The Instigator
Proving_a_Negative
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
chloe-forever-2002
Pro (for)
Losing
0 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 2 votes the winner is...
Proving_a_Negative
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 443 times Debate No: 69275
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Proving_a_Negative

Con

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening Argument
Round 3: Rebuttal
Round 4: Closing Statement

God does not exist. I am looking forward to a challenging debate, hopefully.
chloe-forever-2002

Pro

Many things support the existence of God. First of all, there is an amazing universe full of innumerable things so complex and intricately woven together that the thought of it all happening in a chance explosion seems comical.
Debate Round No. 1
Proving_a_Negative

Con

To start off, I would like to say welcome to the debate. Since you started your argument early I find it necessary to have a small rebuttal here. You are assuming that I believe in the big bang for reasons unknown. Please expand on the "many things" that support the existence of god. For what reason are we to assume that because something is complex it must be made by god? It would be best to show the sources for this. Provide the link to a credible source. This reasoning would also justify the existence of magical flying invisible unicorns in space. Just replace "God" with unicorns. Now it probably seems ridiculous.

My argument:

Not much to say here actually! My opponent is trying to prove the existence of a deity that we cannot sense with any known mechanism. We need substantial proof to conclude god is real. It should be abundant, repeatable, and quality evidence.
chloe-forever-2002

Pro

chloe-forever-2002 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Proving_a_Negative

Con

To clarify my argument in round 1, I should have stated that it is unlikely that god exists since there is no evidence. My opponent forfeited this round. Hopefully he will return to continue.
chloe-forever-2002

Pro

chloe-forever-2002 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Proving_a_Negative

Con

Pro forfeits. Sad days were had.
chloe-forever-2002

Pro

chloe-forever-2002 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by rextr05 1 year ago
rextr05
For the life of me, I cannot understand why people challenge others to prove God's existence one way or the other. For any that say they can undeniably prove God is real to a non believe with definitive proof, is going to be disappointed. & to those tha try to prove there is no God, they will also lose the debate for lack of definitive proof. The reason why? IT TAKES FAITH to believe in God & He said that's the deal, so why debate a moot point?
Posted by Lewis_P 1 year ago
Lewis_P
@Esiar
"To most people (Over half of people in the world): The eternal creator of the Universe."
It doesn't matter how many people use a term in a certain way. It helps with the clarity of a discussion to ensure that both Pro and Con are using terminology that they both agree on :)
Posted by Proving_a_Negative 1 year ago
Proving_a_Negative
Okay thanks for the tip guys. Never thought that I should define exactly what I meant for "god." Sorry for the confusion. We will go with a spiritual deity who is all powerful. Please let me know if that's alright.
Posted by Esiar 1 year ago
Esiar
To most people (Over half of people in the world): The eternal creator of the Universe.
Posted by Lewis_P 1 year ago
Lewis_P
It should be mandatory to begin debates such as these with clear definitions. What is a God?
Posted by Esiar 1 year ago
Esiar
"This reasoning would also justify the existence of magical flying invisible unicorns in space. Just replace "God" with unicorns."
This is illogical and inaccurate. Assume for a second there is great evidence of a creator (I think there is, but that is besides the point): We would know there is a creator, but we couldn't know who the creator is, we couldn't know if it is a FSM or something like that - A God in general would not be stepping outside of proof, but a Pink Unicorn would be.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Proving_a_Negativechloe-forever-2002Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
Proving_a_Negativechloe-forever-2002Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: ff