The Instigator
Diagoras
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Mr.Infidel
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points

The god of the bible exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 4 votes the winner is...
Diagoras
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/31/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,428 times Debate No: 19070
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (4)

 

Diagoras

Con

Of course, I mean exists in the real world. Not "exists in our imagination" or "exists in our hearts" or any garbage like that.
Mr.Infidel

Pro

Disclaimer: I agree with my opponent on this issue, but want to test my ability to play Devil's Advocate.

It is important to know what we mean by "Bible." By "Bible" I am referring to the Jewish scriptures (the "Old" Testament). This is important for this debate.

I will attempt to show: (1) Judaism is the most logical Theistic belief; and (2) the Jewish God exists.

Contention 1: The Bible makes a claim that is an impossible hoax to pull off. That claim is the national revelation at Mount Sinai.
  1. If God spoke to the Hebrews at Mount Sinai, the God of the Bible exists.
  2. God spoke to the Hebrews at Mount Sinai.
  3. Therefore, the Biblical God exists.

Premise 1 is a necessary truth so in this round I will defend how premise 2 proves God exists.

[Moses told the Israelites]: 'Only beware for yourself and greatly beware for your soul, lest you forget the things that your eyes have beheld. Do not remove this memory from your heart all the days of your life. Teach your children and your children's children about the day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horev [Mount Sinai]...

God spoke to you from the midst of the fire, you were hearing the sound of words, but you were not seeing a form, only a sound. He told you of His covenant, instructing you to keep the Ten Commandments, and He inscribed them on two stone tablets.' (Deut.4:9-13)

'You have been shown in order to know that God, He is the Supreme Being. There is none besides Him. From heaven he let you hear His voice in order to teach you, and on earth He showed you His great fire, and you heard His words amid the fire.' (Deut. 4:32-36)

Moses called all of Israel and said to them: 'Hear, O Israel, the decrees and the ordinances that I speak in your ears today -- learn them, and be careful to perform them. The Lord your God sealed a covenant with us at Horev [Mount Sinai]. Not with our forefathers did God seal this covenant, but with us -- we who are here, all of us alive today. Face to face did God speak with you on the mountain from amid the fire.' (Deut. 5:1-4)


The Torah asserts that the entire Jewish nation heard God speak at Sinai, an assertion that has been accepted as part of the Jewish history for well over 3,000 years.

The Torah claims: 3,000,000 people heard God himself speak, this is an impossible hoax to pull off. Allow me to demonstrate with a few statements:

  1. Last week after I ate supper, I went for a walk through the forest near my house. Suddenly everything was awash in a tremendous light and G-d appeared to me, designated me as His prophet. He told me to announce his revelation to you at this time.
  2. Last night while I was eating supper with my family, the room started to suddenly shake and God's booming voice was heard by all of us. He designated me as his prophet and commanded me to announce this revelation.
  3. Do you remember what happened 10 minutes ago just as you and I began to debate this topic? Remember how the room began to shake and the ceiling opened the skies, and you and I together heard God's booming voice come down and say "Thou shalt hearken to the voice of Mr.Infidel for he is my prophet!" And then the room went back to normal and we continued to discuss God's existence. You have to remember, right!

Scenario 1: Believable? Although this theory could have possibly happened, it does not seem likely but you do not know that I am lying. Would you choose to believe me? Without any evidence, why would you believe me?

Scenario 2 may also have happened. If I were to bring my family to confirm the story, it would be a lot more believable than the 1st story. You certainly do not know if I am lying.

Would you have enough faith if I were to then say, "God told me to tell you to give me $10,000 for my ministry"? You'd be a fool to do such a thing!

Scenario 3 is a lot different because you know the story is true or false because it involves you. The 1st two claims had the possibility of being true. You choose not to accept them because they were unverifiable. However this third scenario is impossible to believe. I'm claiming something that happened to you and that you know did not happen. Therefore, since you did not experience it, you know I am either lying or tell you the truth. I cannot convince you of something you yourself know did not happen.

Because of the nature of the revelation of Judaism, we know that it has to be true.

On a final note the great Jewish scholar Maimondies writes: "Israel did not believe in Moses, our teacher, on account of the miracles he performed. For when one's faith is based upon miracles, doubt remains in the mind that these miracles may have been done through the occult and witchcraft. What were the grounds of believing him? The revelation on Sinai which we with our own eyes, and heard with our own ears, not having to depend on the testimony of others...(Mishna Torah-Foundations of Torah 8:1)

You might inquire about times long past, from the day that God created man on earth, and from one end of heaven to the other: Has there ever been anything like this great thing [The revelation at Mt. Sinai] or has anything like it been heard? Has a people ever heard the voice of God speaking from the midst of the fires as you have heard and survived? --Deut. 4:32-33

What Moses is saying is that there will never again be a claim of a national revelation. This is a bold claim, which came to pass!

Let's summarize 3 primary questions:

  1. If Judaism is false and the Biblical God does not exist, why is Judaism the only religion (out of 15,000+) that claims a national revelation, the best of all claims? Why is it that all other religions base themselves on the weak assertion of a personal revelation.
  2. If Judaism's claim is indeed an example of a hoax that falsely asserts national revelation, the author just god away with it, why would he predict that no-one else would ever make such a claim?
  3. If the Biblical God does not exist, how did this hoax get pulled off without anyone noticing?

Thank you!

Reference http://www.aish.com...

Debate Round No. 1
Diagoras

Con

Mr. Infidel brings up one main point.

1.If God spoke to the Hebrews at Mount Sinai, the God of the Bible exists.
2.God spoke to the Hebrews at Mount Sinai.
3.Therefore, the Biblical God exists.

The rest is just based off of this one contention. I will focus on premise 2.

Mr. Infidel needs to offer some kind of evidence to claim premise 2 as fact. There are two things that need to be proven.

1)That 3,000,000 Hebrews all heard the same thing.
2)That is was god that said it.

Mr. Infidel only really addresses that second option by showing that it would be nearly impossible for something other than god to do such a thing. But he has not shown 3,000,000 Hebrews did all hear the same thing. Our only "evidence" are some books that are derived from the same initial source. Likewise, we could say…

1)If the invisibility cloak makes one invisible, than it is real.
2)The invisibility cloak does make one invisible.
3)Therefore, the invisibility cloak is real.

This, of course, being derived from the Harry Potter books. But we know that they are fiction and so not legitimate sources. As such, they cannot be used to prove themselves. Likewise, the bible and other religious texts that have not been shown to be non-fiction, cannot be used.

In order to use any source to back the claim up, my opponent will have to show that such a source is legitimate and accurate.
Mr.Infidel

Pro

Extend my arguments as my opponent clearly shown that he missed the point.


My opponent asked me to prove two things:

1)That 3,000,000 Hebrews all heard the same thing.
2)That is was god that said it.

1) You have to prove they did NOT. Moreover, the Torah clearly says that they all heard the same thing.

2) If it was not God that said it, then who was it? Moreover, the #2 proof of the existence of the Jewish G-d, Hashem, is the fulfillment of prophecy.

Leviticus Ch.26

“And I will scatter you among the nations.” – the first exile to Babylon.

“And I will bring the land into desolation.” – the ruination of the Land of Israel.

“And I will bring your sanctuaries into desolation.” – the destruction of the First Temple.

“And I will not smell the savour of your sweet odours.” – the cessation of sacrifice in the first Temple.

“Then shall the land be paid her Sabbaths.” – the duration of the first exile – 70 years – was commensurate with the number of Sabbatical years, which were not previously correctly observed.

“And you shall eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters.” – a prophecy fulfilled, as described by Jeremiah in the book of Lamentations (2:20), at the destruction of the first Temple.

One can ask, How was it possible for Moshe to know that, over eight hundred years after the Jews entered the Land of Israel under Joshua, the Babylonians would come and destroy the first Temple and exile the people for 70 years? How did he know about the cessation of offerings and the eating of the flesh? Only cognitive dissonance will allow the sceptic to deny that this was prophecy from the true G–d; the living G–d who creates, sustains and directs the course of the world.

Deuteronomy Ch.28

“And you shall be plucked off the land.” – the second exile.

“Your sons and daughters shall be given unto another nation … and you shall serve your enemy … in famine and thirst.” – before the exile.

“The Lord will bring upon you a nation from afar, from the end of the earth.” – a reference to Rome.

“... who will swoop down like an eagle.” – a reference to the Roman legions whose standard bearers carried the sign of an eagle.

“And it will lay siege to all your gates, until your high and fortified walls … are toppled.” – the land is conquered, there is siege, and the walls fall.

“The stranger that is in your midst shall mount up above you higher and higher.” – a reference to Herod.

“You shall betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her.” – a Roman decree.

“And G–d shall scatter you among all the peoples from one end of the earth to the other end of the earth.” – the Jew is exiled to all four corners of the earth.

“And among these nations you shall have no repose, and there shall be no rest for the sole of your foot … and you shall fear night and day.” – the situation of Jews in exile.

“Your life shall hang in doubt before you.” – no financial security.

“And as for them who are left of you, I will send a faintness into their hearts … and you shall have no power to stand before your enemies.” – the Jews are easily subdued.

“Each day’s curse will surpass that of the day before.” – events will happen so rapidly, the Jew will hardly be able to recover from one incident before another calamity befalls him.

“You will be beset by illnesses and plagues not even mentioned in the Torah.” – the many sufferings of exile.

“You shall serve gods … wood and stone there.” – a reference to the fact that, throughout their long exile, the Jew will be subjected to the god of wood – the cross – burnt at the stake with forced conversions; and to the god of stone of Mecca and Medina.

“I will draw out the sword after you … and you shall perish among the nations and the land of your enemies will devour you.” (see Leviticus 26:33,38) – decrees of forced conversion and pogroms.

“And you shall be left few in number among the nations whither G–d shall lead you away.” – in fact it is quite amazing that, particularly during the Dark Ages, the Jew did not disappear totally.

“And you shall become an astonishment.” – the Jews will become a topic of discussion for all.

“... a proverb and a byword.” – the wandering Jew shall be the symbol of suffering and persecution.

“And they shall be upon you for a sign and for a wonder.” – the badges we were often forced to wear identified us as the Jew.

In graphic detail Moshe prophesies the destruction of the second Temple and the following exile with amazing accuracy. He was talking about events that took place 1,500 years after he passed on. How could he possibly have known?

And yet the Jew still survives – and thrives.

“For I am G–d, I do not change, therefore you sons of Jacob are not consumed.” (Malachi 3:6) – the eternity of the Jewish people.

“Only if the sun, moon and stars disappear, the seed of Israel shall also cease from being a nation.” (Jeremiah 31:35)

Amidst great persecution, suffering and exile, Torah study flourished. There were always Talmudic academies producing Torah scholars who carried the baton of Torah learning and transmitted it to the next generation. This fulfils the prophecy, “For it, the Torah shall not be forgotten from the mouth of their seed.” (Isaiah 59:20-21)

Throughout, the Jew kept Shabbat.

“The Shabbat will be an everlasting covenant between G–d and Israel.”(Numbers 31:16)

“It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel.” (Ibid.)

Isn’t it fascinating that, when the other two main religions picked a day for their day of rest, one picked Sunday and the other Friday, but Shabbat remained the day of rest for the Jew? Was this not prophesied?

Reference for prophecy: http://www.chabad.org...;



===TO REFUTE MY OPPONEN'T STRAW MAN==

1)If the invisibility cloak makes one invisible, than it is real.
2)The invisibility cloak does make one invisible.
3)Therefore, the invisibility cloak is real.

I do not quite understand what you are attempting to say.

Thanks!

Debate Round No. 2
Diagoras

Con

My opponent claims that I have to prove that the 3,000,000 did NOT hear anything. This is a false burden of truth. The one that makes the claim has to prove it. As said by Alex Michalos "one who makes an assertion must assume the responsibility of defending it. If this responsibility or burden of proof is shifted to a critic, the fallacy of appealing to ignorance is committed." http://en.wikipedia.org...

Also, since my opponent is making an extraordinary claim, extraordinary support is needed to back it up. The words of a book are not sufficient.

My opponent also seems to forget what a strawman actually is. If I said that was his argument, and so shot it down and claimed victory, that would be a strawman. However, I only said that it used the same line of logic, and used it as an example to show how books cannot be used as evidence, since books can be fiction. Just because some book says it happened does not mean it happened.

Unfortunately, this is the last round, so anything my opponent now says cannot be answered. Again, my opponent has presented a basic syllogism, however the syllogism is full of unsubstantiated claims with no meaningful evidence. As such, there is no reason to resolve the Pro side.
Mr.Infidel

Pro

Because my opponent cannot answer, I will not attempt to rebut everything.

If you have read what I wrote, you will see that I proved why we should trust the Torah. My opponent has not refuted anything I have said.

Thanks. I urge an affirmative vote.
Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Buckethead31594 5 years ago
Buckethead31594
By the way, Diagoras. I am one of those Bible-thumping morons that you spoke of earlier. Please don't be so quick to judge; I have no quirrel with you.
Posted by Buckethead31594 5 years ago
Buckethead31594
Oh well, better luck next time, Mr.Infidel.
Posted by Liquidus 5 years ago
Liquidus
Continue, this is good!
Posted by Diagoras 5 years ago
Diagoras
It's sympathy, not anger.
Posted by Liquidus 5 years ago
Liquidus
Your anger brings a smile to my face :) Please go on!
Posted by Diagoras 5 years ago
Diagoras
No, it isn't. This is a comment section, for a one on one debate. It is not open for anyone to debate in. If you would like some open conversations, then go to the forum sections where there are plenty of people that can tear down your pathetic arguments.
Posted by Liquidus 5 years ago
Liquidus
Allow me to correct you. This IS an open debate in which I have commented on. You have spammed up this comments section with your meaningless comments. I hope you understand better :)
Posted by Diagoras 5 years ago
Diagoras
No, this is a one on one debate, right now, you're just spamming up the comment sections. Thanks. If you want "open" debates, go to the forums.
Posted by Liquidus 5 years ago
Liquidus
Remember, this is an open debate. I could just as well claim another idiotic atheist joins the site.
Posted by Diagoras 5 years ago
Diagoras
I was refering to Liquidus.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
DiagorasMr.InfidelTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm not going to charge Pro a conduct point for trying to shift the burden of proof, but he shouldn't do that. "X must be true because it's in the bible," is not a strong argument, as Con pointed out.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
DiagorasMr.InfidelTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had the best arguments by far but his mention of god existing in our hearts = garbage cost him conduct, or it would have had con not backed up his outrageous claims.
Vote Placed by rogue 5 years ago
rogue
DiagorasMr.InfidelTied
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: Pro made an extraordinary claim and refused to support it. One who makes an affirmative claim must assume the burden of proof.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
DiagorasMr.InfidelTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is right that Pro needs to offer proof. For Arguing devil's advocate, Pro did not do a very good job, and seems like this was more of mocking pro-religious arguments.