The Instigator
racedogg2
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RedneckR0nin
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points

There is at least a 99% probability that God exists.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
RedneckR0nin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/3/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 937 times Debate No: 23360
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

racedogg2

Con

I personally believe that there is a far smaller chance than 99% that God exists. I think the likelihood to fall somewhere below the 1% range, although of course it never reaches 0. I beleive that the concept of a God is far too complex to exist in this universe, and that Occam's razor should hold true: the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one. The burden of proof will be on my opponent to show that God has a high probability of existing. I will refute his/her points to the best of my ability. I will not accept Bible quotes or other religious texts, because arguments of that sort always end up with circular reasoning: "God exists because the Bible says so." Good luck to whoever decides to enter this discussion with me.
RedneckR0nin

Pro

I first want to thank racedogg for allowing me this opportunity to enter this debate., As a newcomer the options are somewhat limited and I am grateful for the chance to debate this topic with him.

I will not want to nor need to use the bible or any other religious material to prove my points. Frankly I believe these types of material to be the best way for him to make his point rather than myself. For most theological documentaion puts a restriction or has to try a create a image of God. When simply it could be that all we know and are is God. That we are so limited in our knowledge of the universe and God be so greatl

To have a certainty of God existing being or less than 1% in itself is not a example of Occam razor in my view. As yes the most simplistic answer is usually right. In this I state the most simplistic rule of physics and that is you cannot obtain one from zero. It does not get any more simple than that I am afraid. Matter could not according to our current level of knowledge simply have appeared from nothing. It had to come from somewhere and something. In regards to this you can and do have a infinite amount of numbers once one is obtained. So simplistically if one exists then as high as we could possibly count is not even the beginning or a minor scratch of the surface of how high it would go. Matter and the beauty of what we call life should also be looked at this way. If we exist and we are intelligent life forms then to imagine a God being a much higher form of life and possessing a much higher form of intelligence becomes almost assured.

The universe is complex and far too much so to have simply appeared out of nothing. It is also far too complex for our minds at this stage of evolution to even comprehend the sheer size of it. This is also in relation to the size down the scale. We cannot see what we know to exist such as the atom and it's parts. If you consider a multiverse theory then every possible occurrence will inevitably happen. This not only applies to God that in itself would be God. Truly omnipotent and truly something we could not comprehend.

Using the Bayes method of probability many have calculated the percentage of God existing. Any person that uses this can calculate a answer to this question. In my studies I have observed many people conclude many different answers. What I have not seen is anyone come to the final answer of being equal to or less than 1%. If you want to look at this question simplistically yet logically the answer is obvious. We simply do not know and who is to say that is something we will ever know either way. So to state that it is a 50/50 answer is not insane to believe and is the obvious choice.

Lastly let us all not forget who is making these assumptions. This does not apply strictly to my opponent or myself but our species as a whole. Humans have a track record of being ignorant beyond logic. We are so entrenched in our ignorance that we know we are being as such and we choose to be anyway. We do not have the mental capacity to make a truly bold statement such as my opponent has made. That alone makes such a imbalance of odds as 1/99 improbable and unlikely.

Thank you again to my opponent for allowing me this opportunity to debate this subject with him. I look forward to the conversing back and forth and through that maybe both can garner a new perspective in this question that has plagued us since the beginning of our species.
Debate Round No. 1
racedogg2

Con

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
RedneckR0nin

Pro

I shall extend my arguments
Debate Round No. 2
racedogg2

Con

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
RedneckR0nin

Pro

I shall extend my argument
Debate Round No. 3
racedogg2

Con

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
RedneckR0nin

Pro

I shall extend my argument
Debate Round No. 4
racedogg2

Con

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
RedneckR0nin

Pro

I conclude with the arguments uncontested.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by RedneckR0nin 4 years ago
RedneckR0nin
Sadly that's not what I really wanted at all
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
Pro lol easy win XD
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
racedogg2RedneckR0ninTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit by Con
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
racedogg2RedneckR0ninTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF