The Instigator
DrAnomaly
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
KJVPrewrather
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

The Existence of God

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  
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: 12/30/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 weeks ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 264 times Debate No: 106245
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

DrAnomaly

Con

Hello, we debated previously and you mentioned you were a Christian. I'd like to debate you on this issue. You go first as you have the burden of proof.
KJVPrewrather

Pro

My proof is more questions than answers. How does a zygote have the same genetic code as an old person? How do life forms exist in all of their complexity without God? How does gravity exist? How do all of the planets revolve around the sun while turning in place. What or who made the big bang happen? How does an organism evolve into another species? Why do identical twins have differing personalities? Science is awesome, but so is God.
Debate Round No. 1
DrAnomaly

Con

I don't know the answer to most of those questions. That is evidence of God how?

It seems like your proof follow this - I don't know, therefor God.
KJVPrewrather

Pro

God is a person, and creation is a mirror that reflects Him. Is not your mirror evidence of you when you look?
Debate Round No. 2
DrAnomaly

Con

"God is a person, and creation is a mirror that reflects Him. Is not your mirror evidence of you when you look?" - Only if I knew that the mirror was reliable. I do not know that creation is a reliable mirror.
KJVPrewrather

Pro

You have fsailed to tell m,e how creation is possible without God.
Debate Round No. 3
DrAnomaly

Con

"You have failed to tell me how creation is possible without God." That is a shifting the burden of proof logical fallacy.
KJVPrewrather

Pro

My closing points. You should go to: https://www.gotquestions.org... for further information. You can submit a question, and they will get back to you within 1 or 2 weeks.
Debate Round No. 4
DrAnomaly

Con

I'll check it out.
KJVPrewrather

Pro

Add me, and send me more debates on anything. I like you.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Hugo_Head 1 week ago
Hugo_Head
Just because things exist does not mean "god" or "gods" exist. In fact "god" or "gods" existence only confuses the matter of creation. What created "god" or "gods"
Posted by Debating_Horse 2 weeks ago
Debating_Horse
What the hell is this?
Posted by John_C_1812 3 weeks ago
John_C_1812
A burden of proof is shared equally as GOD is an axiom, and must also be established as its group of numbers by representation, then proven as group of numbers how they not explain a process of existence. The argument of debate is Constitutional over religious tyranny as many religions do not have a God yet are religion just the same.

May I suggest a more complicated question to answer?
What is the self-value of GOD?
Posted by emsiblook 3 weeks ago
emsiblook
Just because things exist, doesn't mean God exists. There's proof of things existing, but none of God himself. You say that God is a person. How do you get proof of that from the fact that things exist? God could be two people. He could be a woman. He could have created everything and then died. You have no proof of otherwise.
God might have created everything; but that would not be proof of Jesus or Christianity. In fact, others might consider it proof of Islam or Hinduism. How did you come to the conclusion that Christianity was correct?

Why do you assume God created the universe? The universe may come from God, but you have no proof of that. The universe may come from nothing; again, we can't prove that. But both are possibilities. So, what makes God's existence any more possible than any other possibility?
Posted by canis 3 weeks ago
canis
Con got it all wrong:..." It seems like your proof follow this - I don't know, therefor god."...
No votes have been placed for this debate.