The Instigator
GodSands
Pro (for)
Losing
35 Points
The Contender
JustCallMeTarzan
Con (against)
Winning
178 Points

Randomness is a lack of Knowledge in both Spiritual and Physical world.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2009 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,100 times Debate No: 6433
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (176)
Votes (31)

 

GodSands

Pro

By not being able to have the knowledge of a great or a small deal of information is random. As information is knowledgeable, therefore by definition it would appear random, as you have no knowledge of the matter at hand.

If being scared is a fright of sudden randomness, not being able to understand something. Like in my very personal case not understanding the spiritual world is frightening as well as random. Example: Water into wine by Jesus Christ. This will seem random because of your lack of knowledge on the matter at hand. By definition randomness is a lack of knowledge, so with that in mind is the spiritual world not be anymore random than the physical world? As I believe that sin like Satan who hides from a sinner to prevent you knowing your spiritual side. As I believe we are both physical and spiritual beings. Hell is the place where your spirit dies, Heaven is where you spirit lives. Sin leads to a physical life style. Therefore believing in the spiritual world would almost be impossible. And therefore you will remain skeptical of God, angels and spirits in general.
If say a animal such as a cat chases the light from a torch on a wall, it remains skeptical (study from a distance) of the torch.

As randomness can be implied to both the physical and the spiritual world. Like it would be physical to not understand the spiritual world, as spirits can act random to the physical world. On the other hand it would not be spiritual to understand the physical world. Example: To a spirit a brick wall seems random, as to the spirit can walk right through the brick wall. When to physical beings it is perfectly normal. Sin has grown normal to people who only believe only in the physical world. As through out the Bible Jesus tell you to "get to know" your spiritual side. "Do not price in treasure and riches in this life as it will be destroyed my moths and rust, but instead grow strong in your spirit so in heaven your treasures and riches with not be destroyed by moths and rust." As sin leads to physical attractions. Like Drinking, sex, murder, stealing etc...These things are impossible when you are a spirit. And a spirit will seem skeptical about these things. Earlier I wrote.

"Therefore believing in the spiritual world would be impossible. And therefore you will remain skeptical of God, angels and spirits in general."

The devil is hidden so that you would not know of God. But only has lead you into a trap of believing that only the physical world exists, therefore do what you wish.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

My opponent uses an egregious misunderstanding as the basis of his argument. He asserts with no warrant or source that "By definition randomness is a lack of knowledge." However, this is simply incorrect. By definition, randomness is the state of being random, which in turn is:

Random (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
–adjective
1. proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern: the random selection of numbers.
2. Statistics. of or characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has an equal probability of being chosen.

Nothing in this definition arises from lack of knowledge - for knowledge is (among other things):

Knowledge (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
–noun
1. acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition: knowledge of many things.

As the reader can clearly see - a lack of acquaintance with facts, truths, etc... does not equate to a state of occurring or being made without aim or purpose.

***************************************

Some responses:

>> "If being scared is a fright of sudden randomness, not being able to understand something."

This makes no sense. All times you are scared is because you are afraid of sudden randomness?

>> "This will seem random because of your lack of knowledge on the matter at hand."

Assuming this actually happened, this would seem anything BUT random - there was clearly an intention in the action.

>> "By definition randomness is a lack of knowledge"

False.

>> "As randomness can be implied to both the physical and the spiritual world."

Well of course... duh. Unless you mean "applied," in which case, you cannot APPLY randomness - if you purposely apply it - it's not random.

>> "Like it would be physical to not understand the spiritual world, as spirits can act random to the physical world."

Again - doesn't make sense. One cannot ACT random. Actions can appear random to others, even though they're not. And since you've presented no scientific evidence for these spirits, I have no way of judging their actions or the merit of the theory.

>> "To a spirit a brick wall seems random, as to the spirit can walk right through the brick wall."

Again - makes no sense - a brick wall is clearly a constructed object and would not appear random except to some very unintelligent spirit.

>> ""Therefore believing in the spiritual world would be impossible. And therefore you will remain skeptical of God, angels and spirits in general.""

Red herring - immaterial to the resolution.

>> "The devil is hidden so that you would not know of God. But only has lead you into a trap of believing that only the physical world exists, therefore do what you wish."

Red herring - immaterial to the resolution.

**************************************

Once again, GodSands has written a lot of nothing, beginning with a false premise and culminating in the notion that somehow, randomness, a concept applied to a situation where specific a priori knowledge is in principle impossible, amounts to a lack of knowledge. Randomness is not by any stretch of the imagination a lack of knowledge. Randomness is a lack of organization. It is possible to examine that lack of organization and glean knowledge about it, but the randomness itself is not a lack of knowledge.

My opponent will no doubt argue that the impossibility of gleaning knowledge counts as a lack of knowledge. However, consider that the knowledge is not impossible to get - it's merely impossible to get A PRIORI - which is exactly the same situation we find ourselves in with everything. A priori knowledge is impossible - as such, the argument that this constitutes lack of knowledge is nonsense.

I look forward to reading and deciphering my opponent's rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
GodSands

Pro

As a child you believe in Santa Claus? Most children do. You enjoyed the fact that Santa was a cheerful man, who deserved to give gifts to your children. (If you are a parent you get no credit for Christmas when you have young children as Santa does all the work) You as a Child are born enjoying Christmas every year believe that Santa will come into your house (If Santa was to visit ever house in one night, He would have to spend a 1 millionth of a second at each house) Moving that fast is supernatural. Like the devil who hides, it would be impossible for the eye to see Santa as your eye can only see a maximum of a 20th of a second. So Santa is the devils way for bring in the children into the Physical world (mentioned in my other debate, "Randomness is a lack of knowledge in the Spiritual and Physical world")
As a Child the Devil acts like the child is in control by doing nothing on Christmas and the devil (now known to me as Santa) has the burden of running about after presents. When you Grow older you become the devils slave as you do not believe in Santa and therefore the devil anymore. Making your life style converted by physical not spiritual beliefs. And now as a adult with money "You can not serve two masters, money and God." is more avaible, again more involved in the physical world. So now the burden is on you to run into shops buying gifts you are now the devils slave who has seemed to have disappeared as quickly as Santa did.

The trap is hell and if you are still a sinner you will go there unless you trust in Jesus (spiritual) and confess you are a evil person in a physical world.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

My opponent's entire Round 2 argument is completely immaterial and in no way pertains to the resolution.

Although it is quite amusing.
Debate Round No. 2
GodSands

Pro

I supose I win. And then all this includes macroevolution and gravity also lose out here as theay are Physical not Spiritual.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

My opponent's entire Round 3 argument is completely immaterial and in no way pertains to the resolution.

Although it is quite amusing.

*************************************

Again, GodSands has done nothing but spew nonsense that has no real value and only vaguely resembles a coherent train of thought, much less an argument.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
176 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 51 through 60 records.
Posted by mecap 5 years ago
mecap
I think the whole point of the story is that morality is subjective:
Soldiers in war kill people, and even in the Bible God allows people to wage war in order to serve their community... war is a social abstraction, in war the value of human life is reduced, so soldiers are allowed to kill other people without repercussion.

The book shows a different kind of social abstraction: one where reason and logic are overtaken by emotions and fear... religion is full of emotions and fear. Science does NOT stop people from practicing their religion, as a matter of fact I would have had no trouble becoming a Christian if it wasn't for their anti-scientific stance that the religion places. Christianity demonizes the honest work of good people and it seeks to replace it with fantasy and delusions- just like those boys replaced reality with fantasy and delusions.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
Thats all from here downwards:

What did the story of Lord of the Flies means to me?

The Lord of the Flies is strikingly similar to what the Bible teaches. This is what it means to me. When the plane crashes at the start, it is like the fall of man. They came crawling out of the water on to land, like evolution stresses. However the boys did not form from the water, but were actually in the plane flying high above the clouds. Although evolution says the world is 4.6 billion years old, Jack (Satan) claims that the boys will not be saved, which concludes that nothing else matters now we are here. Just us, (boys) the water around them and the island. Nothing else matters. Like evolution suggests. So now in reality, scientists are trying to find a solution of their existence while excluding the existence of God.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
Jesus wasn't wanted, people thought of him to be a liar, a waste of time and although a lot of people listened to Jesus many hated him, at one point people tried to push Jesus off a cliff. – Relating this to Piggy. Although Piggy sounds annoying every time he speaks, people hate what Jesus has to say. They reject him and then ignore him. Like Jesus Piggy founded rules to follow and also claimed that they will be saved from the island. Like Jesus has said, who ever trust in me will have eternal life. On the beach they all fall asleep and then wake up the next morning. I am relating this with that fact that people think evolution was where we came from. Like Jack, it is very convenient to say, there is nobody watching us we can do as we wish" Although the boys knew good from evil before they crashed landed. This strictly related to reality, so who is lying?

Jack on the other hand encourages the other boys to do as they will. And not listen to that annoying fat boy, Piggy. Therefore Jack poses to be Satan. Jack is frustrated and get jealous when the other boys listen to Piggy. Jack is full of violence, lies (through out the play, in my opinion, Jack knew from the start that they will be saved, this is just a time to be in control) and selfishness. Like Satan knows of God and that evolution is false. Yet Jack still encourages the other boys to kill the hog in the island. Once the hog is dead, they turn on Piggy. This to me related to an evolutionary structure of death and life. After all Jack and ‘his' boys do not need Piggy, because they have their own rules.
Ralf is that person who listens to Jesus in real life. He vends of Jack from Piggy a number of times, sticks up for him and has the belief that they will be saved from the island. Although Piggy did not always have Ralf for a defence, this is similar to everyone being a sinner against God.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
Piggy wears glasses to see, when Jack steals Piggy glasses, they are using them to light a fire, so that they can be spotted and saved. However way you see this, it is like all these scientists trying to find an answer to the universe so that they can have their salvation from all these big questions. I say in response of Lord of the Flies, try as they might but the answer was with them all along. Piggy was their answer. Like Jesus is today. Not an endless void of space or in this case an endless space of liquid water. As the boys used Piggy glasses to start the fire, that would mean that Piggy has the tools needed to live, in other word, people are using what God has made to find anything but God. They even set a tree on fire while it was dark. If no one is going to see that, then what hope have they got? They would be foolish to go out a search for life them selves, they would be dead before they even get to the next star.

Piggy dies in a number of fashions depending on what version you watch. In the film version a rock is dropped on Piggy head, and in the play version (which group watched) he fell off of a cliff. This resembles when Jesus died on the cross for our own selfish corrupt ways. Like the boys on the island, which actually killed Piggy, we brought God to the decision that Jesus was needed to save our lives form eternal death. Although Piggy did not belong on the island like the other boys which all belonged to the army scout teams, in this my case, with God. Since Jack is the hot spot for lies, like Satan is, Jack can make up all the rules him self when on the island. This is where the proof of Satan is lost therefore God is thought not to exist in reality.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
Read from the top downwards:

If the boys originally crawled from the water, where would be the proof of any other land or intelligence be but the boy's intelligence. Like our society today which claims to be the only intelligence, (Alien life is flawed in this as in where did they come from? It would be like finding another group of boys stuck on an island else where in the vast ocean) Therefore on main land where these boys originally came from is the answer.
Like most of us today who doubt Jesus' return as said in Mathew and Revelations in the Bible is like Piggy saying, they will come to this island and save us. No one listened however because they are all following Jack in reality. In the end though Jack, Ralf and all the boys were caught by surprise on Piggy truth telling. Where was the proof of this ever happening? Jack and ‘his' boys were too busy fooling around, like according to me and the Bible most people are doing today.

Ralf the only boy who believes and was against Jacks law breaking ways. By denying this you are also denying the reality which we live in today, in that we are like a place of perfection to them, in reality however Heaven is the place of perfection and you are like those followers of Jack. If you say this is all wrong then you are saying that reality is under a rock. All I have done is put the wider picture into a smaller picture frame.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
"A side remark about Lord of the Flies: the interesting part is that superstition drives the boys to start killing, not reason. If they were logically thinking about their situation, they would realize that there is no lord of the flies, no daemons and the man hanging from the tree is not a sleeping monster, but just a dead body. Their superstition and lack of understanding of their natural surroundings drives them to do irrational things." All that I agree on. There is not Lord of the flies. No monster, demons however was not mentioned in the play at all.

Ok back to the point. God can not just be proven by the charasteristics, but it related to a univeral audience that God can easily exist. Ok back to Lord of the Flies.

Read my essay then reply back on your thoughts.
Posted by mecap 5 years ago
mecap
I can't read those messages... what's in them? Can you post them here?
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
http://bl148w.blu148.mail.live.com... --- Even better version. It is a drama piece of coursework. I was told to write on how I felt the talked to me.
Posted by mecap 5 years ago
mecap
A side remark about Lord of the Flies: the interesting part is that superstition drives the boys to start killing, not reason. If they were logically thinking about their situation, they would realize that there is no lord of the flies, no daemons and the man hanging from the tree is not a sleeping monster, but just a dead body. Their superstition and lack of understanding of their natural surroundings drives them to do irrational things. But as I said if you're willing to conceive the first point- "merely listing God's characteristics is not enough to prove that they actually belong to something real", then we can move on and discuss Lord of the Flies or any point that you want to make.
Posted by mecap 5 years ago
mecap
"The Lord of the Flies is strikingly similar to what the Bible teaches."
> Are we doing a book review now? LOL Addressing Lord of the Flies and its alleged similarities with the Bible, man and evolution is yet again a VERY DIFFERENT story.

Why don't you get back to the original point and try to focus on it, that is:
You suggested that given God's characteristics, he MUST exist. But my counter was that we can list characteristics for ANY conceivable thought, it doesn't make them real unless they can be proven to be real. You must show the proof/evidence whatever you got to actually confirm that those characteristics describe a real NOT IMAGINARY being, OR you concede that by merely listing God's characteristics you can't reasonably conclude that he exists.

Do you agree that you need to do more than just name those characteristics?
31 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by philosphical 4 years ago
philosphical
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by saamanthagrl 5 years ago
saamanthagrl
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by jjmd280 5 years ago
jjmd280
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Angrypants66 5 years ago
Angrypants66
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 5 years ago
rougeagent21
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by MewxVenus 5 years ago
MewxVenus
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dvhoose 5 years ago
dvhoose
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by crackofdawn_Jr 5 years ago
crackofdawn_Jr
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by ournamestoolong 5 years ago
ournamestoolong
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DeadLeaves93 5 years ago
DeadLeaves93
GodSandsJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07