The Instigator
backwardseden
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
OrangeDoge
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Atheism is disbelief, Nonbelief, Absence of belief, Rejection of belief

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 1 vote the winner is...
OrangeDoge
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/9/2020 Category: Education
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 376 times Debate No: 125710
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

backwardseden

Pro

First, Let"s be very clear about this as all atheists are individuals. They are not grouped together by some book and must follow its laws, Rules, And regulations with hands square on, Namely the bible as an example.

Since atheism is disbelief, Nonbelief, Absence of belief, Rejection of belief it does not share in the B. O. P. To prove a god(s). There are several reasons for this"

* How exactly can disbelief, Nonbelief, Absence of belief, Rejection of belief be proven?
* All those that have the slightest doubt of a belief in a god(s) are atheists. So how is there the B. O. P. With the slightest doubt?
* Many atheists will also say "I don"t know". Since "I don"t know" is "I don"t know" how is there the B. O. P. Without not knowing? This leads to"
* Billions of atheists simply don"t care one damn little bit to prove a god(s) exists. So for theists to stick that landing of the B. O. P. On them will never wash.
* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such?
* No theist can get his foot in the door to any genuine scientific community of merit from around the world that is not theistic (after all cannot be biased). Take one lucky guess why? Not that any theist can present anything that is genuinely scientific about a god(s). As an example, The first chapter of genesis in the bible does not agree with science in so many horrific ways. An example is plants began to grow without sunlight. So once again the B. O. P. Is entirely up to theists to prove that their god exists and the B. O. P. For atheists to prove that a god does not exist stands.
* Creationists and theists alike, Even though there is precious little consensus between christians, Will never put their product, Namely their god, On trial again. Why? Because all they have on their god is faith based oriented. And faith cannot be proved. Since creationists and theists cannot stand behind their product, Their god, Everything that they put online, Publish, State, Speak, Etc is suspect for any kind of trust and truth. So the B. O. P. Is ---always---, No exceptions, None, Upon them to prove their product.
* A god cannot leap from a BOOK of all things and go POOF say "I"m here, Worship me. "
* There is no mathematical equation to prove atheism. It is like dividing 0 into 0 and getting an answer. Math doesn"t work that way.
* Why should it be an atheist positioning to prove something that has never been proven without any kind of evidence? Talk about being extra counterproductive.
* Suppose a genuine god(s) exists? How would anybody on this planet be able to recognize if it were genuinely true or not?
* What about children and babies who have not yet been indoctrinated into not knowing anything at all about any god(s) because every single person, No exceptions, None, Is born as an atheist? What's their B. O. P. 's responsibility since they are atheists and know nothing about any god(s)? It cannot possibly be anything.
* There"s over 33, 480 denominations of christinaity. So which denomination of christinaity should any atheist believe in should they start to believe? Um no. Obviously there"s no consensus within christianity and the B. O. P is upon theists to prove their god.
* All god(s) requires faith, Not evidence. An atheist requires evidence, Not faith.
"Faith is the excuse people give for believing something when they don't have evidence. Evidently god stupidly created a system where the devil wins by default. " Matt Dillahunty and he"s right.
"It"s called faith because it"s not knowledge. " Christopher Hitchens
* Nothing is tangible about a god(s). An atheist requires something, Anything that is tangible to prove a god(s). There is nothing.
* All god(s) require gullibility. An atheist requires evidence, Not gullibility.

https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=-ipQOlUorkw - I'm Fine with Believing False Things, But Also I'm Not - 7/5/20
Matt Dillahunty: "Let"s say you believe 100 things. What percentage of them would you like to be true?
Caller: "All of them. "
Matt: "OK so you"d like to believe as many true things and many false things as possible. As few things as possible would mean nothing false. What percentage are you comfortable with and why?
Caller: When I think about believing, I don"t think about it as like how many things I want to believe. I think more in terms of what do I believe that can potentially give me insight to understanding things. So you have people that study string theory and other quote um quote theories and to whether they are real or not and that"s up for debate. And you have people that believe these things"
Caller: Why wouldn"t you wait and believe when there"s sufficient evidence for it? Why would you be OK with believing something that"s not true?

Matt: "What false things would you be OK believing? "

Caller: "Potentially false things (still walking on his steps) to get to the greater truth.
Matt: "Why would you potentially believe anything could be false? Why would you believe something is true while KNOWINGLY something is potentially false? That is a conflict. Why wouldn"t you explore this and find out whether or not it is true or whether or not it is false? "
Caller: "Because we don"t have control over what we believe. "
Matt: "You"re either convinced or you"re not. Right? "
Caller: Ummm. Yes. "
Matt: "If you"re convinced of something that means it"s true - right?
Caller: "Umm. Yes. "
Matt: "So how could you possibly be convinced of something, Think it"s true, And also identify it as probably or possibly false? That is cognitive dissonance. And it is of clear rational thinking. "
Caller: "Because we don"t have control over what we believe. "
Matt: "OK can you convince yourself of something that is true and possibly false? "
Caller: "Umm. Yes. "
Matt: "OK well you don"t have sound epistemology. Go ahead, Jim.
Jim Barrows: "Let me ask you this question because OK I think you might be missing something and I"m not sure what it is. So let me assume that I have this proposition that the sky is blue. What are the possible positions you can take on that proposition?
Caller: "The sky is blue and it"s not blue? "
Jim: "There are three propositions you can take. There"s the fourth but that"s my personal favorite but that"s just me. You can accept that it"s true. You can accept that it"s false. Or you can say "I don"t know". And I think what you are trying to do and or have forgotten that that third proposition exists. So when a scientist explores string theory to use as one of your examples, It"s not that he uses string theory as true, It"s that he doesn"t know that it"s true and that he"s exploring it. Does that make sense?

"And my personal favorite "I don"t care". But that"s just me. "

"Sometimes the best position is to take the "I don"t know" position and wait for evidence to come on in. "
----------

https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=EhNUpDQ5Cac - The Atheist Experience 24. 27 with Matt Dillahunty & Jim Barrows - the call begins at the 1:33:37 Mark-RI | Believing Miracles Cause Events Is Justified 7/5/20
Matt: "Until somebody demonstrates that the supernatural exists and can in fact interact with the natural world, You are not justified in appealing to that as an explanation. "
Caller: "If that something existed that would not be explicable through normal science, Because if it was then the event would be natural and not supernatural. "
Matt "No. If there"s something supernatural, That"s where you went wrong. Because you are inferring something about something that you have no evidence for. You don"t know what it"s limits are. You don"t know what X is. You can"t tell me anything about it. And yet you"re trying to by saying if X is supernatural, Then there can"t be a natural explanation for it. But there"s no way to demonstrate there CANNOT be a natural explanation. The only thing we can ever do is show there"s not CURRENTLY not a natural explanation. So you"re hiding a big argument from ignorance fallacy in this model. My definition is really simple" Before we get to use the supernatural as a potential candidate for an observation we must first demonstrate that the supernatural exists and could be a potential explanation for it. "
----------
Here are the rules for this debate. . .
1. Once again, How exactly can disbelief, Nonbelief, Absence of belief, Rejection of belief be proven?

2. To be fair, It is obvious that there"s no possible way you as my opponent can debunk everything listed thus far even though most assuredly some things will be repeated as the RD"s go on, That is IF and only IF you show intelligence and education in which case I hope that you do.

3. Also, It is obvious that you as my opponent would have to prove theism as being genuine and true.

So good luck and have fun!
OrangeDoge

Con

Atheism, As you have said, Is the absence of belief.
And although the notion of theism has been widely debated, Not even the world's greatest minds can deduce a conclusion.

For now, The most pragmatic course of action would be to: Stay in the intermediary. Balance is best, And one must have a balance between science and religion. Only then will we be able to have a definitive answer for this inquiry.

But, Even so, Many have advocated the beliefs of theism for a conspicuous reason: Its words, As flawed as they be, Have played out in today's current events (with the most recent foretelling being John's prediction of pandemics in Revelation).
One that had so swiftly caught my eye, Though, Was the prosperity of the Middle East. Within the tale of Abraham and Sarah, Abraham's eldest son, Ishmael, Had been sent away, Promised a great nation by his father. And, In concert, That very nation was the Middle East.
Now, With their incomparable sources of oil, Ishmael's tale had truly preordained their success.

Fortunately, This had not been the Bible's sole prediction of prosperity.
With this come the first adherents of Jesus's words--the Jewish zealots (bear in mind that, In certain permutations of the Bible, The Jews had been yet to believe in a Messiah).
With great solemnity, They followed Jesus, Earning them his adoration and adulation.
And, In the current day, They are among the most affluent religious groups. Although, This might be dubbed as a mere coincidence, Or the result of higher education. Perhaps it was in a supreme deity's will to make it so?
The problem with this is that--we cannot truly know.

To this day, Man has struggled to ascertain the functions of the universe. Science has been the cause of numerous breakthroughs and advancements in our modern world.

Science can explain the motion of the universe, But it cannot explain whom set the universe in motion.
And that is our largest flaw. We constantly question the existence of a supreme being, But we have had great difficulties in refuting the very existence of said deity.
The way in which the universe functions is in a nearly impeccable manner.
It works in such a way that nearly everything complements another, In such an intricate way.
We are yet to explain why it is so.
But, Faith is like the first step to understanding this.

"Faith" is not merely a belief, Caused by the absence of knowledge. It is a receptiveness to the unknown, Allowing us to still hold a grasp of even the most asinine topics. Faith is the building block of religion.
And, The (possible) supreme being has been shown to work in "mysterious ways. " Even those who do not realize it, May have seen these workings.

For the sake of the latter, Let us say that someone has been battling depression. They blame it on a God for bringing such melancholy to their life. But, Soon, They meet a group of friends--friends in which they can find solace.
And those friends could have been sent by the will of a supreme deity. It might have seemed as such a small thing, But friends were sent to someone who needed them so desperately.

These, However dubious they may be, Are few examples of the ways in which a supreme deity may work.
Even so, It will be difficult for either side to create a constructive argument.
Religion is among the world's most ambiguous topics, And we are still too obscured to truly prove whether or not it exists.

Irregardless, Theism can exist in ways we did not think to be true.
It can be conveyed through one's upholding of their morals, Sundering good from bad, And striving to stray from the dark. Even so, Religion has still had a profound impact on our lives. It is one of the largest factors that continue to balance the world.

In a sense, Religion still runs our lives.
Debate Round No. 1
backwardseden

Pro

Seasoned beatings. I mean greetings. How are you drooling today? I do hope great and in the very beast of spirits. Oh whpppsi. Sorry about all of my deliberate miss-steaks. Willeth you never forgiveth me? Shoot me with a ping pong paddle until my cancerous nosebleed rubber hairs fall out. Of course I have to be my usual sarcastic self.

"And although the notion of theism has been widely debated, Not even the world's greatest minds can deduce a conclusion. "
Oh absolutely 100% they can. Atheism always wins. No exceptions, None. Did you even bother to read ANY of the reasonings as to why atheism is correct over the deduction of a false god in which case no god has ---ever--- been proven in the history of the human race by anyone from any religion? That's a clear definitive "no".
So let's repeat a few of them. . .
* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
Do you have that evidence to prove a god? No, You don't.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such?
Then if you could possibly be able to test and demonstrate a god(s) in which case nobody in the history of the human race has been able to, You would have to assert this god(s). Then once that is done, You would have to declare this god(s). Again, How exactly would you thus do this?
Then once all of that is done you'd have to get all of your information together and get this god(s) get some kind of a passing grade through one, Just one scientific community from around the world. So that leads to the following. . .
* No theist can get his foot in the door to any genuine scientific community of merit from around the world that is not theistic (after all cannot be biased). Take one lucky guess why? Not that any theist can present anything that is genuinely scientific about a god(s). As an example, The first chapter of genesis in the bible does not agree with science in so many horrific ways. An example is plants began to grow without sunlight. So once again the B. O. P. Is entirely up to theists to prove that their god exists and the B. O. P. For atheists to prove that a god does not exist stands.
Now you have another problem. . .
There is no definition for a god(s) because no human has ever been in the company of a god(s) and been able to prove it. You once again cannot test nor can you demonstrate a god(s) nor can you assert and declare a god(s). It is impossible because you cannot define a god(s) because none has been defined by anyone in the history of the human race because no god(s) has ever been seen, Defined, Told to anyone through talking about/ oratory, Written about from a god's point of view as far as to how it can be tested, Demonstrated, Asserted, Declared and thus defined. That is just one reason why no god from any religion not ever, Not for any reason would ever use text, Namely the bible as an example as a source of communication, Advertisement, Correspondence, The absolute worst form possible to any god from any religion.
* Nothing is tangible about a god(s). An atheist requires something, Anything that is tangible to prove a god(s). There is nothing.
Remember that good ole saying "seeing is believing"? Well, It's true. For me personally, This is one of the major reasons why I've always been an atheist. Though granted, There most certainly was another turning point that put the dagger into theism.
* All god(s) require gullibility. An atheist requires evidence, Not gullibility.

So all of theism is wiped clean unit there is evidence for a god(s). But if there is evidence for a god, What evidence would that be that absolutely nobody on this planet would be able to recognize?
So. . .
* Suppose a genuine god(s) exists? How would anybody on this planet be able to recognize if it were genuinely true or not?
----------
* Faith is not evidence of any kind. This does not prove a god(s). We can really get into faith if you want to?
* A book is not evidence and does not prove a god(s). After all, Once again no genuine true god would ever use text/ the written word, Not ever, Not for any reason, Namely your bible (I see you have in an attempt to prove your god's existence and we'll get into that shortly) as a form of communication, Advertisement, Correspondence, The absolute worst form possible to any god from any religion. There are at least 50 reasons for this. Hopefully you can think of at least 3. If not, Then this is why your religion is plundering and atheism has doubled since 2007. Granted a lot of that has to do with the pandemic though exact details of how many have turned to atheism since the pandemic has started is not as of this time known even though it was on a downfall pattern before the pandemic started. This is according to Pew Research Center, The very best poll company in the world.
* Science is not also in any possible way evidence to prove a god(s) either. After all within the texts/ the written word, There's no science to prove a god(s) existence. So it's a double whammy.
----------

OK so now onto what you have stated because there's no truth to it.
"For now, The most pragmatic course of action would be to: Stay in the intermediary. Balance is best, "
Actually it's not. It's not even a close call. The best action is once again and for a third time to repeat these three things. . .
* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such?
So until that evidence comes on in, And until there is a possible way to test, Demonstrate, Assert and declare a god(s) and the supernatural becomes part of the natural so that there is no confusion between the two, Then there is no reason to believe in a god(s). There is no balance. There is no reason to believe.

Also have you read the terrors in your bible and the horrific things your god has done in it? Genocide after genocide, Issuing death warrant after death warrant, Murdering babies and children, Hating women, Loving rape, Deliberately hating children and knowingly causing their horrific pain and suffering, Never believing in peace of any kind as there's been not 50 years since it's inception, Not anywhere, Not at any time, Not within any culture etc etc etc. So "why believe? " You nor anyone can think of a legitimate reason. I can most certainly present you with the exact verses if you'd like? Denial will not be an option.

"Have played out in today's current events (with the most recent foretelling being John's prediction of pandemics in Revelation).
Where'd you come up with that one? Actually no such "prophecy" or any kind of prophecy has been fulfilled from your bible, None. Why? There's no date. You cannot pick something and say "Ah ha, Here's something so let's put a date-time stamp marker on it and thus POOF it's automatically true. " Also you cannot use something that is mundane. At that time there were plenty of diseases going around. So mentioning a disease or two in the bible as it did, Would be quite simple easy and quite mentionable. Also nobody knows who wrote the bible. You don't. Who knows whatever was put into the bible at what time for whenever. You also probably don't even know that at the time of christ, And there's no proof whatsoever that it even existed, Just like there's once again no proof for your god existing, Nobody that was supposedly close to this christ could read or write. So the verses that you read was not put into the bible until a good 50 or so years after the death of this supposed messiah. NOBODY can remember what they did for the past 15 minutes. You really expect ANYONE to believe the verses in the bible are in any possible way accurate? So do you really think a genuine god that is true would use text/ the written word? That's just a couple of reasons why it wouldn't.
So what is going to happen for the rest of this RD is what you have mentioned from the bible are going to be skipped because you have no idea, None as to what is true or not. And truly, Why should I or anyone care what the bible says? A---book---does---not---prove---a---god. Sorry if I stressed that too much.

"Science has been the cause of numerous breakthroughs and advancements in our modern world. "
Yes, And it constantly proves a god(s) wrong.
"But it cannot explain whom set the universe in motion. "
Whoever said there has to be a "who"? That's what is called "an argument of ignorance".
"And that is our largest flaw. "
NO IT'S NOT! Our largest flaw is that we destroy this planet and each other. However Mother Nature is striking back.
"We constantly question the existence of a supreme being"
Who is this "we"? Um no it's only the religious. Atheists don't.
"The way in which the universe functions is in a nearly impeccable manner. "
Actually it doesn't. You should do some research on that.
"But, Faith is like the first step to understanding this. "
Faith in what?
OK I'll end there, We'll get into faith in the next RD. You have absolutely no idea what you are getting yourself into and you will be required to watch some videos and read some expert statements from those who know better who have been doing this for their entire lives, Just as I have if you wish to keep this debate alive. Thanx.

Please tc and have fun.
OrangeDoge

Con

"Oh absolutely 100% they can. Atheism always wins. No exceptions, None. Did you even bother to read ANY of the reasonings as to why atheism is correct over the deduction of a false god in which case no god has ---ever--- been proven in the history of the human race by anyone from any religion? That's a clear definitive 'no'. "
Given that some of history's greatest scientists (Albert Einstein, Galileo Galilei, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, Nicholas Copernicus--and many more) had (at the very least, Subtle) beliefs in the existence of a God, That had been my point. Our greatest minds were torn between it--some believed in a god, Whereas some did not.

(A bit of a disclaimer: I'm not Christain--I had presumed that it was what you would be most familiar with. Sorry for that. )
Time and time again, The notion that "atheism always wins" might be due to a lingering bias. Unfortunately, You refuse to accept any belief in faith.

But, That's reasonable. You prefer facts. Now, Though it is difficult to provide facts in the belief of supernatural (things that we cannot explain) occurrences, I'll try.
"In 1960 the Princeton physicist " and subsequent Nobel Prize winner " Eugene Wigner raised a fundamental question: Why did the natural world always " so far as we know " obey laws of mathematics? " -quote en quote, Theconversation. Com.

In truth, This pertains to my prior argument: How do things in the universe complement each other so impeccably?
You might argue that everything, Truly, Does not, But we are contradicting that via our study of mathematics. Likewise to Einstein's theory of relativity, He had come to a new discovery: The bending of a star's light in the universe. Now, This raised many questions, But was soon solved (via the assistance of Belgian astrophysicist Abbey Georges LeMaitre).
Therefore, A portion of the "imperfections" in the universe are caused by our lack of understanding of it.

"* Suppose a genuine god(s) exists? How would anybody on this planet be able to recognize if it were genuinely true or not? "
Perhaps we might be unable to recognize it.
Then again, A God has numerous permutations of appearance. And, As such, The God would see to it that they appear in a form that we would be familiar with.
Throughout religious texts, Characters that had been visited by a god were usually shown in some way, That they were encountering a supreme deity.
"The Hebrew Bible states that God revealed himself to mankind. God speaks with Adam and Eve in Eden (Gen 3:9"19); with Cain (Gen 4:9"15); with Noah (Gen 6:13, Gen 7:1, Gen 8:15) and his sons (Gen 9:1-8); and with Abraham and his wife Sarah (Gen 18). " - Wikipedia. Org
(I follow the Hebrew Bible--I apologize for not mentioning that. )
"* Science is not also in any possible way evidence to prove a god(s) either. After all within the texts/ the written word, There's no science to prove a god(s) existence. So it's a double whammy. "
In this excerpt, You have stated that science is not able to prove a god's existence. Thus, Have we really been able to disprove the existence of a god WITH science? Simply due to a "lack of evidence"? Especially when the pursuit of science literally cannot provide evidence for its existence?
In that case, Of course, We won't be able to prove a god's existence via science, When these things have little to do with each other.

"Actually it's not. It's not even a close call. The best action is once again and for a third time to repeat these three things. . .
* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such? "
It is nearly incumbent that you maintain a balance. If science does not work, Test the use of "spirituality".
Science can only do so much.
But, What you say is true: There truly is no way to prove the existence of a god.
By saying that, Though, You are showing that science really can't prove such.
Therefore, Shouldn't we deal with these "supernatural" matters via "supernatural" ways? Rather than trying to debunk it using science (something that is applied to logical things), People use "faith" as their substitute.

"Also have you read the terrors in your bible and the horrific things your god has done in it? Genocide after genocide, Issuing death warrant after death warrant, Murdering babies and children, Hating women, Loving rape, Deliberately hating children and knowingly causing their horrific pain and suffering, Never believing in peace of any kind as there's been not 50 years since it's inception, Not anywhere, Not at any time, Not within any culture etc etc etc. So "why believe? " You nor anyone can think of a legitimate reason. I can most certainly present you with the exact verses if you'd like? Denial will not be an option. "
Have you read the terrors of the places that the "god" in these texts sought to destroy?
One example might be the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.
These places condoned rape, Murder, Haughtiness, E. T. C. And that was what God had destroyed.
We sort-of brought those/these things upon ourselves.
---------
"There is no definition for a god(s) because no human has ever been in the company of a god(s) and been able to prove it. You once again cannot test nor can you demonstrate a god(s) nor can you assert and declare a god(s). It is impossible because you cannot define a god(s) because none has been defined by anyone in the history of the human race because no god(s) has ever been seen, Defined, Told to anyone through talking about/ oratory, Written about from a god's point of view as far as to how it can be tested, Demonstrated, Asserted, Declared and thus defined. That is just one reason why no god from any religion not ever, Not for any reason would ever use text, Namely the bible as an example as a source of communication, Advertisement, Correspondence, The absolute worst form possible to any god from any religion. "
The existence of a god has been so ambiguous, As there is yet to be a definitive answer of the representation of a god. You're going to need to do extensive research into each and every nuance of what a god could be if you want to debunk it.
And even so, A god could easily be the creator of the very universe itself.
But, If this "god" were to be absent, What had caused the creation of the universe? We don't know.
As a matter of fact, Why was the universe created? For no reason?
Out of nowhere, Our intricate genetic code just. . Happened?
I mean, Without some sort of entity designing the things we find on Earth (and practically everywhere else), I'd bet you, We'd be seeing some two-legged donkeys with nice tuxedos, Demanding where they find Hollywood, Because the directors refused to even preview their new script for the next "blockbuster" movie. (Strange example, But not too far out of the realm of reality. After all, Nothing keeps the universe in check, Right? A supreme deity can serve as the universe's filter. But, Here we are, In a world in which the most advanced species lay on top. Everything seems natural--as it should be. With the beliefs of atheism, You are inadvertently proposing that things in the universe have happened without a cause/goal. That is called a random world. Now, In a random world, How was everything designed this way? Humans are most eloquent, And therefore sort of rule the planet. Animals choose to stay in the wild. Do not evolve to anything that can really endanger humans to a large extent. I mean, In your "random world, " you cannot deny that things would not be this way. I don't need to go into detail about this. )

"So what is going to happen for the rest of this RD is what you have mentioned from the bible are going to be skipped because you have no idea, None as to what is true or not. And truly, Why should I or anyone care what the bible says? A---book---does---not---prove---a---god. Sorry if I stressed that too much. "
By this, You are practically invalidating a chief piece of evidence. You're not going to even consider the Bible?
This is why you need a balance. You can't cancel out the other, Especially when we're trying to prove something using two completely different ideologies (science and faith/spirituality).

Instead of choosing one, Sole, Holy book to choose from, It would be in one's best interest to connect the numerous holy books that have been written. By viewing the common flaws and common truths of each holy book, You are giving yourself a method to identify the messages it conveys--including how they may correlate to the current world.

And, If you still find yourself unable to believe in the "god" that has been so commonly represented by religious texts, Switch to something a bit more general.
Why not a supreme being who had created the universe? One whose creation is something we still attempt to ascertain, Via science?
I kind of want to ask: Do you deny the existence of a being of that sort, Too?
Are we just living in this random world, Created by a random series of events that just so happened to create something that has lasted for billions of years? Hmm. .
Debate Round No. 2
backwardseden

Pro

You are your own undoing though I'm sure you don't realize it.
"Given that some of history's greatest scientists (Albert Einstein, Galileo Galilei, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, Nicholas Copernicus--and many more) had (at the very least, Subtle) beliefs in the existence of a God,
"beliefs"
That's not hard to figure out now is it? None of them proved a god. That's a very big HUGE MONUMENTAL difference. Btw, Albert Einstein did not believe in a personal god.

OK you are not christian. That's a very good thing because christianity is one up on all other religions as far as the worst possible thing there can be from any religion.
Regardless, There's no such thing as christianity because it is truly impossible to follow the laws, Rules, And regulations as are printed in the text/ written word of the bible. Nobody can.
The same thing is true of believing in god also. It is impossible to follow the text/ written word as are the laws, Rules, And regulations that are printed in the torah, Bible, Quran, Book of mormon, Or whatever.

Atheism always wins because no god has ever been proven. So until a god is proven, Atheism will always win.

OK faith.
"Why would you believe anything on faith? Faith isn"t a pathway to truth. Every religion has some sort of faith. If faith is your pathway you can"t distinguish between christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Any of these others. How is it that you use ---reason--- in every of the other endeavor in your life and then when it comes to the ultimate truth, The most important truth you're saying that faith is required and how is that supposed to reflect on a god? What kind of a god requires faith instead of evidence? " Matt Dillahunty

"Faith is the reason people give when they don"t have evidence. " Matt Dillahunty

"Faith can be very very dangerous, And deliberately to implant it into the vulnerable mind of an innocent child is a grievous wrong. " Richard Dawkins

"Faith is the great cop-out, The great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, Even perhaps because of, The lack of evidence. " Richard Dawkins

"It's called faith because it's not knowledge. " Christopher Hitchens

* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=XcB_g_ElIdQ&t=339s Another Appeal to Faith
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=u1YpgFcW0pA - Why God Reveals Himself to Some & Not Others | Tara - NJ | Atheist Experience 21. 40
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=oSXLMxMYve8 - "We all have faith. . . " | Jeff - Philadelphia, PA | Atheist Experience 22. 42 - "We all have faith. . . "
"In order to make a case for something that is the result of intelligent design, You would need to demonstrate a designer that has intent towards a goal and provide evidence for that. Can you do that? " Matt Dillahunty
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=8w5ccgEYJns - Resurrection, Faith, Personal experience as evidence | Chris - ID | Atheist Experience 23. 28 - Resurrection, Faith, Personal experience as evidence | Chris - ID 7/7 Seth Andrews
"If we genuinely know something, There"s no need to take it on faith. And if you"re going to accept it on faith, Then you"re going to have to play in the arena where every other religion, Every other belief system, Every other truth claim, Playing the faith card gets equal treatment otherwise you"re being a hypocrite about faith. I think faith is a TERRIBLE way to determine what is true or not true. I don"t want to just believe. Let"s go out and know, Or try to know. And if we can"t find the answer instead of making one up or taking it on faith we say that we are simply honest with others and simply say it "I don"t know". I hope to one day know and make that JOURNEY about an evidenced based exploration of facts and a journey towards knowledge with no faith at all in play. " Seth Andrews
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=rahw_YwTfZ0 - Atheists Don't Evaluate Evidence for God Correctly
You have 2 sets of parents that believe in god with dying children and they both pray exactly as hard and use exactly the same prayers. One child dies, The other doesn't. Is there a justification for faith in god for the parents of the child who has died?
Clearly if you answer "yes", Your argumentive humanity has been thrown to the gutter trash, Especially when you cannot even prove a god even exists.
----------
OK moving on. So as you can see, Since faith can be claimed of anything, It cannot be used to explain a god. And no true god would ever use faith and instead would show itself and talk to people. It's also a major reason why no genuine true god would ever use text/ the written word. It would simply avoid all the fallacies of text and talk to people as an example.

Really? OK let's scrap Eugene Wigner. Do you know why it's completely invalid? Don't you think that since 1960, Scientists have made one helluva lot of leaps and bounds since then? That's 60 years ago! I've been doing this for 45!

But I will 100% agree. . .
"Therefore, A portion of the "imperfections" in the universe are caused by our lack of understanding of it. "
See? As stated in RD 1. "I don't know". All good scientists can say I don't know for something that they don't know. For theists it is an impossibility. Why? Dare their god(s) be imperfect? Of course not. Too bad, They all are.

"A God has numerous permutations of appearance. "
How do you know? Do you think you know a god better than it knows itself? You cannot even define a god. Tisk tisk tisk. You have no idea what's coming.
"And, As such, The God would see to it that they appear in a form that we would be familiar with. "
Really? According to what? You? How would you know? Have you met up with a god to know? Again, That's an argument from ab-so-lu-te and total ignorance.

"Throughout religious texts, Characters that had been visited by a god were usually shown in some way, "
Again, Who cares what religious texts have stated? No one knows who wrote them. How many translations there were, How many copies there have been how many updates there have been and will be because language MUST change over time and the kicker is THERE'S NO ORIGINAL to base one god damned thing off of. Even better? Who's to say that the interpreters haven't made mistakes in which case they most certainly have with each translation and update that gets handed down? Ah yes, So AB-SO-LU-TE-LY no one is interpreting correctly. That includes you. Now do you really think a true genuine god would not see through all of these fatal flaws + one helluva lot more and would simply not use text/ the written word, Not for any reason, Not ever and would simply talk to ALL OF MAN, Every single man woman, And child especially those who are suffering, Especially children and babies that are suffering in which case this supposed god has utterly and completely failed to do by the millions per year that it according to your bible knowingly creates per year? ARE YOU JOKING? TEXT IS OUT! It is an abomination that no true genuine gods would ever use. If you still do not see this, Either don't respond to this debate because you either don't want to get it and you go into flat out denial or read this paragraph again until you do get it.

OK let's get into those verses you presented. . .
So? God revealed himself to man. This doesn't mean it's true. God could have lied. He lied to his prophets several times in your bible. Ah yes, That means he could be flat out lying to you and you would not even know it. Would you like those verses? A---god---that---lies. Really?
Now let's show you something that you don't get and or missed.
OK you stated god revealed himself. . . Well um no.
EX 33:20 and JN 1:18 and 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.
Yeah, In your bible there's a good 1, 000 or more supermassive hypocritical contradictions and inconsistencies thus making your bible unreadable.
This is yet another reason why no genuine god would ever use text/ the written word. Not ever!
OK now I know you follow the torah. It still doesn't matter.
Yeah. I was born jewish bar mitzvahed and all with my rich millionaire daddy inviting all of his friends over and I had none. I turned an atheist at 14 when two of my supposed christian friends we were comparing my English torah and their bibles. We noticed that the book of Ruth was out of chronological order. They in being so smug, We decided to take it to their pastor. He said "Maybe it's us that's wrong! " BANG! It hit me. If one book is out of chronological order, The entire text is out of order. And it is. I then began reading it and I could not believe the shocking horrors I read of a completely immoral god.

"Thus, Have we really been able to disprove the existence of a god WITH science? Simply due to a "lack of evidence"? Especially when the pursuit of science literally cannot provide evidence for its existence? "
OK So for a 4th time at least, Probably more. . .
* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such?
Once that's done and also AFTER you assert and declare your god and once you get all of your information together, AS PREVIOUSLY stated, You still would not be able to get into any scientific building(s), Not one of merit that is not theistic (after all cannot be biased) of merit from around the world.
Now let's see if you know the "why" as previously asked?
Also I did ask "why believe? " You cannot think of a truly legitimate reason.

Please tc and haveth thee fun

Put the time into watching the videos. They are very rewarding and hopefully you will get something out of them. The people that took the time to make them do know what they are talking about. Thanx.
OrangeDoge

Con

"Regardless, There's no such thing as christianity because it is truly impossible to follow the laws, Rules, And regulations as are printed in the text/ written word of the bible. Nobody can.
The same thing is true of believing in god also. It is impossible to follow the text/ written word as are the laws, Rules, And regulations that are printed in the torah, Bible, Quran, Book of mormon, Or whatever. "

It's impossible to follow the laws, Rules, And regulations printed in the holy books?
It is highly likely that our interpretations of the holy books cannot be perfect, Either. It is impossible to follow laws perfectly when we, Ourselves, Are not perfect.
Holy books apply to people in differing ways. Each way oftentimes aids people in the current troubles they are facing.
(Try to respect the religion of Christians, Though. It's no wonder people can't "follow the rules of the Bible. " You're literally spitting on them, And those who believe in it. . )
From holy book to holy book, Its contents, Names, E. T. C. Will be different.

BUT!
That's for the Christian Bible, And other written works.
I think I'd be better off speaking of the Torah. You might prefer it, Compared to the Bible, Yes?
Synopsis:
It was handed down to Moses, Passed from generation to generation. (Yes, I'm not going to write an entire essay about it. But, That is not the point. )
You know, People in the past could write down real life accounts of what had happened, Too.
Archaic persons had their own opinions, Anecdotes, And views of the things we find in the Bible.
These things detailed encounters of historical/religious figures, In conjunction with the miracles performed by them.

Switching back to the Bible, Here:
"In one passage of Jewish Antiquities that recounts an unlawful execution, Josephus identifies the victim, James,
as the 'brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah. ' While few scholars doubt
the short account"s authenticity, Says Mykytiuk, More debate surrounds Josephus"s
lengthier passage about Jesus, Known as the 'Testimonium Flavianum, '
which describes a man 'who did surprising deeds' and was condemned to be
crucified by Pilate. Mykytiuk agrees with most scholars
that Christian scribes modified portions of the passage but did not insert it wholesale into the text. "

---------
I see you're using the argument that "No human has ever been in the company of a god. "
Okay, I guess.
But, As you might know, What would happen if God suddenly showed himself to you? You've already said it: Disintegration.
Now, That's following the ideology of the Bible.
Let's take out the Bible (since, Apparently, That's your way to reason).
On the news, The latest headline suddenly catches your eye:
"Man Claims to See God. Talks About Prophetic Visions"
What would you think of that?
You'd probably not believe it until factual evidence is provided, Yes?
Well, As I have said-numerous times-you can't expect to prove the "supernatural" via "science". Why do you keep using that as YOUR argument?
Saying that science can't prove God doesn't mean anything, For you. It shows that we are yet to find means through which we can even discuss the existence of a god.

"OK you stated god revealed himself. . . Well um no.
EX 33:20 and JN 1:18 and 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.
Yeah, In your bible there's a good 1, 000 or more supermassive hypocritical contradictions and inconsistencies thus making your bible unreadable. "
I have already told you--analyze the text.
Presumably, It is only God's natural form that cannot be seen.
Therefore, God used an apt representation of himself, One that will not scorch you to a dessicated crisp.
Now, That is my interpretation.
The thing about the Bible (alongside other holy books) is, That its messages are conveyed in so many different ways.
Based on their predicament in life, Each person has their own way to interpret it.

"* There is also no proof for anything that is supernatural. A god(s) is part of the supernatural.
* The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. Thus far there is no evidence for a god(s) for any religion. There never has been in the entire existence of the human race.
* There is no possibility to test or demonstrate a god(s). After all, How would one do as such? "

I'm starting to think you just skimmed through my words. .

"See? As stated in RD 1. "I don't know". All good scientists can
say I don't know for something that they don't know.
For theists it is an impossibility. Why? Dare their god(s)
be imperfect? Of course not. Too bad, They all are. "

What?
Okay. .
I had been referring to the fact that you said that our world has a lot of "imperfections. "
Note that I said "a portion". .
It seems as though your idea of "imperfection" in a good is when they enact a punishment unto others. Or, Do not aid those in need.
My hypothesis is that this is due to Jesus (following the Bible) dying for the sinsof those mentioned in the Bible, A sort of mortal intervention had been severed.
We don't get punished for our sins, We don't get much help.

You are portraying this as though a god must help each and every person.
No! We will never persevere that way. It would be like being spoiled.
If a god were to help some people, Rather than others, That wouldbe something based on equity.
You help one person--you help everyone. Even the worst.
For a god, It is a menial feat. But, As you'd expect, It is highly likely that humans would take advantage of that.

"The correct time to believe in something is when there is evidence to believe in it. "
You are correct.
Well, Partially.
You cannot disprove theism, Either. Therefore, People substitute "faith" in the stead of "belief". When there is no evidence for or against something, We use faith.
Faith is a receptiveness to the unknown, As I had said before.
You do not have to "believe", But for theists, One of the most powerful
mantras is: "Blessed are those who believe without seeing. "
We follow that.
Constantly saying that there is no proof towards the existence of something does not really mean all that much--particularly when you don't have evidence against it.

(I digress, But I would like for you to consider this possibility, Then:
The Torah had been written in man's {to be specific, A prophet; Moses} interpretation of God's word {with God bestowing the word upon Moses}.
And you expect it to be perfect?
A God might not portray their word in a way that you will immediately see. Once you analyze, Scrutinize, And delve into
the words, It becomes apparent. It would be going against their teachings, Too, If a god had no qualms in saying - "I'm God! " I'm not going to delve into this topic, Either. It's self-explanatory. )

Since the Bible, Alongside other holy books, Has "contradictions" (and they're "unreadable"), Let's try to use logic in this.

For example, What existed before the universe? Nothing?
How did something come from nothing?
What created that something?
Or:
What created the consciousness of living things?
Humans are clearly an intricate structure.
We are yet to see many animals with intellect on-par with ours.
Why?
After all, There would be no limits on what nature could create, Yes?
You might argue that "nature only creates things that are necessary. "
Why is that?
Why is it in that order?
Answer these questions with science, As it's what I presume to be something you're actually pretty good at. (No sarcasm, This time. )
It cannot provide factual evidence against God, And it cannot provide factual evidence for what created the universe.
The argument that I have heard the most? "There is no way a God can exist. The Bible is riddled with 'fallacies'. "
Reasonable. That is your belief.
I just need an explanation for the notion of "something came from nothing. "
No factual evidence?
Okay. .
The concept of a supreme being explains that pretty well. .

"We know that 13. 7 billion years ago, A gargantuan burst of energy, Whose nature and source are completely unknown to us and not in the least understood by science, Initiated the creation of our universe. Then suddenly, As if by magic, The 'God particle'"the Higgs boson discovered two years ago inside CERN"s powerful particle accelerator, The Large Hadron Collider"came into being and miraculously gave the universe its mass. Why did this happen? The mass constituted elementary particles"the quarks and the electron"whose weights and electrical charges had to fall within immeasurably tight bounds for what would happen next. For from within the primeval soup of elementary particles that constituted the young universe, Again as if by a magic hand, All the quarks suddenly bunched in threes to form protons and neutrons, Their electrical charges set precisely to the exact level needed to attract and capture the electrons, Which then began to circle nuclei made of the protons and neutrons. All of the masses, Charges and forces of interaction in the universe had to be in just the precisely needed amounts so that early light atoms could form. " - Time.

Such specific and imperative conditions. .
As a matter of fact, One false move from these particles, And things in the current world would be very different.

By your ideology, All of this happened for no apparent reason. Nothing really initiated the existence of the Higgs-boson, Right?
Apparently, Until we find evidence for what actually created this (hopefully, It will come soon. It's a very interesting topic), The idea of a God is valid and probable.

"How do you know? Do you think you know a god better than it knows itself? You cannot even define a god. Tisk tisk tisk. You have no idea what's coming. "
I had been referring to the different appearances of god, Varying from religion to religion. :/
But, Apparently, We don't know a god better than it knows itself.
In spite of the context, That is true!
Therefore, Who is to truly say that a god is as it is in the Bible?
--I'll have to continue this in a comment-
Debate Round No. 3
backwardseden

Pro

OK you've lost. Here's why.
"It is highly likely that our interpretations of the holy books cannot be perfect, Either. It is impossible to follow laws perfectly when we, Ourselves, Are not perfect. "
That's a joke in you even remotely stating that - correct? Um no it's that god(s) job to make that interpretation clear, Concise and accurate to every single person on the planet which is yet another reason why no idiot god if true and genuine would EVER even dream about using text/ the written word and would talk to every single man, Woman and child as an example especially considering that it hasn't in at least 2, 000 years. The book of mormon is not by any means an update. Now what part of that don't you get?
Text/ the written word/ holy scriptures are now a dead subject.

Absolutely not will I respect christianity considering that it is completely and totally immoral and the unproven storybook character god of print only in it AS STATED just as in the torah, Committed genocide after genocide (do you know why? I'll tell you it's for it's own petty jealousy. Jealousy IS NOT A REASON) thus murdering babies and children, It issued death warrants for those who blasphemed, Worked on the sabbath, Those who did not worship it and worshiped other gods, Those who committed adultery, Those who ARE gay, Those who curse at their parents - but what about those parents that clearly abuse their children? Ah yes, That = nothing, No punishment in this unproven god's eyes, Slavery continues throughout the entire bible, Hating of women is throughout the entire bible, Love of rape, And ah yes this unproven god COMMITTED ABORTIONS in which case supposed christians are us[posed to be so against! One of many supermassive hypocritical contradictions that there are between supposed christians and their supposed god. Etc etc etc.
The worst of the worst? The NT is even more immoral than the OT BY FAR. 1. In order to make it to this mythical heaven, The only way to do this is through the belief in the unproven jesus christ. Everybody else is doomed to be committed to the mythical hell to be tortured and burned forever and ever in eternal flames of fire. It gets worse. . . So Hitler who was a devout christian, And Hong Xiuquan who knew of himself to be the younger brother of christ, They both with their belief in christ will have made it to this mythical heaven. This is also true for all serial killers, Torturers, Rapists, Sodomizers, Pedophiles, Etc etc etc. If they find this mythical christ, They are guaranteed a spot in this mythical heaven. This is a completely immoral bankrupt corrupt law when they, If anybody. Should burn in hell and be tortured to burn eternally forever and ever. But then again, Why should this crapola happen to anybody? If this supposed unproven character storybook god of print only truly exists, It would know ---EXACTLY--- what its dogmeat playthings are going to be doing every single day of every single second throughout time and would thus present peace, Kindness, Care, Love, Harmony etc etc etc. Throughout all of eternity. Nah. That's far too much to ask as this thing as it has never happened for 50 years, Just 50 stinking years since its inception. Not anywhere, Not at any time, And not with any culture. This shows that this supposed god has no power except for the obvious power of its main preference to hate, And have Anger, Wrath, Evil, Vengeance, Rage, Fury, Jealousy etc etc etc and wallows in it as this unproven character storybook god or print only in its bible has freely admitted to all of them. So on the opposite end of the loop, There's the atheist who does not believe in god or christ. Wow. 2. Then we who number in the billions are doomed to go to this mythical hell to forever burn eternally simply for not believing in this mythical christ for having done absolutely nothing wrong. If that is not the most immoral thing from ---any--- religion, What is? You cannot think of anything. So this is true love huh?
I and so is pretty near everybody else that has ever lived, Except for anybody that justifies ---any--- of this manure s--t, Am far more moral than any character in the supermassive inconsistent terrorist bible that brainwashes people.
You probably don't even know that there's over 33, 480 denominations of christianity alone. So which one is correct?
You say I'm spitting on them? No. They are spitting on humanity.
Christianity so is judiasm, So is islam BASED ON A BOOK. And for a final time, It does NOT prove a god. AND a god does NOT leap from a BOOK and say "POOF, I'm here, Worship me. "

Perhaps this will make better sense.
"Assume that we have no answer. Then the answer is "I don"t know". The answer isn"t "I can"t think of anything better, Therefore a god did it. ""Matt Dillahunty He's right. Think about it.

"Man Claims to See God. Talks About Prophetic Visions"
DID YOU PAY ANY ATTENTION TO THE CONVERSATION ON THE SUPERNATURAL IN RD1? Why no, Of course not.
How many thousands have claimed this? Why don't you google it? Oh and btw, National Geographic about 5 years ago did an article on about 10 or so people from around the world who thought of themselves of the reincarnate of jesus christ and was the second coming AND had a legitimate following. One was from Russia. One from Nigeria. One from India. I don't remember where the rest were from. I could only scoff at it.
Well wow. I opened my maw far too soon. Here's a link to this.
https://en. Wikipedia. Org/wiki/List_of_people_claimed_to_be_Jesus
Now notice how many are serial killers, Were clearly insane or were genocidal maniacs?
Btw, And you probably don't know this also but christ is the most fought after figure in the history of the human race. Yet this figure is supposed to be of love? Once again, A supermassive hypocritical contradiction.
----------
Oh I have analyzed the text. Do you think I'm stupid? I guess you must. As stated, I've been doing this for 45+ years, Almost 46. AND I've also talked with roughly 22, 000. What are your qualifications and what evidence have you thus far presented? Propechy? Seriously? Text? Seriously?
Ok I'm putting an end to this.
Here's some websites and more videos for you to check out since you only listen to you.
You obviously completely and totally avoided everything on "faith" which proves that faith can be stated about anything and thus faith IS NOT a pathway to truth, And it's not.

* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=sB9RREO4igc&t=5687s 01:33:27 - Kevin - MS - So, I've Been Thinking, And I Have Proof of God
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=M0t0LmQ0I2k - I Have Been in the Presence of God, Literally
(She's so far gone into her complete ineptitude and doesn't get it and it's hilarious)
* https://infidels. Org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions. Html - The Secular Web (Gigantic site gets into contradictions/ inconsistencies, Absurdities, Fatal flaws, Atrocities, Vulgarities from the verses of the bible with direct links to them. )
* http://www. Answering-christianity. Com/101_bible_contradictions. Htm - 101 contradictions
* Dossier of Reason - DDO will not take the link. However, Not all is lost. Simply google Dossier of Reason PDF and it will be the very first link. (this is a PDF file and its 61 pages long but it has EVERYTHING you could possibly want. It has a lot more than just contradictions. If you want to save it, Simply copy and paste it into your google docs. Its highly recommended. ) Also right below it is another link which is a list of Over 700 Inconsistencies in the bible.
* https://wardoons. Wordpress. Com/debate/ (1, 000 clear contradictions in the bible)
* https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=EcP7XPgr8Vs - Mr Butt Solves Bible Contradictions - What a truly great video! Yes, There"s actually one video that you are going to have to look at here!
* Another link that DDO will not take but all is not lost so simply google Proof that religion is a man-made device and why it is outdated
and it thus is the second link.
*this article mainly uses Christianity
Oh there's plenty more. I haven't even gotten started.

If it"s one thing I"ve learned to do it"s be able to back up my claims with evidence. I ---always--- can. No exceptions, None. Otherwise it"s simple, I don"t enter conversations where I don"t know what I am talking about and thus make myself look like an a$$ in which is a very good way to thus get rid of a lot of genuine friends and loved ones in which case so so so many here on DDO already have. If you cannot back up what you say with solid evidence, Then you have no business in saying it especially if you pretend that you do and because you don"t you invent excuses for it in which case, Wow you should see how many here at DDO do. Yeah, They are your age especially. And if you do that crapola to your teachers = instant F every single time. This was taught to me in college. Why it isn"t taught in grade school, I have no idea.

"It was handed down to Moses, Passed from generation to generation. "
There. Done. You answered your own question.

"Now, That is my interpretation. "
Would a true genuine god allow you to misinterpret? That would be YOUR unproven storybook character god of print only fault for not making things clear, Precise for you to understand.
"The thing about the Bible (alongside other holy books) is, That its messages are conveyed in so many different ways. "
EXACTLY. That's ANOTHER reason why no true genuine god would ever even dream about using text. This isn't hard.
"Based on their predicament in life, Each person has their own way to interpret it. "
WRONG! That's how wars have gotten started and get started.

Nope imperfection is that a god created man with all of his imperfections such as cancers, Diseases, Heart attacks, Broken legs, AND has HUMAN emotions. Those are just a few examples of YOUR unproven god's imperfections.

Sin? In order for there to be sin, There needs to be a god. You cannot prove that a god exists.

I'm out of space.
OrangeDoge

Con

" Um no it's that god(s) job to make that interpretation clear, Concise and accurate to every single person on the planet which is yet another reason why no idiot god if true and genuine would EVER even dream about using text/ the written word and would talk to every single man, Woman and child as an example especially considering that it hasn't in at least 2, 000 years. "
Previous RD: "How do you know? Do you think you know a god better than it knows itself? You cannot even define a god. Tisk tisk tisk. You have no idea what's coming. "
Talk to every single man? Okay. . I don't recall stating that.

Even so, The interpretations of the Bible vary from-person-to-person. That is how it is so captivating. In truth, I am referring to its morals.
It pertains to one's life in varying ways. Still, I don't understand what you mean by this.
Unless you can elaborate on what you mean, We need to drop this. We are discussing "proof" (which I would probably substitute with "probability") of God, And I have already used my examples from the Bible.

"What are your qualifications and what evidence have you thus far presented? Propechy? Seriously? Text? Seriously? "

So far, You have been unable to decisively refute God.
I have done my best to provide factual statements, Yet you make these obscure remarks about everything I say, Constantly trying to refute it by insulting my words. Can we have a civilized debate, Please?
I have barely seen verified evidence from you.
Rather, You "justified" your claims with videos and text/theories, Told by atheists themselves. I've already watched and read them. They have not rebutted the existence of a god.
There is no specific notion of God for me to defend, And the concept of God is therefore not limited to the Bible.
You are yet to disprove a god's presence in the universe. The most you can do is lower its chances.

I was actually looking forward to seeing how science could debunk the ideology of God, But you have recapitulated, Numerous times, That it cannot.
This debate was doomed to fail. Requesting "proof" is much worse than asking for "probability. "

"DID YOU PAY ANY ATTENTION TO THE CONVERSATION ON THE SUPERNATURAL IN RD1? Why no, Of course not.
How many thousands have claimed this? Why don't you google it? Oh and btw, National Geographic about 5 years ago did an article on about 10 or so people from around the world who thought of themselves of the reincarnate of jesus christ and was the second coming AND had a legitimate following. One was from Russia. One from Nigeria. One from India. I don't remember where the rest were from. I could only scoff at it. "

What are you even talking about? My example was a deliberately false parable, Fabricated to provide you with an example of these things. Please, Try to look at what I typed.

"You obviously completely and totally avoided everything on 'faith' which proves that faith can be stated about anything and thus faith IS NOT a pathway to truth, And it's not. "
"Faith" applies to things that transcend logic, Science, & math.
"Proof" is exclusive to math, Science, And logic. Therefore, Faith cannot be used during scientific debates, Nor in things that can already be explained by logic.
I can't think of many ways apply faith to science, Math, Logic, E. T. C. Can you?
In addition, There is a subtle difference between regular "faith" and "religious faith".
Religious faith is belief in one's god, Funded by the pursuit of religion itself. Regular faith is the substance of hope.

"Absolutely not will I respect christianity considering that it is completely and totally immoral and the unproven storybook character god of print only in it AS STATED just as in the torah, Committed genocide after genocide (do you know why? I'll tell you it's for it's own petty jealousy. Jealousy IS NOT A REASON) thus murdering babies and children, It issued death warrants for those who blasphemed, Worked on the sabbath, Those who did not worship it and worshiped other gods, Those who committed adultery, Those who ARE gay, Those who curse at their parents - but what about those parents that clearly abuse their children? Ah yes, That = nothing, No punishment in this unproven god's eyes, Slavery continues throughout the entire bible, Hating of women is throughout the entire bible, Love of rape, And ah yes this unproven god COMMITTED ABORTIONS in which case supposed christians are us[posed to be so against! One of many supermassive hypocritical contradictions that there are between supposed christians and their supposed god. Etc etc etc. "
Let me ask you this: Did God do anything else that notably interfered with their lives?

Try not to bring the respect of Christianity into this, In that case. You appear to have a stifling bias.
Did you read why those genocides had been committed? I understand where you're coming from. But, You did not include what "God" had said, Proceeding his statement that he is jealous.
"I, The Lord your God, Am a jealous God, Punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, But showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. " (Ex. 20:5-6)
Thus, God had already stated his imperfection. I did not state God was "perfect. "
As per the text, These punishments had been enacted due to the knowing committing of sin.
To their disadvantage, They'd been aware of their wrongdoings, Yet continued. (read Sodom and Gomorrah again. )
In the time of the Bible's conception, Obstinacy was all but prevalent. I'm not sure of what you've seen, But within a portion of these "genocides, " God/His followers had apprised them with caution, Instructing them to "repent for their sins" ("In those days John the Baptist came, Preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, "Repent, For the kingdom of heaven has come near. "" - Matthew 3:1-3 {NIV}).
Still, Some disregarded them.

Now, I bring forth an alternate explanation for that:
A good god does not implement equity if you "pray". The Christian God is, Currently, No different from this.
By helping those who randomly pray to Him/Her, God would show that he uses equity as his way to aid people in their lives.
Does that sound better?
Let us say that someone has been inflicted with a potentially lethal disease.
They suddenly pray to a god, And they are healed. Apparently, Prayer will always save you.
The Christian God has not definitively shown himself to work in such a way.

"If it's one thing I've learned to do it's be able to back up my claims with evidence. I ---always--- can. No exceptions, None. Otherwise it's simple, I don"t enter conversations where I don't know what I am talking about and thus make myself look like an a$$ in which is a very good way to thus get rid of a lot of genuine friends and loved ones in which case so so so many here on DDO already have. If you cannot back up what you say with solid evidence, Then you have no business in saying it especially if you pretend that you do and because you don't you invent excuses for it in which case, Wow you should see how many here at DDO do. Yeah, They are your age especially. And if you do that crapola to your teachers = instant F every single time. This was taught to me in college. Why it isn't taught in grade school, I have no idea. "

All right. . That is a bit belligerent.
You claim to support your statements, Yet all you have done is linked videos and text (excluding that single poll you'd accredited. Even so, It doesn't prove much).
Your initial argument was supposed to prove against the existence of a god.
To "prove", One requires proof.
You should have phrased it differently from the start.

"WRONG! That's how wars have gotten started and get started. "
-Please, Provide a bit more evidence.
That's how religious debates have gotten started and get started.
6. 98% of wars have had religious causes. (Stated by Encyclopedia of Wars. )

"Would a true genuine god allow you to misinterpret? That would be YOUR unproven storybook character god of print only fault for not making things clear, Precise for you to understand. "
I understand your point, But were you not the same one who told me that I had no specific definition of God?
(This is just a speculation/opinion, Not fact: Throughout the Bible, Ambiguous messages/prophecies were sent to God's "true" people. )

"It gets worse. . . So Hitler who was a devout christian, And Hong Xiuquan who knew of himself to be the younger brother of christ, They both with their belief in christ will have made it to this mythical heaven. This is also true for all serial killers, Torturers, Rapists, Sodomizers, Pedophiles, Etc etc etc. "
I need not explain this.
Hitler had committed genocide--something that will clearly not get you into Heaven. We need not discuss this.
That statement sounds a bit biased.
For the sake of this debate, You need to stop deviating from the premise.
I asked you questions; you need to provide some sort of an answer, Using definitive evidence--not theories. Right?
Rather, You are stating things that can only stand against the existence of a god. That is what I have done, Too.
You have not disproved the existence of a god.

Let us presume that the universe is, Indeed, A flat universe. This equates to a zero-energy universe. But, In order for the creation of a zero-energy universe, We still require certain conditions:
"Some physicists, Such as Lawrence Krauss or Alexander Vilenkin, Call this state "a universe from nothingness" but, In fact, The zero-energy universe model requires both a matter field with positive energy and a gravitational field with negative energy to exist. " - Wikipedia
I can't convey the rest in this RD.
By showing that the chances of the creation of the universe (chiefly in the manner that it has) are unfathomably slim (10 to the power of 10 to the power of 123; Roger Penrose), One can label the ideology of theism as viable. Whereas, Atheism is still yet to reach a conclusion--was that your goal?
Debate Round No. 4
backwardseden

Pro

OK we're done. I'm so f--king p**sed at you right now. If you don't want to read an angry argument with absolute proof that I can back up what I say and you can't, Then don't read this. I'm not going to argue with you anymore. You haven't stated any factual statements. Not one. How can you when you cannot even prove that your god does not even exist? I have thus far debunked everything you've stated with space permitting.

You have not paid any attention to the videos, To what anyone has told you in them, Nor have you visited any websites presented unto you.
What have you presented?
"Faith" applies to things that transcend logic, Science, & math. "
What kind of truth is that? AGAIN Faith is NOT a pathway to truth because it can be applied to everything.
AND people that have been doing this for longer than 3x that number of years you've been breathing know 100% better than you. I'm not going to take a god on faith and neither should you nor anyone.
For a final time and wow is this so true of you. . .
"Faith is the reason people give when they don't have evidence. "
You don't have evidence of any kind.
"It's called faith because it's not knowledge. "
You can't just make up your own definitions just because you want to.
Faith DOES NOT PROVE A GOD!
If it could your creationists would put your god on trial again. Now why do you think they haven't? It's because all they have is faith based oriented and faith cannot be proved. They happen to know better as they hide behind their shield of religion like cowards. They know they've nothing to prove. Indeed they are one helluva lot smarter than you. You don't think so? Great! Put your god on trial again. See how far it gets you.
Now what part of that don't you understand?
You REALLY think you've proved anything factual?
You believe in a BOOK.

So what if you did not state of your unproven god was imperfect?
This means you worship an imperfect god - right?
Why worship a god and or anything if it is imperfect? Why not believe in yourself instead?

"Did you read why those genocides had been committed? "
Yeah I did. Did you? It's not just me! I see, So you justify the murdering of babies and children for mere purposes of jealousy. The great flood? The biggest genocide of all time which never happened? Yep. The bible lied.
Jealousy IS NOT A REASON AS STATED. Your god didn't want to be hated, Or not to be worshiped. Tough s--t. That's not a reason to commit total genocide. BELIEVE IN PEACE!
You have no morals and are as completely immoral as the god you believe in that you cannot even prove even exists.

Now I am going to shovel down your throat the genocides that you justify + a whole lot of other s--t that you probably won't even look at. So be it. . .
Do you believe that YOUR god was just with his many genocides for no reason at all as NOBODY HAD TO DIE in which many of them killed innocent babies, Children and pregnant mothers? Y____? N____? Why? Why Not? Indeed god is farrrrr worse than Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hong Xiuquan, All serial killers, All rapists, All tortures, All pedophiles, All sadomasochists etc combined. After all this unproven storybook character god of YOURS according to your torah KNOWINGLY creates everybody and everything and KNOWS exactly what is going to be happening. This means this supposed god according to you knowingly created them which means that he is ultimately responsible for them. The great flood according to the bible (which never happened btw) so who knows what the body count was there? God murdered 3, 000 EX 32:27-28, God murdered 14, 700 NU 16:49, God murdered 24, 002 NU 25: 1-11, God murdered 12, 000 JOS 8: 1-25, God murdered 10, 000 JG 1:4, God murdered 120, 000 JG 8:7-10, God murdered 42, 000 JG 12:3-6, God murdered 1, 000 JG 15:14-15, God murdered 3, 000 JG 16:27-30, God murdered 25, 101 JG 20: 35-37, God murdered 30, 002 1 SAM 2:25 and 1 SAM 4: 10-11, God murdered 50, 070 oh get this one just for looking into the ark of the lard 1 SAM 6:19, God murdered 22, 000 2 SAM 8: 5-6 "The Lord gave victory to David wherever he went. ", God murdered 65, 850 because he gave He-Man favoritism to David 2 SAM 8:8-10, God murdered 47, 000 yep more David 2 SAM 10:18, God murdered 20, 000 yep still more David 2 SAM 18:6-7, God murdered 70, 000 2 SAM 24:15, God murdered 100, 000 1 KI 20: 29, God murdered 27, 000 due to a wall falling 1 KI 20: 30. A wall in itself cannot kill 27, 000. Even today its impossible. So its either, A lie in the bible, A misprint, Or an act of its unproven storybook character god of print only, God murdered 185, 000 2 KI 19 35 -37, Oh this is the very best part" Your unproven character storybook god of print only which should be most certainly be taught to children murders five hundred thousand of his own chosen people for no reason 2 CHR 13 17-18 half a million! Thankfully peace is winning over your slumbering idiocy of stupid pathetic murder. God murdered one million 2 CHR 14: 9-14, God murdered 120, 000 2 CHR 28:6, God murdered 75, 813 Esther 9:5-18. Yeah god is really so moral huh?

Do you believe that its perfectly OK for your unproven character storybook god of print only to hate on children and babies for no reason at all and in murder them? Y____? N____? Why? Why not?
https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=2zYG_fJLjBg - god hates children
https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=5kQTIX7NRE4 - Atheist debates get em while they"re young
LM4: 9-11, MT 10:37, MT 2:16, JG 21:10, DT 2:34, NU 31: 17-18, LV 26: 21-22, HS 13:16, EZ 9: 5-7, HS 9: 11-16, EX 12: 29-30, IS 13: 15-18, MT 2:16, EX 21:17, LV 20:9, JG 11: 30-33, PS 137: 8-9, DT 21: 18-21, DT 32:25, DT 2: 32-34, DT 3: 3-6, JG 19: 24-29, EX 12:29, LV 26:29, JM 11: 22-23, JM 19: 7-9, JM 51: 22-26, LM 2: 20-22 oh there's plenty more in the NT.

Oh and btw, YOUR god put children in that position of suffering to begin with which is 100% pure evil and hate. YOUR god absolutely loves to knowingly suffer, Otherwise he would not create their situations for them to suffer. Watch the videos.

And btw, I know that you know that you cannot contemplate suffering at all. Yeah. I could tell you some true horror stories that would blacken your soul and then I could tell you about me, All KNOWINGLY created by your god IF you believe in it.

Please do tell me what a child can possibly learn from suffering? Much less an adult? If you"ve answered "nothing", You"ve answered correctly.
--------
Here"s another example of god"s pure evil and hate"
Your unproven storybook character god of print only knowingly creates children to be raped, Beaten and tortured at the hands of their abusers. . . Sometimes for decades. An example is daddy is sticking in his you know what inside of his daughter age 5 while punching her in the face twice per week for 15 years. To knowingly create children to suffer is 100% pure evil and hate at its finest. You can not get more evil than that with all the hate if you wanted to. Please DO NOT bring in the "Free Will" argument either because children DO NOT have the Free Will to escape from these monsters who commit these horrific acts. AND YOUR unproven god knowingly creates these children to deliberately suffer as well as these monsters to commit their unspeakable crimes to begin with. AND it gets better because each and every single time this supposed unproven storybook character god of print only MUST give "power" to the psychopath/ evildoer/ devil/ sociopath/ criminal/ lawbreaker or whatever you wish to call him or her, To commit his or her crimes that are sometimes heinous and appalling for first time events and sometimes many times more events after that, No exceptions, None while the victim inevitably always suffers with the events sometimes being sometimes sickening and detestable.
The abrahamic unproven god must also love it, Otherwise he would create these horrific events. Please DO NOT invent the excuse that "its not god's fault". Well yeah it is. Otherwise, The unproven storybook character god of print only is NOT in control of everything, Nor is it all knowing, Nor is it all powerful, Nor is it omnipotent. Nor does it care enough to not create these horrific acts. And the worst of the absolute worst is your unproven god is giving a greater value, A greater meaning to these monsters to commit these horrific acts while these children suffer at the hands of these savages who have no free will to SCREAM. The unproven character storybook god of print only IS hate and evil. Pure and simple. So invent better excuses please. Sure, Call me that I "hate" when it was just proven that YOUR god hates and nothing but. AND GOD MUST HAVE GIVEN THAT HATE TO ME AND ALL OF MANKIND. And yes, Absolutely 100% that includes YOU by gum! Wow. What a loving god huh? Pathetic, But typical smug ideal that doesn't work - ever - excuse on your part.

Do you think you should be put to death just because you blaspheme? Y____? N____? Your god thinks so. Leviticus 24:16, Do you think you should die if you work on the sabbath? Y____? N____? Your god thinks so. Exodus 31:14, And Numbers 15: 32-36, Do you think you should die for merely cursing at your parents? Y____? N____? Your god thinks so. Exodus 21:17, Leviticus 20:9. What happens if your parents abuse you? Why is NOTHING! Do you think you should die if you commit adultery? Y____? N____? Your god thinks so. Leviticus 20:10. Btw, Those 4 are from the 10 commandments. So you have no outs, No explanations. Here"s some other wonderful things YOUR god thinks you should die for. Do you think you should die if you are a homosexual? Y___? N____? Your god thinks so. Leviticus 20:13, Do you think you should die if you worship other gods? Y____? N____? Your god thinks so. Deuteronomy 13: 9-10 and Deuteronomy 17: 2-5.

Once again, Others have been doing this LONG before you and they know plenty better than you.
So how's about believing in peace and not all this hate that your torah and the god in it preaches?

Please always tc and have fun.
OrangeDoge

Con

You are acting as though my only argument for the existence of a god is limited to the Bible.
You have made it clear that you cannot counter the existence of a god that is, In very little ways, Similar to the God in the Bible.
Rebutting the Biblical God seems like an adequate, But not definitive way to counter theism.
CON, If the debate was going to be this religious, You have neglected to provide a specific God that I must advocate.
This has given me the liberty to set my own terms.
Therefore, I am free to present an argument FOR the existence of a supreme being, Responsible for the creation of the universe--rather than the one depicted in the Bible alone.
I have already brought an argument (though it is clearly flawed) for the existence of a more "logical" god.
Please, In your next debates, Be a bit more specific.
Even so, Your most significant rebuttal was to show the horrid parts of the Bible. All of these "murders" had been due to sin--not a hatred for the people themselves.
Why not show what has happened to the persons in the Bible once they faithfully followed God's Law? You're simply distorting the image of God by solely showing these acts. (Daniel 12:3 - "Those who have insight will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, And those who lead the many to righteousness, Like the stars forever and ever. "
Numbers 25:10-13 - "Then the Lord spoke to Moses, Saying, 'Phinehas the son of Eleazar, The son of Aaron the priest, Has turned away My wrath from the sons of Israel in that he was jealous with My jealousy among them, So that I did not destroy the sons of Israel in My jealousy. Therefore say, "Behold, I give him My covenant of peace; and it shall be for him and his descendants after him, A covenant of a perpetual priesthood, Because he was jealous for his God and made atonement for the sons of Israel. '""
2 Chronicles 16:9 " "For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, To show Himself strong on behalf of those whose heart is loyal to Him. ")
Source: https://bible. Knowing-jesus. Com/topics/Reward, -For-God~s-People
But, Your RD's failed to provide a feasible and evident argument for a supreme being, One that is contrary to the one shown in the Bible.

I just saw to it that I mention this, But you don't seem to acknowledge the fact that I am not trying to directly state the existence of a god. I am increasing the probability and likelihood of a god's existence. That is why I do not bother with all of your "sites" and "videos". They only apply to people who definitively use "God" as an explanation for things we do not understand. I am {trying} to use it as a possibility. There is no decisive "proof", Just empirical evidence. (This is getting long, But it would really help me out if you could stop linking dozens of videos and texts. Summarize them in your debate. I'm sorry I couldn't read/watch all of it, But ain't nobody got time for dat. )

Unfortunately, The sites you have provided oftentimes apply to resolute theists, Who use the existence of God as an explanation--meaning that it does not apply to me. Given that information, You are yet to "disprove" the existence of a logical god. I have tried to increased the probability of this--which is practically the only thing either of us can do. Have you effectively and significantly completed your part of the bargain?

Your argument about how "God should come down and show himself" to you doesn't really work out. . If the Biblical God had to prove himself to you, It would be contradicting the entire notion of faith.
Having a supreme being, For the matter, Single you out and show Their self to you would be extremely unfair. So many people wish to see a god (namely the One depicted in the Bible), Then they suddenly see that only you get that attention? Just because you asked?
I don't think many logical supreme beings would do that.

I've spent enough time on this matter. I apologize for "making you angry" over a topic you have failed to specify and leave alone during a debate.

---------
Let's delve a bit into atheism, I suppose. .
As you have said, Atheism is the "disbelief, Non belief, Absence of belief, Rejection of belief. "
"Atheism is, In the broadest sense, An absence of belief in the existence of deities. [1][2][3][4] Less broadly, Atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. [5][6] In an even narrower sense, Atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. " - Wikipedia.

I cannot argue with that.

---Naturalism - "Naturalism, In philosophy, A theory that relates scientific method to philosophy by affirming that all beings and events in the universe (whatever their inherent character may be) are natural. "
- https://www. Britannica. Com/topic/naturalism-philosophy

A statement of yours from a previous RD had caught my eye. .
"Oh absolutely 100% they can. Atheism always wins. No exceptions, None. Did you even bother to read ANY of the reasonings as to why atheism is correct over the deduction of a false god in which case no god has ---ever--- been proven in the history of the human race by anyone from any religion? That's a clear definitive 'no'. "

Majority of the times in which the existence of a supreme being has been refuted, It had been completed with a bit of external help--an inadvertent use of naturalism. (Even the Dossier of Reason, Something which has attempted to debunk theists who use God as an explanation, Via science. ) Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a god. You cannot properly introduce an argument against something via it. And that is what you have said. But, With this statement, There might have been an inconsistency in your rules for this debate.

Thus far, Your arguments have implied that if I cannot explain theism using logic, Then a supreme being, Technically, Does not exist.
Except, One can easily cross over to a completely different notion once they begin to implement logic, And bits of science/ration to explain how a god does NOT exist.
Naturalism can incorporate explanations. Atheism is the lack of belief in a supreme deity. It is a reaction.
Once you try to explain how the universe can exist without a supreme deity, Using logic/science/ration, You slowly drift over to naturalism.
Therefore, Atheism does not always win. It cannot be used against another belief--it can only reject that belief (theism).

In fact, This entire debate is slightly invalid.
I cannot prove theism; I can only increase its validity and probability.
As for atheism, It is not valid in this, As you cannot really use it to refute theism--unless you use evidence, Logic, And science (all natural elucidations) to introduce a better explanation. Unfortunately, That would make it naturalism.
The most you can do is undermine the likelihood of theism. I'm not exactly sure that atheism is the best tool to do so. It is a perspective, Not a major concept of the functionality of the world. Otherwise, You could have substantially increased the probability of atheism.

This was a decent debate. You made for good points.
Thank you for the thoughtful conversation, Though I hope you don't stay angry for too long. It's not very good. .
GL in your future debates, @backwardseden.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by OrangeDoge 3 months ago
OrangeDoge
@anc2006, You're right.
I've been spending majority of my time trying to counteract their argument, But in doing so, I've been deviating from the entire topic of this RD, Even when I accused them of doing so.
Thanks for preventing me from wasting the final moments of the debate.
GL in your future debates.
Posted by anc2006 3 months ago
anc2006
Orangedoge, You are not proving that atheism is not a lack of belief of gods. You just said that they are not better than theism. Don't get distracted by a pseudo-keyboard warrior who only has the balls to instigate truisms. If you can, Prove that atheism is not a lack of belief of Gods.
Posted by OrangeDoge 3 months ago
OrangeDoge
With all due solemnity, I don't believe I have made this clear.
The argument of the God from the Bible is, Indeed, A difficult one to assent to. I've been trying to implement the notion of a more realistic being into this debate, But you didn't answer my question.
Could I get your thoughts on the idea of a supreme being (not the One depicted in the Bible), With sovereign over the universe--and nothing significantly more?
Posted by OrangeDoge 3 months ago
OrangeDoge
-und impact on people?
The tales it tells--ranging from the voguish story of Adam and Eve, To the captivating, Riveting "retelling" of David--have mesmerized its readers.
Although some see view it as false, There are messages hidden behind these ostensibly fatuous "anecdotes".
I "believe" because the holy book teaches me crucial lessons.
I "believe" because it is something that has been with man for centuries. Even if a God might be false (my argument shows that I believe otherwise), I will not throw away its teachings.
What sort of book has had such a profound impact on people?
Few that I can mention. .
If you heed the dates at which certain events in the Bible occurred, There are crucial pieces of information within it that line up.

"It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would
invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and
place " under the aegis of the Roman empire " where there was
strong suspicion of Judaism. . .
About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians
Pliny and Tacitus, Who held some of the highest offices of
state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we
learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman
prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor
(AD14-37) " reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. "

Sure, You may say that this means nothing, But. .
Given the accounts of "miracles", "surprising deeds", And accurate time-dates (from what I have seen), It begins to look lesser, And lesser, Of a coincidence.

If you had been referring to "believing in a God, " well, I think I might've already shown you why I believe in such. (If you don't understand what I mean, Read my argument again. )

Sorry for taking this long, But I've been trying to make a certain point evident from the beginning of this RD. .
Read this:
https://www. Gotquestions. Org/Does-God-exist. Html
Posted by OrangeDoge 3 months ago
OrangeDoge
Every time someone mentions a god, Your line of defense is to try to disprove the Bible itself.
It's the only way you can "refute the supernatural". (Although, As I have already said--there are real-life accounts of the things we saw in the Bible. . )
By your standards, It isn't very factual.
Then, For your pleasure, Let's deviate from it a bit.

Given that there are no current restrictions regarding what a god can be, Look like, And act like--they can be anything.
And that "anything" does not have to be a divine entity.
It can be the being that saw to it that they create the universe.
They might not have even cared about helping humans.
Thus, Your analogy about "both parents have two dying children. One dies, The other lives. ", Is invalid.
There's no proof of a god's appearance, Yes?
So, The general idea of a god, As we know it, Can easily be false.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt:
We could have been wrong.
But, It still does not disprove the existence of a supreme being.
(Remember, I'm saying this out of your mantra: The Bible is false. )
Why?
Well, I'm following your words.
No evidence against it.
Remember my question?
Something from nothing. We are yet to explain that.
(By the way, If you have trouble believing the Bible, Focus on its messages. I don't know about you, But that is my notion of a way to derive something from it, For atheists. )

"Also I did ask 'why believe? ' You cannot think of a truly legitimate reason. "
I apologize for not responding to that question.
But, I'll do it now.
I believe in the holy book due to one simple reason: It is not by God alone that one can believe in the Bible. Its words, Messages, Themes--they've all accommodated me in my daily life.
Adherents of religious groups do not follow their holy books because a "God" instructed them to.
They follow it because it "speaks to them". Its morals allow them to differ from right and wrong, It teaches them of life's values.
Few books have had such a profo
Posted by backwardseden 3 months ago
backwardseden
Welcome back. I hope you are doing well and in the very best of spirits:):)
Lack 1. Deficiency or absence of something needed, Desirable, Or customary:
Wikipedia Atheism: an absence of belief in the existence of deities.

If you look to the Thesaurus for the synonyms of Lack, Absence is the very first word that pops up. Sure there's other synonyms such as scarcity (that doesn't quite fit the bill but it's awfully close), Deprivation, Inferiority, Insufficiency, Do fit.
Also, There's no middle ground with believing in a god. You either are convinced a god exists or you are not convinced. Saying "I don't know" is not being convinced a god exists.
Please tc and have fun.
Posted by anc2006 3 months ago
anc2006
I thought it was a lack of belief, Which is not equal to disbelief.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 months ago
dsjpk5
backwardsedenOrangeDogeTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro cursed in round five. That's poor conduct.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.