The Instigator
stefan600
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Pro (for)
Winning
32 Points

There is no god

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 6 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 602 times Debate No: 55851
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (6)

 

stefan600

Con

There is no conclusive evidence for anyone to base their lives around the idea of god. You only live once, don't try and waste it devoting your life to some magical man in the sky who probably doesn't exist. We run this world on a basis of evidence, for example when in court, evidence is used to declare which is guilty, not "faith" or superstitious nonsense. A lawyer would not say i have faith in my client not being guilty and get taken seriously by the jury. It should be the same case in religious debating
Zarroette

Pro

In negating the resolution "there is no god", Con must provide evidence that there is a god. So far, he/she has provided arguments that there isn't a god, and they are most welcomed, yet are only of help to Pro's side of the debate.

As for the affirmation case, I cannot debate Con's argument for god's existence if he/she is yet to make one. However, I will quickly provide rebuttals to popular arguments that suggest there is a god:

1. The popular Kalam Cosmological Argument for god's existence, has been heavily criticised by the works of Lawrence Krauss, who has explained how quantum mechanics can account for how space-time and matter can emerge from 'nothing' [1].

2. The Intelligent Design argument can be shown inherently defunct, as god cannot demonstrate omnipotence and omniscience at the same time [2].

I await Con's case.

References


[1] http://www.atheismandthecity.com...;
[2] https://www.youtube.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
stefan600

Con

stefan600 forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Pro

Extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
stefan600

Con

stefan600 forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Pro

Con provided neither any argument to negate the resolution, nor any counter-arguments to my own arguments. Hence, my victory has been realised.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Liamardo 2 years ago
Liamardo
So pro and con are both arguing that god doesn't exist?
Posted by micycle 2 years ago
micycle
"Con must provide evidence that there is a god"...

Affirming that God does not exist - "There is no god" - also carries with it the burden of proof. In fact, 'for' should be providing evidence that God does not exist (though you both seem to be arguing for the debate title - I think that 'con' misread the title.
Posted by oculus_de_logica 2 years ago
oculus_de_logica
you do realize that you're talking against the resolution. You're affirming that god might exist.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Instigator should be pro.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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
Vote Placed by Burncastle 2 years ago
Burncastle
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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: FF
Vote Placed by progressivedem22 2 years ago
progressivedem22
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Only Pro provided substantive arguments backed by sources, so arguments and sources go to her. Also conduct to Pro, as Con forfeited.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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: Conduct for the forfeits. I suspect that Con wasn't really advocating the position that Pro assigned, but Con never objected since Con forfeited. So arguments go likewise to Pro. Everything else was equal enough. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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: Ff
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
stefan600ZarroetteTied
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