The Instigator
MTGandP
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
giantrobot11
Con (against)
Losing
10 Points

The following argument for the existence of God is logically valid.

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
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: 6/26/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 902 times Debate No: 8790
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (7)

 

MTGandP

Pro

http://www.debate.org...

1. The Bible makes references to God's existence
2. Anything that God inspires is truth
3. The Bible is inspired by God
4. The Bible is truth
5. Therefore, God must exist.
giantrobot11

Con

1. Yes, it does.
2. There is nothing to support this statement.
The book of Genesis
"Now the earth was [a] formless* and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.** 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning´┐Ż€"the first day."

*In order for a 3 dimensional object to exist, it has to have a shape and cannot be "formless".
**God putting light upon the earth, implies that before he did, there was darkness and thus no sun. The sun was formed 4.57 billion years ago from a cloud of hydrogen, the earth was formed 4.54 billion years ago from matter orbiting the sun. Light from the sun existed before the earth did, and before the sun, there was light from neighbouring stars

9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.*" And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

Then I looked at your profile, and looked under religious views.
Debate Round No. 1
MTGandP

Pro

My opponent does not seem to have made any real arguments. His only objection is to my second premise:

"2. There is nothing to support this statement."

However, his objection does not affect my position.

"A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false." [1] In other words, an argument is valid if the conclusion follows from the premises. My opponent has not provided any proof that my conclusion does not follow from my premises.

[1] http://www.iep.utm.edu...
giantrobot11

Con

Fine, I guess you are serious about this debate.
Your argument makes a baseless assumption that anything inspired by God is truth, and that the bible is truth. You do not back up this statement, so how can it be held true?

What I was arguing is that you are saying that anything inspired by God is truth in the second point of your argument.
I point out God-inspired claims to be false. Therefore what God has inspired is not truth. This refutes the second and fourth point, or premises as you like to call them. Your conclusion - "God must exist" - is based on false premises, therefore your argument is invalid.

Your argument makes a baseless assumption that anything inspired by God is truth. You do not back up this statement, so how can it be held true?

Also, this is a circle argument. Your premises follow from your conclusion , and vice versa. Your conclusion must be held true in order for its premises to be true. For your arguments to prove your conclusion, your conclusion must be held true, before it is prove right by your arguments. In order for the bible to be inspired by God (one of your arguments) God must exist (your conclusion).
Debate Round No. 2
MTGandP

Pro

My opponent fundamentally misunderstands my argument. I am not saying that my argument is sound: "A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true." I am only saying that it is valid. My opponent's refutations only apply to the soundness of my argument, and I agree that it is unsound. However, since the conclusion directly follows from the premises, the argument is valid.

I thank the audience for reading this debate, and I thank my opponent for participating with me. Vote Pro!
giantrobot11

Con

In this argument, the conclusion (God must exist) precedes the premises, which make claims of the existence of God. This argument is not valid.
A valid argument has a form like if you put together a and b, you have the result of ab.
This argument has a form like because of a, if you put together b and c, you have a, and because of a, if you put together b and c, you have a, and because of a, if you put together b and c...
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
Could someone who voted CON please explain why?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Why are you PRO?
Posted by Lifeisgood 7 years ago
Lifeisgood
Do you seriously think any sane person is going to accept this?
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
"Wait, never mind. I doubt anyone will take this."
Shhh, don't ruin it.
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
"Should be "are logically valid"."
Why? "Argument" is singular.

"...and try to avoid copying the Skeptic."
What do you mean?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Wait, never mind. I doubt anyone will take this.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Should be "are logically valid".

...and try to avoid copying the Skeptic.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by threelittlebirds 7 years ago
threelittlebirds
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 patsox834 7 years ago
patsox834
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by LB628 7 years ago
LB628
MTGandPgiantrobot11Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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