The Instigator
Mussab
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Dpowell
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

There is proof for the existence of 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 1 vote the winner is...
Mussab
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 706 times Debate No: 55280
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (16)
Votes (1)

 

Mussab

Pro

I will be arguing from the Point of View of a Muslim
1) First round consists of but is not limited to acceptance
2) No arguments in the last round
Good luck
Dpowell

Con

I will accept as the Nondenominational christian I am.
Debate Round No. 1
Mussab

Pro

The universe had to be made somehow. The Big Bang only describes HOW it came into existence. (You know... Everything expanded from one single point, etc.) There has to be something that set off the Big Bang. Matter doesn't randomly create itself by the Law of conservation of Matter. This is where the Kalam Cosmological argument kicks in.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

My other proof for the existence of God is from the Quran itself. The Quran is miraculous Lingustically and Scientifically. Let's start with the Linguistic proof.

Linguistic Proof:
The Quran when read in Arabic is very unique and miraculous. Here's an explanation with some evidence.
http://www.hamzatzortzis.com...

The Quran also gave a famous challenge to make a Chapter like one in the Quran. Nobody succeeded even though the Challenge was introduced where some people were very literate in Mecca that they could create a thousand lines of poetry on the spot. But none succeeded.
(Quran 2:23)
"And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful."

Scientific Proof:
The Quran has multiple verses that show knowledge of advanced science that was impossible to observe in the time it was revealed. Here's some verses:

"And the heaven We created with might, and indeed We are (its) expander." (Quran 51:47)
Expansion of Universe discovered by Tom Hubble

"Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, then We separated them, and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?" (Quran 21:30)
Look how it is similar to the Big Bang Theory

Here's the verse explained (since this one will be misunderstood alone)

There are much more.
Thank you
Dpowell

Con

Dpowell forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Mussab

Pro

I extend my argument.
Dpowell

Con

I apologize to my opponent, for I have been busy. Any way, I shall used our beloved bible. I will be using summarizations of what it says and historical proofs.
The Bible- As far as anyone knows, it could have been written by a family(ies) the may have been there and witnessed those events or told the writer of these events. Or God could have told them, but how could he communicate? So he used an angel to do so.
History- If you take the bible and look at the history of the world, all the events in the bible really happened, maybe not the exact events but the time frame and the events are real so far. What we know may have just been stories that god told himself to teach man kind very important life lessons or Jesus, as we all know, was really alive, may have told these stories for the same reason, and maybe he wrote the bible.
Debate Round No. 3
Mussab

Pro

I can't make a rebuttal since it's against my own rules so i'll just tell you you've mistaken the topic a bit there, mate. Anyways, I hope you guys vote fairly without any bias. Thank you and Goodbye
Dpowell

Con

Dpowell forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mussab 2 years ago
Mussab
@DSky25
Sorry I missed a word or two that changed the whole meaning.
He interacted with Christians and Jews: Fine
You said that these Christians and Jews interacted with Romans and Greeks: False
The Christians and Jews were also Arabs. They undergo the same trade route as every other Arab. Your assumption is quite improbable or outrageous (just for argument's sake). The way I understood it, He interacted with Jews and Christians outside of Arabia. THAT is the dangerous assumption. If that isn't what you said then again, The Christians and Jews were Arabs.
Let me tell you why I prefer Muslim scholars over non-Muslim scholars. We Muslims aren't ashamed of whatever is in Islam. The truth is truth regardless of what some American thinks about it. However, I am paranoid that some non-Muslim scholar will mend in his opinion with the facts.
I don't think that would be suicidal. I actually pointed out a verse was true but wasn't a miracle once for truth's sake. As I said before, we have other proof that would still nail arguments.
Posted by DSky25 2 years ago
DSky25
For the record, I never said that my assumptions were right because some scholars agree with me. If you had phrased it as such: "You seem to imply that you are correct because some non-Muslim scholars agree with you.", then that wouldn't be fallacious, only short sided. I will respond to your wording of implication as it pertains to the correct way of phrasing it. Do you want to know why I trust non-Muslim scholars over Muslim scholars? Because non-Muslim scholars do not have a stake or interest in the reputation of Islam. Their position in the evaluation of Muslim scientific correlations is "neither here nor there" and there are no defining factors that would suggest they are partial one way or another. This does not mean every scholar does not possess some bias, which is why it is important to verify the scholars who pioneer the claims. But, I think it is safe to say that Hell would most surely have to freeze over before any devote Muslim-scholar made any claims that challenged the authenticity of the Qur'an or the character flaws of the prophet Muhammad. And, if they did, I believe that they would be committing social, and possibly legal, suicide by making such claims. Surely, no Muslim would willingly put his/herself in that situation if they did not have to. That is why I am weary of Muslim-scholars.
Posted by DSky25 2 years ago
DSky25
"Most of them are assumptions and opinions"? If someone were looking at this discussion, you have effectively said, "Yeah, I just ignored that stuff because I know they are assumptions." . So, when I explained, "All you have said is that the Christians and Jews claimed Muhammad to be a prophet, that doesn't prove God's existence, it only proves that there were "X" number of Christians and Jews who believed Muhammad was a prophet", that was a double standard? Where was the first standard that contradicts this one? You can't label something I have done and just expect myself or anyone else for that matter, to understand what you are referring to. You are very evasive when it comes to explaining your position. You literally enact no due diligence on your end because if you had, you would find that the papers Moore wrote on embryology WERE financed by the Saudi government. That is no assumption and if you just do a little bit of reading, you will find that the Saudi government approached Moore while in Saudi Arabia, asking him to help with the Qur'an interpretations. Do you really think that Moore just picked up a Qur'an one day without Muslim influence? And maybe if you kept up with Dr. Moore, you would find that the current edition of his book says the embryonic verses were coined from Greek and Indian medicine. Go get this book (written by your savior, Dr. Keith Moore) and turn to page 9 if you do not believe me, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Oh yes, and that book I cited previously was not written by Americans smart guy. It was written by Muhammad Haykal, who was an Egyptian writer and scholar who dedicated his life to understanding the prophet Muhammad. It was translated to English, hence the American Trust Publications. Is this why you think my points are all "assumptions"? Because you don't read? How are you going to avoid discussing my last point now? I am sure you will try to weasel your way around it somehow.
Posted by Mussab 2 years ago
Mussab
@DSky25 Forgot something:
You said that your assumptions were right because some scholars (nevertheless non-muslim scholars) agree with you.
Posted by Mussab 2 years ago
Mussab
@DSky25
Sorry for not addressing all your points. I don't address all your points because most of them are just assumptions or opinions. What am I supposed to tell you? That it actually isn't what you think? So I figured out I'm supposed to ignore them as they're assumptions and not facts. You actually showed one double-standard there. You said that X number of Christians and Jews believing that he was a prophet don't prove anything. You also claimed that Prof. Keith Moore was financed by the Saudi government (which is an even worse assumption. Now you're giving me a book about what Americans THINK Muhammed's life was like rather than giving me a reference to his actual life. I thought opinions don't count as evidence.
Posted by DSky25 3 years ago
DSky25
You're right, all your "proof" isn't science. It's not an assumption that he interacted with Jews and Christians. That notion has widespread scholarly acceptance. Here is one such reference: "Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, American Trust Publications." I have no idea why you brought up the fact that Arabs did not trade with Romans and Greeks. I KNOW THIS. You obviously did not read what I said carefully. I am not going to regurgitate it when it is only a few posts below. Lastly, I don't know how my argument was misconstrued as fallacious. All you have said is that the Christians and Jews claimed Muhammad to be a prophet, that doesn't prove God's existence, it only proves that there were "X" number of Christians and Jews who believed Muhammad was a prophet. How many more of my points are you NOT going to address. I've addressed every point you have made and you have addressed only a few of mine, in an unorganized manner none the less. Don't cherry pick the points you are only interested in addressing.
Posted by Mussab 3 years ago
Mussab
@DSky25 Side Note: I never said that all my proof was related to Science.
Posted by Mussab 3 years ago
Mussab
@DSky25 Sorry I didn't answer in a while.
It's still a dangerous assumption to say that he interacted with a Christians and Jews. Did I phrase my statement incorrectly? Arabs don't trade with the Romans and Greeks. It's also shows fallacy in your argument since it was the Christians and Jews who actually verified he was a Prophet.
Posted by Logi 3 years ago
Logi
I thought Con was supposed to try and disprove God
Posted by DSky25 3 years ago
DSky25
*Cliff note: I support the opposing side of this position, not the Con him/herself. He/she has made an atrocious argument that has no clarity.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
MussabDpowellTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.