The Instigator
critical_mind
Con (against)
Tied
10 Points
The Contender
LatentDebater
Pro (for)
Tied
10 Points

a god without a beginning

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 6 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/25/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,365 times Debate No: 29552
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (6)

 

critical_mind

Con

is there evidence for a god without a beginning or it's only an assumption
LatentDebater

Pro

Not only are al the following religious texts available but there is simply no evidence for a god with a beginning since the only god ever proposed has been the eternal creator of the universe and of consciousness, the original, the first, the beginner.

The following texts all come together to provide evidence of a god communicating with people that he/she/it has no beginning: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Asatru
  • Havamal
  • Eddas
Atenism
  • Great Hymn to the Aten
Ayyavazhi
  • The Akilathirattu Ammanai
  • The Arul Nool
Bahá'í Faith

Books by Bahá'u'lláh

  • The Four Valleys (1857 version)
  • The Seven Valleys (1860 version)
  • The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh (in Arabic 1857)
  • The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh (in Persian 1857)
  • Gems of Divine Mysteries (ca 1859)
  • The Book of Certitude (partly in Persian and partly in Arabic 1861)
  • Summons of the Lord of Hosts (ca 1868)
  • Tabernacle of Unity (ca 1870)
  • The Kitáb-i-Aqdas /The Most Holy Book (Completed 1873)
  • Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed After the Kitáb-i-Aqdas (written until 1892)
  • Epistle to the Son of the Wolf (ca 1890)
  • Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh (compilation chosen by Shoghi Effendi of Bahá'u'lláh's writings, 1853 to 1892)
Bön
  • Bon Kangyur and Tengyur
Buddhism
Theravada Buddhism
  • The Tipitaka or Pāli Canon
    • Vinaya Pitaka
    • Sutta Pitaka
      • Digha Nikaya, the "long" discourses.
      • Majjhima Nikaya, the "middle-length" discourses.
      • Samyutta Nikaya, the "connected" discourses.
      • Anguttara Nikaya, the "numerical" discourses.
      • Khuddaka Nikaya, the "minor collection".
    • Abhidhamma Pitaka
East Asian Mahayana
  • The Chinese Buddhist Tripiṭaka
    • Diamond Sutra and the Heart Sutra
    • Shurangama Sutra and its Shurangama Mantra
    • Pure Land Buddhism
      • Infinite Life Sutra
      • Amitabha Sutra
      • Contemplation Sutra
    • Tiantai, Tendai, and Nichiren
      • Lotus Sutra
    • Shingon
      • Mahavairocana Sutra
      • Vajrasekhara Sutra
Tibetan Buddhism
  • Tibetan Kangyur and Tengyur
Cheondoism
  • The Donghak Scripture
  • The Songs of Yongdam
  • The Sermons of Master Haeweol
  • The Sermons of Revered Teacher Euiam[6]
Christianity
  • The Bible
  • For Protestantism, this is the 66-book canon
  • For Catholicism, this includes seven deuterocanonical books in the Old Testament for a total of 73 books, called the Canon of Trent.
  • For the Eastern Orthodox Church, this includes the anagignoskomena.
  • The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church adds various additional books depending on the specific enumeration of the canon, but always includes 4 Esdras, the Book of Jubilees, 1 Enoch, 4 Baruch, and 1, 2, and 3 Meqabyan.
  • Some Syriac churches accept the Letter of Baruch as scripture.
Christian Scientists
  • The Bible
  • Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy.
Gnosticism
  • Nag Hammadi library and other Gnostic texts
  • Some books of the Old Testament and New Testament
Cerdonianism and Marcionism
  • Only the Gospel of Marcion and selected Pauline epistles accepted
Jehovah's Witnesses
  • The Bible
Latter Day Saint movement
  • The Bible
  • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints uses the King James Bible.
  • The Community of Christ uses the Joseph Smith Translation.
  • The Book of Mormon
  • The Pearl of Great Price
  • The Doctrine and Covenants
  • There are significant differences in content and section numbering between the Doctrine and Covenants used by the Community of Christ(RLDS) and the LDS Church.
  • Other, smaller branches of Latter Day Saints include other scriptures, such as the Book of the Law of the Lord used by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite) or The Word of the Lord used by Fettingite branches.
Native American Church
Rastafari movement
Seventh-day Adventists
  • The Bible
  • The writings of Ellen White are held to an elevated status, though not equal with the Bible, as she is considered to have been an inspired prophetess.
Swedenborgianism
See below.
Unification Church
See below.
Confucianism
  • The Five Classics
  • The Four Books
  • The Thirteen Classics
Discordianism
  • The Principia Discordia
Druidism
  • The Mabinogion
  • Lebor Gabála Érenn
Druze
  • Rasa'il al-hikmah
Ancient Egyptian religion

Old Kingdom
  • Pyramid Texts
First Intermediate Period & Middle Kingdom
  • Coffin Texts
Second Intermediate Period
  • The Book of the Dead
  • Book of Caverns
  • Book of Gates
  • Amduat
  • Book of the Heavenly Cow
  • Litany of Re
Etruscan religion
  • Cippus Perusinus
  • Liber Linteus
  • Pyrgi Tablets
  • Tabula Cortonensis
Ancient Greece
  • Homeric Hymns
  • Theogony
  • Golden Verses of Pythagoras
Hermeticism
  • Hermetica, Kybalion, Emerald Tablet and associated writings
Hinduism
Śruti
  • Vedas
    • Rig Veda
    • Sama Veda
    • Yajur Veda
    • Atharva Veda
  • Brahmanas
  • Aranyakas
  • Upanishads
Smriti
  • Itihāsas
    • Mahābhārata
      • Bhagavad Gita
    • Ramayana
  • Puranas (List)
    • Bhagavata Purana
  • Tantras
  • Sutras (List)
  • Stotras
  • Ashtavakra Gita
  • Gherand Samhita
  • Gita Govinda
  • Hatha Yoga Pradipika
  • Yoga Vasistha
In Purva Mimamsa
  • Purva Mimamsa Sutras
In Vedanta
  • Brahma Sutras of Vyasa
In Yoga
  • Yoga Sutras of Patanjali
In Samkhya
  • Samkhya Sutras of Kapila
In Nyaya
  • Nyāya Sūtras of Gautama
In Vaisheshika
  • Vaisheshika Sutras of Kanada
In Vaishnavism
  • Vaikhanasa Samhitas
  • Pancaratra Samhitas
In Saktism
  • Sakta Tantras
In Kashmir Saivism
  • 64 Bhairavagamas
  • 28 Shaiva Agamas
  • Shiva Sutras of Vasugupta
  • Vijnana Bhairava Tantra
In Pashupata Shaivism
  • Pashupata Sutras of Lakulish
  • Panchartha-bhashya of Kaundinya
  • Ganakarika
  • Ratnatika of Bhasarvajna
In Shaiva Siddhanta
  • 28 Saiva Agamas
  • Tirumurai
  • Meykandar Shastras
In Gaudiya Vaishnavism
  • Brahma Samhita
  • Jayadeva's Gita Govinda
Krishna-karnamrita
  • Chaitanya Bhagavata
  • Chaitanya Charitamrita
  • Prema-bhakti-candrika
  • Hari-bhakti-vilasa
In Lingayatism
  • Siddhanta Shikhamani
  • Vachana sahitya
  • Mantra Gopya
  • Shoonya Sampadane
  • 28 Agamas
  • Karana Hasuge
  • Basava Purana
In Kabir Panth
  • poems of Kabir
In Dadu Panth
  • poems of Dadu
Islam
  • Quran
  • Hadith/Sunnah
Jainism
Svetambara
  • 11 Angas
    • Secondary
      • 12 Upangas, 4 Mula-sutras, 6 Cheda-sutras, 2 Culika-sutras, 10 Prakirnakas
Digambara
  • Karmaprabhrita, also called Satkhandagama
  • Kashayaprabhrita
Nonsectarian/Nonspecific
  • Jina Vijaya
  • Tattvartha Sutra
  • GandhaHasti Mahabhashya (authoritative and oldest commentary on the Tattvartha Sutra)
Judaism
Rabbinical Judaism
See also: Rabbinic literature
  • The Tanakh
    • Torah
    • Nevi'im
    • Ketuvim
  • The Talmud
    • Mishnah
    • Gemara
— Kabbalah
  • Zohar
Karaite Judaism
  • The Tanakh, i.e. the Hebrew Bible
Beta Israel
  • The Tanakh with several jewish apocrypha
LaVeyan Satanism
  • The Satanic Bible
  • The Satanic Rituals
Mandaeanism
  • The Ginza Rba
  • Book of the Zodiac
  • Qolusta, Canonical Prayerbook
  • Book of John the Baptizer
  • Diwan Abatur, Purgatories
  • 1012 Questions
  • Coronation of Shislam Rba
  • Baptism of Hibil Ziwa
  • Haran Gawaita
Manichaeism
  • The Evangelion
  • the Treasure of Life
  • the Pragmateia
  • the Book of Mysteries
  • the Book of Giants
  • the Epistles
  • the Psalms and Prayers.
  • The Shabuhragan
  • The Arzhang
  • The Kephalaia (Κεφαλαια), "Discourses", found in Coptic translation.
Meher Baba
God Speaks
Native American Church
  • The Bible
New Age religions
  • A Course in Miracles
  • Conversations with God
  • Oahspe
  • The Urantia Book
  • Isis Unveiled
Orphism
  • Orphic Poems
Pastafarianism
  • The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Rastafari movement
  • The Bible (Ethiopian Orthodox canon)
  • the Holy Piby
  • the Kebra Negast
  • The speeches and writings of Haile Selassie I (including his autobiography My Life and Ethiopia's Progress)
  • Royal Parchment Scroll of Black Supremacy
Ravidassia
  • The Amritbani Guru Ravidass Ji
Samaritanism
  • The Samaritan Torah
Scientology
  • Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
  • List of Scientology texts
Shinto
  • The Kojiki
  • The Rikkokushi
  • The Fudoki
  • The Jinnō Shōtōki
  • The Kujiki
Sikhism
  • The Guru Granth Sahib
  • The Dasven Padshah Da Granth
Spiritism
  • The Spirits Book
  • The Book on Mediums
  • The Gospel According to Spiritism
  • Heaven and Hell
  • The Genesis According to Spiritism
Sumerian
  • The Barton Cylinder
Swedenborgianism
The New Church
  • The Bible
  • The works of Emanuel Swedenborg
The General Church
  • The Bible
  • The works of Emanuel Swedenborg
Taoism
  • Tao Te Ching
  • Zhuangzi
  • Daozang
Tenrikyo
  • The Ofudesaki
  • The Mikagura-uta
  • The Osashizu
Thelema
  • Holy Books of Thelema
Unification Church
  • Divine Principle
  • The Bible
Urantianism
  • Urantia Book
Wicca
  • Book of Shadows
  • Charge of the Goddess
  • Threefold Law
Yârsân
  • Kalâm-e Saranjâm
Yazidi
  • Yazidi Black Book
  • Yazidi Book of Revelation
Yorùbá
  • Odù Ifá
Debate Round No. 1
critical_mind

Con

first i would like to thank you for accepting this debate
then
like you said
"the only god ever proposed has been the eternal creator of the universe and of consciousness, the original, the first, the beginner"
he was proposed they'all make the assumption that god is without beginning what logical evidence are there that can prove or support that claim because saying so in this or that scripture is not enough evidence so you start by saying god is without beginning and build an argument on that but isn't using an assumption in an argument will make the conclusion a probability so is it an assumption or there're hard evidence
LatentDebater

Pro

I supplied boundless evidence of a God without a beginning being both worshipped, written about and stated the simple fact that a god with a beginning is not a god at all thus meaning that inherently God must have no beginning.

Beginning: the point in time or space at which something begins. http://oxforddictionaries.com...

God might have originated but not at a point in time nor space for God takes up no space since God is a non-physical entity and God is independent of time as God is eternal and existed from the very beginning of time itself. The only argument one could make in your favour is perhaps that god began with time but this is false since time is merely the fourth dimension in which we exist and since the amount of energy and matter in our universe is invariably constant time itself is a delusion. God had no beginning either in time or space and thus I support the idea of a god without a beginning.
Debate Round No. 2
critical_mind

Con

actually you didn't you only provided the written "evidence" even i don't see it as evidence
here you say that god must be without a beginning because if he had a beginning he wouldn't be god and here's the point you assume that god have a no beginning not proven it but we don't know that god actually exist so a god without a beginning remain an assumption
your saying if god exist then he must have no beginning you basing an assumption on an assumption
LatentDebater

Pro

What you call an 'assumption' is a definition.

All the religion I stated define God as a supernatural, eternal force behind all that occurs and will occur. It didn't 'begin' because time itself is a product of this infinitely powerful supernatural force.

I repeat. I gave evidence of the worship and concept of such a deity while you have not gone through the effort of countering even the contents one of those religious texts.

God exists independent of time and space and thus has no beginning in either realm since those realms are products of God's creation.

The issue you are having is coping with relating definitions and I am yet to see a single counter to any points I have raised let alone a single constructive point of yours.

I look forward to the last round where I hope to see at least one rebuttal to the simple fact that if God made time and space then God cannot have begun since one can only begin at a point in either time or space (according to my definition) that you seem to not have refuted).
Debate Round No. 3
critical_mind

Con

first i am not saying that god began to exist i am saying that a god without a beginning is an assumption not proven
you gave evidence assuming that such deity exist and give that deity a definition that he's independent of our time and space and that's also an assumption you haven't proven anything you only assumed and based on that assumption a proof the question is how can you prove god has no beginning without an assumption
LatentDebater

Pro

Let me explain the difference between an assumption and a definition.

Assumption: a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof. http://oxforddictionaries.com...

Definition: a statement of the exact meaning of a word, especially in a dictionary. http://oxforddictionaries.com...

So really my debate hasn't been base don assumption (which appears to be my opponent's single rebuttal).

In the last round my opponent concedes that he is "not saying that god began to exist" proving that he definitely accepts a god without a beginning could exist.

My opponent perhaps mis-wrote his resolution.

All pro has to do is assert that there is a god without a beginning whilst what my opponent is actually 'con' to is that belief in a god, especially the one without a beginning, is only based on assumptions without evidence and I have put my very best effort into asserting that there is a god without a beginning in almost every religion with textual evidence and well-written explanation as well as first-hand witness form of evidence in its favour.

My opponent has failed to address any points I raised instead dismissing all of my very valid points saying they are based on assumptions when in fact they are based on official Oxford-dictionary definitions.

In conclusion, there is a god without a beginning.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
If Pro had cited a single religious text, provided a quote supporting an eternal God, and then explained that this constitutes evidence (facts supporting his position)--I would consider him the winner.

> In the legend of Enki and Ninhursag, Ninhursag bore a daughter to Enki called Ninsar ("Lady Greenery"). Through Enki, Ninsar bore a daughter Ninkurra
http://en.wikipedia.org...

> Ninkurra (Lady Pasture) was a minor mother goddess
http://en.wikipedia.org...

He does not. Instead, he provides a list of religious texts and invites us to read them, since they support his view. First, it is the debator's obligation to do that research and find the line(s) that support his view. Second, many of the texts he points to contradict his position.
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
=== continued ===

- I make nothing of the fact that part of Secondguy's list of sources looks as if it may have been cut and pasted without attribution.
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
The question has been raised: Why didn't I vote sources to Secondguy?

- I don't generally vote sources. I don't usually even notice them.

- But, you have to be honest about what your source said. If somebody misrepresents a source, then I'm happy to vote source points to the other guy.

- Source points are so often abused, they are a bane on the whole of DDO. The instructions say to vote for the most reliable sources. That should be read "most-reliable sources, but so many act like it means "most sources that are reliable."

- In this case, Secondguy seemed to be trying to game the system by quoting many sources, even though those sources did nothing to improve the credibility of his argument. Secondguy would presumably himself agree that all or all-but-one of those sources are wrong (unreliable).

- Secondguy's citations are an attempt to support his claim that "...there is simply no evidence for a god with a beginning since the only god ever proposed has been the eternal creator...." Since we all know of gods who had beginnings, the claim is patently absurd. Athena, for instance, if I remember correctly, had _two_ beginnings. It's as if Secondguy were trying to persuade the owner of a black swan that all swans are white by listing books that he (Secondguy) claims fantasize only about white swans. No owner of a black swan will be persuaded by such a claim; and nobody who has heard of the Greek or Roman gods will be persuaded that they don't have beginnings by Secondguy's claim that his list of books are about unbegun gods. Upshot: Secondguy's citations have no persuasive weight, and can therefore earn no points as the most-persuasive sources.

- We have only Secondguy's word for it that these books claim what he says they claim. Did he read them himself? Or is he trusting the opinion of someone else, without citing that source? Since he purports not to have heard of Thor, we suspect the latter.

=== continued ===
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
S&G obvious.

Persuasion: Firstguy didn't make a resolution. There was nothing to argue.

Secondguy decided the topic of the debate, claiming that

P1: No god-with-a-beginning has ever been proposed.
C: Therefore, a real actual god exists, and it does not have a beginning.

Firstguy accepted that debate topic, and took the other side, so we can go with that.

I'm temped to vote conduct points since P1 is an absurd lie.

The only thing in the debate that seems persuasive is this, by Firstguy: "you assume that god have a no beginning not proven it but we don't know that god actually exist so a god without a beginning remain an assumption".

Translated into Lucid, that seems to mean that Secondguy's (unstated) second premise has not been justified.

P1: No god-with-a-beginning has ever been proposed.
(P2: If no god-with-a-beginning has been proposed, then a real actual god exists, and it does not have a beginning.)
C: Therefore, a real actual god exists, and it does not have a beginning.

Since this is the most persuasive sentence fragment in the debate, I give persuasion points to Firstguy.
Posted by LatentDebater 4 years ago
LatentDebater
I find it amusing that the voters think they exist anymore than god does.

Nihilism makes everything funny.
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
We can't tell which side you want to take. Try making the resolution an affirmative statement.

Resolved: There is persuasive evidence that god had a beginning.

or

Resolved: There is no persuasive evidence that god had a beginning.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by anonynomous 4 years ago
anonynomous
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: So S&G for obvious reasons. The reason I voted con is b/c pro just gives us a bunch of text and then claims b/c these texts say so it's true. I have three problems with this A) a clear appeal to authority but as con doesn't point this out i let it slide, B) You cited pastafarism which im not sure if your relize is a religion that makes fun of the thiestic arguement that athiests must disprove god not vica versa but again as con did not point it out i let it slide but subtracted a conduct point C) Clearly the BOP was on Pro here to show there is reason to belive that a "god without a beginning" exists. As pro doesn't even read his own sources and in general doesn't provide any evedince or logical warrant i gave arguements to con. Still overall A terrible debate.
Vote Placed by YYW 4 years ago
YYW
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to PRO because CON called a definition an assumption. Spelling and grammar to PRO because CON failed to articulate in coherent sentences, capitalize letters when necessary, etc. Sources to PRO because he actually employed them, albeit in a peculiar way, whereas CON did not. And arguments... where to begin. CON essentially begged PRO to prove something, which is absurd because normative claims cannot prove positive facts, but it seemed that CON understood that. PRO, nevertheless, established that people believe in a god without a beginning, and con was unable to disprove the validity of that belief belief. Overwhelming victory to PRO. Moreover, I was disappointed by CON's lack of effort.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: See comments for RFD.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Aceviper. This debate is over a false dichotomy - the nature of a being that does not exist.
Vote Placed by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
critical_mindLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: you first have to prove there is a god before you can debate of a god. since you cannot go outside and look up and see this gods, then there is no god.