The Instigator
tschuk
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
vi_spex
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The Universe could not come about through Natural Causes

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 3 votes the winner is...
tschuk
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/21/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 356 times Debate No: 73940
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

tschuk

Pro

I would like to make the argument that the Universe could not have come about through natural causes, therefore the only option left is a Supernatural Creator. I am not arguing for any denominational god, but rather a Deist God.
I expect for this debate to be civil, and for each party to refrain from insults.
Thank you.
vi_spex

Con

supernature comes after nature, as there must be a nature to be exceeded for as a contrast of there being a super nature

make that matter that is an apple nothing, i dare you, matter can at best transform. matter is eternal, no beginning and no end, only now

any cause is caused by another cause, so a first cause is impossible.

order cant exist without chaos, machines cant exist without nature, life is nature
Debate Round No. 1
tschuk

Pro

I find it curious how you say a first cause is "Impossible". That's not correct when there is an all powerful creator who started it off. It's impossible for there to be no first cause, because you would have to keep asking what caused this, or what caused that, etc.
vi_spex

Con

any cause is caused by another cause. a cause by definition causes, so a cause that didnt cause anytihng isnt a cause, therfore a first cause would be caused by a cause that is not a cause, and it just shows it can be like that

god is a story, not real
Debate Round No. 2
tschuk

Pro

Let it be known that Con says "God is a story, not real" without providing any evidence.

Con also ignores Christian Theology, he ignores our belief in a Creator that exists outside of time and is all powerful.

Con fails to realize what his own theory does to his worldview. Con seems to believe in the Eternal Universe Model which has been disproven beyond a reasonable doubt.
vi_spex

Con

belief=be lie



i have no beliefs, kNow=now

Debate Round No. 3
tschuk

Pro

Why did you accept this argument if you're not going to take it seriously? Pointing out "Belief" as saying be-lie is nothing more than listing what the word looks like if it's split up. It does nothing to support your statement. It's regrettable that you chose to be a child about this, this topic could've made for good debate. Oh well.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by tschuk 1 year ago
tschuk
I would've been able to make more convincing arguments if this debate had been taken seriously.

It was almost like I had to instruct Con on what we were debating about, but due to his ignorance I wasted several rounds on trying to explain things to him and never got this debate rolling.

I will re-post this debate in the future in hopes of getting a more worthy opponent
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 8elB6U5THIqaSm5QhiNLVnRJA 1 year ago
8elB6U5THIqaSm5QhiNLVnRJA
tschukvi_spexTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: S+G to Pro for Con's Round 4 and 3 having numerous errors including incorrect capitalization and lack of punctuation. Arguments to Pro since Con conceded in Round 4 saying 'sure'.
Vote Placed by Jonnykelly 1 year ago
Jonnykelly
tschukvi_spexTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con accepted a very interesting debate but had no real interest in trying to prove his point. Horrible grammar and capitalization.
Vote Placed by CASmnl42 1 year ago
CASmnl42
tschukvi_spexTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side made any particularly convincing arguments, but Pro gets points for taking the topic and the debate seriously.