Is there a "God"?
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
| Started: | 12/18/2007 | Category: | Religion |
| Updated: | 5 years ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 1,180 times | Debate No: | 661 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (21)
 Con Now to the actual debate. Before I give my points, I would like to define God: God is All Seeing God is All Knowing God is Benevolent God is a Higher Being (a.k.a. not human, something more like an angel) If there was an actual God that follows the above criteria, then why do we have so much suffering in the world? There is extreme poverty in China, there are genocides happening in Darfur, and many people do not know where their next meal will come from. If God is truly all seeinging and benevolent, then he/she would see the suffering, and being benevolent as he/she is, would fix the problem. If God does exist, then why haven't we seen any proof? By proof I mean scientific proof, concrete proof. Not that you had a vision and God told you to do something. Going by the criteria posed above, I say that there is no God, and if the opposition is unable to provide proof otherwise, then I win this debate.  Pro God may be all knowing and all seeing, but that doesn't mean (s)he holds our hand the whole through. (S)He created this universe and placing animals, plants, and humans down in order to have some joy in the world. While some choose to be righteous and good, others are devilish in their actions. Just because there is misfortune in some areas, means God is ignoring. To prove to one man or women there is a God is an impossible feat. They must find faith on there own account. But to those who believe God is in our hearts and souls and whats keeps our drum beat to the correct tune. Of course we are only humans and make mistakes. For me to give you scientific evidence is impossible; for I don't believe there is any. But to tell millions of people there isn't a God and expect them to believe you is never happening. |
 |
|
Con "S)He created this universe and placing animals, plants, and humans down in order to have some joy in the world. " Once again, how is haveing millions of people die everyday to things that could eaisly be prevented joy? Would you be joyful if you were starving everyday and had no education and was suffering form malaria? I don't think so. And yes, this does happen. "To prove to one man or women there is a God is an impossible feat." Let us say for a moment that there is a God. If he/she showed us all some actual proof, that he/she existed, would he/she not be giving us proof? Would that not be concrete evidence to show that God exists? Therefore, it is not impossible to prove it. "But to those who believe God is in our hearts and souls and whats keeps our drum beat to the correct tune. Of course we are only humans and make mistakes." How does this prove that God exists? You are just reafimming what I said. Becuase the topic of this debate is "is there a god?" and the oppostition has not provided any argument showing that there is, I win this debate. The arguments that Partyboat have said have all been reufted by me and shown to be immaterial. Thank You Pro Partyboat forfeited this round. |
 |
|
Con Pro |
 |
21 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by padfo0t 4 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 7 |
Vote Placed by burningpuppies101 4 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 7 | 0 |
Vote Placed by Padfoot36 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Vote Placed by King_Jas 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Vote Placed by adamh 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by kenito001 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Vote Placed by undecided_voter 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by indicolts 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by UN_diplomat 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by sagarous 5 years ago
| Cindela | Partyboat | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 0 | 3 |
You do not have faith in your family in the same way you have faith in God. You trust your family and you leap to an absurd conclusion with God.
You cannot prove God exists because God doesn't exist. I could give you a number of good reasons to doubt the existence of God. Just as I could give good arguments to doubt unicorns and goblins. The problem isn't that both sides are equal. If that is the case you should suspend your belief and neither believe or disbelieve... and guess what? That's atheism.
The problem is one side is saying you don't have one smattering of evidence and the other side is saying of course we don't have evidence we believe it more because it doesn't have evidence. When strictly speaking, you have no evidence for false things. -- To consider that evenly matched and thus a job for faith to fill in the gap is silly. I can't prove the existence of leprechauns either. Where does that leave the issue? Believe in leprechauns anyway?
Yes. Both sides of the argument can be proven. If God comes down from the sky and says I'm God. That's good evidence that God exist. Just as if the very notion of God is contradictory and absurd and there isn't one shred of evidence for the idea. That's good evidence that God doesn't exist.
To say that the evidence for X and not ~X is incomplete and thus lets assume X just because even though X is absurd and the world looks exactly like ~X is true... well that's not right.
Some people do need faith to believe in themselves, and love. :)
I theory though, just as I can not prove to you God does exist, you can not prove to me God does not exist. So therefore it is a question of faith. In no way can either side of the argument ever be proven true, it is strictly an argument of opinion not fact.
- Dan Barker
You can't prove God exists because God doesn't exist. The only way to even believe God exists is by suspending your ability to reason and declare that God exists. Giving it a cozy name like "faith" doesn't make it valid, its still a grossly flawed epistemological mistake. You can faith yourself into any number of beliefs even completely contradictory ones. Take a look at the debate on Mormonism for a good example of that.
Why does it take faith to believe in:
Unicorns.
Leprechauns.
Fairies.
Gods.
Goblins.
Ghosts.
Yet, no faith to believe in:
Chairs.
Water.
Yourself.
Wind.
Love.
Families.
I'll give you some time to mull it over.
The bible is just man writing about his experiences. It has been translated and edited for thousands of years by none other than the flaw filled man. How then can we believe it?
God is a creation of an idea to fill the lack of knowledge that humans have about our beginnings.
Also, not entirely related, but in this year we look back at the Greeks and practically mock their gods. Who now believes in Zeus? What will people think of our religions in a thousand years?
(s)he does not? No, because it takes some degree of faith to believe in God.
The only limitation is that you need to prove something false. If it were true, this limitation wouldn't exist and it would be pretty easy. After all, a benevolent God would be pretty obvious if the punishment for non-belief is eternal torture a benevolent God should make himself quite apparent. I suppose you could deny it if you wanted, but you'd be hard pressed to do so.
Though, without a God, one can not only disbelieve but have good reasons for disbelief. While believers need to undermine all logic and just conclude the conclusion on the grounds that they really want to and spend considerable effort maintaining this belief.
The Universe is not:
All Seeing
All Knowing
Benevolent
a Higher Being.
Partyboat is clearly lost. You can't prove the existence of such a God because there is no God. You might as well argue 2+2=7 or Square Circles Exist.