The Instigator
roland54
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Gandalf-Ofek
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Origin of the universe are religious

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/20/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 415 times Debate No: 60688
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

roland54

Pro

Claims to explain origins/beginnings with nothing or infinity are insubstantial. Are religious explanations any more precise? A solar system in 7 days can just as be contradicted. Other creation accounts are less precise. What can we trust? The laws of nature seem reliable, but have we measured accurately?
Scientific explanations of beginnings- eg big bang theory, oscillating theory- can contradict each other, therefore there is a need for narrowing. Religious explanations contradict both scientific explanations. Were we created or did existence respond to laws of nature?
Do scientific laws also contradict each other? For example, does thermodynamics contradict big bang theory? According to big bang theory, we all came from nothing, but thermodynamics states that energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed, so how could they have come from nothing?
Religious explanations are very similar to each other so is any religion unique?

I'd like to hear responses before I post any more. Looking forward to hearing from you!
Gandalf-Ofek

Con

Religions for the universe are not likely to be religious because the religious method isn't based on fact but on guessing and imagination only while scientific method use guessing and imagination as well but they guess things based on fact they already have. Another very important part about religious answers to thing compared to scientific answers is that on one hand religion takes the knowledge they have ins some point and match their fact to their current knowledge and they refuse to learn new knowledge and facts that doesn't suit them and aren't comfortable with them and on the other hand scientific methods always search for new knowledge and always match their fact to the new knowledge they learn and based on these facts they search for more knowledge and this continues forever so science always learns new things.

The religion of the universe is a pretty complicated thing. You can view it from different view points and from your argument it's not entirely clear what do you mean by your saying that religions for the universe are religious because there are different religious view points for the origin of the universe but I'll contradict some of them. One of the religious beliefs and the most famous one is the one written in the bible that says that all the universe including life on earth was created in 6 days. This story about the religion of the universe can be easily contradicted because there is no physically possible way that the universe would come even close to it's current state in just 6 days and there are even things on earth that were found that are clearly older then 6,000 days (close to the estimated time the universe exists by religious beliefs).
There is another belief that says that that God made the universe probably with the big bang and then didn't interfere and just watched . This theory is harder to contradict but it's easy to prove that this theory isn't religious because when the theory says that God created the universe you can view it from different view points you can see it as if a super intelligent civilization created us as a simulation and they do not interfere and just watch, it matches the theory but it's not a very religious thinking another view point is that God in this theory is the Big Bang itself and indeed the Big Bang can be viewed as God but then again it's not very religious and finally God in this theory can be viewed as the physical and the mathematical laws themselves which are pretty much the base of what we live in and they apply everywhere and can easily be viewed as God, this again isn't a religious thinking but Math and Physics are more Godly then any religious God.
Debate Round No. 1
roland54

Pro

roland54 forfeited this round.
Gandalf-Ofek

Con

Gandalf-Ofek forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
roland54

Pro

roland54 forfeited this round.
Gandalf-Ofek

Con

Gandalf-Ofek forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
roland54

Pro

thankyou for your reply. you mention knowledge and facts, which are gained by learning. this can be applied to religion and science. you refer to the six days of creation. however,such ideas as big bang and oscillating theory are no more explainable by zero or infinity. are these two answers any more likely? you give no scientific detail, but criticise religion. comparing the sources of information for both, I believe the two can be compared for accuracy. creation ,if this is the case, could not have been carried out by nothing, as in the big bang idea or by infinity, as in the alternative answer. the six thousand years proposed by bishop usher only refer back to adam and counting until now. they do not include any information of the time before adam.
yours, rlh.
Gandalf-Ofek

Con

We can't comprehend everything that exists because some of them are beyond the capability of the human mind. However I believe in the things that are more rational and I see the big bang theory more rational than the creation theory so I stand for that theory.
Debate Round No. 4
roland54

Pro

roland54 forfeited this round.
Gandalf-Ofek

Con

Gandalf-Ofek forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Terridax 3 years ago
Terridax
What side are you arguing for? Your title would point towards religion, but your post for round one appears as if you're against both religion and science.
No votes have been placed for this debate.