The Instigator
MikeNH
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Galahad
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Why Should I Believe 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 1 vote the winner is...
MikeNH
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 476 times Debate No: 41462
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

MikeNH

Con

This debate will give me (CON) and my opponant (PRO) a chance to have a rational discussion regarding the belief that a god exists. I have been presented with the claim that god exists, and have yet to accept the claim until I am presented with good evidence/reasoning to justify such a belief.


---------------------------Rules---------------------------

PRO must believe/accept the claim that a god exists, and he/she will have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it is rational to hold that such a claim is true.

------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------Format---------------------------

Round 1: PRO will present 1-2 arguments for the existence of god. Please, NO MORE than 2 arguments will be presented, I would like to keep this argument relatively focused.

Rounds 2-4: Responding back and forth to arguments/rebuttals presented, NO NEW ARGUMENTS can be made.

------------------------------------------------------------
Galahad

Pro

Hello, Glad to be here -
What I am about to argue may not be what you had in mind, but I hope that it at least might be able to interest you with a new view point. Before I begin, I just want you to know that my ideas about God are something I believe, not anything specifically preached in any religion. This is merely how I feel about religion as far as I'm concerned.

#1
Why does anything exist? I believe absolutely in the scientific Ideology. it makes perfect sense that we have evolved from lesser-developed organisms. Some religious people claim that this is not true, citing religious texts which describe God as having created everything in an extremely short time period. This I don't believe. Creation stories are allegorical as far as I'm concerned, and in reality God merely augmented evolution and monitored it's progress over a massive amount of time. In short, Science and Religion corroborate each other. The fact that we even exist as intelligent life-forms on this perfect planet is odds-on impossible. The fact that we are here is proof of divine intervention, in this case of God.

#2
People are constantly developing technology and inventing new things. Understanding and acceptance only increases over time, and people create more and more amazing things. Despite what some religions would say, if you examine the heart of any major religion, they all say to love other people, and accept them regardless of their circumstances. This ideology has been clouded by the actions of many people over hundreds and hundreds of years, but it still stands today. All of these religions agree that there is a God out there that only wants the best for people, and for people to help, love, and accept each other. This highly developed ideology, surprisingly universal, shows that there is indeed someone out there, God, who merely wants the best for all of us and is willing to do just about anything to help us out.

I am sorry if my "arguments" were not focused enough; i tend to find myself better at responding to others rather than divulging long ideological pieces. Looking forward to subsequent discussion rounds, and I hope that I will be able to raise interesting points in response to what you think.
Debate Round No. 1
MikeNH

Con

Contention #1

"The fact that we even exist as intelligent life-forms on this perfect planet is odds-on impossible. The fact that we are here is proof of divine intervention, in this case of God."

Do you care to expound on these claims? You need to provide evidence for these assertions, because they are basically meaningless without any explanation...

1) How is this planet "perfect"?
2) How is it "impossible" that we exist as intelligent life forms
3) How is our existence proof of God?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Contention #2

"if you examine the heart of any major religion, they all say to love other people, and accept them regardless of their circumstances. This ideology has been clouded by the actions of many people over hundreds and hundreds of years, but it still stands today. All of these religions agree that there is a God out there that only wants the best for people, and for people to help, love, and accept each other."

What exactly is the "heart of any major religion"? It would seem to me that the only thing one could argue was the heart of the major monotheistic religions are there holy books, which are demonstrably filled with the most horrible and disgusting acts and direct orders. Slavery, rape, torture, human sacrifice, genocide, the list goes on... I normally would provide sources for this, but I'm guessing you already are aware of these things as you appear to be a fairly normal and rational person.

The books clearly aren't loving and accepting, they are hateful and divisive more often than not. You admit the people "cloud" religion with their terrible actions... So what is this "heart" of religion that you talk about that teaches love and acceptance??

----------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------

Contention #3

"I am sorry if my "arguments" were not focused enough; i tend to find myself better at responding to others rather than divulging long ideological pieces. Looking forward to subsequent discussion rounds, and I hope that I will be able to raise interesting points in response to what you think."

Thanks for your responses. I'm being totally honest here, your arguments don't seem to make any sense to me. The first argument appears to be an argument from ignorance, because you don't understand how humans evolved and are so intelligent, therefore God must have done it. It's a pretty straightforward fallacy. Your second argument was basically that religions are "highly developed" ideologies that show universal goodness, but it's so massively clear that from any source, the people, the books, the preachings, they aren't universally anything, let alone universally good. The teachings are mutually exclusive and they even contradict themselves at times.

I just haven't gotten any good reasons to believe a deity exists.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Galahad

Pro

Galahad forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
MikeNH

Con

As my opponent has forfeited that round, I will wait for further arguments.
Galahad

Pro

I am truly sorry, MikeNH, but time has gotten away from me and I was unable to reply to your post in time; for that I am truly sorry. As it turns out, the last few days have been really crazy for me and I have had very little spare time. The way it seems now, I do not think I will be able to give the proper time and consideration to this debate or any other for the next few weeks. For this reason, I have to say that I am formally forfeiting, as I do not want to insult you with half-developed arguments and responses. My deepest apologies, and I hope that you will soon be able to find someone who can better expound on this topic than my poor opening.
again, my Deepest apologies,
Galahad
Debate Round No. 3
MikeNH

Con

No apologies necessary, thanks for formally forfeiting. When you get the time again send me a message and we can come back where we left off.
Galahad

Pro

Galahad forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by William.Burnham 2 years ago
William.Burnham
MikeNHGalahadTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited. Con seemed to angle the argument in a better fashion.