The Instigator
brainfigure
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Is there no god?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 6 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/12/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 478 times Debate No: 45778
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (6)

 

brainfigure

Pro

Ask yourself if there is a god. You will probably say yes. The majority does. But if you ask yourself about your answer and ask about the answer to that question and so on, you will be backed into a corner by logic itself.
Mikal

Con

I am going to take this just off the resolution

Pros is claiming there is no God

This is a positive stance and requires extraordinary evidence. Often when we debate the idea of a God existing, we deal with probability. We can almost certainly claim

"There is probably not a God"

but it is almost impossible to say

"There is no God"

This is the stance my adversary has taken and did not defend.



What is God

This is the argument that can shatter the resolution. Essentially my adversary did not define God. Whether we are discussing the Christian God (Yahweh), Ala, or even if God is a exists metaphysically without our mind. God can simply be an abstract idea to some people, or God could even be the Universe itself.

The resolution is so wide that my adversary has taken a nearly impossible stance. For him to say there is no God, he would have to have overwhelming evidence.

My argument is that there probably is no God, but there is no 100 percent way to verify this. We can only assume this using logical progression in our thoughts and rationality.


Conclusion.

The resolution was not and can not be upheld.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
The majority consider themselves religious.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
brainfigureMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided an argument which Pro could not contest due to round limitations. Pro only made a few statements. Con wins since he pointed out the lack of a valid argument by Pro.
Vote Placed by jdtroughton 3 years ago
jdtroughton
brainfigureMikalTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: All Pro requires is a lack of evidence, and reason to doubt the assertion of god claimers. Both are overwhelmingly evident. Con's attempt to lawyer a win out of this was the last nail in a coffin constructed of wishy-washy logic divorced totally from reality.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
brainfigureMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: No proper arguments by Pro. Con clearly explained and clearly presented his arguments with proper refutation which went UN-contended as this was a single round debate and an easy win for Con.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 3 years ago
codemeister13
brainfigureMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used no evidence to back their case and they failed to make any arguments as to why they take their position other than stating logic says so. To that, I ask how so? Con created an argument around the resolution and defended it. Points to Con.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
brainfigureMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro asks a hypothetical. Con actually makes arguments. Pretty clear win for Con...
Vote Placed by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
brainfigureMikalTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: There was no real arguments presented by Pro...