The Instigator
GodSands
Pro (for)
Losing
32 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Con (against)
Winning
38 Points

To believe in God is simply not enough, since you believe in God surely you must know God?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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: 2/18/2009 Category: Education
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,036 times Debate No: 6986
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (27)
Votes (10)

 

GodSands

Pro

Many Christian think believing in God is enough. Firstly I want to state what people mean by believing in God.

It is like this: If I was to believe in someone, I must know that person to believe in that person. Right? I do not understand why people only believe in God, this is one reason why there are so many Atheists these days. For that what puts them off. For that you must know God. Not just believe in God.

A Atheist will think, "For that who can believe in God when there is no evidence for God?" I say, there is no evidence for the belief in God like there is none for me taking a plane to Los Angeles. But to know me would be a different story. You would simply need to get hold of me.

By saying, "Hey Josh you want to go for a drink some time?" I would reply quickly remarking to your question, "yes of course." Just like God would. Apart from there would be spiritual water, not a pint of Fosters or a glass of Moet.

When a Christian says, "yes" in response of one saying, "Do you believe in God?" That is quite right, you should believe in God. However if I was to say, "Do you know the Lord God your heavenly Father?" And that particular Christian says,"No I do not, should I?" The answer is yes, you should for that is why Jesus died.

Atheists and skeptic look, its not why one should know God but for why one should believe in God. For that I was to say, "I know God" The Atheist would not know whether to believe me or not. I say I know God personality and you will not believe me. For likewise when you say, "I do not believe what just happened!" In a positive, not a negative way, God is working in your life. For that you do not believe in the event just like you do not believe in God, however you know the event. Surely you must know God.

What If you say negatively, "I do not believe this is happening to me" Again likewise you do not believe in Satan. On this account you can not know Satan as Satan is constantly changing. for that say you are in a car crash, would you want another car crash? For that you won a holiday to Greece, would you like to win again? I say that you can know anything you want to happen or occur. As God is a constant and there is no end to God, you can believe in God. For that matter, if I was to believe the Devil was to create a new species through evolution, I could believe but not know if my belief was to become true. One, evolution does not exist in a transforming manner. Other manners yes. Evolution of growth and understanding.

Anyway if a Atheist says to you, believer in God, "Why do you believe in God as there is not proof?" Reply back saying, "Just like there is no proof of you believing in David Beckham making it into the 2010 world cup" For that any knowledge is personal, every friendship is personal, But to believe in one is not personal. God wants not just you to believe in Him but you as a friend. In fact God is in the right for Him to believe in you. That you should know God should lead you to know His capibity.

For that reason, Atheists you can know of God but not know God in till you want to know God.

To believe in God is simply not enough for that will not allow one to enter God's kingdom. For what use is a belief in God when you do not know God?
beem0r

Con

My opponent proposes that one who believes in God also must know God. This is patently false.

My opponent suggests that people simply 'believing' in God is what causes there to be so many atheists around. However, it's just the opposite. If the choice to simply believe in God was removed from the table, there would be more atheists. Among christians, there are some who believe that they know that god exists - people like my opponent, for example. Then there are people who are not sure, they simply believe that God exists. This group of people is the overwhelming majority of christians. So let us say that this group is made to disband - that simply believing in God is not a valid position. We would ask every person in the group to decide between two neighboring positions - they could either choose to have uncertainty erring on the side of disbelief [atheism], or they could choose to say that they KNOW god exists. Certainly many of these christians would choose the second group, but the more rational-minded of the lot would have t o accept uncertainty erring on the side of disbelief. To a rational mind, certainty regarding something for which there isn't rock solid, undeniable proof is an untenable position.

Next, my opponent suggests that Jesus died specifically so that people might know God. This is false, especially when we look to scripture for the answer: as far as the bible is concerned, Jesus died to save mankind from their fate in hell, by taking the sin of the world on himself and dying at the hands of man. He did not die so that people could know God in this lifetime, he died so that people might be united with God in the next.

Further along in my opponent's argument, he says the following: "When you say, "I do not believe what just happened!" In a positive, not a negative way, God is working in your life. For that you do not believe in the event just like you do not believe in God, however you know the event. Surely you must know God."
If it is not clear, I will explain - my opponent is equivocating. This means he is using two meanings of the same word as if they have the same meaning. When a person says they don't believe in God, they mean that they do not think that a god exists. When a person says "I don't believe what just happened!" that person means something completely different - they mean that while the thing did just happen, they are amazed that it happened. While one statement does infer knowledge of the thing, the other actually cannot exist if you have knowledge of the thing. If you know that something exists, you necessarily do not hold a position of disbelief on the matter.

My opponent goes on to another "I can't believe this is happening to me," but this time a whole 'nother definition. Here, while the person is inferring that they know what's happeneing to them, they mean by this sentence that they are very disappointed with the way things are going. This, once again, is not the way in which Atheists don't believe in God.

As he always does, my opponent throws in an irrelevant statement about evolution. While it does not have anything to do with the resolution, he feels as though he has to exaplain that he doesn't think biological evolution happens. While this doesn't help or hurt him as far as this resolution is concerned, it does hurt his credibility - GodSands is obviously not a good judge of sufficient evidence for believing or knowing.

Next, my opponent claims that Atheists can know of God, but not know God. First, it's impossible for an atheist to know of God. To know of him means that the likelihood of him existing is 100% in that person's mind. To not believe in him means that the likelihood of him existing is less than 50% in that person's mind. These are mutually exclusive - the perceived percentage chance of him existing cannot both be 100% and less than 50% at the same time - Atheists by definition do not 'know' of God.

And lastly, my opponent claims that to get into heaven, it is not enough to believe in God - one must KNOW God. This is false, and is certainly not supported by scripture. For example, let's look at John 3:36:

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
http://www.biblegateway.com...;

Further, to know God, God would have to make himself known - either by direct contact, or whatever other means. While my opponent may claim that God has divinely revealed himself to him, this is obviously not true for any of the Christians who do not know God - since a divine revelation would automatically mean that a person knows God.

Thank you for reading, and good luck to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 1
GodSands

Pro

Thank you very much Beem0r. God always knew there would be Atheists.

I see that the first point of mine you came across was that, the reason why there are so many Atheists is because there are to many people who claim to just believe in God. This is true. It opens a door of belief to Atheists when one is confronted with a choice. Even you know that a belief in God will do nothing, and for that matter you are put off by even thinking about engaging the presents of God. Because a belief in God will do nothing but give one false hope, in that one may enter heaven.

Jesus even said that you need to be prepared like a bride for a wedding. And that if you are not, by not knowing God you will be rejected from God. Christians are not people who wonder into church on Sunday morning then wonder out again because they think by going to church every Sunday will grant them access into heaven. There are people who do that, they will say, "For I am a Christian" But they are not. They will say getting drunk is fine and sex before marriage is cool with God. If that was to be the case then surely what makes one not a Christian by far they take in Gods ability but they do not take it in to their hearts and instead follow their own in that matter.

Like if I was to say to you, what could a god achieve? Could a god create a universe? Is that not what a god is? If otherwise the very definition of a god would not exist. For this is the belief which a fake believer in Christ Jesus carries. They talk the talk but they do not walk the walk. Very similar to Atheists in fact.

Just like Atheists they talk the talk. An Atheist will say, "I believe in no God" I will reply for what reason do you not? Is it more likely that God would exist instead of us human beings? And like fake believers in Jesus Christ, they will say, "For I do believe in God, but surely does he really care about what we do?" Can you see the similarities, where as a Christian would know God by the actions, for that God is holy and so can that a Christian can be holy, if the Christian puts all his/her heart, mind and soul into following God.

For that is knowing God. By doing good through God and not evil. Atheists do not believe in God because they lack that responsibility. Fake Christian, however lead none believers away by their actions, that Atheists are actually clever enough to see the difference between them and a none Christian who claims to be a Christian. I did, since I knew the concept of God, I thought I was Christian for 14 years. Because I believe in God, that God led Moses to separate the Red sea. I assure you, believing in such events does not make you a Christian. Just like believing in evolution does not conclude you to become a evolutionist, in till you actually do the research. (The false meaningless research that is) Any how by doing good deeds will not grant you any access into heaven. But when you trust in Jesus to save you, your automatic response is to bring other to Christ. There are two ways, and one is more effective. One is by speaking to one about Christ and another is by acting like Christ. Add them both together and you get and you put a very convincing point across.

When you do only the speaking one you are by far not a Christian. This is a great analogy: 1 Christians you are like doctors who are here to heal those who are sick, you come in to work dressed smart and correct for work, but you let those sick patients die. 2 You come into work dressed and ready to work, but you did not listen to any advice and that patients dies. 3 You come into work dressed clean and right for the job, you understand what's wrong with the patient and act on it. Finally after many months the patients recovers and owes you his life. I would only say thank Jesus for with out him no one would be well.

For that to help bring people to Christ you must not only believe in God but know God. Do not just believe in your job can save lives but know it can save lives.

Like how the mind works, you will not feel any pain in till your mind has realised you have something wrong, for that you will not see what you are doing wrong in till you know what you are doing wrong. It is simple, you are simply not wanting to believe you are doing wrong. Because you do not know you are doing wrong. Atheists and false Christians alike are faced with this problem, that false Christians believe it is wrong to get drunk, yet they do not feel guilt, and Atheists do not believe it is wrong to get drunk and again there is no guilt. In this account Atheists and false Christians are in the same boat. For Christians they know it is wrong and evil. And for that Christians know God.

In this conclusion God is not a single point a 3 dimensional being, held high in the sky. For that God is all good. Know God is know good from evil. Believing in that God has become Jesus Christ is a different story, and that you need to believe in Jesus Christ. I suppose this is what makes all religions false. That you believe you are made perfect by knowing God only. But by knowing God through Jesus, who died on the cross, grants you access in knowing God. No other way can you become a Christian. For that we have all sinned.

"Further, to know God, God would have to make himself known - either by direct contact, or whatever other means."

Surely. This is what happens, you inherit God as your Father. It will lead one to tears and confession to then repentance. I can truthfully say that, if it does happen to anyone they will never even forget it. For a time there is nothing between you and God. The experience lasted for around a week for me. In that time I teached to people about Gods grace to about 40 different people. At times there was groups of eight or more. In that you will know when you have accepted Jesus in to your life.

Lastly I do not believe I know God, this is a very incorrect statement. I know God, end of. You know God by knowing what is good and evil and acting on it. This brings joy in to your life. Joy that you have stepped out of what the world thinks. This makes Satan very angry. In that I can now look at the world and see Satan speak through people, that Satan is using those who are unaware to stop others from coming to Christ. This bounces among Atheists causing them not to even speak a word about Jesus Christ or about God. This is why people hate saying the name Jesus Christ, and strangely they hate what hope he brings because Satan hates the hope God offers to you. In this any hope to not be punished, you as a human would accept it naturally.
To have doubt about hope is not natural in any other case but for some reason it is in Christ? This is your life on the line not whether you will get the wooden spoon, this is much more serious.

I am saying a belief in God is not enough. And that I mean it.

Thanks. GodSands out.
beem0r

Con

My opponent once again states that belief in God rather than knowledge of God leads to atheism, because it presents potential believers with a choice. My opponent fails to realize that everyone is necessarily given a choice between the various religions. If the choice was between not believing, believing, and pretending to know, more people would be believers [as it is now]. If the choice of believing was removed, these people would have to pick one of the other two groups. Unless 100% of 'believers' picked the 'pretending to know' category, this would lead to a decrease in the number of Christians. Relatively few christians are willing to act like they know of God's existence - most Christians simply believe; they have faith that God exists. This is because they do not have sufficient evidence on which to base 'knowledge,' and unlike my opponent, they do not usually pretend to. Thus, by removing the choice of mere belief, we would be creating more non-believers, which would, according to the tenets of christianity, lead to more people going to hell. Most christians base their religious affiliation on faith and belief rather than knowledge - it is inconceivable why my opponent would want to tell these people that they should not have faith in God, that they should require knowledge of God to be Christians.

My opponent notes that people do not always do exactly what God supposedly wishes - but although God supposedly dislikes the intake of certain alchoholic beverages and doesn't like people having sex without being married, he no longer expects people to be perfect. This is why he sent his son, Jesus, to die - to take the sins of the world on himself, so that even a wretched 'sinner' might be clean and able to enter the kingdom of heaven.

My opponent states a hypothetical conversation:
Atheist: I believe in no God.
GodSands: Why not? Is it more likely that God would exist instead of us human beings?
Atheist: For I do believe in God, but surely does he really care about what we do?

There are two glaring problems with this. First, in GodSands line, he implies that it is just as likely that God exists as it is that humans exist. This is false - the probability that a God exists is unknown, and the probability that humans exist is 100% - we have very direct and irrefutable proof of humans' existence.
Second, the atheist's reply to GodSands makes no sense. An atheist does not believe in a God by definition. My opponent, in assuming that even atheists believe in God, is being foolishly naive.

Doing good is not defined as knowing God: plenty of people who don't even believe in God do good things. Scientists who lead the way for technological advancements and scientific understanding, philanthropists who donate money to curing diseases or helping the poor, many of these people are not even believers. To do good does not require God, it simply requires a willingness and ability to do something good. I held the door open for someone this morning at school - that action was my own - it had nothing to do with God, or with whether or not I believe in or know God.

Next, in the same paragraph, he explains that doing good things is not enough to get into heaven. Well that's odd - he defined doing good things as knowing God, and now he's saying that doing good things isn't enough. In any case, he claims that "when you trust in Jesus to save you, your automatic response is to bring others to Christ." I don't see how that has anything to do with knowing God. In fact, my opponent even uses the phrase 'when you _trust_ in Jesus to save you,' indicating not knowledge, but hope, faith, and belief. People who are 'mere' believers convert people all the time. One does not have to 'know' something to attempt to convince others of it. For instance, conspiracy theorists don't _know_ that 9/11 was an inside job, but they still attempt to spread their _belief_ that it was.

My opponent says that a true Christian doesn't only speak about Chrsit, a real Christian acts like Christ. First, I'll simply say that this is not true - a Christian is anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior. Even so, this point has nothing to do with the topic; a 'mere' believer in Christ can certainly not only speak about Christ, but act Christlike as well. In fact, even unbelievers can act like Christ, if they so choose.

My opponent keeps referring to 'false christians' and how they think it's OK to get drunk. Like I've said, to be a Christian, one only needs to believe in Christ as their lord and savior. But further, we're not talking about people who think drinking is OK, we're talking about people who believe in God through faith rather than pretending they have knowledge. Many _believers_ also believe that it is wrong to drink or have premarital sex. Many people who simply believe in God do follow the various rules of the bible. In fact, even some nonbelievers share these moral beliefs.

Knowing God and knowing Jesus are not required - a Christian simply has to believe in Jesus as their personal savior - through that one thing, their sins are taken from them, and thus they may enter the kingdom of heaven, free of sin.

I made a comment last round about how the only way to know God is through divine revelation - through God revealing himself to you. My opponent agrees - he claims that this is exactly what happens. Unfortunately, my opponent's testimony here is not exactly proof of his point. There are a multitude of devoted believers who do not claim to know God, who do not claim that God has divinely revealed himself to them. The fact that my opponent, one man, claims to have experienced a divine revelation is no reason to believe him. If that was enough to convince people, then everyone should've become a mormon when Joseph Smith said he found Gold Tablets with Jesus' writings in America. If that was enough to convince people, then everyone should surrender themselves to Allah, for there are many who claim that Allah has revealed himself to them. If that was enough to convince people, then we would have to all hold a multitude of beliefs - we would all have to believe anything anyone said was divinely revealed to me. And thus, I tell those of you for which this standard of evidence is sufficient - it has been divinely revealed to me that to simply believe in God is enough - one does not have to know God.

My opponent then shows his ignorance of the english language. He asserts that he doesn't believe that he knows God, he simply knows God. Of course, the very statement "I know God" necessarily means that that is what you believe. Here is an example.
Toaster Streudels are better than Pop-Tarts.
You see, by saying that to someone, I am necessarily implying that that is my position. Unless I am purposefully lying, I necessarily believe that that is true.

Also, my opponent claims that atheists hate talking about Jesus Christ, due to some influence of the devil. This is not true - perhaps there are some who become upset when someone talks about Jesus, but most of really don't mind.
My opponent also falsely states that to have doubt about hope is not natural. This is blatantly false. I hope my life will get better, but I don't know it will. I believe that it will, but I haven't discounted the possiblity that it will not. I have my doubts, as I do with any hope.

One more thing, I just feel like I have to point this out. A few christians I know, including my opponent, seem overly eager to ascribe all evil deeds to the devil acting through people and all good deeds to God acting through people. I'll just note how ridiculous this is - it flies in the face of free will, and if it's true, there's really no reason to hold us accountable for our bad deeds: after all, it wasn't us, it was just the devil acting through us.

Anyway, it's time for the closing statements.
Debate Round No. 2
GodSands

Pro

You don't hang about do you Beem0r. When it comes to topic such as this you like to make your self seem knowledgeable, sure you have good intellect. But that does not solve this when you do not know what you are talking about.

Sure you might be right and I might be wrong, but I believe I am not....no only joking, thought you had something going on, didn't you? I know I am talking truth.

I will say this clearly. And if you still do not get it, it will not stop me trying again.

Christians, great people are they not? This actually leads into my Christian and Satanic debate I had. That Christians know the knowledge given when they turn Christian, given by God Him self for handing over ones life. This is when you are trusting in Jesus, for not man or woman shall come to God unless they trust in Jesus. You can not possibly only believe and trust in Jesus and forget about God. For that is what you are saying. You are forgetting about the existence of God. A watchful eye, who knows all your sins in secret and public. To not sin and follow God you have to know God. I will never ever believe in someone and not know them. How stupid is that, what fools would encourage one to follow another with out knowing them first. Is that not what your parent told you? Never to trust strangers. You surely are leading people down the wrong root. Would you ever say to your child, "If a stranger approaches you, be sure to do what he tells you." That would be foolish. Yet for some odd reason you and other Atheist encourage this by doing sinful deeds. For I can get drunk, in that I put all my trust into this bottle of Southern Comfort. It will lead me into a bed of which is not mine. Yet you will say to your child do not trust a stranger. You can not even trust your self. When you walk down a path you trip. Or when you drive you car to work, you will not trust in anyone for that there are traffic lights, even then there are accidents. For that I do not believe in traffic lights to be 'the life savers' and therefore I know traffic lights are not life savers.

Jesus I know can save me, it clearly says:
"Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the Earth
Worship the Lord with gladness; come into his presence with singing.
Know that the Lord is God.
It is he who made us, and we are his;
We are his people and the sheep of his pasture.
Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise.
Give thanks to him, bless his name.
For the Lord is good; his steadfast love endure forever,
and his faithfulness to all generations." -- Psalm 100

"Know that the Lord is God." -- This really settles it. For that I will say no more on that.

People lead others into sin by encouraging them into sin. God has given us a conscience. Where that it will allow one to know whether he/she is doing something good or evil. It is like a alarm bell, which goes, "Brrrrrrring!!" when you have done a sin, Since Atheists and false Christians have not known what is actually good and evil, but only by how the world portrays good and evil, their conscience alarm will not go off. For that the heart of man is easily corrupted. (I've watched Lord of the Rings lately) But it is true. The heart of man is easily fooled and corrupted. I would suggest that if the world decided to have murder off the list of crimes, murders would rise very fast. A Christian however would remain as he/she is and would not follow the world. All those who do not know Jesus/God will follow and believe in what the earth says to do. Will please the world. For who ever believes in Jesus will know how to please God.

What has happened? Why do people believe in the world and know how to please the people of this world. You said you opened a door for a thankful pass byer. That is good and thoughtful, I have never said an Atheist can not do good. Otherwise this world would never get along. You waited and welcomed a person through the door before your self, in generosity. Did you expect a thank you from him/her when you put your self out of the persons way? For when you are with Jesus you know then even when you do not get a thank you, you have done good for God. And that is what separates God from the world. That if every time I was to do a good deed God showed Him self so I could see Him where then would be that define line between the world and God? For I do not care if a person was to not grant me a smile or a thanks you. For it is God in heaven we all please when we do good. That person can easily become your enemy, in days. That person will turn on you if you do right against that person.

Why should we believe in God and God's Son Jesus Christ? Why should I get to know God the heavenly Father?

Why , for He will bring people to the truth. Seriously by now, if you were offered eternal life, should you not give up your worldly wants? For eternal life. Would it not be correct to think that one who offers everlasting life you should trust in Him, the Son Jesus Christ. For that who has the world not let you down. Again and again. For now it is the time to change and now we know the world has failed every human on the planet. If you keep the world at your standard instead of God you will remain the lower part of the world for no body is perfect in anything. Not even at the worlds standard, for even those are not even met. Rise above this world and become a child God. God will offer you knowledge from good from evil. God will let you become righteous. The world will only lead you to death. For it has, and that is why everyone dies, every person to exist has died. And every person who will exist will die, because they have entered into the curse of this world. The seed of man.

I am not choking anyone with this. You just refuse to swallow it. For if I was to stop talking about it what else would you eat and drink? Jesus is the bread of life and the wine is Jesus' blood, which washes away sin.

I have gone off topic slightly, however you can not possibly say a Christian does not know God when there is a Bible full of what God is like.

Beem0r says that me are not controlled by Satan, I what ever sense do you mean Beem0r? I am talking about Satan controlling your spiritual side. You have never seen a demon of course. People however who are spiritually conscience do. For to say that there is no more than physicality is quite preposterous. It is lame to say there is nothing more, when you clearly know you would accept the spiritual world for excitement if there was no bounty along with it. The Devil is all what is evil in the universe in that with an absence of good from God the Devil will automatically commence, there will be never a time where there is no good or evil. And that the only reason why there is still good in the universe is because God originally planned good. In till the hearts of man chose to disobey. Are you not smart enough, that you need kinetic teaching to know what is good from evil. That once there is no good there is evil for that if there is no evil there will be only good. Hell is waiting for ever person in secret. Where as God knows if one will enter it His gates into heaven.

Satan right now has you in control. Otherwise why will you not stop doing evil, in which will kill you? By know God you know what will kill you and will not. If you trust in the world it will kill you, if you trust in God the world will also kill you. Like it killed Jesus. Evermore if you know good from evil through trust and believing in Jesus, you will live on. That you will never be let down.

Thank you.
beem0r

Con

My opponent starts off by commending my intellect, but reassuring me that I simply don't know what I'm talking about. He then jokingly says that he might be wrong, but he recants, stating that he "knows he is talking truth."

I don't know how to explain it further, but the fact is that my opponent does not 'know' these things he says he knows. He doesn't "know" that he's correc,t he doesn't "know" God, he believes. Albeit, his belief in each one may or may not be based on evidence, but that does not change the fact that it is not knowledge, it is belief.

My opponent moves on to tell a story. He rhetorically asks the question "Christians, great people, are they not?" The answer, as it is for most groups of people, is "sometimes." There are good christians, there are bad christians. In fact, I know that my opponent agrees that at least some christians are bad people. For instance, my opponent describes himself as "a very evil corrupt person" in the comment section of this very debate. While I don't think he's evil [though I do think he is misguided], his admission means that at least we can agree that no, christians are not necessarily 'great people.' That's not to say that a christian cannot be a great person, but simply that being christian does not _make_ a person great.

My opponent claims that one cannot trust in Jesus while forgetting about God. This may be quite true, but it has no bearing on the debate. Just as one does not ave to know Jesus to believe in and trust him, one does not have to know God. Case in point is every moderate Christian around - they praise the lord their God, they believe in Jesus as their savior, but they do not profess to know.

He also claims that to not sin, a person has to follow God and know God. This is incorrect - one only has to adhere to the teachings of the Bible. Even so, almost all christians will admit that everyone sins. These fictional people who 'don't sin' don't exist.

Next, my opponent says that it is foolish to trust in someone without knowing them first. If this is true, then all christians who have not been given a divine revelation are fools. A divine revelation is the only way to 'know' God, and the majority of christians have not had these revelations. Asking them to 'know' God requires that God first give them a divine revelation. And yet, he hasn't. Therefore, it must be that God wants everyone he hasn't given a divine revelation to to believe in him through faith rather than knowledge.
In any case, it's true that we put faith in people we don't know. When I go to McDonalds, I trust that the guy who hands me my sandwich hasn't poisoned me. When I vote in an election, I trust that the person I am voting for will push a political agenda I agree with. When I walk by a man on the street, I trust that he will not attempt to mug me. Society itself is based on trust and belief in one another - even in strangers. Of course, my faith in that guy I walk by on the street isn't absolute, but it's still true that I don't know him [as in being personally acquainted with him] and I still trust him to a certain extent.

My opponent himself even gives me a great example of this trust without knowledge - traffic lights. Every person who has knowingly gone through an intersection without first making sure that there are no cars running red lights - that is to say, pretty much every driver - has trusted his fellow drivers without knowing what they would do, without knowing them, and really, without even knowing if there were people at the lights. While going through such an intersection, I might say to myself "I'm not sure if there's anyone sitting at that red light, but if there is, I trust that they will not run their red light and cause a wreck." Similarly, a fairly rational Christian might say "I don't know for sure if there's a God, but if there is, I trust that he will absolve me of my sins through Jesus Christ and allow me entrance into the kingdom of heaven when I die."
To ask this Christian to instead have some sort of sureness is to ask him to defy logic. One cannot know that which one does not have knowledge about. A scientific analogy for this would be gravity. I know that things usually fall when I let go of them. I have direct knowledge of this. At one point in history, I would have believed that this was due to Newton's Gravitational Law. Unfortunately, I would have been wrong. Newton's Gravitational Law has been falsified, and better gravitational theories have replaced it. However, it is incorrect to say that we 'know' how gravity works - our current theories could also be incorrect. We simply believe [albeit based on a great deal of evidence] that they explain how gravity works correctly.

My opponent gives us some bible verses, but fails to explain their relevance. After that, he explains that God has given us consciences, but for some reason or another, these consciences don't work for anyone who doesn't "know" God. That sounds rather ridiculous. Watch this:
I have a pet lizard in my room, and he gave all of humanity the knowledge that I am always right. Unfortunately, this knowledge only works for people who know my lizard. See how little sense that made? You don't know that I'm always right, therefore you lack this knowledge. If you lack this knowledge, then my lizard didn't really give it to you, now did he?

My opponent also suggests that is murder was decriminalized, people would start killing one another, except Christians would not. This is incorrect, and it is based off of the assumption that everyone except christians derive their morals from the Law. Rather, it is often the opposite - while most people figure out their own moral system, Christians rely on what is written in a book. Now, I know that's not fair - I know that Christians would not start killing people if that commandment wasn't in the Bible. I am simply pointing out how ridiculous it is to assume that non christians would go into killing frenzies. A few psychopaths might, as they do now, but that's pretty much it. The only increase would be from the psychopaths who choose not to ONLY because it's illegal, not because they value human life.

Last round, I brought up the example of me holding a door open for someone, as I regulalrly do. My opponent assumes that my motivation to do so would be so that I could receive a 'thank you,' and he states that this is the difference between worldly morals and Godly morals. Sadly, my opponent is mistaken - I don't really care whether I get a 'thank you.' Sure, it's nice, but I'd open a door for someone even if I knew they weren't going to be thankful, if only to save them the trouble of reopening it.

My opponent makes an argument in support of trusting in Jesus Christ. As far as this debate is concerned, I have no reason to disagree with him. It is exactly what I am advocating christians should do. However, unlike my opponent, I simply ask that they do not pretend to know God. Those who know God must already have had divine revelations, and those who have had divine revelations would necessarily know God already. People cannot simply choose to 'know' God.

My opponent once again claims that the evil in this world is the Devil's doing. This is ridiculous. Evil comes from the greed of Man, from the desire for power at the expense of others, etc. It is in man's nature. That is also true of 'good.' It is man's nature to work together, to help those in need. Neither good nor evil are controlled by divine powers. If all evil WAS the devil's doing, then it would make no sense to put the blame on humanity, as God does.

I believe I have shown throughout this debate that as far as Christianity is concerned, believing in God is enough, and people should not required to know God.
I sincerely thank anyone who read through this, and I apologize for the unorganized, hard to follow layout.
Also, thanks to my opponent for the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
27 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
So one does it against me. Even though I said do not vote for me by vote bombing. I am not a fool, vote bombing goes up in 7's.
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
And please I hate it myself, do not vote bomb. :)
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
Getting drunk is against God despite if can handle it.

LogicMaster: I understand what I am talking about. Saying that debates are not for me, is untrue. No one can debate a perfect debate. Correct on my ideas but don't say debating is or is not for some one.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
GodSands: I said that drinking itself is neither good nor evil. I indicated that drinking responsibly is fine. The obvious implication is that drinking irresponsibly is not fine. I don't know why you think I'm advocating reckless, irresponsible abuse of alcohol. I certainly haven't given you any reasons to make you think that.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
Yeah, I think most of the times I talked about the req's for being a Christian I noted that you have to believe in Jesus _as your savior_, have faith that he will take your sins, etc. There's a difference between 'knowing' someone and accepting their sacrifice or having faith that they will save you [knowing in either sense].

Though I do admit that most of the debate, I was walking on a thin line, since there is a difference between knowing someone exists and being well-acquanted with someone [knowing them in the other sense]. GodSands was flipping between different definitions, so I figured there wasn't so much harm in doing so myself.

But yes, I was a lot less comprehensive, consistent, and precise than I probably would have been against a different opponent.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
edit: I'm pretty sure I'd vote CON (which I base on Godsand's performance in prior debates).
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
There is certainly more to "believe" than mere existence. Otherwise, the devil and demons could be considered "Christians." Indeed, both are suggested to acknowledge God's existence, but are not represented as being "Christians" Believe is used in the context of "acceptance", hence why Christians will often say something along the lines of "I accepted Jesus Christ into my heart".

That said, from what I could bear to read of the debate so far, it doesn't seem Godsands did much to uphold his side of the resolution. He has got plenty of passion, but he is lacking in the reasoning department. I'll give the whole debate a read later, but I'm pretty sure I'd vote based on Godsand's performance in other debates.

Godsands, I think you'd be more suited to blogging than debating here. You seem more the type to wish to get your ideas known rather than logically pitting them against someone else's
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
This debate is unbearable to read X_X
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
Too much alcohol leads you astray, you lose gripe of reality, you are made violent, you forget about the important things in life and you worry. Alcohol destroyes the body, your body is the temple of your spirit. You would not break another body, but you are doing that to your self.

This you see as neither good nore evil. I see it as evil. for those reasons. Your knowledge of good and evil is poor. And you do not know God. I do.
Posted by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
Beem0r, I'm sure you're aware of the real reason why drinking is evil. It can lead to sex... which can lead to ...

... dancing.

</religious jokes>
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 8 years ago
studentathletechristian8
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 saamanthagrl 8 years ago
saamanthagrl
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 Alex 8 years ago
Alex
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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:43 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 mecap 8 years ago
mecap
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 dwest23 8 years ago
dwest23
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 TheRaven 8 years ago
TheRaven
GodSandsbeem0rTied
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 Glitchy 8 years ago
Glitchy
GodSandsbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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