The Instigator
Thiest_1998
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
PsychoScientist
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Why don't people want to believe in God when it's so obvious there's one

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 859 times Debate No: 86784
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (23)
Votes (0)

 

Thiest_1998

Pro

I'm a born again Christian who believes the Bible is worn for word true KJV and wondering why
atheist choose to shun God?
PsychoScientist

Con

First of all, faith. Faith is not obvious, because you're believing in something you cannot see. You must remember this: Most people that believe in God, may probably believe in him because there is no other explanation as to how and why the Universe was created. In a debate against Cardinal George Pell, Dawkings mentioned: "That we do not know the answer, does not mean we should turn to God". It is not "obvious" that God exists because there is no proof. Just like there is no proof of all those Greek gods, and Hindi etc. One cannot prove that God exists or doesn't exist.

Many people ask themselves: "What if he doesn't exist?"
Debate Round No. 1
Thiest_1998

Pro

Thiest_1998 forfeited this round.
PsychoScientist

Con

PsychoScientist forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Thiest_1998

Pro

Yes I cannot see it at the moment but just because I can't see something doesn't mean it's not there I can't see gravity doesn't mean it's not there.

Some do believe in him for that reason yes, I mean there are two options there is a God or there isn't I believe that there is a God and the people who say that there isn't a God in my opinion thier argument is weak, I believe that if you cannot 100% prove he doesn't exist then he probably does he probably left a message for us saying why he created us why we're here where do we go when we die depending on our choices and I believe he did which is the bible, with 0 errors and false information.

Btw let's keep the subject on the Christian God.

Why don't you want to believe in God?
PsychoScientist

Con

Thank you for your arguments, however, there are things I shall address.

First of all, you cannot use gravity as an example, because gravity is a proven phenomenon, God is not proven. I believe that you are wrong to say that the ones who say God doesn't exist have a weak argument. Actually, I believe that your argument is weak. "I believe that if you cannot 100% prove he doesn't exist then he probably does." As I said on my past argument, which I assume you didn't read according to your argument here, but I mentioned that one cannot prove God does or doesn't exist. I confess I have to agree there is a probability he can exist, it just cannot be proven.

You mentioned that God left the Bible as a message to let us all know that he created the world. Your argument is wrong, the Bible was not written by God, it was written by humans ourselves. As how the Greek mythology was written, by humans. Saying that the Bible has no errors, is a huge assumption you take on this debate. Since God cannot be proven, the Bible cannot be proven as well. Apparently you say that a God left a book lying on the floor to let humans know that he created the world so he should reap the glory. That's not the Christian God I know.

You need to educate yourself, and do a huge amount of research because your arguments were too weak, therefore it was easy for me to refute them.

Good Luck.
Debate Round No. 3
Thiest_1998

Pro

Thank you for your arguments, however, there are things I shall address.

Actually gravity is only a theory it's never been proven if you believe that it is a proven phenomenon then prove it I would really like you to prove something you can't explain.

Btw just because you can't explain something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I did read your last argument btw apologies if I missed it whatever it was.
I never said that the bible was written by God I believe that it was written by men just like you.

It is not an assumption to say that the bible has no contradictions or errors because from reading the bible and not finding any it's easy to say that.

I never said God left a book on the floor.

I think you need to learn how to read because you're twisting words and sentences a lot.

Your arguments are easy to refute.

PsychoScientist

Con

Hello, I thank you for your arguments. You didn't refute anything of my arguments, absolutely anything. Saying that I've been "twisting words" is not refuting an argument. You should go and mature a bit.

You said that God left the Bible for us to know what he did. So yes, you are basically saying that God made the Bible, and therefore, left it for us. You never actually specified that you believed that the Bible was made by men anyway, so you must have figured that out now. I must have misunderstood about the Bible having no spelling and grammar, however, I don't know why you would even bring something so meaningless in this debate.

I thought that you had assumed that the Bible had no errors, as in everything in it was true. And I did not mean God left a Book on the floor literally, you should learn about sarcasm. You should grow-up, mature. You must have come to this debate, very well informed, however, you have proven otherwise.

I also recommend learning better grammar and vocabulary, because I cannot sometimes understand a thing with all the run-on sentences.

"Your arguments were easy to refute."

There were never "twisted words". You didn't refute my argument, therefore, my argument stands.
Debate Round No. 4
Thiest_1998

Pro

You are twisting words I have never said God wrote the bible if anything you've misunderstood, what I meant was that God inspired man to write the bible which is is his message to us.

Is it really that important that you I should specify that the bible was written by men also you didn't even refute what I said which was that
the bible has no contradictions in any way.

If you read the whole argument instead of skimming it you would know why I put it in.

Mate I know sarcasm it's just difficult to tell if someone is using sarcasm on a written debate especially if you don't know the individual you are debating.

I didn't assume there are no contradictions in the Bible I know there are no contradictions in the Bible YOU can't show me any the people in the comments can't show me any I can't find any soo it must have 0 contradictions.

You haven't answered any of my arguments you pick and chose one thing out of my argument and left the rest out, also I answered all of your arguments.

1.This proves my point your arguments are weak.

2.You cannot refute my arguments you picked out one thing and left everything else out the second you saw an argument you couldn't refute.

And when you say do more research be specific also you need to do more research as well I asked you to prove gravitys existence and you could you do that one thing for me please and refute one of my arguments.

Thanks for the debate I love you all with the love of God including psychscientist (no homo) and have a nice day.
:)
PsychoScientist

Con

Hello, thank your for your arguments. However, my arguments still stand solid. There are things I shall address.

First of all, your grammar and spelling is trash. All I see are run on sentences, therefore, I cannot understand much of what you're trying to tell me.

You say the Bible "must" have "zero" contradictions because nobody in the comments could answer them. That is the most idiotic excuse for an argument I have ever seen in this website. Also, that is an assumption because you are saying that the Bible has "zero" contradictions, when not even God is proven.

Gravity, simple. The Earth is round, so how are we standing on the floor? How is the space station floating in space? Why do objects fall down if you throw them in the air? The simple answer is gravity. It is a proven phenomenon, and you saying that gravity isn't really proven is also idiotic.

My arguments were not weak, you failed to refute them. Probably because they were too solid for you. Anyways, my arguments still stand tall. Also, you are failing to read and comprehend what I'm trying to tell you through my arguments, that is why I have to repeat the same thing all over again.

When your debating, be sure you are well informed of everything you actually need to know. Don't come to this website with weak prior knowledge.

Well, voters should take into consideration, I had:
Superior Grammar, and convincing arguments. The rest is up to you.

Thank you for this debate. Although we aren't really that friends with each other, I enjoyed this debate. I will see you around soon.
Debate Round No. 5
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 1 year ago
Stonehe4rt
Lol, well overall, good job Mod.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Theist, I'm the voting moderator. I removed that vote, I didn't cast it.
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
White flame con didn't refute anything he avoided most of what I said
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
I get what you mean but I didn't even get to that because he kept ignoring my argument and I had to reiterate what I said just to make him answer it which he did in the last argument.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: JustAnotherFloridaGuy// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Con (S&G, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Both Pro and Con forfeited a round. Both sides also seemed a little heated in their rounds. But otherwise, they both had decent conduct, so that will remain tied. Pro's S&G wasn't exactly bad, but Con did have notably superior S&G. Con therefore takes the S&G points. In short, Pro's resolution that it is obvious that there is a god was negated by Con as Pro did not end up proving anything. Pro made a wide variety of claims and did not support them with evidence or even a minimal amount reasoning, so Con easily refuted them. Con takes more convincing arguments because his arguments stand essentially unrefuted. Neither side used sources, so that remains tied.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) S&G requires better explanation. This point must only be awarded in instances where the S&G of one side is bad enough that it's difficult to understand. (2) The voter is requires to explain arguments by assessing specific points made by each side. This vote focuses solely on generalizations.
************************************************************************
Posted by Stonehe4rt 1 year ago
Stonehe4rt
It was a pretty weak debate on both sides for proof, but logic wise, when you go back you always realize you need something. No matter how far you go. It really comes down to this, do you believe a rock (or object that contains every element that just so happens to be needed to make the universe) or you be a little more realistic and say it was formed by some sort of intelligence. Which would show why DNA is a code, why Electrons and Protons can work like 1s and 0s from a code, Why their is logic behind science, why Math is always balanced, ect.... I mean everything models intelligence. However Pro did not make this arguement, but Con didnt really make a solid arguement either, so meh.
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
You know what's so funny nobody has told me any contradictions in the Bible yet hahaha
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
Are you for real are you trying to say things happen by themselves.
The evidence is "everywhere" for example you're walking on the street and you see a house that house did not magically appeared there a group of people obviously built it as well as anything everywhere you look the examples are countless name me 1 thing that happens by itself.

Atheist arguments are weak
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
You haven't even given solid proof of gravity you basically asked a bunch of questions and how could I have spelling problems when I have spell check and reviewing it and finding no error's also you haven't told me any so I guess that argument still stands
Posted by BackCommander 1 year ago
BackCommander
Nothing happens by itself, where is your proof of that Thiest_1998? If you find it difficult to find evidence relating to something not being there you'll finally understand what it feels like debating with a theist about the existence of any god.
No votes have been placed for this debate.