The Instigator
tower
Pro (for)
Losing
17 Points
The Contender
Koopin
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

The God of the Jews exists, and Judaism, as explained by Orthdoxy, is the correct religion.

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: 3/26/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,635 times Debate No: 11517
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (21)
Votes (6)

 

tower

Pro

The entity described as God in Orthodox Judaism is real, and has all the qualities attributed to Him by Orthodox Judaism, and Orthodox Judaism, with all its doctrines, laws, and practices, is the only true religion.
1.There is a God of some sort, because there is no other explanation as where the world came from. All scientific evidence points towards a creation point of the Big Bang, but science is at a loss to find a cause for the Big Bang. Logically, something not bound by the laws of cause-and-effect e.g., God, caused it.
2.Assuming God is benevolent (we can assume this because a supreme being would have no other need for us than to show us his benevolence), he would give us happiness.
3.True happiness cannot be given, because then it is charity, and the happiness would be marred by the lack of comfort that is universal with the acceptance of charity. Therefore, a system would have to be set up in order to earn happiness.
4.The happiness would be most effective in a place that is dedicated to happiness. This place cannot exist on earth, if only because the suffering of others who have not earned happiness would mar the happiness of those who did earn it. Therefore, an afterlife would have to be created, and happiness would not necessarily be given in this world.
5.A benevolent God would give instruction as to how to earn this happiness, because creating a system which no one knows how to use is as cruel as not creating one at all.
6.He would give it an extraordinarily large amount of people, and not one person, because one person, even a person demonstrating miracles, can be conceived as a hoax. However, a very large amount of people, all stating God spoke to them, cannot be conceived as a hoax, because it is impossible to convince thousands of people a) that God spoke to them when he didn't, or b) to lie to the rest of humanity and claim that. It is equally impossible to claim that God spoke to thousands when he didn't, because one cannot produce the thousands or their descendants. (Obviously, the thousands must survive for this to hold true.)
7.The only religion to claim this is Judaism.
8.If God changed his mind about how the system works, he would have to hold another event to rival the original. Since neither Christianity nor Islam nor any other religion based on the Bible claim this, they must all be false.
9.The Old Testament's (according to Judaism, the only testament) laws and statements cannot be followed as is, since it is written in a highly esoteric and poetic form (e.g., "thou shalt bind toetafos [Hebrew] between thine eyes…" what are "toetafos"? How does one make them? Where between the eyes do they go? None of this information is given.). Therefore, there must be an accompanying oral explanation handed down with the original written Bible.
10.Orthodox Judaism is the only branch of Judaism that possesses such an explanation, handed down through the generations, and considers it completely valid.
Koopin

Con

I am not joking around, but my argument is going to be very short.

Burden of Proof. You must prove to me that Judaism is the correct religion.

You just gave simple statements that does not prove anything.

God can not be proved in man's eyes.

It even says so in the old testament.

"Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding."

I look forward to your response.

Sources:
(1). http://bible.cc...
Debate Round No. 1
tower

Pro

I thank my opponent for responding.
I'm not entirely sure what my opponent dislikes about my arguments. I have proven that God exists because there is no other explanation for the creation of the universe. If my opponent disagrees with this, he must either offer an alternative explanation, or prove why mine cannot be true.
I reaffirm my previous arguments.
My opponent says:
"God can not be proved in man's eyes.

It even says so in the old testament.

‘Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.'"
I find it interesting that in a debate about Judaism, my opponent uses a Christian website as a source. [1]
Here is a Jewish translation for that verse:
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and do not rely upon your understanding." [2]
A small difference, perhaps, but vital. It means that lack of understanding God is not an excuse to lack belief. It does not mean that person cannot use natural science to bolster his beliefs, and it certainly does not mean that "God can not be proved in man's eyes." A simple look at context will tell you that this is written in the form of advice, anyway, and not as a commandment or statement of fact.
Additionally, Jewish philosophy books traditionally hold that a person is required to investigate to his greatest ability the existence of God through natural sciences and logic. [3] Clearly, this would not be the case if the author knew the Bible said that's impossible.

[1] http://biblos.com...
[2] http://www.chabad.org...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Koopin

Con

I thank my opponent for posting his next argument.

My opponent claims that he has proved that God does indeed exist, the reason for this is because there is no other explanation. This is wrong.
There is a theory, which I do not believe, that says that it is all an accident. That we just pooped out of no where and that we slowly evolved into people. Now, just because they can not prove this, does it mean that it did not happen?
Also, assuming that you did prove that God exists, there are many other religions. Christianity, Islam, Mormon, ect…
Many of these religions have a logical way of explaining their beliefs.
You still have not proven that Judaism is the correct religion.
I look forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 2
tower

Pro

tower forfeited this round.
Koopin

Con

Argument extended.
Debate Round No. 3
tower

Pro

I assume my opponent is referring to the theory of evolution. However, this is somewhat irrelevant, as the theory of evolution only deals with the development of life, not with the origins of the universe.
As I've stated previously, the only serious scientific explanation of the creation of the universe is the Big Bang. There are no credible or even viable theories as to what caused the Big Bang. It is a seemingly causeless event. Unless you can give it a cause or find a reason it doesn't need a cause, it follows it was caused by an entity that doesn't follow the universal laws of cause-and-effect, aka, God.
My opponent says:
"Also, assuming that you did prove that God exists, there are many other religions. Christianity, Islam, Mormon, ect…
Many of these religions have a logical way of explaining their beliefs."
Again, I wonder if my opponent read my opening arguments.
I have explained that it would be unreasonably cruel to start a religion through a single prophet. Judaism is the only religion that has not done this. Unless you can find me another one that does, or find me a logical reason that God did not do this, I have disproved the validity of all religions except Judaism.
I beg my opponent to furnish me with actual arguments.
Koopin

Con

I thank my opponent for his response.

"I have explained that it would be unreasonably cruel to start a religion through a single prophet. Judaism is the only religion that has not done this."

You say this, but how does that disprove any other religion? We are not debating based off of your old testament. Why would God not send just one person? He used Moses to lead his people to the promise land. That was one man.

When I stated evolution I was stating it as an example.You would have to prove everything wrong except Judaism in order to prove that Judaism is the correct religion.

Let me give you another example of something, Solipsism. How do you know that any of this exists? It may just be your mind that exits and it is making everything up for you. There may not even be a universe. Can you disprove it?
Debate Round No. 4
tower

Pro

"'I have explained that it would be unreasonably cruel to start a religion through a single prophet. Judaism is the only religion that has not done this.'

You say this, but how does that disprove any other religion? We are not debating based off of your old testament. Why would God not send just one person? He used Moses to lead his people to the promise land. That was one man."
The logic of this is not based off The Old Testament (incidentally, you say it is "my old testament" but it is actually the Christians Old Testament. It is the only testament for Jews). It is based off any understanding of God. If He wanted us to do something, He would not tell us through one person. That would be unreasonably cruel. People could not determine if that person was telling the truth. Therefore, they could not be blamed for believing that the prophet was a hoax. I have made this argument before, and you have not refuted it.
Additionally, Moses was a political and spiritual leader, as were all the Jewish prophets, but God spoke directly to every living Jew and informed them what He wanted from them, as well as the fact that Moses was in charge. This is explicitly stated in the Bible multiple times. Naturally, it would get around the problem of proof if God told you that man was a prophet. Additionally, it is impossible to make up this lie. A person cannot claim that thousands of people spoke to God when he cannot produce those people or their descendants. No other religion claims something even remotely close. You still have not got around this. It is impossible to get around this.
"When I stated evolution I was stating it as an example.You would have to prove everything wrong except Judaism in order to prove that Judaism is the correct religion."
I have proved every religion wrong except Judaism. No religion follows the basic logic of not relying on one prophet except Judaism.
Also, what, exactly, where you stating evolution as an example of? Evolution is a theory concerning the rise of life, not the creation of the universe. The two things have nothing to do with each other. You are attempting to bring an example of an alternative theory to answer a question that the theory does not address. Apples and oranges.
"Let me give you another example of something, Solipsism. How do you know that any of this exists? It may just be your mind that exits and it is making everything up for you. There may not even be a universe. Can you disprove it?"
Certainly. Solipsism is an immature argument. It essentially recreates the entire universe inside your head. It does not simplify anything, and adds labels to everything, and does not conform to Occam's Razor. [1] Besides, it is also irrelevant to this argument. If the universe is truly in my head, then the rules I have dictated for it force God to exist in the universe in my head. Thus God exists in the universe.
My opponent has not put up any significant arguments, and I have destroyed the feeble ones he has put up. He has not successfully contradicted the line of logic in my opening arguments. Vote pro.

[1] http://www.freivald.org...
Koopin

Con

"If He wanted us to do something, He would not tell us through one person." Yes, you have said that before, but you have still failed to prove it! There is no where in the Jewish testament that says that God would not simply use one person! You yourself can not even deny this. But it is what your whole argument is based on.

Using evolution was show that there are always possibilities. It is possible that the world simply evolved, and if this was true, then there would be no correct religion.

"Certainly. Solipsism is an immature argument. It essentially recreates the entire universe inside your head. It does not simplify anything, and adds labels to everything, and does not conform to Occam's Razor. [1] Besides, it is also irrelevant to this argument. If the universe is truly in my head, then the rules I have dictated for it force God to exist in the universe in my head. Thus God exists in the universe."

You still have not disproved Solipsism. I do get where you find it an immature argument. .. But if Solipsism did exist, then there would be no real correct religion since God does not really exist in the first place.

Solipsism and evolution are just one of thousands of beliefs. In mans eyes, we can never prove which is the correct one. We must simply have faith.

"My opponent has not put up any significant arguments, and I have destroyed the feeble ones he has put up. He has not successfully contradicted the line of logic in my opening arguments. Vote pro."
I have been really busy this weekend, and since this is only a 24 hour debate, I had little time to write a huge argument. But my point remains the same, which you have not "destroyed." I guess you supposed that I was going to go through your "line of logic" and try to take those down one by one. I have done a different style since had so little time. I am sorry if you were not able to debate like you usually do.

Audience, Judaism has not been and can not be successfully proved, if it can, my opponent has failed to do so. Therefore my opponent has failed to prove that Judaism, as explained by Orthdoxy is the correct religion.

Thank you audience for reading, and thank you Tower for debating with me.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tower 7 years ago
tower
If you don't have time to debate, don't take the debate. Your "random posts" are, frankly, insulting. Your closing arguments made me wince. I've looked over your other debates and that has just disappointed me more. Please avoid doing this in the future.
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
I know I should have taken this more seriously, But I am in 4 debates already and have been super busy. I am just randomly posting so I don't forfeit.
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
Koopin, thanks for ruining what could have been an interesting debate. :(
Posted by tower 7 years ago
tower
Thank you for sharing in my frustration. This is one of the first debates that I've posted, and I have to say I'm tremendously disappointed. I probably will repost this in the hopes of getting a serious contender.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
This is a TERRIBLE debate. What the hell Koopin?

tower, you should instigate another challenge directly to one of the prominent atheists on this site to give you a real debate.
Posted by grahamreiver 7 years ago
grahamreiver
You mean Judaism is the correct religion?!!!! Holy hell, I am totally forked!!!!
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
'There is a theory, which I do not believe, that says that it is all an accident. That we just pooped out of no where and that we slowly evolved into people. Now, just because they can not prove this, does it mean that it did not happen?'

It has been proven. LOTS AND LOTS OF TIMES. Meh, I don't even know why I bother with you.
Posted by popculturepooka 7 years ago
popculturepooka
Also, that has got to be the biggest argument from ignorance ever. That's pretty much the definition of God-of-the-Gaps. :(
Posted by popculturepooka 7 years ago
popculturepooka
Ah, I would've done this debate. How do I miss these ones?
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
tower, I am oing to be gone this weekend, If you want to you can post, but I may forfeit, if you could wait till tomorrow to post, that would be great.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
towerKoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 tower 6 years ago
tower
towerKoopinTied
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 Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
towerKoopinTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Steelerman6794 7 years ago
Steelerman6794
towerKoopinTied
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 InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
towerKoopinTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
towerKoopinTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40