The Instigator
Bocaj1000
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Nzrsaa
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Religion isn't Real

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...
Nzrsaa
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/6/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 653 times Debate No: 56152
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Bocaj1000

Pro

Religion was created to explain the supernatural. Human minds cannot comprehend the vast universe and its explanations. But as of the 21st century, scientists are starting to explain the unknown. Religion was not created to answer the questions we started asking nowadays.
Nzrsaa

Con

Hey everyone
Since its just a 1000 character limit, I'll keep the arguments short.

Burden of proof
Pro is making a positive claim that "religion isn't real" and so the BOP lies on my opponent in this debate. So in order to win the debate, I must discredit the claims.

Genetic fallacy
An obvious response to Pro's argument is that it commits the genetic fallacy, whereby through explaining the origins of a belief - in this case, religious beliefs - you thereby attempt to discredit the belief in itself. [1]
Note that the motion is "religion isn't real"; to which, Pro responds by stating that "religion was created to explain the supernatural". This appeal to religion's origins is an irrelevance in establishing the truth value of religion itself.

Science
Pro claims that "scientists are starting to explain the unknown". However, God claims are beyond the reaches of science. It cannot possibly empirically prove of disprove God.

Sources:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Bocaj1000

Pro

The matter can be answered by the simple paradox: "Could God create a rock so heavy that he couldn't lift it?"

If you would like more evidence, there is hardly any evidence for religion to be real, other than the Bible or other religious books. The books would be false if the religion is false.

Science has already taken man to the stars, a theory that has not been thought of when most religions were created. They do not explain that man would fly in space and find no heaven.
Nzrsaa

Con

Omnipotence paradox
The paradox is false, as it misunderstands what 'omnipotence' is. It is not the ability to do absolutely anything - rather, it is the ability to actualise the logically possible. To 'create a rock so heavy that [God] couldn't lift it' is a logically impossible scenario - not even an omnipotent being could do it. However, omnipotence doesn't mean to be able to do the logically impossible.

Evidence
Pro states 'there is hardly any evidence for religion to be real'. However, let me present a proof:
1) Whatever begins to exist has a prior efficient cause
-proven by the metaphysical truth 'out of nothing, nothing comes'. If there is no cause, there is no effect.
2) The universe began to exist
-proven by the Big Bang
3) Therefore the universe has a prior efficient cause
- Logically follows from 1/2

Science
Heaven is transcendent to the universe and so we shouldn't expect to discover it in space.

I extend my other points, as Pro hasn't as of yet responded to them.
Debate Round No. 2
Bocaj1000

Pro

Bocaj1000 forfeited this round.
Nzrsaa

Con

Vote Con, and God Bless
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 2 years ago
Solomon_Grim
I also think stating that religion is based around the unknowns of the universe is incorrect and a dangerous belief. Religion has to do with the internal man. Thats why science doesn't bring happiness, but God can.
Posted by Bible13 2 years ago
Bible13
Heaven, by the way, is a spiritual dimension. How could someone expect to find it in the physical space?
Posted by Bible13 2 years ago
Bible13
First of all, the subject is: "Religion isn't Real". By saying: "Religion was created..." you just proved yourself wrong. And how exactly is the paradox relevant? God by definition can not be supported. So can something that can't be supported and something that can support everything coexist? This wouldn't be the only thing he can't do. For instance, he can't act wickedly or tell a lie, and boy does that make me glad! You still don't: 1) prove religion is not real or 2) prove God is not real.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Bocaj1000NzrsaaTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
Bocaj1000NzrsaaTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: French Fries