The Instigator
16kadams
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
Dizzle
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

it is possible that god exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 5 votes the winner is...
16kadams
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/30/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,874 times Debate No: 20136
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (25)
Votes (5)

 

16kadams

Pro

This is my first debate on religion so either cut me some slack or let a noob on this topic come forth. (I wish izbo was still here then)

C1: kalam Cosmological argument

Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.
Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) [1]

There is a logic to this, if q is true then p is true. therefore p is true.

Whatever causes the universe to appear is not inside of space, because there was no space causally prior to the creation event. The cause must therefore be non-physical, because physical things exist in space.
Whatever causes the universe to appear is not bound by time (temporal). It never began to exist. There was no passage of time causally prior to the big bang, so the cause of the universe did not come into being. The cause existed eternally.
And the cause is not material. All the matter in the universe came into being at the first moment. Whatever caused the universe to begin to exist cannot have been matter, because there was no matter causally prior to the big bang. [2]

So what I am saying is how does everything come from nothing.

C2: teneology:

1. If teleology exists, then an ordering intellect exists.
2. Teleology exists.
3. Therefore, an ordering intellect exists.

"Where goal-directness is associated with consciousness, as it is in us, there is no mystery. A builder builds a house, and he is able to do so because the form of the house exists in his intellect because it is instantiated in a concrete particular object. And of course, the materials that will take on that form also exist already, waiting to take it on." [3]

So the concept is something just doesn't pop up, something smart had to have done it. The example is a house.

Moreover, as David Oderberg has argued, teleology is present not just in organic processes, but also in the inorganic. Processes such as the water cycle and the rock cycle are inherently teleological in nature. [3] [4]

C3: laws of logic

here are some arguments:

I cannot be w and w at once.
something cannot make itself

So I cannot make myself, someone else has to. These arguments are from my 5th source.

The laws of logic are absolute.

The laws of logic are absolute even in another diminsion or universe. [5]

The laws of logic do not rely on people as they are absolute, wether or not we exist.

They are not related to physical properties

my 5th source is where this is from.

That is it for now.

http://plato.stanford.edu... [1]
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com... [2]
http://www.debate.org... [3]
David S. Oderberg, "Teleology: Inorganic and Organic," in A.M. Gonz´┐Żlez (ed.), Contemporary Perspectives on Natural Law (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008): 259-79 [4]
https://school.carm.org... [5]
Dizzle

Con

As the con i will be putting my answer forward in favor of the big bang theory which in fact i do believe is what created the universe.

There are many scientific theories as such to prove god did not exist and that the big bang created this universe but how can we know this for sure?

According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state which expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion caused the young Universe to cool and resulted in its present continuously expanding state. According to the most recent measurements and observations, this original state existed approximately 13.7 billion years ago, which is considered the age of the Universe and the time the Big Bang occurred .

The Big Bang is a well-tested scientific theory which is widely accepted within the scientific community because it is the most accurate and comprehensive explanation for the full range of phenomena astronomers observe.

The theory of 'did God exist'. Is merely just a theory you either believe or you do not believe. How did people come to the conclusion that God created the universe? What created God? and so on..

The main point of evidence on God existing would be the bible but as yet there is no reasonable idea or theory on who wrote the bible. There are also many stories on god such as Jesus being Gods son, and how Jesus cared for everyone and had healing hands, one story also claims he gave out sandwiches and they just kept coming out of his little bag.

The only evidence if you would call it evidence on all this stories of God and Jesus come out of the bible.
Therefore the only reason god was known to be the 'creator' was due to all the good deeds and fascinating things not only God but also his son had done. This is what is mentioned in Genesis 1.1: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

But where did the person who wrote the bible get this idea from was he told? or did he just assume because god was helping everyone?

If god really did exist why does he not help people in need. Why does he not stop wars and bring peace to the planet.
And put physicists to sleep about their theories. No he has not done this and is not doing this right now like parts of the bible claiming he and his son did all these wonderful things for this world. Why not now is all you can ask?

If God really is creator of earth and heavens above. Prove it.

The only reasonable theory to do with the creation of the universe is the big bang because it is the most accurate and comprehensive explanation for the full range of phenomena astronomers observe.

Previous experiments—including WMAP results released in 2003—had provided strong evidence for the rapid-expansion theory, called inflation, that was first proposed by physicist Alan Guth in 1980.

In the trillion-trillionth of a second after the big bang, the universe expanded from the size of a gumball to astronomical proportions, according to the inflation theory. The universe then settled into a more leisurely pace of expansion over the past 13.7 billion years or so.

http://bible.cc...
http://www.straightdope.com...
http://www.everystudent.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
16kadams

Pro

Thank you for accepting :)

Rebutals:

My opponents big bang theory:

It is pretty universal that the big bang happened, but how it happened is a mystery. The theory is that the universe had no matter before it started, another theory was it was only hydrogen and helium, so answer this, how did it start. How does an explosion just start, how does everything come from nothing.

My opponets theory of did god exist:

What happened is people felt that is was logical that there was a higher power. Which it is because so far your argument is the big bang theory happened, but you leave us with 1 question, how did it start. Now I will answer the question, who made god:

No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)

notice this says before time began, so is this possible? let's use SCIENCE to prove me correct:

One is that God exists outside of time.
Therefore, God has no need of being created, but, in fact, created the time dimension of our universe specifically for a reason - so that cause and effect would exist for us. However, since God created time, cause and effect would never apply to His existence. [1]

That means that with time non-existant when he was around he didn't need creation, plato the great philosopher agreed. So he didn't need to be created according to philosophy, and science as dimensions play into this.

His jesus and caring remark:

How is that not possible as anything is possible. I was planning to edit this but you accepted, since anythings possible god can exist. You have the BOP to prove no it is not possible. Also it is possible he cared about everyone. I care for people I do not even know because I am a nice person. Also why would he basically kill himself, further more he was predicted by the prophets. So that is entirely possible.

The bible reference:

The reason you used a christian reference so I used a christian one too. Even though I was hoping for this to be a generic god. According to the bible the person who wrote is got the information from god.

His why doesn't he help:

Have you ever heard the phrase god helps those who help themselves? Also he cannot directly intervene as he has left his kingdom when jesus left, and will only be able to directly intervene when his son returns. Here's an exaple:

If I go to the east, God is not there; if I go to the west, I do not see Him. When He is at work in the north, I catch no sight of Him; when He turns to the south, I cannot see Him (Job 23:8-9).

So it says you go to god, god doesn't come to you.

Psalm 27:14,

Wait for the Lord's help. Be strong and brave, and wait for the Lord's help

So go find god, once you find him wait until he helps you.

His prove it remark:

I have to prove it is possible which I already have mostly, you have to prove it is not possible, hence the title. I was really going to change it to make it easier for you but it was to late.

His big bang remark again:

I agree the big bang happened but what started it.

I am done refuting, my opponent hasn't even started refuting my arguments, so lets look over them again:

C1: kalam cosmological argument

The first premise expresses the metaphysical truth that something cannot come from nothing, the denial of which is absurd. If something could come into existence without a cause, then it's odd as to why we do not have any examples of this constantly happening. Why doesn't everything and anything pop into existence without a cause? Indeed, why doesn't a black hole suddenly appear and consume our solar system? It can't be because nothingness is constrained by physical laws, for there is nothing to constrain. To deny the first premise is to thus deny causal regularity. Moreover, philosopher David Oderberg has argued that the first premise is a necessary truth. [2] [3]

C2: teneology

The teleological argument suggests that, given this premise, the existence of a designer can be assumed, typically presented as God.

According to Xenophon, Socrates (c. 469-399 B.C.) argued that the adaptation of human parts to one another, such as the eyelids protecting the eyeballs, could not have been due to chance and was a sign of wise planning in the universe. [4]

So intelegent planning proving a higher power here.

C3: laws of logic

That if one sign denotes generally everything denoted by a second, and this second denotes generally everything denoted by a third, then the first denotes generally everything denoted by the third, is not doubted by anybody who distinctly apprehends the meaning of these words. The deduction of the general form of syllogism, therefore, will consist only of an explanation of the suppositio communis. Now, what the formal logician means by an expression of the form, "Every M is P," is that anything of which M is predicable is P; thus, if S is M, that S is P. The premiss that "Every M is P" may, therefore, be denied; but to admit it, unambiguously, in the sense intended, is to admit that the inference is good that S is P if S is M. He, therefore, who does not deny that S is P -- M, S, P, being any terms such that S is M and every M is P -- denies nothing that the formal logician maintains in reference to this matter; and he who does deny this, simply is deceived by an ambiguity of language. How we come to make any judgments in the sense of the above "Every M is P," may be understood from the theory of reality put forth in the article in the last number. It was there shown that real things are of a cognitive and therefore significative nature, so that the real is that which signifies something real. Consequently, to predicate anything of anything real is to predicate it of that of which that subject (the real) is itself predicated; for to predicate one thing of another is to state that the former is a sign of the latter [5]

==end==

==conclusion==

It is possible that a creator exists, also my arguments are stronger and they rely on more then his does. I have refuted my opponents arguments and statements. He has not refuted my case but I hope he answers the questions. Thank you.

sources:

http://www.godandscience.org... [1]

bible

http://www.debate.org... [2]

David S. Oderberg, ‘Traversal of the Infinite, the "Big Bang" and the Kalam Cosmological Argument', Philosophia Christi 4 (2002): 305-36 [3]

Xenophon, Memorabilia I.4.6; Franklin, James (2001). The Science of Conjecture: Evidence and Probability Before Pascal. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 229 [4]

http://www.peirce.org... [5]
Dizzle

Con

According to the big bang theory, the universe began by expanding from an infinitesimal volume with extremely high density and temperature. The universe was initially significantly smaller than even a pore on your skin. With the big bang, the fabric of space itself began expanding like the surface of an inflating balloon – matter simply rode along the stretching space like dust on the balloon's surface. The big bang is not like an explosion of matter in otherwise empty space; rather, space itself began with the big bang and carried matter with it as it expanded. Physicists think that even time began with the big bang. Today, just about every scientist believes in the big bang model. The evidence is overwhelming enough that in 1951, the Catholic Church officially pronounced the big bang model to be in accordance with the Bible. I repeat in accordance with the bible!!!

The big bang theory is the theory that the universe started from a single point, and has been expanding ever since.
This has been well-established by observations, such as the apparent movement of galaxies away from us, and the cosmic microwave background radiation believed to be the leftover light from the big bang.

The evidence for a big bang having taken place about 15 to 20 billion years ago is overwhelming, so I naturally believe that it is the case.

However, if your real question is "why did the big bang happen in the first place?" then that ceases to be an astronomical question, but a religious one.

Some astronomers, who are religious, argue that the big bang theory confirms the existence of God and the basic elements of the creation story as told in the Bible. First came light, then the heavens, then the Earth ...

However, many other scientists do not. Scientists, like people in most any profession, have a vast diversity of religious beliefs. Some of us attend houses of worship, others do not. Some of us consider ourselves very religious, others consider ourselves staunch atheists. Just because we study astronomy does not mean we have any more agreement as to the 'why' questions than anyone else.

http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu...
http://www.umich.edu...

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
16kadams

Pro

before I start I will say something, since I was not able to change the resolution in time my opponent now must argue that in no possiblity in no way does god exist. He has to prove that all proof leads to the denial of god, which he has not done.

"Physicists think that even time began with the big bang. Today, just about every scientist believes in the big bang model. The evidence is overwhelming enough that in 1951, the Catholic Church officially pronounced the big bang model to be in accordance with the Bible. I repeat in accordance with the bible!!!"

I am a catholic and said above I agree with the big bang, but you still didn't answer how did it start. Also since you haven't answered it I will answer it for you, god made the big bang making time. This answers your question also about who made god because if time doesn't exist and other dimensions exist then no one had to make god. You just helped my point. Further more if the church said it goes with the bible then it can be related to god.


" The big bang theory is the theory that the universe started from a single point, and has been expanding ever since."

agreed but still :


1, what started it.
2. how did it start from nothing without godly intervention.
3. Is there proof that god did not do it?

My answers: it is logical that some intelectual being/force started the big bang
It needed godly intenvention to start (my theory god ate beans and grabed a lighter, just kidding obviously)
and there is no proof a god didn't do it, therefore you can say it is possible he/she did it.

so well yeah thats it.

"" then that ceases to be an astronomical question, but a religious one."

False scientists are still puzzled on how it started. So since they have no definate conclusion anything could be the answer. Since anything (well anything relavant) can be the answer then god might be one, therefore it is possible he exists. You have not proved that god doesn't exist. You need to prove his existance is immpossible, which you have not don. My side of the BOP is done, yours not so much.

his religeous and astronomy argument 2nd part

well so cool a few astronomers agree with me, but still is it not possible god exists? Yes there is a posibility and all I had to prove was that and I have done it, you have not even come close to saying it is impossible.

Ok, well you haven't proved your case, so to make it hard I will state my arguments one more time, proving that it is possible that he exists.

C1: KALAM COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.

I will show you it's basic consept again:

Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.
Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) [1]

So that is a logical argument. SO that is enough explanation.

C2: teneology

1. If teleology exists, then an ordering intellect exists.
2. Teleology exists.
3. Therefore, an ordering intellect exists.

This is also self explanatory.

Plato (c. 427–c. 347 B.C.) posited a "demiurge" of supreme wisdom and intelligence as the creator of the cosmos in his work Timaeus. Plato's teleological perspective is also built upon the analysis of a priori order and structure in the world that he had already presented in The Republic. Plato does not propose creation ex nihilo; rather, the demiurge made order from the chaos of the cosmos, imitating the eternal Forms. [2]


C3: laws of logic

I cannot be w and w at once.
something cannot make itself

So I cannot make myself, someone else has to. These arguments are from my 5th source.

The laws of logic are absolute.

The laws of logic are absolute even in another diminsion or universe. [5]

The laws of logic do not rely on people as they are absolute, wether or not we exist.

They are not related to physical properties

my 5th source is where this is from. [3]









http://plato.stanford.edu...;[1]
Brickhouse, Thomas; Smith, Nicholas D. (April 21, 2005)."Plato". Internet Encycopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved November 12, 2011. [2]
https://school.carm.org...;[3]
Dizzle

Con

There was matter and there was antimatter. When they met, they annihilated each other and created light. Somehow, it seems that there was a tiny fraction more matter than antimatter, so when nature took its course, the universe was left with some matter, no antimatter, and a tremendous amount of light.
This tiny bit of matter left over was about 4.6% and contained atoms (protons and neutrons). All of life is made from a portion of this 4.6%.

One theory is that the Big Bang was caused by the implosion and resulting explosion of a prior universe.
Is it possible there is a teapot in orbit around Mars?
Yes, we can't prove there isn't, but there is no reason to think so.

Would this debate ever be solved into the right answer maybe, maybe not the time may come or may not there is no way to prove there is not a god and there is no way to prove there is a god or that god created the universe.
How is anyone ever going to resolve this matter unless if god if he exists comes forward and proves it to all there's no way of knowing all of it could have been made up to make people believe and have something to worship.

My opponent picked a topic for an easy win but i reckon i gave him a run for his money, I believe there is more evidence to prove the big bang created our universe prior to many other universes unless someone comes forward in order to prove there is a god we will never know .

If you use your sense of wisdom you can quite easily gather that there is more evidence facing towards the big bang theory than to any other theory. There may be a god there may not everyone asks the same question 'is there a god'
we will never know so if you think clearly and realise there is a lot of scientific evidence pointing towards the big bang and people believe only in god because they have nothing else to believe in Believe Big Bang Believe Con.

Thank you for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Dizzle 2 years ago
Dizzle
yes!
Posted by owen99999 2 years ago
owen99999
I am atheist and I recognize it's POSSIBLE I just also reconize there is pratically no evidence for it and most likely wrong and that there is tonnes of evidence for contradicting theories (the big bang, evolution etc).
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
I'm sorry I was gonna change it to god exists but...yeah
Posted by Illegalcombatant 2 years ago
Illegalcombatant
Dizzle says..."if there was an alien mother ship hovering above earth I am pretty sure we would know due to technology, e.g. satellites, telescopes etc."

No Dizzle, it has a cloaking device.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 2 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
This resolution flows pro about 98%. Even atheists recognize the possibility (although none of the current gods have any proof) that a god or gods could exist.
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
kk thanks for accepting
Posted by Dizzle 2 years ago
Dizzle
Anyway that was a good debate and good luck :)
Posted by Dizzle 2 years ago
Dizzle
You never know there may have been different universes.
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
dizzle, there was no matter before the big bang
Posted by phantom 2 years ago
phantom
You're right.

http://www.debate.org...
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Rational_Thinker9119 2 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119
16kadamsDizzleTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Of course it's "possible" that God exist, the question should have been based on "most likely", so based off the title I agreed with Pro before the debate. The KCA is flawed in many aspects but Con never took advantage. He could have said that logic states "everything that exists, has a beginning" so since pro said himself that "The laws of logic are absolute even in another diminsion or universe", God must have a beginning...Con just asked "who created God?" without any reasoning. Pro wins.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 2 years ago
ConservativePolitico
16kadamsDizzleTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made the case that it is POSSIBLE that God exists... no one asked for him to prove that he does only the possibility which he managed gracefully.
Vote Placed by cameronl35 2 years ago
cameronl35
16kadamsDizzleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Resolution was almost an auto win for Pro. He easily proved it is possible despite the so-so arguments.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 2 years ago
vmpire321
16kadamsDizzleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Lol. I'm surprised that CON accepted, given the resolution.
Vote Placed by Deathbeforedishonour 2 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
16kadamsDizzleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro proved that it is possible that God exists, therefore he gets my vote.