It is reasonable to believe that God exists
Debate Rounds (3)
God is defined as the supreme being of the universe. The intelligent designer responsible for our existence.
Reasonable: "(of a person) having sound judgment; fair and sensible." (Google)
Argument from intelligence
1. Without an intelligent designer of the universe, the universe was created without intelligence.
2. The universe shows intelligence.
2a. Intelligence only comes from a mind.
3. Therefore, the universe shows intelligence because it was created from a mind.
How does the universe show intelligence? I am showing some intelligence by writing this post. Out of the 26 letters of the alphabet I've grouped and sequenced these letters specifically for the purpose of conveying an argument. Intelligence can be interchanged with the term "specifed-complexity." As another example, the information directing each one of our cells show specified-complexity. When cells act on this information, we don't observe them performing random or arbitrary functions - but rather they perform very specific functions for very specific purposes using their assortment of complex, micro-organelles. Bill Gates is quoted as saying that the DNA in our cells is like a digital code but far more advanced than any software ever created:
"DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created."
R13; Bill Gates, The Road Ahead
Getting back to my initial point: without a God requires a non-intelligent cause. Random and spontaneous causes never indicate specified-complexity. Would you assume that the Rosetta Stone was written through wind and erosion? No.
1. Universal and unchanging laws of order are not created chaotically
2. The universe shows universal and unchanging laws of order
3. Therefore, the universe was not created chaotically.
Look at the laws of gravity, physics, thermodynamics, etc,. Does these laws of universal, unchanging order indicate that the universe was created chaotically? No, it certainly wouldn't indicate that. Would it indicate intelligence? Yes, because the laws themselves are formulaic and finely-tuned to allow for us to exist. An infinitesimally small change in many of the constants in our universe would not allow for life to exist as we know it. This quote elaborates more specifically on just ONE example of many proving that the universe is fine-tuned:
"Another interesting example of a finely-tuned initial condition is the critical density of the universe. In order to evolve in a life-sustaining manner, the universe must have maintained an extremely precise overall density. The precision of density must have been so great that a change of one part in 1015 (i.e. 0.0000000000001%) would have resulted in a collapse, or big crunch, occurring far too early for life to have developed, or there would have been an expansion so rapid that no stars, galaxies or life could have formed.9 This degree of precision would be like a blindfolded man choosing a single lucky penny in a pile large enough to pay off the United States" national debt."
Argument from objective morality
1. objective morality cannot exist without God
2. objective morality exists
3. Therefore, God exists.
Is it always wrong to murder without cause? Is it always wrong to rape someone against their will? If God doesn't exist, you cannot say it's objectively wrong but only that it's wrong according to you. Universally, regardless of culture, and regardless of time period humans recognize that murder and rape are wrong. If we are freak accidents of random mutation, why would this be? Some atheists might say that if murder and rape wasn't wrong, it would hinder the evolutionary process and the reason why we see these awful things as being wrong is because our purpose has been to populate and survive. If no God exists, no objective purpose at all exists. This includes the purpose to populate and advance the evolutionary process. If you derive purpose from a natural process, does it follow that we should derive purpose from every natural process? Remember that dying is a natural process too.
The Big Bang
The most widely accepted theory of how the universe came about, and that has the most evidence supporting it, is the Big Bang.
The Big Bang has shown that time, space, matter, and energy were all instantaneously created with the Big Bang.
Therefore, the necessary cause of the universe must've been timeless, spaceless, and immaterial.
The only two causes that meet the necessary criteria of being timeless, spaceless, and immaterial are 1) an abstract idea, like the concept of "love", or 2) a mind. A mind is a better causal explanation of the universe than an abstract idea. This begs the question, "who's mind?" and that answer must be God. In a chain reaction of necessary causes, the origin of the first cause must be eternal and the original causer of all causes - God.
Kshitij12345sharma forfeited this round.
Kshitij12345sharma forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sswdwm 2 years 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:||7||0|
Reasons for voting decision: FF.... And trolling.. Not cool
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.