The Instigator
user39681
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
ILL_logic
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Music proves that God exists

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...
ILL_logic
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,123 times Debate No: 46086
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

user39681

Pro

Music proves that God exists.


  1. Without God, music would not exist

  2. Without God, we could not enjoy music


The burden of proof will rest on the opponent to explain music without God.

ILL_logic

Con

first of all user i want to of course say thank you for the topic this is a new one for me and excited to be a part of it ! =]

"music proves that god exists" as you stated - i would like to know if you dont mind what song ? what artist? and what proof?

"without god music would not exist" my argument is simple on this matter , gods existence has never been proven to be true
so in theory music is mans invention

"without god we could not enjoy music" that is interesting, seeing as again god has never been proven to be real so what you are stating is just another "theory" and in no way shape or form a fact

"music without god " can you explain this in a little more detail?
Debate Round No. 1
user39681

Pro


ILL_Logic,


By “music”, I am referring to the language of music, rather than a specific song or artist. By analogy, it would be like referring to the English language, rather than a specific poem or poet.


First, you claimed that God's existence has not been proven, which means that my argument from music is invalid. This is circular reasoning (“Since God's existence has not been proven, you cannot prove God's existence…”). Also, I believe that God's existence is strongly evident in other things besides music, although this is another discussion.


Second, you said that, in theory, music is man’s invention. I disagree. It is true that composers write songs, but who came up with music in the first place? As an analogy, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote the poem “The Arrow and the Song”, but he did not invent the English language. Likewise, Beethoven wrote the popular Moonlight Sonata, but he did not invent the musical language. Where did the language of music come from?


My question to you is: How can you explain the language of music without God? If man invented music, then why can the Moonlight Sonata, written by a German in 1801, be appreciated today in the USA in 2014? Music is supported by an underlying framework, or language, that spans people across the world and throughout time. Evolution cannot account for it. Man cannot account for it. Such a magnificent language does in fact prove a magnificent Creator, God.


ILL_logic

Con

PRO,

im going to try and explain this without "attacking" your beliefs

as far as im concerned music is not a language so that is false
mu"sic [myoo-zik]
noun
1.
an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color. http://dictionary.reference.com...

not language leave language out of this especially the english language the english language was no where close to being the first language spoken and nobody even knows for a FACT the exact time or place that music or language was created

second you ask "who came up with music in the first place " you believe that it was god so prove to me how god created music can you do that ?

this whole debate should be invalid just because the fact that you are claiming that music is a language . first you need to know what music is to debate it
Debate Round No. 2
user39681

Pro


Longfellow described music as "the universal language of mankind". A study demonstrates this to be true [1]. The study shows that even people who have never been exposed to Western music understand it. Even your definition of music implies this by mentioning "rhythm, melody, harmony, and color". Where did these come from in the first place? John Williams wrote the famous "Olympic Fanfare and Theme", but he didn't invent melody, rhythm, or harmony. Where did these tools come from?


Take harmony, for example. The study of harmony becomes incredibly complex. For instance, back in 1957, Hermann L. F. Helmholtz opened his book "On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music" in this way [2]:


"In laying before the Public the result of eight years' labour, I must first pay a debt of gratitude. The following investigations could not have been accomplished without the construction of new instruments, which did not enter into the inventory of a Physiological Institute, and which far exceeded in cost the usual resources of a German philosopher."


Wow--eight years of research, new instruments, and high cost! All just to study the "tip of the iceberg" of harmony. This demonstrates to me that music is, in some senses, like physics or math. It can be studied diligently. We can come up with conclusions and research papers on it. Do you really believe that this could have resulted from evolution or by man's invention?


Because music is so intricate, complex, and powerful, it proves the existence of a Creator, God. Man cannot create a language that spans the globe to every culture and throughout time. Man cannot create a field where it takes eight years just to study a small portion of one part of it. We have music written hundreds of years ago across the world that is still appreciated here today. This is strong evidence for a Designer and that we are all made in His image.


[1] http://www.sciencedaily.com...


[2] On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music, Hermann L. F. Helmholtz, Author's Preface to the First German Edition. Second English edition, Longmans Green, And Co. 1885


ILL_logic

Con

There have been Men that have devoted there whole life (more then 8 years) to trying to prove gods existence they have all failed ,yes along there path and search they have stumbled upon theorys but have always failed to provide cold hard proof that there is in fact a god at all or has ever been . you as a human being right now can buy a telescope and see that the universe is real ,you could physically adventure into space.

you state here "Man cannot create a language that spans the globe to every culture and throughout time. Man cannot create a field where it takes eight years just to study a small portion of one part of it." that is the most uneducated statement i have witnessed in a long time you are saying that homo sapiens are to dumb to invent speech (know how to use there diaphram-tounge -and lips ) if man cannot create his own language i simply ask WHY is there over 1000 different types of languages? you are saying men are not capable of this but this has already been proven a long time ago by science and biology .

Rhythm has influence on being successful or not in living.
The universe has its own rhythm, constellations have their rhythm, the solar system has its rhythm: from the planet to the atom, everything has its rhythm.
Each day has its rhythm, each being has its rhythm, each organ has its rhythm.
http://listeningtothestars.com...

now to say that GOD simply just put planted this into us with a flick of his wand is a big statement and even more great to try and digest . the fact that i am trying to make here is that everything can be explained without god . your assuming god made speech and music . i still find this rubbish seeing as i dont believe speech was ever created instantly . it was formed over time i believe it took Homoneanderthalensis and Homosapiens a VERY long time to develop speech and communication it is most obvious that they we are not born with knowledge of speech and music and any field of science this is why we go to school that should explain itself .
i have no source for the statement above for it is logic of my own of research i have learned over the years of studies you can accept this or not accept this
Debate Round No. 3
user39681

Pro


To oppose my argument, you said no one has proved the existence of God. Again, this reasoning is circular ("Because no one has proved God's existence, we cannot prove the existence of God..."). I disagree with you here.


You stated that everything has its own "rhythm", which means nature can explain it. However, you use "rhythm" in a very loose sense. The beating of ocean waves against a seashore may be very pleasant and musical in the loose sense of the word. But it is very different than the rhythm of a full symphonic orchestral piece. In good music, a person intelligently creates specific, complex rhythm for an exact effect. (Counterpoint also makes extensive use of rhythm across multiple melodic lines.)


You also claimed that man is able to create a universal language like music because he has created over 1,000 different spoken languages worldwide. First, children must learn the language of their parents for years before understanding it, while someone who has never heard music before can appreciate it. And so the language of music is fundamentally different than a spoken language: people are born with the ability to appreciate music. Second, man has splintered spoken language into a thousand pieces, the opposite of creating a universal language.


Suppose I walked into a remote village and started speaking in English. No one would understand me. It could take me years to teach them English, or for me to learn their language. But suppose I walked into this same village and started playing music. Instantly, people throughout the village would understand. They would understand the emotion and beauty of music that they have never heard before. How is this possible? Man cannot account for it.


Music is so complex and beautiful that highly educated people can spend their entire lives studying its inner workings. And yet, music is so universal that even a child can appreciate its emotion and beauty. This is strong evidence that God is the Author of music. He has made man in His image and given us an appreciation and a love for music.


I appreciate the chance to share my thoughts on this subject with you. My prayer and desire is that music will point you to its Creator. Turning to Jesus Christ as personal Saviour and Lord is the only way we can experience true music in our soul. When we come to Jesus, we can experience what Paul spoke of in Ephesians 5:


"Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God."


ILL_logic

Con

i have to ask that you not ever quote me because i just witnessed you do it wrong and add words to my mouth here is proof
here is my quote
"if man cannot create his own language i simply ask WHY is there over 1000 different types of languages?"

now look at where you tried to quote me

"You also claimed that man is able to create a universal language like music because he has created over 1,000 different spoken languages worldwide."

not only did you add words to my own quote you added only words that would help your cause i find that disgusting and very
immature. and there is another reason why this is revolting its because in my quote i was asking a question as anyone can see
but you state that it was considered making a claim ? enough with this it was just bothering me ,moving on

you state that "people are born with the ability to appreciate music. "............... user..... people are born with the ABILITY to appreciate anything ! ! ! anything at all people can appreciate unicorns. they can appreciate drugs and murder and god and violence and atheist etc. so what people are born with "abilities"

here is something funny it is not relevant but you said this "Suppose I walked into a remote village and started speaking in English." i only find this funny because you will possibly be killed and cooked ,or they will THINK YOU ARE A GOD that just walked out of the jungle and they will worship you one of the two here you can see a primitive tribe trying to shoot down a airplane with arrows
" Uncontacted Indians in Brazil appear defensive from the air. This photo was taken in 2008.

i just thought it was slightly funny to think you would walk into a jungle to go show a possible man eating tribe music

here is yet again another one you gave me ! you state -

"When we come to Jesus, we can experience what Paul spoke of in Ephesians 5:"

"Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God."

so many things wrong with this i will begin

(1). this cannot be used as proof for anything because nothing in the bible has ever been proven true or correct 100 % so nothing in the bible can be taken seriously as of right now

(2.) speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs . i dont care about "spiritual anything" and this is why

here is the definition of spiritual
SPIRITUAL
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

(3.) "submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God." ........... so i should bow down and be very afraid of god . makes sense seeing as he only flooded the earth killing everyone except noah and family and set a whole town of sodom on fire and killed everyone except LOT and when one of LOTS sons wives turned around to watch god turned her into salt ! yes.. he used his magic and turned her into a pile of salt .. i do not believe this at all ! but i will say that it would be a pretty cool power !

you finish this debate by saying you will pray for me then you try to convert me to your religion and want me to bow down to your god and fear him with you lol ! im sorry but im going to take my chances and stand up to god and say I DO NOT FEAR YOU ! YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE ! AND YOU WILL NOT SMITE THEE !
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by DarkChiyoko 3 years ago
DarkChiyoko
Pro really spoke to me, I truly respect him.
Posted by ILL_logic 3 years ago
ILL_logic
those would have been fine points to bad the debate is over and now voting though
Posted by black_squirrel 3 years ago
black_squirrel
Some more arguments for CON: if you play rock music backwards, you hear the devil. Some religions do not allow/listen to music because it is bad for you, (e.g., Taliban, Dalai Lama) and certainly not divine.
Posted by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
@user39681, alot happens in hundreds of millions of years that you cannot begin to understand. It's funny to say that people believe that their is no way humans are monkeys, yet their so unwilling to look at how the first bacteria evolved. Or theories on when did a cell get a nucleus, or to even imagine the life of a neanderthal, or how humans domesticated cats and dogs, or how apal lived 200,000 . Yet without using any shred of evidence or a single though of is music simply man-made
Music[1]: sounds that are sung by voices or played on musical instruments
I think it's pathetic that you won't tive up even though you know you're getting dominated. You're literally attempting to defy modern day science based on what, the god who lives in your imagination?

Source:
[1] www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/music
Posted by user39681 3 years ago
user39681
Actionspeak,

It is impossible for evolution to account for the origin of music because it is much more complex than even our understanding. It takes years of music theory at colleges and universities for the best musicians in the world to learn this, and even then their understanding is not complete. It grows more as they study music throughout their lifetime. How could this be an invention of man? Songs are certainly the invention of man, but music itself is not.

How can evolution account for this amazing beauty and complexity?
Posted by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
Pro, I will take back every word I said if you watch this video, and list one reason why it's incorrect.[1]

Source:
[1] http://m.youtube.com...
Posted by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
Music is believed to be invented as a sexual lure, or as a way to bring people together.[1]
In addition music is still in use today because of brings out strong feelings/emotions.[2]
For example mad world.[3] brings out sadness/confusion and love story brings out love and heartbreak.[4]
Pro, it isn't hard to say something exists because of god simply because you don't know why it's to meaningful or why it came into existsnce, pleaseuse google before you support a non-existant invisible being and seem stupid in a debate.

Sources:
[1] http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
[2] http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
[3] http://m.youtube.com...
[4] http://m.youtube.com...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
user39681ILL_logicTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was definetely more convincing, but pro gets conduct because of Con's final line.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
user39681ILL_logicTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments extend from an Intelligent Design argument, which, in my opinion, is a very poor argument, and it was up to Con to highlight the flaws in logic. Pro's general argument (laid out in round 1) begs the question, and Con successfully suggests that it does indeed beg the question. Music should have been defined in round 1 by Pro, as he/she then proceeds to chose a specific definition afterwards; Con notices this and responds adequately (semantic games by Pro, conduct to Con there). Pro made a fair bit of ground when Con dropped some arguments, but the ultimate burden of proof was not sufficiently handled on Pro's part. Pro provided a solid source, albeit with a blogging entry also. However, the date of the source's publication is 1895, not 1885 or 1957. Nonetheless, it was pleasing to see such a good application of a source, despite it being a rather old one. Con only provided a blogging site of some kind.