The Instigator
An0nym0use
Con (against)
The Contender
Percivil
Pro (for)

God Exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
An0nym0use has forfeited round #3.
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: 6/3/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 480 times Debate No: 114891
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

An0nym0use

Con

1st round is for acceptance only.
No new arguments are to brought up in the 4th round.

Definitions:
God is defined as the Christian God (omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent)
Omnipotent: Able to do anything
Omniscient: Knows everything
Omnibenevolent: Possessing infinite benevolence and being morally perfect
Percivil

Pro

Good day to everyone here. Im Percivil and I will be for the motion which is whether god exists. I wish my opponent good luck in the following rounds of the debate and I hope that the voters vote fairly.
Debate Round No. 1
An0nym0use

Con

Thanks for accepting.

In this debate, I will be presenting 2 arguments that show that the existence of God is impossible, and a further two that argue it is highly unlikely that God exists.

1) The Logical Problem of Evil:
(From Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [1]):
1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
5. Evil exists.
6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil.
7. Therefore, God doesn't exist.
This proposition shows that it is logically impossible for God to exist.

2) Paradox of an Omni-God [2]:
God's "Omni" attributes (omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence) raises a number of paradoxes that makes said attributes inconsistent with one another and therefore impossible for them to exist at once.
1. If God knows everything (due to his omniscience), he knows what it feels like to lie. If he knew what it feels like to lie, he must have done it, therefore undermining his omnibenevolence.
2. If God can do anything (due to his omnipotence), God can cause an unpredictable event. If he did so, he would not be able to know the outcome of the event, therefore undermining his omniscience.
3. If God can do anything, he can create an object he cannot move. If he were unable to move that object, however, he would not be able to do anything therefore undermining his omnipotence.

In conclusion, these two arguments concisely explain why the existence of God is logically impossible.
I will be presenting two more arguments next round that show God's existence is highly improbable in the unlikely event the opposition manages to circumvent my arguments.

Thank you for reading.

Sources:
1) https://plato.stanford.edu...
2) https://en.wikipedia.org...
Percivil

Pro

Argument:
In the 8th century,during a mass,the bread and wine turned into actual flesh and blood. Years later,scientists investigated the miracle and came to the following conclusions:
1.The Flesh is striated muscular tissue of the myocardium (heart wall), having no trace whatsoever of any agents used for preservation.

2.The Blood and the Flesh were found to belong to the rare blood type AB.

3.The Blood of the Eucharistic miracle was found to contain the following minerals: chloride, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium, all normal components of blood. The protein components were normally fractionated with the same percentage ratio as those found in normal fresh blood.

4.All the scientists agreed that the Flesh and Blood would have rapidly decayed without effective preservatives.

Professor Linoli, famous for anatomical studies, conclusively excluded the possibility of a fraud, affirming that no human hand could have made such an expert cut from the Heart, which was made tangentially, that is, a round cut, thick on the outer edges and lessening gradually and uniformly into the empty central area.

Source:http://www.traditioninaction.org......

Oh and a little bit more about the miracle of lanciano,when scientists cut the piece of flesh,each piece was 15.85 grams. How is this special? Take a look:
Original piece:15.85 grams
Each cut piece:15.85 grams
Source:https://www.michaeljournal.org......

If god does not exist, then how could this miracle have occured? Is it plausible to say that this can be explained by science when there is no scientific explanation for this? I"m open for explanations but the last I checked there was not a single explanation for this miracle. And if you"re wondering why there isnt an explanation for this(or at least one I could not find) from science,the definition of a miracle is an event which is inexplicable by natural or scientific laws and hence attributed to divine agency. Oh and trust me if you can debunk this with science, you"d win the nobel prize or something even greater.

Question for my opponent:
If god does not exist, is it plausible to say this can be explained by science when there is no scientific explanation for this?

Rebuttal(s):
"2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
5. Evil exists.
6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil.
7. Therefore, God doesn't exist.
This proposition shows that it is logically impossible for God to exist."
If both evil and god exists, doesnt it already proove god exists? Anyways moving on:In the movie infinity wars,the character doctor strange gave Thanos the time stone and that in the end caused Thanos to win at the end of the movie. But if you watched the movie closely,you would have noticed the infinity gauntlet was shattered after Thanos snapped his fingers. So sometimes to win,we need to take a step back. This is the exact same thing over here. God is letting evil have a temporary win in order to win. That point was for things like demons. For evil on this earth:Never forget god gave us free will but people chose to abuse it and hence evil. And this is the work of demons and hence it goes back to my first point with the infinity war reference.

"1. If God knows everything (due to his omniscience), he knows what it feels like to lie. If he knew what it feels like to lie, he must have done it, therefore undermining his omnibenevolence." God created all things,all feelings so just because he knows what it feels like to lie doesnt mean that he did lie.

2."God can cause an unpredictable event. If he did so, he would not be able to know the outcome of the event, therefore undermining his omniscience." Firstly,if you cause something, you would know the outcome. Lastly, you said and I quote,"If he did so..." By saying the word IF it means it didnt happen so your point wont be of any use.

"3. If God can do anything, he can create an object he cannot move. If he were unable to move that object, however, he would not be able to do anything therefore undermining his omnipotence." Put yourself into the shoes of god:you are making things for pretty much the entire universe. Why would you want to make something which cant be moved? Plus you already said the word IF so it means it hasnt happened yet as stated in my previous rebuttal so your point wont make much use.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Percivil 3 years ago
Percivil
Too late bruv...
Posted by tejretics 3 years ago
tejretics
@An0nym0use

I'm willing to debate you on this topic, if:

(1) I can defend a generic God rather than the Christian God.

(2) God is defined as "the sentient creator of the universe." Or the word "conscious" to replace "sentient." You get what I mean.

I'm willing to negotiate on (2), though, or add certain characteristics if you want them there.
Posted by JeffreyMcInally 3 years ago
JeffreyMcInally
Hi An0nymouse,
I am willing to compete against you in this debate, however, I am unable to accept due to my low rank.

I am asking if you may make an exception and allow me to compete against you in this debate.
Thanking you in advance,
Jeffrey
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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