The Instigator
Pro (for)
12 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

The concept of gods, religion & supernatural arose to explain what was not yet understood.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/25/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 702 times Debate No: 53363
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)




People created gods, religion and the supernatural as attempts to explain things in the world that they did not understand. As Human understanding grew, those concepts changed more slowly than the increased understanding. Most religions have been hopelessly outstripped by human scientific knowledge, but their adherents are reluctant to let go of the comfort and perceived certainty that these beliefs give them. However, everything is part of the natural world, there are no gods and anything considered 'supernatural' simply is not yet fully understood.
This is my first debate in this forum, so please excuse me if I have not phrased the question as clearly or succinctly as it could have been.
I propose a relatively free-form format, with initial positions in round 1, rebuttals in round 2 and conclusions in round 3.


thanks for the pro that make this debate
and because my religion is Christian so i just purpose base on Christian
actually, this is also my first debate so please be fun.. :D

Argument : People are not created Gods, religion, and the supernatural
because we know that first God are not created because base on holy bible God can't be created,
there are so many facts that religion is true example the ark of Nuh is found, and of course with this many people will believe to religion. so if people create God, so who create people? ok many people say that from evolution but many scientist just pretend theirself like Dr. Charles Dawson, but scientist already found that what Dr. Charles Dawson found is not true. and the concept that make people not yet understood is not true, because the faith from christian make them understand, but we know that they can't tell it directly but they understand, example like they become possessed and the theology people or the others can extrude the evil spirit from that people and if they don't understand, how can they extrude the evil spirit? and of course it's supernatural. and religion people understand why they choose their religion and many atheist become religion people because they alraedy have direct contact with God and it's miracle . so with this God give people faith so the believe to God. and also they know if people die they know where they go, it just between hell and heaven but for atheist if they die they don't know where will they go, because they don't believe it. it just they stop after they die. and it means that many people understand because of their faith even they can't tell it directly
Debate Round No. 1


With regard to the finding of Noah"s Ark, it is not true:
Accepting that "God" had to come first because the Bible says so simply leads to a circular argument: How do you know the Bible is true " because it is the inspired word of God " How do you know that God is real " because the Bible says He is. This is not evidence. Hesiod"s Theogony was written in the 7th century BC and describes the ancient Greek religion"s Gods and creation myth. Do you think that the Greeks of that time didn"t also believe that it was "inspired truth" and an accurate description of reality? There are dozens " maybe hundreds " of self-described Holy books in the world. They can"t all be true, so how does one decide which to believe? Simply put, most people decide based on their heritage " parents teach their children what they believe and it becomes what the children will believe.
Charles Darwin"s theory of evolution has not been conclusively proven or disproven, but people who disagree will continue to find flaws in it. The most basic of these "flaws" is the initial source of life. We do not know. However, it is equally disingenuous to say that God created life, because we are left with the question of where God came from. If "He was always there" then why can"t we assume that life was always here? Either answer requires a leap of faith. The fact is that we do not know how life began, but evolution and scientific inquiry will lead to more complete, accurate and provable answers than "God did it."
Evil spirits and exorcisms are "shows" to deal with (usually) psychological disorders that the ancients did not understand and many today refuse to understand. A person with multiple personality disorder exhibits what appears to be a different "personality" than usual, so there must be a demon in there to account for the "extra" personality. It"s a chemical imbalance treatable with medication and appropriate therapy, not an unseen spirit.
Death is the final unknown for which Gods, religion and the supernatural were created. People fear the unknown, and death is perhaps the greatest and most personal of those unknowns. Again, there are many religions each with different stories about "the afterlife" " none is more or less valid than any of the others. They give comfort to those who remain, and hope for when they will die. That does not make them accurate and without solid evidence we simply do not know what (if anything) happens to the "person" after death.
Finally, you close with the argument that "God gives people faith so the[y] believe [in] God "" This is just as circular an argument as God exists because the Bible says He does. Where is the independently verifiable, testable evidence? Faith is useful for 'filling the gaps' of our knowledge, but it shouldn't be a substitute for actual research and discovery.


actualy the quistion is what is purpose of life?
why we should live if we should die?
the question is only in religion, and scientist just base on fact
now i ask you how about the miracle happend, life baby from 5th floor fall down but isn't die? and how about this
even scientist can't explain the miracles happen, but for religion people, of course they know that. Their faith tell them, and even it's unconsciously. and about the Noah's ark. in that web say it base on geological, but how about the big flood, after noah and the others get out from the ark, of course the flood isn't finish yet, and there are earthquake happend so it means that the ark isn't stay still. the ark move because of natural disaster.
and about God, God is true, so who create us? who create this nature? is all this happend suddenly? of course not. if you say that evolution and scientific inquiry will lead to more complete, but what's the fact? still there are so many missing link. even expert claim expert, so what is the true? many expert just pretend because just search the popularity like when i said in the first round. and there are so many people become believe to God because God Already give them the faith and not just that, many people also have experience meet God, but when they talk to many people, they don't believe it. so because of that , Bible is proven. to be a good People or Right people isn't easy, they must through many block, and that's become true.
and you said that
"Evil spirits and exorcisms are "shows" to deal with (usually) psychological disorders that the ancients did not understand and many today refuse to understand"
yeahh they refuse to understand it because they can't understand it without faith. if you ask faith people, they won't answer you, but they understand with their faith.
so the death, all religion will say they afterlife is Hell or heaven.
many people fear to death but if people have faith they won't but isn't mean they will suicide. even many people don't know about death, where will they go, but the purpose is just two, hell or heaven. and if people really want to prove with all science , you can't prove it. because it's not about science, it's about supernatural. so scientist can't describe it. because science isn't prove all thing because they just base on fact. many people don't believe it so because of that many scientist want to search it, and it can't be prove.

and if you won't believe it, it's better if you read the Book "heaven is so real"
and it will prove That God is real, you'll know where we will go after death
Debate Round No. 2


Life is its own purpose, there is no need for any other reason for life. It"s like asking why the sky exists, or what is the purpose of electromagnetism. Assuming there is a God, how does that give life purpose if He will not explain what His purpose is? As to the question "who created us" that is an equally meaningless question. To paraphrase what I stated in the previous round, if we needed God to be created, then why didn"t God need someone/something to create him? If God could have arisen from nothing, then why could it not be true that the universe arose from nothing?
I can"t respond to your argument about "miracles" without more specifics. I don"t know what "baby from the 5th floor" you are referring to, so it is impossible to answer that specific "miracle", but most so-called miracles are explained as mistaken perception, outright fiction or by sound scientific principles.
"They refuse to understand it because they can"t understand it without faith" is simply a non-sequitur, since faith means acceptance without understanding. If you understand a phenomenon, there is no need for faith. Maybe this is a matter of definitions:
faith (fāth)
n. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

faith [feyth]
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

Full Definition of FAITH
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion
b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

"[A]ll religion[s] will say [the]y afterlife is Hell or heaven" is not true. Many believe in reincarnation, and even those that do have concepts roughly equivalent to "Hell or heaven" have far differing specifics. Some believe in limbo (where the souls of those who had no opportunity to know God are sent), or purgatory (a particularly Catholic doctrine in which all those who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven or the final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned). The Jewish religion has no uniformly accepted doctrine regarding the afterlife and although Islam"s doctrine regarding the afterlife generally agrees superficially with Christian doctrines, many of the specifics differ significantly

With regard to the book "Heaven is so Real" anyone can write a story but that doesn"t make it true.
It "proves" nothing, except the writer"s ability to tell a story.

Back to the original issue: people created gods, religion and the supernatural as attempts to explain what they did not understand. Everything that does exist can be explained, even if we do not yet have the knowledge to do so, and it is not wrong or unacceptable to acknowledge that there are things we do not understand. There is no real need to make up explanations for such things, only the need for patience until they can be explained properly.


"As to the question "who created us" that is an equally meaningless question. To paraphrase what I stated in the previous round, if we needed God to be created, then why didn"t God need someone/something to create him? "
God is Alpha and Omega and it means that God is the first and the last. so you understand that the first and the last.
and Miracles, miracles is true, and if you watch the video you'll know that.

and about faith, yes it's true that faith is belief and trust in and loyalty to God, but i mean that if we have faith to God we'll understand trough the holy spirit, like base on christian when the Pentecost happen they confuse because they hear the prophet talk with their language, and it means that they understand because the holy spirit. and if people have faith to God of course the holy spirit will come to them and will make understand.

and you said about limbo, actually limbo isn't true
because limbo is just some speculative idea because when that age, they confuse if people stuck in their original sin
and it's still not proven. and about the rencanation, yes the hindu or buddha people are believe in that, but they still believe hell and heaven. because their teory of the rencarnation when they kill animal, like example if they rack cat when the cat is pregnant so when they die, they will reborn and they automaticly will punish by nature, example their life will suffer,etc. and afterthat they will die , but won't rencarnation again, and of course they will go to hell or heaven. and about God, religion , and supernatural isn't KNOWLEDGE, so it means that even expert won't know it. like i said before it just when people have faith to God and holy spirit make them understand.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Realdy 2 years ago
Your grammes is good Than me, because i'm a newbie :D
Posted by Realdy 2 years ago
hei in the 3rd round it just a conclucion or there are any rebutal?
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
actually they don't continue to grow. the skin dehydrates and shrinks back giving the appearance they continued to grow. I was asking how might Con win?
Posted by Watchemoket 2 years ago
You can call it "materialistic" but I prefer the term "reality"
How do you define 'supernatural" except as it relates to nature? It is something outside of ('super' to) nature. I understand nature to mean everything that is real. Maybe that is semantics, but I don't know how else to explain it.
My basic premise is a question of perception and refusal to acknowledge the unknown. Gods, religion and the supernatural (call it GRS for short) are tools used by people to explain what they don't understand.
I absolutely acknowledge that there is much that we as a species do not understand - probably more than we collectively do understand at this point. A person or persons senses something (through any of the senses by which we experience the world) - you used the term BS - and does not understand it. I do not claim that BS therefore does not exist, but that when it is called 'Zeus" or a ghost, or any other term from the "GRS" group it is due to a lack of understanding and a need to avoid acknowledging the unknown.
A previously buried corpse is found disturbed, with longer hair and nails than when buried, and the 'living dead' is an explanation. They didn't understand that hair and nails continue to grow for a time after death, so they believe that it revived. A mythology grows up around the story.
More important, basic things require more elaborate explanations. Gods (super peoiple but with power to control the world around us) explained the seasons, why the sun rose and set and (especially important) how food crops grew, why it rained, and so forth. The raw power of lightning and thunder HAD to be controlled by someone, or there was no way to understand and control them. Pray to the right god, the right way, and you're safe. If you are killed, then you obviously didn't pray right, or enough.
I'm not sayuing that GRS is inherently bad (or good), but it should be seen for what it is, and not as a valid explanation of reality.
Posted by Mhykiel 2 years ago
So the only truth is found in a materialistic world view. And IF I prove anything supernatural to exist then it automatically becomes a not yet understood part of the materialistic view? your also asserting what ever human scientific knowledge doesn't know doesn't exist. So gods, religion and supernatural are part of what is not yet understood so they don't exist. So... BS doesn't exist IF BS is proven it exist then BS becomes part of science, but if BS is misunderstood it doesn't exist. So how exactly does one get off your roller coaster?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by imsmarterthanyou98 2 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument and rebuttals were barely legible, Pro's argument's had some flaws but overall Pro came on top on the argument's sources going to PRO he had more sources and more reliable ones, Conduct is tied .
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
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:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's argument was nowhere near flawless, but I'm not sure what con was even trying to say most of the time. Con didn't have great grammar either, and his one source really didn't support the argument but rather used someone else's words to make an argument for him. I gave conduct to con for the incessant use of quotation marks around everything that pro didn't agree with.