The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
enclave101
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

miracles occur, but not to atheists

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 4 votes the winner is...
enclave101
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/13/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,086 times Debate No: 32463
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

what are thought of as miraculous events are heavily documented and readily available. someone can see with no retinas even though this seems scientifically impossible etc, just to use an example.

the common objection of atheists and skeptics is that things just happen to occur by probability, that a genetic deviance, or random chance etc has caused it to happen to them. (that's how evolusion occurs, someone with a genetic deviance getting their genes prominent in the population)

but I don't see these things happening to atheists.
I see plenty of evidence from chrisitans and to a lesser extent other religious folks. but I don't see it from atheists etc, why is that? they might claim that it's just not as newsworthy or interpreted that way given the lack of religious context etc.
but you'd think there's at least be noteworthy evidence, or something, at least, that shows it happens to atheists etc
enclave101

Con

I believe miracles due in fact occur to atheists. For example there is a whole list of celebrity atheists, and some of them are Mark Twain, Angelina Jolie, Hugh Hefner, Steven Hawking (one of the better minds the world has ever seen), and alot more. And these people did have some miraculous things happen to them.

List of other atheists.

http://www.celebatheists.com...
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

so where is a citation or link or something that shows something that would be called a miracle to religious folks, happening to atheists?
"i believe they happen" is pretty weak.
also, even if i acknowledged that they may occur, as a favor from God, it would be very small percentage wise, so maybe i should change my title to very rarely etc.
as of now i'd be happy with just couple or a few examples.
enclave101

Con

The citation was the list of celebrities that are atheists. Also only 20% of Americans have no religion or are atheists, so that means they would have less of a chance to have miracles occur to them. And Mark Twain is one of the better writers of the 19th century, so its a miracle that he became so famous through his writings. The google deffinition for a miracle is a highly improbable or extraordinary event, development, or accomplishment. So with that deffinition countless miracles can happen to atheists. For example my friend who's an atheist is great at math and science, so great that he got invited to the high school worldwide youth science and engineering club or wyse. Soo that is by deffinition a miracle.

Percent of atheists in america link is below.

http://www.alternet.org...
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

the percent of atheists doesn't really have much to do with anything.

you need to show hard evidence, and by far much better than you have shown

itd be a semantic argument for you to call this a miracle:
"For example my friend who's an atheist is great at math and science, so great that he got invited to the high school worldwide youth science and engineering club or wyse. Soo that is by deffinition a miracle.

first, n0 we should all acknowledge warm fuzzies, coincidences and mere good things happening to people, are not miracles. second, even if it meets some random definition, we all know miracles are things that are scientifically inexplicable, things that appear supernatural, even if we all conceded it may not be. being invited to the youth club isn't that.

inexplicable cures, seeing with no retinas, that sort of thing.
where's the evidence?
enclave101

Con

The percent of atheists in america does matter because that shows atheists have less of a chance of miracles occuring to them then raligous people. And you never gave me a deffinition of a miracle so I found one that worked with my cause but you completely ignored it. Also the title is "Miracles occur but not to atheists", so all I have to do is give one example of an miracle occuring to an atheist; and than I win, which I did. Then you respond with your own criteria for a miracle, after I gave one????? And with that no-body can heal inexplicable cures unless we go back to biblical times, and in the bible it states that Jesus cured prostitutes and non-beleivers, so atheists did have miracles occur to them; just way back in biblical times when everyone did myrh.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Silence_Boy 4 years ago
Silence_Boy
Seeing with out retinas is not a miracle, many animals are capable of this. The people who you are referring to can only see shadows, so i wouldn't really call that sight. If miracles happen to Christians, then explain to me why not one christian, who is an amputee, has ever grown his/her legs or arms back? Dairygirl has not given a single example of a REAL miracle, therefore she has failed in her argument.
Posted by sovietsalesman39 4 years ago
sovietsalesman39
* "miracle" in my opinion
Posted by sovietsalesman39 4 years ago
sovietsalesman39
there is no such thing as a "miracle in my opinion"
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
or maybe its true that miracles don't happen to anyone, but some Christians perceive it happening to them.
Posted by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
Atheists may be atheists because they are the ones who have never experienced a miracle or did not realize it.
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
lol that is so true.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
Please add definitions. Once those are in place I might be interested in this, but am paranoid of semantics debates "well what is a miracle really?"
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
dairygirl4u2cenclave101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not meet his burden of proof and wasted my time with an irrelevant link in the first round.
Vote Placed by jackintosh 4 years ago
jackintosh
dairygirl4u2cenclave101Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: The definition of Miracle was never concise, so Con adapted his own. The pro on the other hand has no leg to stand on either, siting in his opening "someone can see with no retinas even though this seems scientifically impossible" but give no citation to reference as a miracle, for example could this person see via an electrical prosthesis implanted in the occipital lobe? I would like to see the documented miracles that Pro seems to rely on heavily be cited in that side of the debate.
Vote Placed by Misterscruffles 4 years ago
Misterscruffles
dairygirl4u2cenclave101Tied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments to con, as "you can't disprove me" doesn't meet the BOP. S/g to con, as well, JUST LOOK AT IT FOR YOURSELF.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 4 years ago
MassiveDump
dairygirl4u2cenclave101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm not assigning sources to anyone because Con's sources didn't really link to the argument. Convincing arguments AND conduct awarded because "your argument is weak" is not a strong argument. Spelling and grammar awarded because holy sh!t, pro! People have shift keys nowadays!