The Instigator
Masterful
Pro (for)
Tied
1 Points
The Contender
2far4u2CharlesDarwin
Con (against)
Tied
1 Points

God does not exist. Prove your stance.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 724 times Debate No: 112962
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

Masterful

Pro

I'm looking for a rational religious person to talk to. If you are not rational or have an I.Q of less than 80 then you should not accept this debate.

Rules:

1. No Bible quotes are allowed as Bible quotes do not prove anything.
2. No insults.
3. State your views.
4. dsjpk5 is not allowed to vote on this debate, he a a known vote spammer and his votes don't mean jack.

If rule 4 is broken Moderators will be contacted.
If any other rules are broken, points should be deducted at the voters discretion.

Keep it as concise as possible we don't want to hear a rant we want substance. If you ain't got any then don't accept.

My views: I don't think a God exists. Using 'God did it' is the same as saying 'it's magic'
2far4u2CharlesDarwin

Con

ag|nos"tic
[aɡG2;n;4;st=8;k]

NOUN
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.
synonyms: sceptic " doubter " questioner " doubting Thomas " challenger " scoffer " cynic " unbeliever " disbeliever " non-believer " rationalist " nullifidian
ADJECTIVE
relating to agnostics or agnosticism.
synonyms: sceptical " doubting " questioning " unsure " cynical " unbelieving " disbelieving " non-believing " faithless " irreligious " rationalist " nullifidian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So this is you is it please correct me if you do not fit these criteria in any manner or form?

so, in other words, you are a fence sitter or for the sake of it an undecided atheist or an undecided religious person.

Where are your own foundations or don't you have any starting point for your own existence. Or don't you even believe that you exist? there is nothing in nothing and there is no excuse to believe in nothing as you still believe in nothing. So is nothing something as for the point of existence or even the starting letter of this conversation. What was it again A for agnostic?

If you can answer this one question I would thank you from the bottom of my heart and be forever be indebted to your masterful IQ level.

Could an existence creator have unconditional love if free will was taken from its own creation "us", by coming out from behind an eclipse,"death" as to crucify it's own and our own free will?

Free will; I don't know you. I only know of you. If I ever knew myself at all. Say what you mean and mean what you say is not mean it's meant from the heart. Sometimes we need to be cruel to be kind, but don't forget the golden rule.

The golden rule; What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself.
Debate Round No. 1
Masterful

Pro

You can define me as a rationalist if you want. I asked for an insight into your own beliefs, but you haven't touched upon them.

I will try and answer all your questions. Though some are of your questions are poor.

1] You have a paragraph where you ask for what I believe my starting point was. As you were unspecific I will answer with:
My starting point was in my mothers womb.

2] You ask if I think I exist, you then assert I believe in nothing:
Of course I think I exist and I don't even believe something came from nothing unlike you.

3] You ask if an existence creator could have unconditional love if free will was taken from its own creation.
Well clearly not if that existence creator allows people to be born with birth defects and in some instances born to die in the first year of their life.

4] The rest is dribble.

If your second round is as poor as your first round then I'll remake this debate with someone else.

I'd like to ask a few questions.

1] Why do you believe in God?
2] What traits does your God have? Does he know all and is he he all powerful?
3] How old do you think the Earth is?
2far4u2CharlesDarwin

Con

So you have done no more than to attack the messenger to reveal your own flawed logic by doing so. Not only have you done this you have not even comprehended the question put forward as you have not even at least tried.

I am starting to think that masterful IQ level has problems with comprehension. Or is it that you are another monotone abuser that hide behind apathy? Unintentionally or intentionally within your own confluence.

so let us try this again, shall we?

Could an existence creator have unconditional love if free will was taken from its own creation "us", by coming out from behind an eclipse,"death" as to crucify it's own free will?

Why not even try to explain to me what you believe free will actually is. Or have you no belief of that as well?
Debate Round No. 2
Masterful

Pro

I knew you'd give me a poor debate. If you read my response 3 you can see I answered your stupid question, you failed to answer any of mine. I will no longer debate you due to this. Thanks for making me remake this debate...

Your I.Q is below 80.
2far4u2CharlesDarwin

Con

So much for that.
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Masterful
White trolled.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Emily77// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Pro (S&G, Arguments), 1 point to Con (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Con couldn't produce a reasonable argument of any kind. Pro should have continued on with the debate despite it being seemingly one-sided.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain S&G. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. Even if one side didn"t produce an argument, the voter must assess the relevance of the other side"s arguments. (3) Conduct is insufficiently explained. The voter is required to show how one side was insulting, forfeited a round, or violated the rules of debate. No other reason may be used to award this points.
************************************************************************
Posted by 2far4u2CharlesDarwin 3 years ago
2far4u2CharlesDarwin
The statement below was intended for Don't beat me Master full of anger. Not you tanner-1230 as I had not noticed you voted on this joke of a debate and being suppressed that anyone other than the atheist club would bother.
Posted by 2far4u2CharlesDarwin 3 years ago
2far4u2CharlesDarwin
Is that a hide tanner from animals or is that to go sunbaking?

You are obviously a fence sitter that leans one way or another on a debate bases protocol.
If you're going to continue to sit upon the fence of indecision, don't deceive yourself by going out on limbs that break and tangents that do no more then, to let yourself down.

Peace be with you.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Masterful
Tanner how can I make a counter point to a claim of God, when my questions go ignored by con?
Posted by 2far4u2CharlesDarwin 3 years ago
2far4u2CharlesDarwin
Been holidaying have you Im-intelligent. Haven't seen you about for a while.
Posted by 2far4u2CharlesDarwin 3 years ago
2far4u2CharlesDarwin
Well, it's the big man with a brain. Good for you.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Masterful
This debate is going to be remade due to the participant not stating his views and neglecting my response to his questions.
Posted by Im_Intelligent 3 years ago
Im_Intelligent
welp
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Masterful
The creator of the universe.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tanner_1230 3 years ago
tanner_1230
Masterful2far4u2CharlesDarwinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Terrible debate if Pro put forth any real points instead of merely counterpoints I would have voted for him. Also since he broke his own rule by insulting his opponent gave conduct points to con. This was a poor debate.

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