The Instigator
lord_megatron
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
AlphaTBITW
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

We are the main focus of God

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 490 times Debate No: 74033
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

lord_megatron

Con

Why do we think we are the main focus of the God?
We are polluting his planet pretty bad and draining all resources.
But if God is the creator, doesn't he need to answer other organisms (plants, animals, fish) prayers too? Couldn't the Almighty create another improved version of us, or simply create another Earth? What if God is waiting us to die by ourselves, then start over on the planet?
AlphaTBITW

Pro

I think that we should understand that God is, by nature, omnibenevolent. Therefore, no matter how much His creation does wrong, He would still love them.

I also do not think it reasonable to assume that God would have to answer to the prayers of organisms who do not have the capacity to conceive of Him.

Concerning the last argument, of course He could not make Human 2.0, unless He eliminates that which makes us human.

Finally, in an attempt to show that we are the main focus of God...

It seems much more logical for God to concern Himself with the species that can worship Him.
Debate Round No. 1
lord_megatron

Con

Omni-benevolent- Then why do I hear God will punish sinners? Where is his great benevolence gone now?
'I also do not think it reasonable to assume that God would have to answer to the prayers of organisms who do not have the capacity to conceive of Him'
We do not know how to communicate with animals, for they don't make strange sounds for nothing. What if they too believe in a God, only lack the intelligence to make a statue of him or something?
'Concerning the last argument, of course He could not make Human 2.0, unless He eliminates that which makes us human.'
Why not? We are an imperfect species, and we have a bit of the God as well as the Devil in us. Won't he prefer much more loyal and good species to take over the reins of the Earth? Certainly God doesn't appreciate the development of atheism in his very own creation, if that is what you say.
'Finally, in an attempt to show that we are the main focus of God...
It seems much more logical for God to concern Himself with the species that can worship Him'
Again, we do not know if animals have prayers or not. Plants can't speak or even move, so that is a dead end. Plus why would God associate himself with us mortals and our little candles/flowers? He hasn't shown himself on the Earth on this modern time, why would he bother with materialistic things if he is the CREATOR? He can create ANYTHING, so why will he care about puny humans and Earth when he can even make Marvel universe come alive?
AlphaTBITW

Pro

Then why do I hear God will punish sinners? Where is his great benevolence gone now?

God punishes because he is benevolent. God would be a God absent of justice if he allowed sin to go unpunished.


We do not know how to communicate with animals, for they don't make strange sounds for nothing. What if they too believe in a God, only lack the intelligence to make a statue of him or something?

What if, what if. I will stand by the belief that dolphins are not trying to warn me about the end times unless evidence shows otherwise.

You're making the greater claim here by asserting that which cannot be disproven in absence of evidence in support of your claim. That is, of course, if you do claim that animals believe in God. If you do not, then you have made no point.


Why not? We are an imperfect species, and we have a bit of the God as well as the Devil in us. Won't he prefer much more loyal and good species to take over the reins of the Earth? Certainly God doesn't appreciate the development of atheism in his very own creation, if that is what you say.

Again, God is omnibenevolent. He could never destroy his creation entirely or change them.


Again, we do not know if animals have prayers or not. Plants can't speak or even move, so that is a dead end. Plus why would God associate himself with us mortals and our little candles/flowers? He hasn't shown himself on the Earth on this modern time, why would he bother with materialistic things if he is the CREATOR? He can create ANYTHING, so why will he care about puny humans and Earth when he can even make Marvel universe come alive?

How puny are we really, if we came up with the Marvel universe? You're not insignificant. You're the result of 4 billion years of evolution. Fifty sextillion planets in our Universe and yet you are the apex species on one with actual life. You are not insignificant.

As comparative to what God could create, show me one feature which could be improved upon from humanity, objectively speaking.
Debate Round No. 2
lord_megatron

Con

If God will punish sinners, then believe it, WE ARE SINNERS. Stealing, murdering, warring, deception, manipulation, I don't think he wanted his creation to do all this and more.
'Again, God is omnibenevolent. He could never destroy his creation entirely or change them'
You contradict yourself, you say he will do justice yet when the matter comes to you you make up the excuse of benevolence. God will be frustrated by this.
'We do not know how to communicate with animals, for they don't make strange sounds for nothing. What if they too believe in a God, only lack the intelligence to make a statue of him or something?'
You're making the greater claim here by asserting that which cannot be disproven in absence of evidence in support of your claim. That is, of course, if you do claim that animals believe in God. If you do not, then you have made no point.
This kind of argument goes the same for God's existence, for there is little evidence for him yet he can't be disproved. Since in this debate we are believing in God, we'll have to accept this as well.
'How puny are we really, if we came up with the Marvel universe? You're not insignificant. You're the result of 4 billion years of evolution. Fifty sextillion planets in our Universe and yet you are the apex species on one with actual life. You are not insignificant. '
We didn't actually make our self, so the credit as the apex species will go to Creator, not us. You may say we are not insignificant, but I speak from God's eyes. He would be saying 'Puny little humans wasting time debating and arguing. If only they'll give that time to my planet.'
'As comparative to what God could create, show me one feature which could be improved upon from humanity, objectively speaking.'
I don't say that God would improve upon humans, I say he would create an entirely more responsible, intelligent and good species. Anyways, there are many features that can be improved. One would be our physical prowess, for the early man was pretty weak with no claws or sharp teeth. Another is laziness. Far too many people have become unproductive these days. Creatures which need far lesser recreation than us, and who can work longer and more efficiently without getting disinterested.
Although it seems this debate has slide off the resolution already.
AlphaTBITW

Pro

If God will punish sinners, then believe it, WE ARE SINNERS. Stealing, murdering, warring, deception, manipulation, I don't think he wanted his creation to do all this and more.

I wholeheartedly agree. He never wanted for His creation to do such evil, but he gave his creation the free will to do evil.


You contradict yourself, you say he will do justice yet when the matter comes to you you make up the excuse of benevolence. God will be frustrated by this.

You falsely assume that justice is eradication of those who do evil, instead of actualizing one's ability to abstain from it.


This kind of argument goes the same for God's existence, for there is little evidence for him yet he can't be disproved. Since in this debate we are believing in God, we'll have to accept this as well.

While I disagree that this argument could possibly apply to God, in that I believe that there is sufficient evidence, you are correct in saying that God's existence is assumed when dealing with the issue of God having us as His main focus.

With that being said, you have not sufficed your own BoP for this claim that animals believe in God. Therefore, this argument is to be thrown out.



We didn't actually make our self, so the credit as the apex species will go to Creator, not us. You may say we are not insignificant, but I speak from God's eyes. He would be saying 'Puny little humans wasting time debating and arguing. If only they'll give that time to my planet.

Of course the credit goes to the Creator, but it shows that we are significant to the Creator for creating us.

You have not sufficed your BoP to show that these would be the words of God.


I don't say that God would improve upon humans, I say he would create an entirely more responsible, intelligent and good species. Anyways, there are many features that can be improved. One would be our physical prowess, for the early man was pretty weak with no claws or sharp teeth. Another is laziness. Far too many people have become unproductive these days. Creatures which need far lesser recreation than us, and who can work longer and more efficiently without getting disinterested.

You have not shown that God would create a more responsible, intelligent, and good species.

Early man was adaptable without both traits. This is why the man wore the lion, with its sharp teeth and claws.

Laziness is a trait which is dependent upon one person or another. I asked for an objective trait.


My opponent has not given us any good reasons to accept any of his claims. Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by AlphaTBITW 2 years ago
AlphaTBITW
There is no continuation. I restated my claim without arguing against any one of your points.

Thanks for the death threats and insults though.
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
lord_megatron
Nonsense this is a continuation of the debate. And I am gonna kill pro now, I am really getting pushed to use foul words. Benevolent idiot
Posted by AlphaTBITW 2 years ago
AlphaTBITW
God is benevolent.

Do not let the comments section effect the debate.
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
lord_megatron
If we were significant to God, why he hasn't done any major action to stop the bad things of the planet. AND DON'T you dare start that he is benevolent. I will destroy you if you dare say that word again pro
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
lord_megatron
@ Pro Well then God hasn't made us abstain from evil. And don't start off with BOP, give the BOP that God exists or that he is focusing on me. Vote for me
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
lord_megatron
You mean to say God isn't against the devil? If we are sinful creatures that means the devil has conquered more of our mind than God, but God is still benevolent?
How do you think animals don't have a SOUL? I don't care what your Bible says, for ultimately it is written by human hands, and of course we'll show ourselves as superior.
Why didn't God stop World war 1? It is because we aren't his main focus, that he wants to create another Earth for his entertainment and is tired of our boring nature.
Posted by leojm 2 years ago
leojm
I would love to debate this topic with you but im rarely on because i have a busy life. but to answer your question we are God's importance, we have souls animals don't, sorry for all those animal lovers out there. we may be polluting his earth but He doesn't care, this earth will come to an end one day, and everything in it. And bout the animals and plants well that's our responsibility to care for them as it says in the Bible. and God wouldn't wait for us to die, there is a day He will come down to judge the living and the dead. We are sinful creatures and He is aware of that.
No votes have been placed for this debate.