The Instigator
backwardseden
Pro (for)
The Contender
CarlosRN
Con (against)

Evolution is proven fact... god (thankfully) no matter which language you speak is not proven fact

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
backwardseden has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/8/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 2,279 times Debate No: 115276
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (53)
Votes (0)

 

backwardseden

Pro

Evolution is proven fact...
Antibiotic resistant microbes, better known as "superbugs" is 100% confirmation and certification and proven fact that evolution is taking place right here in the here and the now. Antibiotic resistant microbes are evolving every single second of every single day to become more resistant to antibiotics.

Superbug 1. a pathogenic bacterium that has developed immunity to antibiotics, or an insect that has developed immunity to insecticides.
(has developed means evolution is taking place) Now watch the vidies that proves evolution is taking place in the here and now)

http://www.youtube.com... - Frontline - The Trouble with Antibiotics Documentary
http://www.youtube.com... - Dan Rather Reports Addicted to Antibiotics
Dan Rather "Every year more than 90,000 Americans die from similar infections that are resistant to antibiotics. That stunning figure is higher from the death toll from AIDS, car accidents and prostate cancer combined."
http://www.youtube.com... - Antibiotics Resistance

The so what nothingness god of the bible (thankfully and rightly so) is not proven fact
No matter which language you speak. god is NOT proven fact.

My opponent cannot win the evolution argument in which was just listed and proved. So only religion is left to argue in this debate.

Rules:
1. The BOP to prove god is always up to theists. No exceptions. None. That's because there have been no tests to prove this understudy, nor have there been any demonstrations to prove this god of the bible, nor have there ---ever--- been any eye witness accounts of this god character in this century to prove this god. So until this god appears, the BOP of his existence is upon theists.

2. No creationists will be allowed as evidence. Why? They cannot stand behind their product, namely their god, not ever, when any truth comes into play. A perfect example is no creationist of merit would ever be stupid enough to put their god on trial again. Why? Because these dunderhead sloppy second joes 100% know that they will lose. That's because they know that all they have to go on is faith based oriented in which cannot be proved. And since they cannot stand behind their product at any crunch time, whatever evidence they present becomes chocked up and worthless.

dsjpk5 will not be allowed to vote in the voting process.
CarlosRN

Con

In this debate, backwardseden, takes the side of evolution, or materialism. I, as you can tell, take the opposite side which is theism. More specifically, I will provide evidence that shows a theistic god. This means, a space less, immaterial, powerful, personal, infinite, intelligent being. This does not necessary prove the god of the Bible, although I do believe he is real. First, I will start by showing evidence that God is real by using the cosmological argument. I will use the acronym C.R.I.M.E.S. This not only shows evidence for the theistic god, but shows how evolution is flawed.
C - Creation
You'd be surprised to know that as a Christian I believe in the Big Bang. Over the recent years, the Big Bang has been proven to be the best explanation for our reality. We know that the Big Bang and everything had a beginning from the evidence. NASA's Hubble has shown clear evidence that the heat from the Big Bang is slowly cooling down. If it's cooling down, something must have started it. Even atheists admit this. Stephen Hawkins agreed with this idea, although I also believe that space, time, and matter came from nothing. Not only that, the Big Bang is highly tuned. Stephen Hawkins put it this way: "If the expansion rate was different by one part in a thousand, million, million a second after the Big Bang, the universe would have collapsed back on itself or never developed galaxies." You can't use evolutionary laws in this because this is where everything came from. Whatever caused the Big Bang must be spaceless, immaterial, and timeless. Did nothing create something out of nothing? Or did someone create something out of nothing?

R - Reason
If evolution is real, you cannot justify reason. More surprisingly, Darwin himself knew this. "With me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the minds lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would anyone trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there were at all any convictions in such mind?" (Charles Darwin). If we our minds evolved from RANDOM, UNGUIDED processes, why should we trust anything we think? If we are just molecules in motion, we shouldn't believe in our minds. We merely react, we don't REASON. Evolution cannot explain minds. If evolution is real, are we just molecular machines? Then, we don't have free will, we don't reason, we react, therefore we should trust ANY of our thoughts, INCLUDING THE IDEA THAT EVOLUTION IS TRUE. Atheists call themselves free thinkers, yet, their own argument falls on it's own foundation. I think that's the fatal flaw in atheism.

I - Information
This takes us to the very basis of life. Evolution says we all evolved from one-celled amoebas. This is the macro-evolution argument. You know it. From swimming worms, to moral, intelligent humans. Now know that amoebas do not say "Made by God" or "Made by Evolution". So, what you have to do is make an interpretation. You need to look at the data and come to a logical conclusion. This is why science doesn't say anything, scientists do. All data needs to be interpreted. What data? Today, we know what's in a cell. Let's suppose for a moment that you like alphabet cereal. You're a teenager and one day you come downstairs and see that the cereal is knocked over on the table and the letters spell "Take out the garbage - Mom" What are you going to think? The cat knocked it over? The wind did it? Bacterial evolution? No, you're going to say that is intelligent design from an intelligent mind, because we KNOW that messages only come from minds; they don't come from repetitive, random forces. If that's true, then where does the message for DNA come from? Every living thing has DNA. What IS DNA? Bill Gates (who is not a Christian) put it like this: "DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software ever created." DNA is an immaterial code and message. It IS expressed in materials, but can only be interpreted by minds. The letters and order by which is appears is NOT determined by any chemical, or physical process. As far as I know, codes only come from coders. Messages only come from minds. DNA is like a message. It's like "Take out the garbage - Mom" expect is far larger and complex. Your DNA has about 3 billion characters in it. ALL in the right order. although we know its not always perfect because mutations occur. Now you can say that the amoeba's DNA maybe evolved and started small. Problem is, in an amoeba there is about 1,000 volumes of an encyclopedia worth of information in there. To believe that resulted by natural forces like evolution is like saying that the Library of Congress came up from an explosion in a printing shop. Life and information seem to need an intelligent cause. You know who said this? Not a Christian, but Richard Dawkins himself.

M - Morality
68 years ago the Allies liberated the camp which contained dead bodies. If God is not real, saying killing and torturing humans is just an opinion. Why? Because if there is no standard (God) that is beyond humanity and human opinion, then that is your opinion against Hitler's opinion. There are no objective moral right, or objective more wrongs. In fact, if God does not exist, the Nazis were not wrong. If there is no god, love is no better than rape. Not in an objective way at least. You may not like it, but its not really wrong. If god is not real, blowing up people watching a marathon is no better than feeding the poor. If god is not real, religious crusades are not wrong, because there is no standard of righteousness. There are no human rights if there is no god. It's all an opinion. If we're just overgrown germs, that got here by evolution , then we are no different than any other animal. I'm not saying atheists don't know morality, i'm just saying that they can't justify morality. There is no purpose in evolution. I just says what survives, not what OUGHT to survive.

E - Evil
The atheists were supposed to bring this one, however, I believe evil is actually EVIDENCE that God is real, here is why. If God exists, we have creation and design of the universe, reason, laws and logic, morality, free will, laws of nature. The Laws of Nature shows that God not only created everything but sustains it. We know how it works and its so precise. That's why we can take space shuttles to mars. Now evil is for God, why? Because objective evil presupposes objective good. And objective good requires God. C.S. Lewis before turning into a Christian had a doubt about evil and thought it was a case against God. One day, he realized that argument didn't make sense. In Mere Christianity he wrote this after becoming a Christian: "(As an atheist) my argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?". There is no such thing as injustice unless there is justice. And there is no such thing as justice unless there's a standard outside of us known that is objective and does not change. Look at it this way. The shadows prove the sunshine. There would be no shadows unless there was sunshine. You can have sunshine without shadows, but there wouldn't be shadows unless there was sunshine. And the sun, the origin of sunshine, could be seen as God. Same goes for evil. You can't have evil without good. You can have good, but we wouldn't know what evil is unless we knew what good is. And finally, the last letter.

S - Science
I thought the atheist was supposed to bring up science. "Christians don't do science. They don't believe in evidence." Actually, we do. In fact, science is against evolution and atheism. If there is no God, we wouldn't even have science. This is what Einstein said about why we can do science: "The most comprehensible thing about the world is that it is at all comprehensible." Why can we look at the world and draw conclusions about everything? Only if theism is true or any immaterial realm is true, we can do science; because science is built on a foundation of immaterial realities that theism, not atheism, can explain. Here's some of the things science needs to work but can't be explained by evolution or atheism. Orderly natural laws, causality (You can't prove the law of causality by using a science experiment, you have to assume it exists. Science only searches for causes.) Laws of Logic (that, by the way, we are using right now to understand each other through words. Science can't explain that.) reason, free will (you have to freely evaluate data to understand it because science won't tell you, only scientists do.) realism (The idea that we can appropriate, through our senses, truth) and morality. We can't even trust scientists unless they are ethical and tell us the results of their experiments truthfully and honestly. These are all laws, or things, that are immaterial and cannot be explained by matter or materialism. You can't get honesty through a test tube. Honesty is not a molecule, it's a human value. If atheism and evolution is real, then none of this is true. Not even what i'm writing. People think science is against God? No, atheism is at war with science. You have to give up your common sense to become an atheist. Christianity, contrary to popular belief, is based on reason and logic. Christianity is not blind faith, ATHEISM is blind faith. To conclude this, we know that CRIMES is an acronym showing evidence for God. All these aspects of reality are immaterial, therefore, when atheists use them to explain the world, they are stealing from God to make their case. and stealing is a CRIME. Now let me say quickly that I believe in adaptation in living things, but not macro evolution for reasons we already discussed. These are the reasons, among many more, why reality is better explained by a theistic god.
Debate Round No. 1
backwardseden

Pro

Here"s how I run things JR... if there is the slightest hint of you inventing excuses from something in which you clearly know nothing about, especially when its the subject in which you claim to professing you have knowledge upon, namely this one, and you really don"t, and yet you pretend that you do by coming up with invented excuses and or flat out lying, I will insult you with my brand of insults that are original, funny, stupid, deranged and walls to the ball insane, unless those excuses are so far fetched that they are clearly pulled off from your groin to be a groin pull from the gold-i-lox area to keep scientists looking for other planets, then all bets are truly off and I may end the debate right then and there because I DO KNOW my stuff, whereas most don"t. Who knows? I may give you a strike 3 and you are out. We shall see. OK I will.

"In this debate, backwardseden, takes the side of evolution, or materialism."
Materialism 1. preoccupation with or emphasis on material objects, comforts, and considerations, with a disinterest in or rejection of spiritual, intellectual, or cultural values. (um nope) 2. the philosophical theory that regards matter and its motions as constituting the universe, and all phenomena, including those of mind, as due to material agencies. (um nope) Especially with definition 1, that"s strike 1.

"I, as you can tell, take the opposite side which is theism. More specifically, I will provide evidence that shows a theistic god." That"ll be good because no one in human history has. So let"s see what you"ve made up to get past The Buggs Bunny and Road Runner hour. "This means, a space less, immaterial, powerful, personal, infinite, intelligent being. This does not necessary prove the god of the Bible," Well yes it does, because that"s what we are SPECIFICALLY talking about. Can"t you read? Do you know what "reading" is? You know. Words. Sentences. Now you go back and you READ the RULES because THE RULES SPECIFICALLY STATES the "god of the bible". So if you want to argue with the god of the bible, then fine, if not, then bye.
CarlosRN

Con

backwardseden, you say that the things I said could be false and I could be lying. However, everything that I just listed is not only common sense that can be learned by anyone, but is completely backed-up with data and evidence. This is not a god-of-the-gaps argument. We don't know all these facts from things that we don't know, but rather from things we DO know about the universe and our reality. Most importantly, you should be asking yourself the question: "If evolution and atheism is true, why does it matter to lie?". That's your opinion.
You denied that materialism is the complete trust (or faith) to take the side of the physical world which explains everything around us. The moment you say this is not true, and bring an immaterial argument, not only that shows you're not a materialist, evolutionist, and atheist, but you recognize the fact that there's something beyond human kind. So you don't believe in evolution then.
Back to the main topic of this debate. Which explains reality better? Atheism or theism? I provided clear evidence from scientific data, evidence, conclusions, quotes and philosophy to show that there is a god. C.R.I.M.E.S. does not prove the god of the Bible specifically. For that, we must prove His existence through the Bible and its truth. I will now provide clear evidence that supports the God of the Bible.
Are miracles possible?
If we look back at the cosmological argument, which states that the Big Bang not only came from nothing but did it with great precision, we now know that the first verse of the Bible (In the beginning, God created the heavens and earth) is at least possible. If this verse is true, ALL the other verses in the Bible are at least possible. Why? IF God really did create the heavens and earth, can he walk on water? Sure He can! He created water. Can he turn water into wine? Of course he can. Can he raise people from the dead? Of course, He created life! Well, evidence shows the first verse is true. God can do whatever He wants that is not illogically possible. What do I mean by that? There are some things that God cannot do because it's not logical. Like create an one ended stick. Or create a square circle. Even you can do things God can't do. Lie, sin, change, or make mistakes. God is perfect, why is He going to sin or change? If He could change, He wouldn't be the standard of perfection that makes Him God. He is the standard by which everything else is measured.
Now let's go to the second point. Is the New Testament True? You might ask: Well, why not the Old Testament? Because if we can show proof that the New Testament is true, the Old Testament is automatically true. Why? Because Jesus is in the Old Testament. If he validates and supports the Old Testament, then we can proof it by understanding the New Testament. Jesus taught that the entire Old Testament is not only true, but is also the Word of God. Now, I will show evidence that the New Testament is true by using The Five E's argument.
1. Early Testimony
Most if not all of the New Testament documents are written prior to 70 A.D. We have eye witness accounts. Specific and sharp details that could only be written by eye witness accounts. In the Book of Acts there is about 84 eye witness testimonies from chapter 13 to chapter 28. Gospel of John has about 59 of these as well. These eye witness testimonies are highly accurate historically and in detail. Denying the New Testament is reliable by looking at the eye witness accounts is like saying the Titanic never sunk. How do we know that the Titanic sank? None of us saw it sink. The oldest person to have seen it sink is no longer alive. Well, we have eye witness testimonies that have deep detail about the event, we have archaeological evidence this happened, and we even have the Titanic at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. Or is like saying George Washington never existed. Yet we have eye witness testimonies and historical records.

2. Embarrassing Testimony
There is a lot of embarrassing details in the Bible that would have never been made up. For example, all disciples run away from Jesus, who they thought they trusted, at the moment of the crucifixion. And while they were running away, who were the brave ones? The women were the brave ones! You don't lie to make yourself look bad. Sure maybe we've done it a few moments under specific conditions, but never enough to write a whole book about your mistakes and who you really are. Both in the New and Old Testament are filled with the most sinful persons. For example, King David. He is supposed to be a figure we all look up to. He is a man after God. But what does he do? He lies, he commits adultery, he commits rape, he murders one of his soldiers because of fear that his evil deeds are seen. And he is supposed to be a hero? God tells the sins, brokenness, mistakes, flaws, and darkest of deeds of every character in the Bible. This shows you this is not invented.

3. Excruciating Testimony
Looking at all the historical eye witness testimonies, we know that all the apostles and followers of Jesus are tortured and killed in the most horrific ways. And they could have all avoided their death by simply denying that Jesus didn't raise from the death. Or at least, they could've prolonged their lives. If Christianity isn't true and it's just a joke, or a lie, why would they risk everything they have? Including their lives? In fact, let me give you a quick summary of the evidence that shows how these events happened, to some of the apostles.
Matthew - Killed by stabbing as ordered by King Hircanus.
Mark - Burned during Roman Emperor Trajan's reign.
Peter - Crucified upside-down by the gardens Nero on the Vatican Hill circa 64 A.D.
Andrew - crucified on an "X" shaped cross by Aegeas, governor of the Edessenes, around 80 A.D.

4. Extra Biblical Testimony
There are many non-biblical testimonies about the Bible and Jesus that further prove the reliability of the Bible and the evidence. To give you an example: We have Flavius Jesephus. He was a Jewish historian born around 38 A.D. He also served the Roman commander who was Vespasian in Jerusalem until the destruction of the city came. He wrote "Antiquities of the Jews". This mentions data and historical testimonies that prove Bible verses. This is what he wrote: "At this time there was a wise man who called Jesus. And his conduct was good, as he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive..."

5. Expected Testimony
Prophecies of Jesus were written in the Old Testament that were before 700 years in advance. These prophecies further support the truth of the Bible because it stays congruent and claims something that will absolutely happen. The Old Testament is filled with prophecies because these would support the truth of the Bible. Jesus knew this. That's why he performed miracles. Jesus knew that anyone could claim to be the Son of God, and he used miracles and prophecies to prove that he was really the Messiah, since he had authority over evil, disease, natural disasters, evil, and nature.

These are some of the reasons why the New and Old Testament really are true. If the Bible is true, and proves that God is real though the words and evidences we have, He exists. There are many other reasons why I believe evidence points toward the God of the Bible. The C.R.I.M.E.S. and Five E's arguments clearly show that there is not only a theistic god but that the God of the Bible is true. Now, before we continue, I am well aware that I just gave a lot of information in the last two rounds. backwardseden might not be able to talk about every point I made, so he can pin point to a specific topic he would want to focus on. I gave all this information because I not only have the responsibility of supporting my world view, but he also asked me the question. backwardseden may want to further talk about who God is and His nature. For that, he must present specific questions because I have given the overall view and summary of why God exists and why Christianity is the best explanation of our reality. However, he must also support his worldview. To backwardseden, I ask, if evolution is real, and it brought us to this point, why is your moral sense different than anyone else. Without a standard of good which is God, our moral sense is no better than Hitler's. So why is your moral sense better than his?
Debate Round No. 2
backwardseden

Pro

OK let"s see what you got in this round. Now we are specifically squawking about the god of the bible. Those are the rules as stated in RD1. If you can"t stick to that then its an immediate shebang exit for me. K? Gooda.
Common sense? There is no common sense, thinking, reasoning, rationalizing, nor logic within your god because none is required. Data and evidence? Oh that"s a good one. According to what? Certainly not by ANY scientific community worldwide. NOT EVER since YOUR god"s inception. Then you mention "we". Who is this "we"? Um no its you. Only you because there is no consensus within the christian worldwide community.

"If evolution and atheism is true, why does it matter to lie?" Well now its rather apparent that you paid absolutely no attention whatsoever to RD1 AT ALL which proved that evolution is taking place in the here and now which is irrefutable. Strike 1.

You also have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what atheism is. So let me clue your teeny bopper brain in, rather than you inventing excuses for something in which you clearly know nothing about and yet you pretend that you do and you thus make excuses for it. Strike 2. Atheism: 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. That"s all atheism is. Nothing more. Nothing less. Wow here"s even some videos to help your diaper mold brain out as to what atheism is"
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 1. Reasons for accepting atheism
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 2. Proof that atheism is accurate and correct
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 3. Bill Maher - Atheism IS NOT a Religion
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 4. Atheism a religion?
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 5. The case for Atheism (Richard Carrier)
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 6. The Gospel According to Carrier
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 7. A believers guide to Atheism in 9 minutes
http://www.youtube.com... - Video 8. Is Atheism a Dogmatic Religion?

And to even help you a little further to prove unto you that evolution is taking place, and you can watch this on National Geographic"s masterpiece series which just concluded "One Strange Rock"...Prof Chris Perry "After the parrot fish have eaten the coral, they then excrete it as sand." Narrator Will Smith "In one year, one fish poops out a ton of sand, literally." Chris "That same sand material that you find in parrot fish poop can be found in the islands themselves. Sometimes, on some islands the sand is made up of 70% of parrot fish poop. The parrot fish are absolutely crucial to the development of these islands." But life"s not done. Fish form the fresh beach, then more life follows on. And presto. Instant island paradise." That"s evolution. In other words, the sand that you walk on, those beaches were created by those parrot fish excretions, yeah the sand you lie---down---in and the sand that you squish---your---toes---between. Without parrot fish, no beaches, no life there, no nothing, NO ECOLOGY, no nothing, no evolution. Duh.
Mike Massimino "Its kind of amazing what a small creature can do. That a bunch of little fish can build an island just by going about their daily routine. That"s quite an impact."

Another form of evolution from the show" Mae Jemison "Plants here are green because our sun is green. The majority of light emitted from the sun is in the bluegreen wavelength. It doesn"t look green to us because it has light emitted in other areas to - in red and blue. And so when you blend all those together they look white. Most plants here on earth have evolved to use primarily red and blue light for photosynthesis. They reflect back the green light which is why they look green." Yep. That"s irrefutable evolution. There"s 0 you can say to convolute it. Try harder.

I denied materialism because you are terrible at reading people"s tells. You are a puny psychologist. If this was a game of poker, I"d take all of your chips before you would even sit down to the table. I am very spiritual. I believe in Mother Earth and her spirit you total ignorant jacko&&. I do not in any way have a "preoccupation with or emphasis on material objects, comforts, and considerations," Nice try. Care to take any more feeding ground cannibalistic tries for your exploding cigar tactics that regurgitate right back in your face? So the rest of that humility paragraph that is spattered grease on your tongue is eliminated.
Yes, which is better, atheism or theism. Well the videos above prove atheism. And you have 0 data to support theism, NEXT.
"philosophy to show that there is a god." According to what? ONLY YOU.

"If we look back"" Let"s eliminate that paragraph right here and now, K?
GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.
GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.
GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.
GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
E 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26 Man is to have dominion over fish, birds, cattle, and all wild animals, yet--
GE 2:15-17 It is wrong to be able to tell good from evil, right from wrong.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

GE 1:28 God encourages reproduction.
LE 12:1-8 God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes
childbirth a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter
is twice that for a son.)

GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of
omniscience as well as with the fact that God allegedly does not change his mind: NU 23:19-20, 1SA 15:29, JA 1:17.)

Oh and oh yeah with that paragraph of you stating god creating life, you still have to prove that your god exists.
Oh really, according to what is jesus in the OT? "Jesus taught that the entire Old Testament is not only true, but is also the Word of God." That"s a good one. EVERY SINGLE CHRISTIAN ON THIS PLANET OF MERIT will disagree with a true imbecile like you. OK we"re done. You don"t know what the f--k you are talking about. Strike 3. Don"t even bother posting me again. I certainly won't even bother reading your slop and thus responding to a jerk like you who knows NOTHING about his religion. Bye.
CarlosRN

Con

backwardseden, for some reason, you keep coming up with the idea that God does not support common sense, thinking, reasoning, rationalizing, nor logic. These are all immaterial values that cannot be proven with science unless we use human interpretation (Reason) which atheism and evolution cannot explain because evolution is the UNGUIDED, UNINTELLIGENT, RANDOM process that only reacts; it does not reason. God gave us a mind, and the natural forces of His power that we use all the time, and make up the world. You then mention that evidence and data is not reliable and scientific. backwardseden, I repeat, all of the evidence I gave was from non-Christian sources. That's what I do through scientific evidence and quotes. Stephen Hawkins, Christopher Hitchens (Although I haven't mentioned him yet), Charles Darwin, Richard Dawkins, and C.S. Lewis when he wasn't a christian. You can find these very same arguments through scientific results.

You assume that evolution is a complete fact, yet, I am one question above you. You ask, assuming evolution is truth, "Is God real?". Not only I have provided evidence for God, but I ask, "If evolution truly is real, how does that explain reality?" Answer is, it doesn't, its flawed because of reasons I have already listed.

Then you continue to define atheism. backwardseden, I don't know why you're doing this. I have given evidence that puts atheism to the test. You say there's no god or supreme beings. I say, there is because it better explains reality. Understand that I am not changing the definition of atheism, and rather, I am giving evidence that atheism is flawed. That's what I did through C.R.I.M.E.S. and the 5 E's.

You mention National Geographic's information and evidence for "evolution". backwardseden, this might surprise you, but I actually agree with your scientific evidence that there is a change in living things. THE PROBLEM: You say this is strong evidence for evolution, and I say this is the adaptation of changing living things and the change of ecosystem and environment. None of what you stated is evolution. Evolution is the change of lower animals into more complex ones. This is not happening in your evidence. This is the natural and changing process of adaptation and animals supporting the environment. When you talk about bacteria becoming resistant to drugs, I AGREE. That is adaptation under specific environmental conditions, but it no way this proves the lower animals turning into complex, moral, intelligent, free willed, reasoning, logical beings that is US, human kind as we know it. You also mention photosynthesis, although I don't really see how this is evolution because you state the FACT that plants use the sunshine and turn green. It doesn't reference a previous standard (lower animal or living creature) turning into a complex, thinking one. Plants have always been green backwardseden. Macro-evolution cannot exist because it's flawed.

You state you believe in Mother Earth, and her spirit to be specific. If you believe this "entity" is real, and is divine and surpasses human kind, then you are NOT an evolutionist (because evolution is the UNGUIDED, RANDOM, UNINTELLIGENT process that only relies on reaction). And you are NOT an atheist. You, backwardseden, gave me the very definition of atheism. Atheism does not believe in a higher or supreme power that is beyond human kind.

Mother Earth, as a divine entity, cannot exist. Why? Going back to the cosmological argument, whatever created the universe has to be immaterial, powerful, intelligent, infinite, personal, and timeless being. Mother Earth is WITHIN time and space. This entity cannot be "god" or a divine power above us all because it is limited within our reality and cannot be higher than that. God however, is outside of time and space, this makes Him God. More than that, Mother Earth does NOT tell us who we are, what we should follow, and what morality is.

You make a good point. Philosophy according to me? These ideas and arguments do not come from me directly, although I understand it and can use it to support my worldview. You said you didn't want me to use creationists in this debate, but you ask, who supports this other than myself? To name a few, apologist Frank Turek, C.S. Lewis, Ravi Zacharias, and more information from many apologists and the education and comprehension of the Bible's truth.

You list some Bible verses, although I'm not quite sure what you're trying to show me. If you'd explain it for me, I will answer.

You question the fact that Jesus not only was in the Old Testament, but also taught that the Old Testament was reliable and was the Word of God. How do we know this is true? The Bible itself, obviously, gives evidence this is true through prophecies and facts. Here is evidence supporting my claim.
Isaiah 7:14
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel."
Zechariah 9:9
"Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey."
Isaiah 53: 3-7
"He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth."

These are Bible verses in the Old Testament that show the New Testament is true. More importantly, these prophecies are referenced in the New Testament, and are completed. It is false when you say Christians would disagree with me, because this is one of the MAJOR doctrines of Christianity. backwardseden, strikes are not yours to give, let the voting choose if either atheism or theism better explains reality if you won't choose.

Now, you didn't respond my morality question. Let us assume that evolution is completely true. I ask: Why are your moral values better than Hitler's if there is no moral standard we can't appeal to and compare all things with?
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
53 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by AKMath 3 years ago
AKMath
*to
Posted by AKMath 3 years ago
AKMath
I would like o debate you on abortion as well seeing your profile.
Posted by AKMath 3 years ago
AKMath
Please invite me as it says you don't accept debates.
Posted by AKMath 3 years ago
AKMath
Yes I accept the debate about evil. And I also want to debate you on other things in the future such as - "Al guns are absolutely required to be banned, period if, just as all religion is required to be banned if there is to be worldwide peace. 3 other things are also required to happen. 3. Borders are required to go. 4. The media is required to go. and wealth and money is required to go." Thank you.
Posted by AKMath 3 years ago
AKMath
Yes that would be perfect. Thanks a lot for your time. I appreciate it.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
backwardseden
"I'll do a separate debate with you dealing with evil, if you truly want to do so. But this debate was about evolution." And you have the f--king nerve to mention anything at all about your god, for any reason, in which case you still cannot prove this god of yours even exists. Oh but wait by gum this god of yours would not even use text as a form of communication, not ever, the worst form of communication possible, so you still have nothing. Oh but wait by gun, you cannot refute the 3 form of evolution that I have proven unto you. And for more information on the other two that were just listed (and I wasn't talking to you then), then you can watch National Geographic's One Strange Rock in which knows a lot better than your god and you. But wait by gum, you also seem to be so jumpy about this christ bit and you cannot even prove he ever existed as well, much less was the messiah in which he most certainly was not.
And even better you most certainly are not a christian by any means oh my great non thinker.
Tell yah what, when you get some actual evidence that your god actually exists, and not some stupid story made up from your bible which under scrutiny doesn't hold up at all, contact me then, K? OR you can say right here, right now "I don't know". Because you don't know. Nobody does. All scientists of merit, no exceptions, none, will always say "I don't know" unless it is something that they do know. And there is only one thing, just one, that is proven fact. Guess what it is? Or not.

Now as asked of your partner, take one lucky guess as to what YOUR god and bible are based on and nothing but? Let's see if you know. I 100% guarantee you'll never get it.
Posted by CarlosRN 3 years ago
CarlosRN
I'll do a separate debate with you dealing with evil, if you truly want to do so. But this debate was about evolution.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
backwardseden
so who knows how many pregnant mothers died there in his bible thus proving this god to be nothing but pure evil, hate and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god loves yummy cannibalism in his bible LM 2: 20-22, JM 11: 22-23, LV 26:29, 2 KS 6:28-29, LM 4: 9-11, proving this god to be truly sick and completely whacked out thus is evil, hates,and thus cannot be involved with love..
* Indeed god is far far far worse than Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hong Xiuquan, all serial killers, all rapists, all tortures, all pedophiles, all sadomasochists etc etc etc combined. After all god knowingly created them which means that he is ultimately responsible for them. Its either that or god is not a god and lets them off the hook with nothing but a tap on the shoulder for their horrific, disgusting, repugnant crimes and simply god---does---not---care. Now here's some examples of god"s sickened, diseased, abominable atrocities for absolutely no reason at all... the great flood according to the bible (which never happened btw) so who knows what the body count was there? 3,000 EX 32:27-28, 14,700 NU 16:49, 24,002 NU 25: 1-11, 12,000 JOS 8: 1-25, 10,000 JG 1:4, 120,000 JG 8:7-10, 42,000 JG 12:3-6, 1,000 JD 15:14-15, 3,000 JD 16:27-30, 25,101 JD 16:27-30, 1 SAM 4 34,002, 1 SAM 6:19 50,070, 2 SAM 8 65,850, 1 KI 20: 28-29 100,000, 1 KI 20: 30 27,000, 2 KI 19 35 -37 185,000, 2 CHR 13 17-18 500,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, 2 CHR 28:6 120,000, Esther 9:5-18 75,813, 2 CHR 14: 9-14 1,000,000!!! etc etc etc Yeah god is really so moral huh? Nope.
sorry, your god is completely immoral.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
backwardseden
* god in his bible knowingly and truly hates children through numerous passages such as LM4: 9-11, MT 10:37, MT 2:16, JG 21:10, 2 SAM 12:11-14 which is truly sick and disgusting, DT 2:34, NU 31: 17-18, LV 26: 21-22, 1 SAM 15:3, HS 13:16, 2 KS 15:16, 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, MK 7:10, MT 15:4, MT 10:21), JG 11: 30-33, PS 137: 8-9, 2 KS 6: 28-29, DT 21: 18-21, DT 32:25, DT 2: 32-34, DT 3: 3-6, JG 19: 24-29, EX 12:29, 2 HS 2: 23-24, LV 26:29, JM 11: 22-23, JM 19: 7-9, JM 51: 22-26, 2 KS 8: 9-15,LM 2: 20-22, RV 2: 18-23 only to name a few proves god hates and is 100% pure evil and 100% proves he cannot be involved with love.
* god hates women in his bible LM 4 9-11 sick and disgusting, HS 13:16 sick and disgusting, JD 21:10, 2 SAM 12 11-14 sick and disgusting, DT 2:34, NU 31 17:18, LV 26 21:22, 1 SAM 15:3, HS 13:16 sick and disgusting, DT 2 32-34, 2 KS 8: 9-15, 2 KS 15:16 sick and disgusting, EZ 9: 5-7, HS 9: 11-16, 2 KS 6: 28-29 sick and disgusting, JD 19: 24-29, LM 2 20-22 sick and disgusting, 1 COR 14:34,1 TY 2:12 proves god hates, is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god loves rape in his bible NU 31: 17-18, 2 SAM 12: 11-18 sick and disgusting, JD 19:24-29, JD 21: 10-24, DT 20: 10-14, DT 22: 28-29, DT 21: 10-14, JD 5:30, EX 21 7-11, ZE 14: 1-2 proving that he is evil, pure evil and nothing but, is filled with hate and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god commits abortions who knows how many times within several verses in his bible, so that means that christians do not follow their god which is extremely hypocritical and contradictory from his bible HS 13:16 sick and disgusting, 2 KS 8: 9-15 sick and disgusting, 2 HS 15:16 sick and disgusting, HS 9: 11-16, and perhaps the biggest acts of abortions were committed in the great flood according to this so-called god of the bible in the great flood (which never happened btw)
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
backwardseden
@CarlosRN - OK since you are such an idiot and know absolutely nothing about your bible, you are going to get it.
* god hates gays in his bible and wants them stoned to death LV 20:13 proving god hates,is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god hates anyone that blasphemes and wants to put you to death LV 24:16 which is true 100% hate and evil and nothing but and shows that god is nothing but hate and evil.
* god hates anyone that does not believe in him in his bible 2 CHR 15: 12-13, ESPECIALLY if someone worships another god/ idols other than himself, thus wants to kill them DT 13: 9-10 and 17: 2-5 proving god hates, is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god endorses slavery in his bible EX 21 the entire chapter especially 20-21 which is truly sick and disgusting, LV 25:39, LV 25:42, LV 25: 44-46, DT 15: 12-15, DT 23: 14-16, MT 18:25, proving god hates, is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god gets jealous in his bible EX 20: 3-5, EX 34:14, DT 4: 23-24, DT 32: 16-17, DT 5:9, DT 6:15, JH 24:19, PS 79:5, PS 78:58, 2 COR 1:2, proving that he is evil, hates and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god wants you to die in his bible if you break the sabbath EX 31:14, NU 15: 32-36 proving god hates and is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god issues death warrants on those that curse at their parents (they are probably children) EX 21:17, LV 20:9, MK 7:10, MT 15:4 proving god hates and is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god wants to put you to death in his bible if you commit adultery LV 20:10 proving god hates, is evil and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god has freely admitted in his bible numerous times that he IS evil IS 45:7, 2 SAM 12: 11-14 sick and disgusting, EX 32:14, 1 KS 1 22: 22-23, 2 CR 18:22, JM 19:3, JM 19:15, JM 23:12, AM 3:6, DT 30:15, 2 KS 22:16, JU 9:23, PV 15:3 thus proving that he IS evil which is irrefutable and also proves he hates and thus cannot be involved with love.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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