No. 1


God isn't real why is because if matter can't be created or destroyed then how was God made and if he was how could he create matter from nothing AND DON'T SAY because he's God because that is bull also if God were real why would he have a need for us? he is already the most powerful being so why create lessors? If you were powerful enough to create the universe why make people to challenge your excitence? simple you wouldn't. Also if the Big Bang is such a lie then how come it STILL HAPPENS? what i mean by that is galaxies are still being created. Not to mention that he would he just make us if he already created us then why stop there? why not make more beings? simple he didn't because HE ISN'T REAL at least the Big Bang explains why human may be the only beings.


Ok, so the Con starts off by saying that God can't be real because matter can't be created or destroyed, but this actually is not in line with the Christian view of God. Because God is God, he is not bound by all the rules of physics, chemistry, etc. that control our universe. Therefore, the existence of God and creation of the universe are completely possible. The Con's second argument is that if God is so powerful, then why did he create us? My answer to this is quite simple. According to Christian teachings, humans are the children of God. He created us for the same reason that most parents choose to have children: they want to have a family. Con's next argument is that the big bang is still happening, but the big bang does not disprove God. The bible does not explain exactly how Earth was created, so it is completely possible that the big bang was how God created the universe. Finally, Con says that because there is no life outside of Earth, then God cannot exist. This is an illogical argument because no matter how many/ how few people God created, you could still ask why he did not choose a different number. I don't know why he stopped where he did, but I see no reason why this proves that he doesn't exist. Also, could you please explain how "the Big Bang explains why human may be the only beings."

Now on to my argument. I believe that God does exist for the main reason that the world is very complex and perfect. There are so many factors that make life on earth possible that it is unreasonable that it was an accident. I heard an analogy once that said if you have a 10,000 piece puzzle and you throw all the pieces on the ground, no matter how many times you do it you will not end up with a fully completed puzzle. It takes an intelligent being to put together the puzzle. I find it much more likely that the universe was created intelligently instead of randomly exploding into place.
Debate Round No. 2


The Pro says
The bible does not explain exactly how Earth was created, so it is completely possible that the big bang was how God created the universe.
This is false because it says (using bible to disprove his argument) as stated "In the beginning God created the heavens and the EARTH.
He also states that
But the Big Bang does not disprove God.
This too is dis proven by what i previously stated by the Bible never mentions the Big Bang
He states that
world is very complex and perfect
If it is so perfect then why doesn't everyone get along? Why does everyone have their own personal views of the world? why isn't every argument one sided? Why is God then for questioned?
What I mean by the Big Bang explains maybe that the big bang made life on Earth ONLY
and also families usually don't have just one child and stop (don't know exact percentages) so why would God (one child referring to humans not just one race)
For his argument states that
It takes an intelligent being to put together the puzzle
Not every person is Intelligent and according to you God is God not a PERSON so you can't clam that plus almost every one can put together a puzzle just a different time rates so you expect me to believe that someone can make the universe and the Earth in 7 DAYS? I don't believe it.

My argument is that God wouldn't know what a family is if he is alone he wouldn't know how to create MATTER which I used to prove that God can't excite if matter can't be made or destroyed so how can he create this "perfect" world you clam we live in. If God experimented with it then it was an accident!So don't clam that. Well according to Christians and you that God is perfect the he would know what number to make.


Ok, there are a few main arguments in this debate. I will take on each of them in turn.

First, the Con says that the Big Bang disproves God. He does this by saying that the Bible never mentions the Big Bang. This is an illogical argument because no one understood the universe back when the Bible was written. The creation of the universe was described in ways that people could understand it back when it was written. For this reason, the Big Bang does not disprove God.

The next point that Con makes is that our world is not perfect, so there cannot be a God. When I made this argument, I was talking about Earth and the conditions required for life to exist, not the society of the humans that inhabit it. Con's argument about people not being perfect does not disprove God either. God created us as imperfect beings so we could learn and grow on Earth then return to him. The imperfection is part of the Christian understanding of God's plan and is therefore not reason to disbelieve God.

Con's next point is that if God exists, then he would create more than one species. Con has no backing or logic to this claim, only the question "why not?". Also, Con's analogy about about most families not stopping at one child works in my favor because God did not stop at one, he created billions of people. Finally, Con says that the Big Bang is the reason that there is only life on earth, but this neither disproves God, nor does it make any sense.

The next point is a continuation of my complexity of creation argument. The Con makes a bunch of jumbled arguments against my analogy, but they do not disprove God. The puzzle idea was simply an analogy; not all the parts will fit in exactly. Finally, Con says that God could not create the world in seven days. This is an illogical argument for two reasons. Firstly, God is God, so by definition he can do things, like creating the universe, that our mortal minds cannot fully comprehend. Second, day and night were not in existence when God started creating the universe, so there is no reason to think that he measured his time by our measurement of days.

Finally, Con says that God would not know how to create a family or matter. This is unreasonable because humans did not need to be told how to create families, so why should God not know? Also, as I said before, God is God so creating matter is not an issue for him.

I am winning this debate because the Con has no arguments that disprove God and my argument about the complexity of creation still stands.
Debate Round No. 3


I shall do the same

Yes my argument is logical because the Big Bang disproves God you are illogical because you just said that people didn't understand the universe so you just said God isn't real because the people didn't understand the universe so how can God be real.

I am too if Earth is so perfect so why are resources limited and why do certain disasters happen that kill thousands.


God is God what does that even mean God is God you are you I am ME it doesn't even prove that he is real and if God is only one thing then how can you compare him to himself? NO The Bible says on DAY ONE... so yeah there were days. Human do get told how to create families and GOD was not so how could he know LISTEN TO WHAT I AM SAYING MATTER CAN NOT BE MADE OR DESTROYED.

I am winning because the pro is using ill efficient facts does things I tell him not to do I bring reason and I do support it.
You have not that concludes this debate.


I didn't quite understand all of Con's arguments in that last round, but I'll try to address what I can.

First, Con just saying that the Big Bang disproves God does not prove anything. He did not explain how God was disproved, so the Big Bang should not play a role in the voting. Even if you do vote by the Big Bang, God is compatible with the theory, as I have explained before.

Next, Con says that our Earth is not perfect. Once again, I am talking about the conditions required to support life, not circumstances that make life less enjoyable. Compared to every other planet that scientists know about, our Earth is the only one remotely capable of sustaining life. This is what I am talking about and I believe that this is evidence of God.

I have no idea what Con is talking about when he says "YOU NEED TO READ AFTER THAT I MEAN THAT HUMANS!!!!! ARE ONE CHILD", so I am skipping it.

What I meant by "God is God" is that because of the nature of God as understood by Christians, God is not subject to all the laws of chemistry, physics, etc., such as the law of conservation of mass. I'm sorry if this was confusing, but it does not change my arguments.

Con's argument that God would not know how to create families is flawed for two reasons. Firstly, God pretty much invented families. There is no reason that God could not create something new. Also, in the non-religious view of evolution, there had to be the first family at some point. Because of this, there is no reason that God shouldn't be able to make a family.

I should win this debate because the Con has no strong reason that God is not real, but my argument about the complexity of creation still stands. Voters, please keep in mind that there is no real way to prove weather or not God exists, so vote based on argumentation and without bias. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by thepieman 5 years ago
I'm an atheist, and this was a sh!t argument against god. The Big Bang theory ONLY explains the early expansion of the universe, not its origin. My argument is the difference between me and your god is that if I could stop a child from being raped/killed, I would. "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~Epicurus
Posted by gordonjames 5 years ago
I get the impression that neither PRO or CON considered much of the absolutely huge amount of information available on this subject through history.

Here is a good summary of the argument for God has this info on their site.

There are "Objective arguments" that try to use outside data to point to God.
There are "Subjective arguments" that use my experience of God's presence
Then there are philosophical arguments like the "Prime Mover" or "first cause" that you have touched on.

People have been debating this for thousands of years.

As I see it.
There will always be enough proof for those who are already convinced.
There may always be enough doubt for those who do not want to believe.

My experience have taught me to seek God.
The more I experience Him the stronger my faith grows.
Posted by robert_alderete 5 years ago
Well I was a little on the fence with the question in the first place anyways. It seemed to me as Con used the bible out of context. I have read some of the bible but not enough to debate about it, it just seemed that Con pulled out info and really didn't expand on it. Idk just my opinion.....
Posted by lmudude 5 years ago
Heck ya he is. Really for all of you out there who dont think God is real listen up. Really you think the 'Big Band Theory' is real so how did the stars get there. O ya God put them there. I for one think the Big Bang theory is wrong but thats just me. If God was not real how would you me or anything be here!
Posted by nathanknickerbocker.9 5 years ago
Yes definitions so that I don't get WHICH god
Posted by IX 5 years ago
Seriously? Definitions? At least try for a SEMBLANCE of a debate format...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 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 Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: Secondguy was more lucid and cogent, better at refuting his opponent's arguments. Firstguy flirted with incoherency, sentences quit scanning.