The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
The Contender
dheaslip
Con (against)

religion is false

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
dheaslip has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 261 times Debate No: 94035
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

vi_spex

Pro

religious people disagree, proving they have no truth or knowledge, no objectivity, just subjectivity

truth can not disagree
dheaslip

Con

I can already tell you are one of those atheists who like to throw out insults because they have no real information or thoughts, aside of the ones which have been fed to them in public school growing up. So try to keep that on the down-low. Anyway, your topic is quite rash to come to the conclusion that religion is false. Technically you are religious. Have you been to the moon? Have you watched evolution happen? Did you live through the big bang? No, so you take faith that it happened, you have no solid evidence aside from word of others and what they say is true. So if religion is false, maybe you should come up with your own belief system which relies solely on personal experience, then you can make the claim that religion is false. Also, I'd like to hear your reasoning on why religion is false, without insulting God or the Bible, which an unintelligent may do. I have run into smart atheists, but most of them are just ignorant people who are angry with life and filled with guilt. So we'll see who you are.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

information is not real, thoughts are information

evolution is obviusly true.. change over time is true.. landslide

did you fall and hit your head or is it religion?

i dont know god, only know is true.. nature is random, machines are intended.. nature is the opposite of machine

belief is religion, unknown

knowledge is memory
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
i mean utterly crazy.. it is crazy atleast
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
to say god listens in, is to me utterly insane..

does cigarettes hear the smokers crys for cigarettes behind the glass? no but cigarettes is god putting the fool in hell
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
it can all be see, the moving arms part and that.. you would leave the ground, and be able to move your arms very fast but not to fast for me to see

you can whisper and your insanity agrees god heard it, the neighbours to
Posted by canis 4 months ago
canis
I can run 100 meters in 4 sek. But it can not be meassured
I can move my arms so fast that I can fly. But it can not be seen
I can yell so loud, that a god will hear me....But it will never be known.
It is not false what i wrote. Same thing is true when it comes to a religion..Words....
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
poor damn fools
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
my points explain themselves.. they can not be argued with, i simply win
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
concept=information
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
he didnt attack my position so i proceed to destroy him in any other way
Posted by theteamnoob 4 months ago
theteamnoob
The idea that information is not real is not really a simple concept at all. You just made a statement without saying why it is true.

"i dont know god, only know is true.. nature is random, machines are intended.. nature is the opposite of machine" does not make any grammatical sense nor does it really relate to the argument as it does not explain how it links back to religion being false.
The other two are exactly the same. If you would only explain your points so that you could be properly debated as it causes so much confusion.
Posted by vi_spex 4 months ago
vi_spex
its so simple no explanation is needed
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.