Is The Christian God Real? And is The Bible Real?
Debate Rounds (5)
I challenge MikeTheDebater to this challenge as i saw him argue against Islam several times and enjoyed his argument. Now i would like to see him argue against me, an agnostic atheist.
I hope my opponent accepts this debate, thank you.
Be respectful: I feel like Debates always go smoother when there is a mutual respect between the two parties
Quotes and facts need sources: Sources should be properly cited
And most importantly keep an open mind :)
Ill let my opponent present her points first.
Firstly I must know: Do You Believe the Earth Is 6000-8000 Years Old??? I ask this to know if I should be arguing against not only creationism but young earth creationism.
I will begin this debate by stating what I believe happened and why I believe it. I will give proof in the form of facts, and citations.
I believe the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. We can determine this age by looking at what is called the Hubble Constant. The expansion rate of the universe, figuring out how fast it is, then how large the universe is, then doing a simple equation T/D = A . T being the total distance of the universe and D being the distance traveled per year of the universe to get a non-exact (but extremely close number and A being the total age. Scientists also used other ways, read this article: http://www.space.com.... To further educate yourself on the topic. I also believe the earth is 4.54 billion years old. We can determine this through many ways, and as not to waste characters, I provide this link to help give points and explain why almost every scientist agrees on this fact: http://www.talkorigins.org...
I believe the Universe was originally an infinitely dense point and inflated at huge speeds (and is still inflating as we can see by the universe expanding) to create the universe we know today. I came to this conclusion as we can look at the universe; it is expanding in all directions at a constant speed. (we can determine this using the Hubble Telescope which shows galaxies moving away from us, this is known as The Metric Expansion of Space https://en.wikipedia.org... ) if we trace back this expanding universe it slowly comes back to one singular point. Here let me give an example, when something is dropped on the surface of water, it creates ripples going out in all directions, if you trace each ripple farther and farther back to a single point were the object first hit the water. The same concept fits with the universe, if the universe is expanding in all directions, it must come back at one singular point, this point is called The Big Bang (I disagree with this name as it was not an explosion but inflation like that of a balloon). Now I wish to avoid questions such as "were did the big bang come from" because then I will argue "where did god come from because a creator needs a creator" then we will both spend the duration arguing over a fact that neither one of us can answer. But if you wish to I will engage this argument.
I believe in the Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection, this is supported by fossils, which show species slowly changing into other species. We also can see even ourselves slowly evolving; we can look at things called vestigial organs or organs that do nothing; such as the appendix, and the small sac attached to your large intestine Wikipedia has good information on vestigiality in humans at this page: https://en.wikipedia.org.... These organs show that at one time we needed them but because of evolution, we no longer do. Evolution is shown by fossils in things we call "intermediate" or "transitional" forms, these things show skeletal records of something that seems to be in between 2 species as if one species were changing into another, our friends at livescience have a page on these fossils and why they help prove Darwin"s theory http://www.livescience.com...
I choose not tot believe in the Christian "God" and the stories told in its holy book The Bible as they make outrageous claims in outrageous situations, such as a sea being parted, the Noah"s ark story, etc. I see no definite proof for God and his existence in our world, I feel there is no need for a God for the world to have existed as it does today, I grew up in a very religious home but am now an Agnostic Atheist, I do not believe in God, but who knows, maybe my opponents arguments will change my mind.
Mike your next turn You must describe your points and why you believe them.
You say that you believe the Bible claims the earth is a few thousand years old. Now unfortunately, what most people dont know is that the 7 "days" of creation in the Bible arent literal 24 hour periods but rather undisclosed amounts of time. These "days" could have been anywhere from 1 month to 3 billion years. The Hebrew word "Yom" as used in the Bible literally means a period of time, not a specific linear 24 hour day. Thus I believe that the Universe is 13.8 trillion years old as well. Just because I am a Christian and choose to believe in a higher power does not mean I must reject scientific fact in order to compromise my religion with reality. In fact, when we analyze the Bible in depth with its historical claims we find that the Bible is chronologically and morally sound in its logic and philosophy. In fact, the Bible references many large historical events that occurred during the time of its writing
you also said that you believe that the Universe was an infinitely dense point that exploded into the universe we now know today. Well, the Bible does too. In the beginning of Genesis, the author depicts a scene much like the one you just described. In Genesis 1:2 we read,
"Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep"
by "formless" and "empty" we can assume this meant that outside of this area in which God was, there was nothing else, much like the infinitely dense point you described. The explosion can also be explained by a Bible verse,
"And the LORD said, let there be light. and there was" Genesis 1:4
now when I imagine the big bang and "let there be light" I see a very similar event occurring. The simple truth is that the Bible does not reject the Big bang theory, the Bible just believes that there was a being on the end who flipped the switch to start the process in motion.
With respect to evolution. Christianity as a whole does not in any way reject natural selection or evolution. Most Christians actually believe in evolution due to the enormous amount of scientific evidence backing the theory up. Again, we still believe that science and natural processes happened, we just thing there was a driving force who created the system to benefit his creations and allow them to adapt.
on the topic of "outrageous" bible stories, the miracles depicted in the book are not too far fetched and many of them are actually very plausible. For example, a few years ago, researchers traveled to the red sea to see if its parting was possible as Moses allegedly did it in the Bible. What they found was quite surprising. they found that a certain reef under neath the ocean would pop out at certain intervals just enough to expose temporary sand bars which would allow people to walk through as the israelites did. http://abcnews.go.com.... So to say the stories of the Bible are far fetched is really quite far from the truth
TheSubtleMechanic forfeited this round.
mikethedebater forfeited this round.
The problem with what i Have that you are suggesting, is its a broad, non supported claim, that has little to no evidence to back it up.
The Big Bang Theory states that a random amount of mass, time , light exploded to create our universe, which is why our universe is so random. The reason are Earth is so "fine tuned" as some say is because since there are literally Sextillions of planets out there it was BOUND to happen on AT LEAST one of them. Yet you suggest that while there was nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, there lived a complex, (obviously more complex being than anything else in our universe) in this nothing which had the complexity to create the universe, to morph DNA, to create genetic code, and that this being, this entity, put a book down for us to read with contradictory laws and no definite proof to support his existence? I mean if this God wanted us to believe in him SO badly why didn't he give us definite proof of his existence, why did he make us have a literal 3000 choice guessing game? And yes i understand the concept of "free will" but the lack of definite evidence, the amount of other religions, the amount of skepticism of other people, why would your God do this, why not at least give a MODERATE amount of proof to back up his claims, which is what the bible is. Anything the bible supports can be backed up with more evidence and has scientific explanations to prove it. The fact is that the bible could have been true, it could be real of course, but with no empirical data to support it, theirs reason to believe in it. I mean sure, a unicorn COULDVE created the universe and used evolution to shape the existence of all the beings, but without evidence to suggest that it DID, threes no reason to believe in it. In fact theirs lots of evidence to support a non god proven existence. Saying that something has always existed is impossible as everything in that object would happen at once. And if God was not always there then who created him? And who created that? It causes an infinite paradox.
mikethedebater forfeited this round.
But because he did not I will further restate my claims that scientific physics disproves christianity and further proves a non-god supported view, like Stephen Hawking said:
"Because There Is A Law Such as Gravity, The Universe can And Will Create Itself From Nothing"
That is all I have to say for now, until he posts an argument. Thank you for this debate and I hope you respond.
mikethedebater forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Gondun 1 year 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: Conduct goes to Con for finishing the debate. S&G were good on both sides. Pro successfully countered all Con arguments, but made none of his own in response, so arguments is a draw. Sources go to Con for citing more of her arguments.
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.