The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

god didnt build plants, because they are natural, plants dont need a mechanic

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: 11/3/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 208 times Debate No: 81989
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




nature flows in the path of least resistance

natures prime operative is progress, anti force being preservation


I don't exactly get what you're trying to say. You say god didn't build plants, but what do you mean by "God"? Some would say it's the force that made everything in the first place, or a great helper somewhere. Some would even say God is everything, as pantheism says. That said, it depends on your concept of a "God".

You say nature flows in the path of least resistance. Naturally, yes. But who said "God" is not what is natural? If all natural and unnatural things come from a God, them plants come as well. Even if you use "God" as the Christian one, God created all that is natural and human beings twisted his creation with the help of the "Devil".

Your claim is only true if you say God makes things that are out of nature/physics, which is contradicted by the Bible and even post-modern definitions of "God", like "he who makes the laws of physics". The whole discussion is flawed, though, because of the great amount of definitions that the word "God" can have.
Debate Round No. 1


i dont have beliefs

a plant is not a concept

plants are, there is no need for some one to repair them because no one build the plants

natural is random, not specified, intent is specified


I did not say you have beliefs. I did not say a plant is a concept also.
You said natural is random, not specified.
Life is not random. Life follows patterns, which are known as the laws of physics, chemistry, maths...
You can know plants are not entirely random because plants of the same species look the same. They have same attributes and characteristics as well. Natural is constructed randomly under well established laws through observation and experimentation. That said, it's random, following a specific set of rules. They can do anything as long as it's inside those rules.
What I'm saying is: it all depends on your concept of God. If a God is someone who makes the laws of science, then plants, being under laws of science, exist because of God's intent.
You also have to try to express yourself clearly. This is a communication and communications are two-ways based. You can't assume I will understand your message just by you saying random things. I contradicted your arguments and I want mine to be contradicted as well. Otherwise, it's not a debate, but an argument.
Debate Round No. 2


life is nature, nature is random.. the environment shapes my body, i dont choose how i look

random is a pattern

math is not natural, math is mechanical, and math is only considered true based on reality or logic

creation and destruction is impossible in reality, matter=1=1=transformation

so science created plants if i believe it?


What are you saying? You make no sense at all. Please try to answer my arguments.

"random is a pattern"
Yes, the results of how your body looks and how plants grow are random WITHIN laws. I'm arguing that it's possible that those laws come from some sort of intent. You DID NOT answer my question about God. What's God for you?

"Math is not natural"
Maybe not. But we can understand how the world works with it. Thus, we can understand how nature works. Fibonacci, etc.

"Math is only considered true based on reality or logic"
What do you consider true? Isn't it true what is based on reality?

"creation and destruction is impossible in reality, matter=1=1=transformation"
True and False. In reality all we have is something being transformed into another thing, or an amount of things, etc. That said, things are being destroyed and created everytime. When something rises, something falls. It's the ultimate circle of life.

"so science created plants if i believe it?"
What the hell is your problem, man? I'm not saying science created plants. I'm saying plants follow a natural pattern which are based on laws of physics. Men did not "invent" laws of physics. These are known behaviors of the world we live in, based on experimentation and observation. Those LAWS are how we can know our world. I'm not saying science created plants. I'm saying nature, God, whatever you call it, operate under certain laws that makes the creation of plants possible.
Debate Round No. 3


possibilies are false


yes, you cant figure much out about the world without thinking..

reality is true.. consideration is not true

make the matter that is an apple nothing, i dare you
creation=from nothing to something

nature is created or not

possibilities are false


So, you're trolling me. Great, m8.
Debate Round No. 4


nice acting troll
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.