The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Existence of god

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,057 times Debate No: 105111
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)




As in this case the burden of proof lies on the opposite site (you can't proof absence) I would first like to hear the arguments of my contender.

But I wont just say that absence of evidence is evidence of absence (even though it is), I also want to point to the obvious empirical evidence, which we see in our universe and which doesn't align with the proposition of a omnibenevolent, omnipotent and omniscient god, which cares about the human race in particular. I obviously know that in theism you can explain all of it away, by proposing why god would make it in such away, but so can everyone with every badly defined hypothesis, which theism is. It isn't hard to just say god is "mysterious" and then dismiss the data. This isn't a positive feature of theism, as it makes it unfalsifiable and therefore from the beginning a particularly bad hypothesis.

First the problem of evil. Now I already expect the answer of "free will", which our loving god wanted to provide us with, so that we find him by ourselves (on base of the worst possible evidence). But this argument doesn't work well with several of gods properties ascribed to him by theist. While omnipotence is in itself logically invalid (can he create a stone so heavy that he can't lift it), especially his omnibenevolence doesn't really show in our observable universe. The problem with the claim, that it is all for free will though, contradicts his omniscience, because while in naturalism a free will most likely isn't possible (and it isn't observed in the brain), it is absolutely certainly not possible with an omniscient god. To go even further, omniscience doesn't even work with his own free will.
Let me explain. If god knows that he or anyone else is going to do something before they actually do it, they can't decide against doing it, because else he wouldn't have been omniscient in the first place. This especially applies to himself, for exactly the same reason. Therefore we can conclude that he either hasn't given us free will, which would raise the question of evil again (concluding he can't be omnibenevolent or omnipotent), or he can't be omniscient. If we conclude he can't have any of his full powers, and would therefore raise the question, why we should call such a being god.

Now lets go to some clear observation of our universe and compare them to the prediction of theism, that god has build the universe for our live. Again you can argue away all of those point by gods mystery, but that isn't an explanation at all.

What would be expect for a universe according to the theistic hypothesis:

God should be obvious or at least give some evidence for his existence which is compelling. This would align with the though that he wants us to find him free (a freedom which isn't observed) and with his love for us, because he wouldn't want us to go to hell for the unnecessary crime of not believing in him.
I think it is rather obvious, as this debate shows, that this isn't the case.

Humans should be a rather important part of the cosmos and the cosmos should be mostly habitable. This again aligns perfectly with his love for us and also with his wish to bring about exactly us and again it doesn't fit the data (we are very insignificant).

Humans and organisms should be designed or build by an absolutely fail proof mechanism, so that humans actually would be certain to arise. This again doesn't fit our observation of the twisted way humans evolved by the process of random mutation and natural selection, which isn't fail proof in any stretch of the imagination.

Live should essentially be just without random suffering, which aligns with his benevolence, but as explained above, is again not observed.

Under theism there should be one religion, which is given to everyone (there is no reason for god to choose one specific peasant tribe), and which has progressive sacred texts with actual information. Again I think it is rather obvious, that our sacred texts are all but progressive and rather mirror the tribal rules from 2000 years ago.

To conclude we would expect under theism that there would be a perfect universe fitted for us, while under naturalism we would expect some kind of a mess.

All together it is strong empirical evidence, which leads to the conclusion, that there is no god.

I am looking forward to the arguments of pro.


I"m going to accept on the sheer level of ignorance of the Supremacy of God by this and ALL unbelievers. That he has listened to Biblically illiterate believers is a given, that he has literally no knowledge of God is also obvious by demonstration. Reasoning ability indeterminate at this point based on demonstrated gullibility, hence the statement, absence of evidence is evidence of absence... an absurd statement and cliche of no importance, Second equally naive term CAN God make a stone so heavy he can"t lift it. Why would such a stone be needed? Is it Mans beliefs that God exists to entertain HIS creation? Nonsense!

God isn"t into entertaining humanity, He"s into judging humanity. Neither is God here to prove Himself too you, as you will know Him the second He cast you into Hell. To suppose that God sits around creating things for entertainment of humans purposes, which have zero usefullness, as in said stone! Please.

First understand the sovereignty of whom your speaking God! God IS no respecter of persons ... meaning He doesn"t care about your RIGHTS! You HAVE NO RIGHTS AS GOD SEES IT! ... period. He is Creator of all and for Him WAS ALL created. Check it out.
Ezekiel 18:4
"Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.
Romans 9:21
20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" 21Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use? 22What if God, intending to show His wrath and make His power known, bore with great patience the vessels of His wrath, prepared for destruction?"
Romans 9:14
14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
16It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God"s mercy. 17For Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."

So WHO HAVE YOU BEEN listening to????
Does any of those ACTUAL SCRIPTURES sound Like God isn"t fully prepared to cast you into the bowels of Hell, at HIS WILL ALONE?
God makes NO DEALS, with humanity ... by HIS WILL and mercy ALONE, God HAS MADE A WAY, that Man CAN be saved. Man has the FREE WILL to accept or refuse..... thats where free will ENDS!

The Bible tells all children, followers and people of God HOW we are to conduct ourselves. We are to recieve according to our performance. Rewards, inheritence or ONLY SALVATION. NONE of the scriptures are for the athiest or unbelievers as they ARE GOING TO HELL! Not optional! You WILL KNOW God or You WILL be cast into Hell and finally into the lake of Fire created for ALL IMMORTAL CREATURES, souls of Men and Angels alike!

Such a shame that the majority of the population will go to HELL because they are Lazy, Prideful or Stupid. The textbook definition, not the insult. Which is - having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.

Indeed, to know of the potential existence of Heaven and Hell, and to ignore this potentiality because of laziness, pride or anything, having the knowledge .... and you do! That it is reputed to be eternal suffering for all souls who reject God .. is utterly stupid and completely indefensible by anyone of reputed intelligence!

Therefore hear now the truth of the one you mock daily. And hear Gods few questions He DOES ask the unbelieving?
Hebrews 10:29
How much worse punishment do you think will he deserve, the one having trampled upon the Son of God, and having esteemed ordinary the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and having insulted the Spirit of grace?

It is only JUST that you be schooled by one of only 3 existing class of Christians. Go here to learn what those are and what they entail. Or don"t. I myself do not care, what you chose as the consequence is yours alone.

First WHAT is the Characteristics and Nature of the one you mock? I could tell you, but better to let HIM TELL YOU, that you may understand WHY He tells Us His Chuldren that FEAR OF THE LORD IS the beginning of knowledge!
Leviticus 10:1
1Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them. 2And fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD."

God incinerated Aarons sons! Does that SOUND LIKE someone who is gonna take crap from YOU or anyone else?

2 Kings 2:24
23Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, "Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!" 24When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number.

Does THIS sound Like God is into turning the other Cheek to you?

Check this out!
Romans 12:20
On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. ***********************In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."

THIS IS WHY we turn the other cheek .... SO God is free to REVENGE HIMSELF UPON YOU!

don"t think so? Read on ... Proverbs 24:17
17Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, And do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles; 18Or the LORD will see it and be displeased, And turn His anger away from him."

See? If we WANT God to make you PAY, we cannot be cheerful over the matter or God, will rise you up instead, to keep US from sin ... not because God wants to not punish you. He stops because He keeps US from doing wrong. Your suffering is unimportant!
Read it yourself ... it"s not in hieroglyphics its right in your face!

So forgive me but you haven"t obviously the first clue. About WHO GOD ACTUALLY IS.... and it doesn"t sound to me like you"ve BEEN TALKING to anyone who DOES!

These ARE SCRIPTURES OF GOD! I didn"t make them up. Next: Loving God! TO three types of people ONLY!
1. His Disciples. 2. His Followers. 3. His People. Again IF you want to know WHO THOSE ARE? Go to the link.

His WRATH is against all other Souls. That would be YOU! See Gods Love? Gods Love means He has MADE A WAY, for you to COME to Him, accept His EXTREME Sacrifice, to recieve FORGIVENESS for all Sins you committed PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE!

Romans 10
8 But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, "Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame." 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile"the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."


By coming TO God, acknowledging your a sinner in need of Salvation, accepting His Sons Blood in atonement FOR YOUR SIN. Repenting and letting God indwelling Spirit to come into your Heart. God agrees to GRANT YOU ETERNAL LIFE FREE!


THIS IS PRECISELY WHY .... All those Denominations that have different beliefs, that you Athiest yourselves know CANNOT possibly be correct, one God, ONE BELIEF! Your RIGHT, but here"s the part you DONT KNOW! They REMAIN SAVED ANYWAY, DESTINED NEVER TO BE SEPARATED FROM GOD ... Because Gods Love COVERS thier unfaithfulness, By Gods unfailing FAITHFULNESS!
They are the People of God. The last type of Christians. Again go to the link. To understand this term.

So I suppose my opponents Topic of EXISTENCE OF GOD? I in humbleness and dutifulness state ... the REALITY OF GOD totally and completely doesn"t depend on YOU OR YOUR BELIEF AT ALL! Your under Gods Mercy or under Gods Wrath. No third to chose from, and I am hopeful you"ll come around, cause Oblivion? NOPE , not found ANYWHERE IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE! Why? Simple DOESNT EXIST! What does exist is you ... ALL OF YOU are just ONE BREATH AWAY, from losing your RIGHT TO CHOOSE, where your eternity will be spent, and unless you don"t OWN A TV, youve not much more time to decide.

So listen to the words of ignorance, total lack of knowledge, the lazy, proud and stupid ... or Listen to what Gods Word just Told you, cause IT NEVER CHANGES .... even if you want it to!

Go seek God ... God WILL PROVE HIMSELF TO YOU! I now this is my thought, but I am convinced the level of His presence you WILL EXPERIENCE YOURSELF, will DEPEND TOTALLY on YOUR SINCERITY TO HIM.

IF YOU go to Him with the BELIEF I EXPERIENCED, When He touched and CHANGED MY HEART .... He ... the Creator of ALL THINGS will MEET YOU, personally, physically, Spiritually and SUPERNATURALLY! You WILL sellout completely to God after an experience like that, I guarantee it!

But again.. it will depend on YOUR SINCERITY, and level of belief.
Debate Round No. 1


Before we start I think I have to remind you that writing something in capital letters doesn't make it true. Also I want to remind you, that finding some excuse for why god would do it in a way, which is contradicting the expected, isn't an argument (you can do it for everything, which would make god unfalsifiable and therefore by definition not true). Additionally to say that it is biblical illiteracy, which result in disbelieve is just blatantly false. If you read the bible, as I have myself, with an open mind, I am sure that it is the most compelling argument against the religious believe (I must say in defence of the bible, that I am not a fan of fiction). You open it and just read genesis 1 and it is a enumeration of the most hilariously unscientific and just blatantly false claims you could possible imagine. While the bibles claims are scientifically false, you don't have to wait for long before it becomes absolutely appalling in any moral terms, as in Gen 19 Lot gives his daughters free to be raped. But god gets to justice and just destroys all of Sodom and Gomorrah. We just have to go one by one through the bible to have a perfect description of the most evil being imaginable: god. Now we can just say that it is only the old testament, but I happen to disagree. The center of the New Testament is the thought of god to torture, humiliate and kill his son, for no crime, to be able to forgive mankind its sins. Now what could possibly be bad about this? If god is all powerful and loving he can do what he wants and e.g.: just forgive mankind, but not with god. god has the special need of human sacrifice to make it fair. Now one could say that Jesus was always such a peaceful character and while this is mostly true, it isn't all of it, as we see in Matthew 10:34: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
Now I think it should be obvious, why I don't think that the bible is a positive thing leading me to god.

But all of this wouldn't matter, if there was a proof that there was such a god. He would be still morally about the worst possible being, but if he exist that has no influence anymore, because not to belief it if it was even well attested would be stupid.

Now seemingly you haven't understood any of the points I made. Directly at the start you say "absence of evidence is evidence of absence... an absurd statement". I would like to know why you think so. I give you a quick example Bertrand Russell used: I state that there is a teapot, which is somewhere in the universe with unlimited power, but is to small to be observed by any of our measurement devices. We have no evidence of it what so ever aside from me claiming it (absence of evidence) and wanting you to worship it. Now I say in respect of your intellect, that you wouldn't believe me and would say that this tea pod doesn't exist and you wouldn't therefore start to worship it (you would take it as evidence of absence). Now please explain to me how it is, that if you put said believe in a two thousand year old book and again have no evidence for it, you would now say it does exist.

Then to come to the point of omnipotence. I am not stating, that I am surprised that there isn't such a stone on the earth to entertain humans, but am aiming at the implications. Now let me explain to you what it means: The question is whether god could (not does) create a stone, which is so heavy that he can't lift it. If you say yes, god isn't omnipotent, because he can't lift the stone. If you say no god isn't omnipotent, because he can't create it. Therefore the thought of a omnipotent god is illogical and he can't be omnipotent. I would like to know how you reconcile this (not by some allusion to why god wouldn't do so).

Now that the biblical god isn't respecting the rights of humans, I have to agree with you. You even provided us with examples on just how bad your supposed god is. Now I also as you can see above agree with you that the god of scripture is "fully prepared to cast you into the bowels of Hell", but I can't agree with you on the proposition, that in your fantasy people will go to hell for being "Lazy, Prideful or Stupid", but rather, because of gods incompetence to provide us (all of us not just one primitive tribe) with evidence that convinces the brain, that he gave us according to you. You go on to point out that the bible shows how malicious and vindictive god is and how unjust he is concerning some stupid rule of his, but I am surprised to see that you say he keeps us from sin as he doesn't want to punish us. I don't really get how you come to that conclusion after quoting god killing two people for taking "wrong fire". He seems to be absolutely thrilled by killing people. You go on pointing out what a bully your imagined god is, where I am again absolutely on your side.
But all of this is absolutely beside the point of the debate, which I remind you is the existence of god. If I belief that the bible is the word of god you don't have to explain to me, that atheism as well as many things no one can influence, such as gender or sexual orientation, are sin. I would know that according to the bible they should be stoned to death (together with quiet a lot of other people).

Now we come to the important part where I am again going to quote you: "These ARE SCRIPTURES OF GOD! I didn't make them up."
Now I know you believ ethat the bible is the infallible word of god, but here we actually touch on something that is important to the debated question. You claim that the bible, a book, which is around 2000 to 2800 years old, is the infallible word of god and is inspired by the divine. While I touched shortly on that in the first round you seemingly need it explained further. In Addition to the extreme age of these books, they are written by illiterate and barbaric palestines. In the case of the new testament, it is also written about 40 years after the death of Jesus (if he even existed (I refer you to Richard Carrier a historian who sincerely doubts it)), by people who where neither eye-witnesses nor had any good eye-witness accounts. On top of that we don't even have original texts, but rather copies of copies of copies from another good time later (they aren't reliable, which is why the eye-witness account of a witness in court is even a day afterwards handled with care (this can be explained by neurology)). Then we have the accounts in the bible which absolutely contradict each other (I wont elaborate but give just a list):
Now we have the question what actually is part of the gospel, as it was changed over the time. This doesn't align with the thought that it is infallible at all. Than there is the problem, that all that is written in the bible is absolutely not fitting the expectations of a divine book. Let me explain that. If someone would think objectively, what you would expect of a book, which is written by a perfect being to instruct humans in order to help them, you wouldn't expect any of the things that actually are in the gospel. You would expect progressive moral values (for he is morally perfect according to religion), for example slavery is wrong.Tthis can't be found anywhere within the bible, as it just gives you instructions on how to treat them (Deu 15,1"23, ...). It should have something interesting scientific in it (because science brought humans a good live), e.g.: the germ theory of disease and that we should wash our hands before dinner. We would expect one version and not different people claiming to posses the perfect word of god (e.g.: bible, koran, ...). Instead of all of this, we have an ancient book which describes about the least moral things, according to illiterate tribes in Palestine, written 40 years after their occurrence and has aside from obvious false statements also a lot of contradictions in it. Now I know you can just say that you don't believe, but it is pretty much clear as soon as you read the bible and listen to modern historians and not just your pastor. Therefore as the bible has no historic value and it is obvious that it was written by man to fit their tribal rules (which mostly weren't that good or just), we can't use it as a source of fact and you can't just quote it as though it were fact.

Now we can come a little to your description, that if I would come to god through Jesus and the atonement of sin I will be saved. The sin you are describing can either be from the action of the Jews in the old testament, which would make us born in sin and commanded to be well, or it could be in some action. Those action such as homosexuality, which I am sure you regard as a sin, aren't chosen (as well as all the others, if we take into account that there is no free will observed). No one chooses to be gay (aside from god making you gay according to you) and no one can change it. The other side would say, that we have sin, because Abraham had sin, of whom we are historically pretty sure that he didn't exist (as well as moses and the egyptian exile). Therefore is the concept of sin not fitting for our experienced world.

Now you describe freedom as being with god for ever, but I can't see in the slightest how a divine north korea you have to stay and be happy in, has anything to do with freedom of any kind.

Therefore I conclude that you haven't made any arguments, but just stated that if you believe in the bible it is obvious. I have shown that believe in the bible isn't in anyway a route to truth and therefore there is no argument for god.
You say that belief in god will come from the sincerity towards him or how you devote yourself to him and it would result in revelation, but I can asserts as many other that this isn't true. Also I don't know why I should call something god, if it needs to be worshiped to be good (your god sounds more like a three year old child to me).


Opinions? THATS your basis of arguement .... HUMAN opinion? Secular opinions ... the sum of MANS KNOWLEDGE, in comparison to the Creator of all things? Let me show you why that"s not wise!

Perhaps it is more likely you and I have different thoughts on what truth actually is. You waste an entire paragraph judging God based on your idea of justice, your idea of morality, then in the SAME BREATH judge God guilty, for the actions of someone ELSE (Lot) Your idea of justice eh? I note that you ALSO adjucate punishment towards God Himself, for the evil done by humanity? Because there IS evil people in the World who do NOT heed God .... say like yourself for example, God is hereby adjudged guility for YOUR CRIMES of injustice ... is that how it works? Because of this He can"t BE God.

And Why? Because He didn"t strike you Dead, instantly for your immoral actions. That"s what you call justice is it? So those who lie, cheat, steal, murder, kidnap, rape .... Gods to blame eh! So that those souls are going to spend eternity in FLAMES of Fire .... not punishment enough huh? So what"s your plan ... send them all to Hell BEFORE they do the deed? Kinda like Minority Report huh?

You should make up your mind? You just whined an entire paragraph about Gods heartlessness .... for what? Injustice? Did you not just do the same thing to God? Unjustly accuse Him guilty for a crime He did not commit! What else have you been unjust in!

Oh yes.... incompetence! You emphatically accuse God of incompetence outright for what? Your presumption! You THINK man can jumble up the scriptures through mankinds ignorance, though the entire Bible foretells the whole of human History FROM BEGINNING TO END!

Excuse me .... but that"s YOUR UNPROVEN OPINION. you haven"t proved that accusation? Where is your evidence proving humanity has been sucked beyond yourself! I certainly haven"t been fooled, i"m fully Biblically knowledgeable. God has seen to it that I study, and am provided guidance through the scripture. Obviously since you doubt Him He leaves YOU ODF"n.

That"s military for "Out Der Flappin" cause Bud you know squat! No wonder why. Your a Legend in your own Mind. No one can teach you. So what do you say.

How bout showing us scripture that PROVES GOD tells humanity to Make His own interpretations of His word. How bout some scriptures that Tells Men to go to Scholars, Theologians, commentaries, or even to Schools at all to learn how to understand His Bible?

Or because YOU don"t believe that MUST mean He doesn"t exist .... I mean because your so smart, so educated, so FAIR and Just. Oh wait ... thats right you Blame God because your a pervert, rapist, thief, liar, charlatan, crook, dead beat dad, adulterer, bully, evil through and through ..... but wait ... IF Gods to Blame for all that .... men by this theory are all guiltless ... according to YOU, maube its God who needs to go to Hell.

Not happening sweetpea. God created Heaven and Earth, and He HOLDS YOU GUILTY, for your OWN stupidity and SIN ... and He"s gonna say it by sending your arrogant butt to HELL junior! So when you speak of Your Creator ... how bout you show some respect son!
Debate Round No. 2


You once more don't understand a word of what I am saying. I know I wont convince you or even show you that you don't argue therefore I will be quick. For all the arguments just READ the arguments I made. You go again over to your assertion that the bible is the word of god and therefore he doesn't want people to question him. I know you hate thinking and logic but I will now show you in an easy way why that can't be working:

You say god exist because the bible says so.
Why should you believe in the bible?
Because it is gods word and he exists.

If you have ever heard of circular reasoning (or reasoning at all) you would notice that you can't argue with that.

Why do I base my arguments on human knowledge?

I can just observe things that the human senses allow me to observe. this builds the reality I am living in. Based on such observations I evaluate my surroundings, for example on the question whether a god exists.

You on the other hand say that you base your knowledge on god. I ASK you to tell me how you know what god wants. There are to sources:
The bible and your own experience (because you can't evaluate something you haven't experienced or ever observed)
Now I have shown why the bible isn't a good source and in my comment I have shown why the experience of god can be scientifically explained to not be very useful. As you can't measure god with some device less attracted to error that our brain, you have no base for your knowledge of god and therefore take it on faith (I ask you why you than don't take the tea pot on faith).

I am not judging the "imagined" god for Lots misbehaviour but that the extinction of a city or the torture and human sacrifice of gods son Jesus isn't a moral proposition and yes I use my morality because unimportant of whether god believes it is just to kill people for using "wrong fire" or not, it is. Also the notion of hell is not just as I described above as ell, because for example something as being gay is not a choice and doesn't harm anyone. To torture someone for something they can't influence (again besides god who according to you made the person gay) and which doesn't harm FOR ETERNITY is also not moral. I am not judging god for the atrocities committed by humans in the bible but for his own. This points out that the bible doesn't describe a good god and therefore if we had now reason to belief in him it wouldn't be something helpful.

I am not saying that it is god who is accountable for human misbehaviour because he hasn't killed them before they did it. I am saying that alone the proposition of hell is the least just and most immoral thing imaginable, as it isn't to little punishment, but unjustly way to much (example being gay).

I state that god is incompetent as he wants to save us according to you but isn't able to give us any evidence for him that would compel people to believe in him. therefore the proposition to punish for not believing is hideous.

then you say that the bible tells all of human history. I am sorry but I can't find an account of science or the industrial revolution anywhere in there. I also can't find something condoning slavery and I am still hopeful that you agree with me that it is immoral.

I am not saying that the bible says that it can be reinterpreted. I am saying that the bible is an ancient book with no evidence of being divine, with contradictions etc. I say that the bible isn't a source of truth. I don't care whether it says I am allowed to think on my own I just do (also the usefulness of people studying the bible) and conclude that the bible isn't the perfect word of the creator of the universe and therefore has no influence on the truth of something.

The problem is not that I am not willing to accept arguments but that I am not willing to accept random assertions you believe to be true as fact. The actual problem is your belief which is dogmatic and doesn't allow arguments.

Now we have again some of your ad hominem attacks and some more assertions that I will go to hell.

Concerning my present knowledge of the nonexistence of arguments in favor of gods existence I am willing to take the risk.


Up to this point you"ve not provided a strand of actual evidence .. just opinion.

(Con states:
I can just observe things that the human senses allow me to observe. this builds the reality I am living in. Based on such observations I evaluate my surroundings, )
Then my young arrogant friend you are incompetent!

Now the topic, of the existence of God hinges on Facts .... NONE of which humanity nor YOU (Con) actually HAVE. Despite your ire, the simple facts are that you simply have NEVER sought God in sincerity, and THIS IS what"s required by scripture! So you see Con And atheists alike. You have challenged His Sovereignty, you have refused to subjugate yourself for Prides sake ... a thing God hates MOST! Hell is the price!

Jeremiah 29:13- You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.
Proverbs 8:13- To fear the LORD is to hate evil; I hate pride and arrogance, evil behavior and perverse speech.

1 Samuel 2:3
"Boast no more so very proudly, Do not let arrogance come out of your mouth; For the LORD is a God of knowledge, And with Him actions are weighed.

These ARE evidence given of the God you don"t know. What YOU don"t know can fill volumes, and more importantly, that YOU don"t know does not constitute TRUTH! Ignorance by willful failure to seek knowledge just makes you uninformed. That limits you understanding of what TRUTH Is. Again, not lack of evidence ... just lack of proclivity to STUDY!

So let us set aside the He said she said. Lets LOOK at THE EVIDENCE.
First .. the Bible. The Bible IS The Ultimate TRUTH! Not opinion, that"s a FACT! That atheists refuse to accept that truth, is not binding on what IS TRUTH, by way of actual experience over superstition! I know because I have had the privilege of having MET God.

That you met someone and tell me and I CHOOSE to refuse to believe you, does not make the meeting any less true! Just means I REFUSE to acknowledge it, by ignorance! Now IF I MET your friend myself ... then I would believe because of experience as opposed to ignorance. But that"s YOUR problem alone!

So Bible IS evidence! Next lets look at evidence of ignorance on the part of humanity!
Review the Evidence!
This is the Scientific paper that PROVED evolution was a myth. False and without basis in fact!

Excerpts: "Miller, along with his colleague Harold Urey, used a sparking device to mimic a lightning storm on early Earth. Their experiment produced a brown broth rich in amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. "

Excerpt: But the Miller-Urey results were later questioned: It turns out that the gases he used (a reactive mixture of methane and ammonia) did not exist in large amounts on early Earth.
When Miller repeated the experiment using the correct combo in 1983, the brown broth failed to materialize.

Excerpt: "It seemed to refute a long-cherished icon of evolution"

That"s evidence of Fact Con! The ICON of evolution was a FAILURE, it didn"t work! Did YOU know this? NO, so because you didn"t know this are we to believe that somehow VOIDS the Truth, in favor of human Delusions. Nonsense! Sure their going to TRY it again... but thats not the point, the point was THEY LIED, and kept spreading the LIE!

But? Even THAT isn"t the point! The POINT is how a World of .... intelligently educated human beings, could swallow, that animal/human Life? Could possibly COME from soup?
That"s the real point! Of the entire animal and human World HOW MANY ARE born from SOUP Con?
Factual Answer: NONE
So this naturally begs the question ... WHY if nothing is born of soup TODAY! Would you be naive enough to believe such a story? Cause they have letters after their name? Please!

NEXT: Abiogenesis (biopoiesis, or informally the origin of life, is the natural process by which life arises from non-living matter, such as simple organic compounds.

Excerpt: The classic Miller"Urey experiment and similar research demonstrated that most amino acids, the basic chemical constituents of the proteins used in all living organisms, can be synthesized from inorganic compounds under conditions intended to replicate those of the early Earth.

Course you NOW KNOW ... the TESTS FAILED! So abiogenesis... is also a Lie! But lets ask the questions anyway, just so you understand this? Name any animal/human living creature you know ... that was birthed by non-organic material in the annals of Science?
Factual answer: NONE

FACTAL DATA: Animal and Human Life is created by Ovum. No creature Life can be produced without FIRST the Ovum!

So IF as we NOW KNOW the origins of LIFE did NOT come from inorganic- material. Where DID it come from?

You have seen the evidence Con? Brown soup was an error in testing, when done RIGHT it did not HAPPEN! So That PROVED abiogenesis is also fiction, false and untrue! No actual Animal or Human Life was CREATED, by inorganic,material, which also establishes as FACT ... Nothing ever crawled OUT of the primordial ooze! You"ve been deliberately LIED TO by evolutionary scientists all these years!

God IS the Origin of Life ... can"t Disprove That can you Con ... you can only CHOOSE to not believe it .... which is NOT lack of evidence, it"s your own ignorance for NOT looking! I HAVE LOOKED and Thats why I have the TRUTH on MY SIDE. you? You got bupkis, Innuendo, imagination, and delusions, nothing more?

Now lets see some PROOF ... with RESULTS that SHOW that a living air breathing animal Life was created by OTHER THAN EGG.

In short my ignorant friends ... Life COULD NOT HAVE EVOLVED... from nothing, IF NOTHING WAS CREATED? Evolution SHOWS and HAS PROVEN no species of animal human life was created throughout the WHOLE evolutionary experimentation process dating back from Darwin to the present! Everything came from .... egg, JUST LIKE it does to this very DAY ... Biology 101.

NEXT: In the beginning, there were simple chemicals. And they produced amino acids that eventually became the proteins necessary to create single cells. And the single cells became plants and animals.

Read more at:

REALLY? Is that statement TRUE Con? CAN YOU SHOW US these plants and animals Scientist created that PROVED their theories? Nope all lies, they never created a Thing! Otherwise NAME the animal/human or Plant came from amino acid? Didn"t did they ... they CAME FROM EGG. These lying Scientists are attempting to infer from no actual proof at all .. that the EGG, formed in the soup. Course they never produced one, but why let TRUTH get in the way?

So name the animal that formed from a single cell other than egg of course cause it HAS to BE produced by an already EXISTENT ANIMAL/HUMAN!

Lie after lie, no proof, but you believed it to be true ... and it was False al along JUST like everything else you said to this point!

God speaks of the How he created Life ... all as adult animals and adult Humans and adult plants ... which NATURALLY PRODUCED EGG AND SEED to populate the Earth ... not brown soup Con! never brown soup!
Debate Round No. 3


Now finally you start to at least in parts come away from just quoting the bible. Lets go through your arguments.

First you sad that it is "incompetence" to not be able to observe things, which the human senses don't allow and that god can't be observed in the human way. So far I agree. Now you say that it is just a fact, which is given to you, if you seek him. Now as you can see in my last arguments I have shown that such experiences of believing people can be explained by neurological studies of their brain activity. This studies of the brain activity (besides others by Andrew Newberg) don't have the need to evoke a supernatural entity to account for the religious experience. The major problem with the claims of experiencing god lye in the problem, that the human experience, as we aren't perfectly rational, is prone to experience things, which aren't happening. This combined with the fact that we can't observe god in any other way, suggests that the accounts given are no useful prove of the existence of god. Now you comprehend the message of the god of the bible rather well as you say that to "refuse to subjugate yourself" is a sin and this again fits into the picture that the bible isn't in fact a document given to us by god, but rather a human document from tribal Palestine, which was devised to build a structure of hierarchy in a society for which religion always was an important base.

Now I agree again that the things I don't know can fill volumes. This isn't surprising at all in the light of the immense amount of matters, which could be known. You then go on to say that I don't know what constitutes truth and I again am willing to say that I can't know it for certain, but what all humans know, is that trough the method of science, which had empirically the best output (better then faith by far), obtains objective facts about our universe. Besides the logical truths discovered by mathematicians it so far seems to be the only way to obtain truth (I would like to know another which you could provide). What you can see throughout history is that religion and faith (which is in conflict with science), doesn't provide truths comparable to those of science (I encourage you to search for similar prosperity in the human race in the 13th century).
Therefore as we don't have any sources of god (the bible is no source) or any evidence for his existence, we can conclude on the basis of our current understanding of truth that he doesn't exist (and I can assure you that there are scientific efforts to find either).

Now you say that the bible is truth, which you again can't back up with evidence, which would dispel my doubts I have expressed earlier about the low likelihood that it actually is divine. Also I have just shown you that you believing to have met god is an absolute non sequitur, as we can account for it in natural ways and can't obtain any evidence for your or someone else's statement to met god. Therefore we would have to say either that all we think we know about science or mathematics is in fact wrong, because someone thinks to have met god, or we accept that the human brain isn't always perfectly rational and people see sometimes things which aren't real (which we know they do). I think for any reasonable person the choice is clear. Therefore I seems both absolutely rational to say that most likely your "meting with god" doesn't show reality, as well as to say if I myself would experience such an event. You could change that if you would present clear (scientific) evidence for this encounter.

Now we come to actual evidence which can be interpreted. Your quote describes that the conditions in the Miller-Urey experiment weren't representing the actual conditions and that with the new conditions the tests run by Jeffrey Bada didn't result in the needed amino acids. The point which you seemingly have missed and which shows that your point is false comes now as it was noticed that amino acids where actually build, but destroyed right after by nitrites which turn the solution acidic. But now we have to take into account that this acid would have been neutralized and with the needed base (which was in the "primordial soup") he got the amino acids (unimportant of the color).

"When he reran it, he still got the same watery liquid as Miller did in 1983, but this time it was chock-full of amino acids."

Now the other building blocks which need cyanide's still seemingly came from meteorites (which isn't in any way unlikely as in the early earth there were many meteorites hitting the earth). This is all absolutely cogent with evolution (even if it all had to come from a meteorite it would still not contradict evolution in the slightest). Even the paper it self describes exactly your reaction as creationists who want to see evolution fall.

"It seemed to refute a long-cherished icon of evolution and creationists quickly seized on it as supposed evidence of evolution's wobbly foundations.
But Bada's repeat of the experiment armed with a new insight seems likely to turn the tables once again. "

Therefore as you seemingly didn't understand what the principle of evolution actually is, I would encourage you to study it again and then also reread the paper you quoted. I would always advise you to first read the whole article you are quoting, because as you see already the paper debunks all of your arguments.

Also no one in science tries to spread an illusion as you can see evolution both on the micro scale in bacteria and in the macro scale if you look at the abundant number of intermediary fossils (

Now your following remarks about evolution really show your ignorance of the subject matter, as you say that neither humans nor animals are born from "soup". If you knew what evolution actually proposes, you would know that there is no one defending the point that animals where directly born from the primordial soup. Evolution started with RNA most likely and went over single celled live to sponges etc. till we at last are now at animals and plants, where humans evolved in the branch of the primates. This doesn't happen directly and doesn't start directly, because it takes time. even though it started relatively fast it was still a matter of several thousand years as it is a process of probability. I encourage you to actually study what evolution is about and you will see that it fits the data very well.

Again the abiogenesis building organic chemistry from inorganic materials as you see above is absolutely consistent and is still very much attested for. How those molecules assemble is so far not fully understood, but for example in the RNA-world hypothesis we have a good basis to assume it started with self-replicating RNA (and peptides according to your second source). That we don't know for sure, isn't in the slightest an argument for god ,as we can say pretty much certainly due to other factors, that this isn't a solving hypothesis (it would be a stupid god of the gaps hypothesis).

The claim that everything start with the Ovum is also false, because you haven't considered the cell division, which was the first mode of proliferation.

I all in all really encourage you to understand about what you are talking. As you see there is no need for a god in the origin of life and it is therefore disproved (your hypothesis isn't the one matching the data).

Now I have also shown that it isn't at all surprising that we haven't build random live in our labs, because it takes time (more than the few years it is studied).

You follow with a source describing that after LUCA as the first common ancestor the evolution is clear and that LUCA according to newest research was build in the interaction between peptides and RNA. Again we don't yet know the exact mechanism, but there is nothing to suggest that it isn't natural (it is a little complex and therefore not easy to find out).
The again we know that single celled life was the precursor of multicellular life, which was build from it with the mechanism of evolution. That not everything living comes from an egg I have already explained. The problem we have for why we can't se a single cell mutate into multicellular life is that it takes time. To be exact from LUCA about 3 billion years therefore again it isn't surprising that we don't find it. No one said that an egg was build in the primordial soup, again learn what you are talking about.

Now to comprehend it there is nothing you say, that even in the slightest contradicts the principle of evolution or which would point to a supernatural begin of life. As we can understand all of that scientifically this still doesn't even hint at a god. I would really encourage you to learn about what you are talking, because it wouldn't have wasted a whole round on demonstrating your scientific illiteracy.

We can conclude over all arguments that you still haven't brought a single one and that there is no reason to believe in the imaginative figure god.


In closing;
Notice how there is ZERO PROOF, in everything Con says?
"But Bada's repeat of the experiment armed with a new insight "seems likely" to turn the tables once again. "

Lets review that statement? "SEEMS LIKELY " What it MEANS is that it still "NOT TRUE"!

Forget that it FAILED huh? Just ignore the failure, You got nerve asking for proof all the while providing NONE yourself! The FACT IS that animal /human LIFE is here and there IS no NATURAL way that we could have gotten here under any Scientific tests done.

The FACT IS that the Biblical account IS THE ONLY PLAUSIBLE explanation FOR LIFE ON EARTH ... PERIOD!

The FACT IS that there are people in existence today, that HAVE actually come into contact WITH The God of the Bible!

The FACT IS the proof of Gods existence IS PROVIDED for humanity within the pages of scripture.

What doesn"t fit the delusion, is simply ignored or not mentioned in rebuttal!
Nothing about Life coming from egg? Doesn"t fit Cons delusion!
Nothing about amino acids being on your shelf in the medicine cabinet, and LIFE isn"t leaping out your cabinets? Doesn"t fit his delusion! Protein-sits in your cabinets, no Life jumping out your cabinets?

Everyone knows REAL Animal/Human LIFE ONLY comes from egg/Ovum/seed! That isn"t going to change for your imagination nor postulation!

Translation ... Evolution is a proven FAILURE and only the blind and unlearned still believe it! THE RESULTS OF THE EXPERIMENT FAILED!The primordial ooze story did not happen in reality! The theory is BUSTED! By Hard Scientific Test Results!

Let us all attempt to put things into proper prospective. The sum total of evidence is what MUST reign supreme. Not conjecture, Not belief nor theory must win over HARD SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE! No matter our conclusion today, it will continually be the goal of humanity, to discover the ULTIMATE TRUTH!

Not TRUTH as defined by ordinary Men, whose reason and integrity can be corrupted, by powers far beyond our own control. We must not allow ourselves to be persuaded by the elite of the world. It is the reasonable responsibility of all souls to determine the universal truth of the existence we inhabit.

Make no mistake there IS a unified universal TRUTH, one that cannot be manipulated by Man! TRUTH as we ALL KNOW ... is a consistent state of reality! Attempts to circumvent Truths of Reality are always doomed to failure! Because it cannot BE circumvented! It has a finality in result! Despite misdirection, fabrication, manipulation in ITS END ... the RESULTS will NEVER alter or change, because it IS TRUTH!

The example ALL readers of this debate have now determined, by RAW DATA, not Pros nor Cons presumptions, opinions, or oration can manipulate the FINALITY of the result ... because the TRUTH always wins out ..... ALWAYS ! Remember that folks!

What was the RESULT! You see. No manner of manipulation, nor FALSE or misleading of data neither fabricated data can ALTER the REALITY OF THE RESULT!

Ladies and Gentlemen ... the results are in! Among all tests conducted by Evolutionary experimentation by the leading minds of this and previous generations ...... NO animal/Human Life was created! NONE.
Thats your answer. That"s the TRUTH! You can deny it , you can refuse to accept it, but evidence will always prove your lying, to people family friends and worse to yourself.

Can"t mature in a Life surround by self inflicted lies.
The Microscopic World and the Physical World ARE and REMAIN distinctly different! The microscopic World REMAINS microscopic forever.

The physical World does not ... it BURST through the microscopic to BECOME PHYSICAL LIFE! From the tiniest of creatures as in the gnat, to the majesty of the Blue Whale, to the grass beneath your feet, to the Massiveness of the Planets, stars and galaxies that are suspended in the Heavens. These are REALITY !

Not imaginary soup that produced nothing? Not single cells forever doomed to remain in the world of the invisible, forbidden to burst forth into OUR Reality! Not microbes which at their end are restricted to the invisible World!

God is REAL, You ARE being held fully accountable for your actions and upon checking OUT of this World, payment comes due and payable!

Ahhh but we left out God? After all that"s what Con has been saying all along ... THERE IS NO PROOF!

Oh you mean like the proof of evolution? Is THIS the proof you seek? That rock hard SCIENTIFIC proof ... that HAS proved your absolutely WRONG about the Origins of LIFE!

The Christian Bible (KING JAMES VERSION 1611 edition) REMAINS the ONLY LIVING TEXT in the WHOLE of Earth!

Living text? It Lives ... because IT IS a saga that IS BEING played out on the World Stage ... even at this moment as you read this! Oh prove it .... goes the Cons? Allow me to answer the Cons of the World on behalf of all Christians everywhere ..... NO! See the Christian Bible is the ONLY Holy Book that, is LIVING .. meaning it IS being played out, in future context! What IS happening CAN be followed IN the Bible, should anyone have the desire to search it!

That"s Gods promise to us (His People). Here: John 13:19
"I am telling you from this time, before it comes to pass, so that when it comes to pass you should believe that I am He."

John 8:24
That is why I told you that you would die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins."

Isaiah 44
6"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. 7Who is like Me? Let him proclaim and declare it; Yes, let him recount it to Me in order, From the time that I established the ancient nation. And let them declare to them the things that are coming And the events that are going to take place.

Isaiah 44:8
Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one."

Now, IF that"s true, we should KNOW when things happen. Yes, we do, that doesn"t mean we know the dates! Just what IS to happen. Like the alignment of the stars in the Heavens that just passed on September 23rd 2017. Had the News media going NUTS! They had been talking about it for years, months and DAYS before the event


Every single news outlet, magazine, radio announcer, internet bloggers, newspapers around the World.... TOLD YOU IT WAS PREDICTED TO OCCUR PRECISELY AS DESCRIBED IN THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE! AND Followed the event until the event Passed Precisely as described in the Bible!

The Cons immediately responded after the event BUT, BUT, BUT the World didn"t END! Like it SAID!
The TRUTH ... from a Christian, that STUDIES, let me enlighten you the bible never said the World would end on that date, or any date!

Here"s the Revelation itself ... Revelation 12
" 12"A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2"She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 5"She gave birth to a son, a male child, who "will rule all the nations with an iron scepter." And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne.

WHERE DOES THIS SAY the World ended? Doesn"t does it! Moreover it tells of a continuing future event that ... IS still in motion! The SIGN spoken of is IN PLAY, the Child born ... the SECOND SIGN is to OCCUR! The moment That SIGN appears ... the First Sign will be fully completed.

Now lets be real folks ... that millions watched the event unfold ... that news organizations GAVE CREDIT to God for having TOLD it before it came about! THAT IS EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

These ARE Evidence that the bible did in fact describe perfectly the alignment of the HEAVENS 2000 years ago! You can DENY it, Ignore it, but evidence it IS! And considerably MORE evidence than anything Con has submitted to disprove Gods existence!
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
Your urge to cheat will be tremendous.
Remember must have been created BY Evolutionary experimentation FROM NOTHING, just like the Scientist CLAIM!
if they borrowed anything from actual living organisims, thats cheating, there WAS NO organisms on earth at its beginning!

Honestly I myself just don"t get you guys .. I mean you easily believe you CAME FROM NOTHING?
But God having put you here is somehow LESS reasonable ?
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
Greetings my friend. You been on my mind.

Yes we ARE all aware of your opinions, and unsubstantiated claims. But for a change.

List the ****Name of the Scientist, *****the experiment done **** AND the result that CREATED an actual animal that has given birth in the same manner as an animal or human! *** Just ONE. ***

Because despite your rhetoric... the entire civilized World knows ... that the SOUP, or bacteria and or even the microbe ..... MUST have produced 1 (ONE) LIVING creature that DID IN FACT crawl out to fill the earth with viable, visible creatures! Over 8 million species at last count!

But see how kind I"m being ? I ONLY ASK for ONE!

Once you put THAT here where WE ALL. Can REVIEW the TEST RESULTS ourselves ... I mean honestly, everybodies be taking the entire planets opinion as FACTS for far to long .. making ignoramus"s out of us all for ages! Time to wake up now don"t you think?

Time to put our big boy and big girl panties on and be adult? Yes?

After you do this ... THEN we"ll talk!

Posted by tfroitz1 3 years ago
You finally accept your own evidence that there were amino acids in the primordial soup.
There is as I already said multiple times no observed start of life in our laboratories. This is as I have also stated due to the time it takes (it just started once as we observe the same genetic code working). We don't so far know how life started, but just that the first life we know of is LUCA (as in your source) of whom everything comes. LUCA is a single celled organism (to your point about whether all life starts with an ovum I can just advise you to look at bacteria). Now the definition of life is that it can self-replicate. The question how life started is therefore actually where the first self-replicating molecule was. Science doesn't know exactly how it worked (RNA or maybe RNA with proteins (which are build from amino acids and that in an order as your source says ( Therefore we can say yes, we don't know the mechanism starting it (you don't know how god did it either), but no that doesn't contradict evolution or hint at a creator.

Now it isn't our obligation to proof the non existence of something as this isn't actually possible (Look at )
Therefore I said right in the beginning that absence of existence is in this case evidence of absence. Therefore provide positive evidence for the existence and don't just assume it.

We now all know that thinking is according to you and your god a sin as you don't "subjugate" yourself, but as we aren't living in the bronze age, the fact that it is written in the bible doesn't help. Now before you actually learn what you talk about, this conversation won't bring us anywhere.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
tfroitz1 refused to show real scientific data to support the conclusions of Evolutionary Scientist. Perhaps you can.
Does life come from the Ovum and seed? Or does it start as amino acid? Medical journals everywhere STATE ovum while botony experts state seed!

tfroitz1 was hopelessly lost in ignorance and capability to escape lunacy, to see what was plainly before him. The Scientific experiment ... that began the Lie of Evolution. In the test itself, it FAILED TO PRODUCE ANIMAL/PLANT/HUMAN LIFE.

It produced only amino acid, which The Entire Medical Profession can tell you produces NO LIFE, never has and never will.

Notice, that RATHER than being SHOCKED that you have been sucked all these years? You have done EXACTLY as all the unbelievingly did! Not acknowledged the TRUTH, and diverted you attention back to the stupid (stu"pid- adjective1. having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.) unproven statement of the unresearched portion of the World.

God is a belief, not real!
Really, and you have PROVEN this by research and study? NO!
I see, like the rest of your kind (athiests) YOU FEEL WE SHOULD do all the research FOR YOU!
Uhhhh ... NO.
Hell or Heaven ... those are your choices! Note I said YOUR choices not tfroitz1, or Followerof Christ, or missmedic, or pinnochio1 ..... YOURS Marta10. The choice YOU MAKE, determines your eternity, so choose wisely, do the RIGHT THING ... stop talking trash, and START LOOKING, Reading, Studying ... not blogs, not opinions, not scholars, not Theologians.... the BIBLE and Prayer is ALL you need ... the second you open your HEART in truth and sincerity ... the God of Creation WILL COME to YOU ..... HIMSELF! Right in YOUR ROOM, no matter WHERE you are at that time!

Till then I hope you don"t mind if I ignore your ignorant statements, though I will answer reasonable questions!
Posted by Marta10 3 years ago
the existence of god is a belief and only a belief, I believe there is none, but there is no proof of how it exists.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
Ahhh, MORE proof that Con is just not capable of listening at all.
Are you telling me you DON"T KNOW that anmal/Human Life comes from egg and "NOT" amino-acid?

Let me dumb this down a bit more? The SOUP? Did not produce LIFE, therefore it is NOT the Origin of Life because it produced NONE.

I"m beginning to think your not intelligent! Its best for me to move on, because your understanding of ..... well EVERYTHING is seriously impaired!

Believe whatever you like, and go see about getting some additional tutelage in ... well in everything! I"m glad your not on our side! And I know that"s probably offensive to you but ... I"m just being honest with you!

WOW! Bye Con.
Posted by tfroitz1 3 years ago
Now if you aren't capable of reading your own source I am going to just quote it to you:

"When he reran it, he still got the same watery liquid as Miller did in 1983, but this time it was chock-full of amino acids." (

Your point is based on the perception it that it didn't work, but it DID!!!! JUST READ!!!!

Now you have already with your absolute ignorance of even the rudimentary parts of the theory of evolution demonstrated so clearly that you haven't understood even a single word in the papers describing evolution, that I can affirm even if you have studied those test that you with certainty didn't understand a word. LEARN WHAT EVOLUTION IS!!!

No one says that the primordial soup build first animals but that over the course of the last 3 billion years single cellular life evolved into humans. IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, LEARN EVOLUTION!!!

Then it is a sign of good work to not just directly state something as fact. You should know that, as your points show that with the first criticism they collapse. Scientists aren't as arrogant as to say it is a fact because it is always more to be learned. The only people how are certain are those who don't understand it in the slightest and are ruled by irrational bronze age doctrines. People such as you!!!

I recommend you some sources with which are easy enough to understand. Before making another embarrassingly stupid point LEARN IT!
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
Well, facts are facts. You are incompetent, because you never a tually looked up the results on ANY evolutionary experiment. I spent over a year, might have been 2, verifying that literally every test was a FAILURE. Not a single living physical animal has ever been created.

All they could do was promise that something WOULD GROW in a billion years! How stupid is that? You actually despite that you took biology in school, KNEW all living creatures on earth came from ovum, and all plants came from SEED. And you let some smooth talker convince you you came from brown soup and amino-acid.

And here you are using big words to make yourself feel like you know anything, but were to ignorant.... I don"t know. Do you call someone ignorant for "NOT" actually reading the test papers? Or does that fall into the dog-lazy category?

Tell us, didn"t the WORDS being used catch you attention ... you know words like, " it is believed " "it suggests " "could infer" " was agreed" "points to" oh and the big one " Seems Likely" hehehe, you athiest just live a world of thoughts com0leyely contrary to ratinal thought.

But In your defense God did say ....Isaiah 6:9 9He said, "Go and tell this people: "R39;"Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving." 10Make the heart of this people calloused;
make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."

Athiest really anger the Lord!
Posted by tfroitz1 3 years ago
Now I can"t just lets such nonsense stand there. I won"t even bother with evolution as you can just READ my arguments AND your quoted paper (you will see I haven"t ignored even one of your points). Also think back that the biblical account is packed with contradictions and isn"t a plausible explanation at all (again LOOK at my arguments). The bible, as I have already EXPLAINED, isn"t a historical source and can"t therefore be taken, to prove.
You finally accept that it is "HARD SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE!" that matters if we want to get truth and my arguments as well as your quotes show just that: SCIENTIFIC PROOF. And this is actually obtained by just humans and shows nothing but the natural world. To conclude I have to say to you LEARN WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! This is especially needed if you say things like the microscopic world isn"t physical, which is so absolutely wrong, that it can't be described. Just an example: the human Sperm and Ovar can just be seen under the microscope and you noticed that it develops in something a human eye can see.
Now about the bible we don"t have to talk any more (it is clearly not scientific) (also why the King James Version as an edition which represents copies of copies of copies). I can"t remember when the last thing happened that was foretold by the bible. Your quotes just say that god says he will foretell something but doesn"t do it at all. What you say to be a sign predicted by the bible was in fact just a solar eclipse, which is in fact not often, but not that rare either (It is pretty much inevitable that after the described event there will be the same over again (there where many)). The quote from Revelation though doesn"t mention the solar eclipse. It also doesn"t mention, why it occurs (not really good). But as you have now excepted that scientific facts build truth we know, that it is just a specific angle in which earth, sun and moon stand.
Now again to conclude: LEARN ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING!!!!
Posted by tfroitz1 3 years ago
Only a quick reply: @Asym

Seemingly as well as my opponent you don't understand the theory of evolution at all. Why your example doesn't describe evolution is that your IPhone isn't alive and therefore doesn't reproduce or mutate. Therefore it has nothing to do with it. Also even though you think that an explosion is something messy it is actually the case that it is always an increase in entropy. The early universe was very much ordered and with the big bang it produced additional disorder. What we see is mostly a messy universe.

I have answered your weird arguments but let me shortly reply to what you say here. The only thing you are doing is to say that because you have learned to believe you do so. You do it not even noticing that you have left all reason and thinking behind you. If you want truth or something as close to truth as it can be you need to observe it and think about is. Now I encourage you to start thinking again, this is what you seemingly absolutely stopped
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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