The Instigator
TheSkeptic
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points
The Contender
austinm1333
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points

The Following Arguments for the Existence of God are Valid - 1D

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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: 2/4/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 938 times Debate No: 6778
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (4)

 

TheSkeptic

Con

Note: the "1D" notation in the Topic title is simply for searching purposes.

[Definition - Existence]
http://dictionary.reference.com............
1. the state or fact of existing; being.

*NOTE* I am not debating whether or not a God exists in one's MIND, but rather in REALITY.

[Definition - Valid]
http://dictionary.reference.com............
1. sound; just; well-founded
2. Logic. (of an argument) so constructed that if the premises are jointly asserted, the conclusion cannot be denied without contradiction.

*NOTE* Stemming from the second definition, I don't intend for my opponent to create a syllogism. Simply put, my opponent needs to construct an argument of which I can't successfully defeat (of course, this is to the opinion of the voters).

Additionally, I require that my opponent argue for whatever deity they are proving with the intent of showing that it is PROBABLE/DEFINITE the deity exists (through their argument). Saying that something is possible does not mean it exists.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is how the debate will play out:

Round 1: This is my Round 1 for clarifications and guidelines. For PRO, he/she will either state that his following arguments will affirm a specific god (i.e. Christian God, Muslim God, etc.) or a metaphysical supreme being. My opponent can list the attributes of the metaphysical supreme being in his Round 1 is he/she wishes. THEN, my opponent will LIST his/her ARGUMENTS with at least a brief EXPLANATION for both (I don't want just a line of titles).

Round 2 - 4: I will refute his/her arguments and it will go back and forth as such.

I hope we have a good debate!
austinm1333

Pro

ok i would like to thank you for this debate so does god exist

of course god exists he is the creator of the world matter of fact he created everything the reason that god exists is not by he said she said but rather do you believe god is real the fact on life is that everyone thinks of a higher power we all really choose god some choose others but the majority of the issue is if god is real is he or is he not matter of fact no one can rather choose if god is real no one know who god is this debate is point less know if god even exist matter of fact god could be a girl no one knows i'm done debating this round i just wanted to point out a couple of thing this all really is just logic but its the true so think to your self is god real does god exist who is god those questions can't be answered and mabey they can be but its up to the person wheather god is real or not

ty for this debate have a nice day =)
Debate Round No. 1
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate, but I lament at the fact that he not argued for the existence of God at all.

=====Arguments=====

I won't go through every line because simply, 90% of it is gibberish. His "argument" is more of a conversation than actual argument. In fact, a close reading of my opponent's argument shows that he unwittingly CONCEDES THE DEBATE.

"no one know who god is this debate is point less"
----> Then why the hell did you waste my time by accepting this open debate?

"so think to your self is god real does god exist who is god those questions can't be answered"
----> Again, you shouldn't be debating

"but its up to the person wheather god is real or not"
----> Truth is determined by the subjective mind of an individual? Interesting...

=====Conclusion=====

At most, my opponent's argument is a testament for agnosticism, and that's giving the benefit of the doubt to him. He has not shown any evidence or proof for the existence of God. A potentially good debate has unfortunately been ruined.
austinm1333

Pro

austinm1333 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
TheSkeptic

Con

My opponent has forfeited his debate (unwittingly) and this round. Unless he comes back with a spectacular argument that astounds all those who read it, you should vote for CON.
austinm1333

Pro

austinm1333 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
TheSkeptic

Con

It's obvious who the winner is.
austinm1333

Pro

austinm1333 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
The sort of people who would vote Pro*, that should've said.
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
We'll see, Roy. The sort of people who would vote Con in this debate are generally the sort who don't read the debate anyway. A lot of them won't even notice the forfeits.
Posted by RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
It's not possible to win by forfeiting three rounds.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
I thinking of retaking this debate.
Posted by george19 8 years ago
george19
to find (or come close to finding) the truth, about anything, one must discard all past beliefs, assumptions, et.. and examine the question anew. although this requires much time and effort, conclusions based upon former miss-information will get you no farther than where you already are; and you accomplish nothing. If the human race is to ever get any better, it must shrug off its past misconceptions; even Einstein with his gifted math abilities could not breakthrough his dilemmas because of incorrect paradigm's. Campbell pointed this out, probably not the first, but the status qua liked things the way they were, maybe not now so much. The human race needs its curiosity stimulated, its strength to boldly go where no man has gone before, we (include the status qua) are not going anywhere if we cannot take our foot out of the mud(of lies) and take the next step. Good luck. PS; before I die from the boredom.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
Nah - I probably won't have time for it anyway.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
Haha I don't mind at all.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
Should I take this again? (Just kidding)
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by philosphical 8 years ago
philosphical
TheSkepticaustinm1333Tied
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 Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
TheSkepticaustinm1333Tied
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 TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
TheSkepticaustinm1333Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
TheSkepticaustinm1333Tied
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