The Instigator
BobTurner
Con (against)
Winning
42 Points
The Contender
SnowyOxygen
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

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 7 votes the winner is...
BobTurner
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 9/6/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 737 times Debate No: 61343
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (7)

 

BobTurner

Con

resolved: god exists

SnowyOxygen

Pro

I accept and await your opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
BobTurner

Con

Obviously Pro has the burden of proof to demonstrate that God exists.


I will offer a few possible claims that he must, also, be able to rebut in order to win in addition to fulfilling his own burden of proof.


C1: The universe could function perfectly fine without a God

The universe is capable according to many modern physicists to self-create, which means that God is completely unecessary and another variable in the equation.

C2: No evidence

We have no evidence for God and no need for a God. We should, by Occam's Razor, reject this theory because we have another one, the one I offered in C1, that is more plausible, more likely, and with fewer -- no, actually -- assumptions.

C3: Problem of Evil

God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent by the definition of God.

P1) Evil exists
P2) Evil was created by God
P3) This would require the capacity to create evil
C1) Therefore, God cannot be omnibenevolent

C4: Problem of Suffering

God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, so he should be able to amelieorate suffering. Yet, people suffer.


P1) If an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God exists, suffering doesn't.
P2) Suffering exists.
C1) Therefore, an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God doesn't exist.




Back to Pro.
SnowyOxygen

Pro

SnowyOxygen forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
BobTurner

Con

forward my arguments
SnowyOxygen

Pro

SnowyOxygen forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
BobTurner

Con

Pro makes no arguments, fails to respond to mine, and hasn't fulfilled his burden of proof. If he makes any arguments in the next rounds, voters should disregard them. It would be extremely unfair for him to try to argue when I don't have the ability to respond.



Vote con.
SnowyOxygen

Pro

SnowyOxygen forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Lets answer that argument that If God were so good, why is there evil. God created beings. And those beings created evil. It was found in him. Because of free will. Lucifer is the only being in existence that had an original thought apart from God. He thought in his heart, " I will exalt my authority above the authority of the most high. Of course that did not work he found out. He and those who were with him fell to the dust of the earth. For one thing Lucifer was not in the same class as God. Adam was, but Lucifer was just a servant being. Adam was a son of God.He was created in the God class
Now God gave Adam dominion over all the works of his hands. Everything natural.Lock, stock and barrel.And he gave it to such degree that he had the right to sell it. He didn't have the moral right to do it, but he had the legal right.It would be the same if I owned a house and signed title deed over to my son. If he were to do immoral things in it and had let crazies oin there to ply their crazy lifestyles, what could I do. I now have no legal right to push myself in their to straighten the mess out. All I could do is be ready to come in when invited in.God is in that position. He has to be invited into a persons life . He cannot legally just push his way in. If you come up with terminal cancer, he said that he would heal all of your diseases. Psalms 103,3. One thing he will not do is force that healing on you. If you choose to reject his offer, then he will sit quietly waiting for you to reconsider. He wqill let you die. In fact he will let you go to hell.
Why is it that most people never give God the time of day till something bad happens.Then they almost always blame him." Why did you let this happen"?Adam did the same thing. " The woman YOU gave me made me do this". Adam blamed Eve and God. You have the freedom to accept God or reject him. He will accept whatever decision YOU make and act accordingly.
Posted by BobTurner 2 years ago
BobTurner
Didnt even read what you wrote. we'll debate this soon
Posted by 1Credo 2 years ago
1Credo
Please provide reasoning for your claims rather than simply asserting that you're correct.
Posted by 1Credo 2 years ago
1Credo
I admire your extensive vocabulary.

"C1: You know NOTHING about science."

I'm certainly no expert, but at the end of this coming Spring I will graduate with a double major in Biology and General Science (which includes Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Geology) so I wouldn't say I know "nothing." Even if I did know "nothing", this would hardly be an objection to the points I made about your incorrect assertions about the universe.

"C2: No, there is absolutely NO evidence for his existence. Even the philosophical arguments don't bear him out, but they're awful, anyway."

I'm not sure which arguments you're referring to. I can think of several sound arguments in favor of theism, whereas there are not comparably good arguments in favor of atheism.

"C3: "he idea of an all-good God creating evil is irrational." It is irrational, which is why he doesn't exist.
P1) God created the universe
P2) the universe contains evil
C1) God created evil"

By what stretch of the imagination does it follow from "God creating the universe" and "there is evil in the universe" that this evil was created by God? If I create a child, and the child goes on to steal something, have I created thievery? Surely not. Remember that evil is the absence of good, without good there can be no evil. But if you don't believe in a God, as I assume you don't, where does this idea of "good" and "evil" come from? On what basis do you make the claim that anything is evil?

"C4: First, I meant unwarranted, gratuitous suffering like innocent babies dying before they can even get a birth certificate.
Second, "Suffering is a co-requisite to the existence of free will" is bull because we don't have free will if God is omniscient.
Your arguments are terrible lmfao."

Any type of suffering is consistent with the existence of a God who gives us free will. I do not see any inconsistency between omniscience and free will. Please provide reasoning for your claims rather than simply asserting that
Posted by BobTurner 2 years ago
BobTurner
also your arguments are SO bad lmfao

C1: You know NOTHING about science. This has been proven by Hawkin, Krauss, et al. so many times over. The universe can emerge from zero net energy.

C2: No, there is absolutely NO evidence for his existence. Even the philosophical arguments don't bear him out, but they're awful, anyway.

C3: "he idea of an all-good God creating evil is irrational." It is irrational, which is why he doesn't exist.

P1) God created the universe
P2) the universe contains evil
C1) God created evil

Either you deny the existence of evil or you deny that god created the universe. ether way you lose

C4: First, I meant unwarranted, gratuitous suffering like innocent babies dying before they can even get a birth certificate.

Second, "Suffering is a co-requisite to the existence of free will" is bull because we don't have free will if God is omniscient.

Your arguments are terrible lmfao.
Posted by BobTurner 2 years ago
BobTurner
we could probably finish by thursday.
Posted by 1Credo 2 years ago
1Credo
I'd be happy to debate the topic with you. I'm leaving for Spain on Thursday and will be without internet until next Tuesday, so I don't want to have to forfeit any rounds during that time. Maybe it would be best to start the debate next week, unless you think we can finish by Thursday? Either way is fine for me.
Posted by BobTurner 2 years ago
BobTurner
1Credo: You're wrong on every point. Let's debate!
Posted by 1Credo 2 years ago
1Credo
I take issue with each claim:

C1: The universe could function perfectly fine without a God

Self-creation out of nothing is nonsense. Something must have the property of being able to "create" in order to create a universe. Nothing has no properties, and thus is unable to create anything.

C2: No evidence

There are many sound arguments for God's existence. Perhaps the issue is the lack of desire to look at the evidence rather than the lack of evidence itself.

C3: Problem of Evil

P2 (Evil was created by God) is false. Evil is the lack of good, just as darkness is the lack of light or cold is the lack of warmth. The idea of an all-good God creating evil is irrational.

C4: Problem of Suffering

P1 (If an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God exists, suffering doesn't) is false. Suffering is a co-requisite to the existence of free will, and therefore I see no issue between the existence of suffering and the existence of an all-perfect God.
Posted by SnowyOxygen 2 years ago
SnowyOxygen
Damn I was tired... I even accepted the debate on the wrong side -_-
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: ff.
Vote Placed by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: FF, Pro could have easily won this since Pro didn't support ANY of his premises... Bare assertions.
Vote Placed by Ajabi 2 years ago
Ajabi
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Mikal 2 years ago
Mikal
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, and just to let con know I'd consider him as having BOP because he's the instigator and it went unmentioned in round 1.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 2 years ago
LDPOFODebATeR0328
BobTurnerSnowyOxygen
Who won the debate:--
Reasons for voting decision: FF... BUT, Con was being quite unfair... He made the debate posting periods as 10 minutes! I'm sure he made his speech beforehand... Thus, I decided to vote for... No one!