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

Is God Real?

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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/3/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,218 times Debate No: 90587
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (2)




A lot of people have been saying that there is no God. I don't know if this has been debated on before, but I figured I'd hear what unbelievers have to say and how strong their argument is about God.

First off, let's start out with the Big Bang Theory. Scientists say that the world started out as a timy clump of matter, then just started expanding. If so, where did that matter come from? And don't say other matter, because then where did that come from?

Also, there's the idea of evolution. What proof is there that we evolved from primates? What would cause us to lose our tail and hair? If there was a predator to the monkeys, they'd all be dead except for the ones that had the special traits. Why, then are there still both monkeys and humans?

Read this article for proof on why God is real.

For proof that is mostly original, look around you at the plants, trees, clouds. Look at the details. Are these really created by chance? What are the chance that carbon molecules randomly collide and make complex life forms?

Thanks for reading. Please say what's in your head; I won't be offended by anything unless you call me a ---- (pick your four-letter word) idiot.


I thought I would start out by answering your questions in order.

The "clump of matter" was actually a singularity of all the energy in the universe. Right now we are unsure where this singularity came from or why it "banged". In fact, there is a newer hypothesis that suggests that the universe didn't start as a singularity and has just always been here. I'm not going to talk about it because a) it doesn't have a whole lot of research yet b) I know very little about it. If you want a detailed explanation of the first moments of the universe there are videos on youtube.

You and many others against evolution seem to think we evolved from monkey's. It's simple, we didn't. Think of a human, monkey, gorilla, baboon mixture thing. This is our common ancestor. It has gone extinct because it was out competed. Thinking on the evolutionary timeline monkeys are equal to us +/-. The proof is fossil evidence of intermediate forms. I can explain more if you want next round.

Ah, details. Many people, even those who trust evolution don't know/understand how the first cell came to be. A cell is basically a bubble with some stuff inside. The bubble is closed off by a cell membrane. A membrane is a phospholipid-bilayar. For those who are not science savvy this is like a bunch of fat molecules that look like tadpoles with two tails, and the tadpoles are facing away from each other. The tails face inward and the head faces outward. I'd make a drawing if I could. Using the fossil record we know that the elements needed for making these lipids were present on the earth when we estimate the first cells were created. You'll have to forgive me because I can't remember the names of the scientists who conducted this experiment but basically they proved that when these necessary elements were lifted into clouds and struck by lighting during storms. This energy allowed the elements to fuse together to form these lipids which then naturally came together to form a bilayar. This was when the first cell was made. From there it gained organelles (another story for another day) and then after a couple billion years there was a diverse group of organisms and multi celled organisms came into existence and sexual reproduction began which sped the mutation and thus evolution rate incredibly and that event began the Cambrian explosion (google it). From there land mammals, large plants, fish ect. evolved. So no, plants and trees today were not just random carbon molecules smashed together and neither was the first group of cells. Also, certain structures benefit the organism which allows it out compete others and thus reproduce more spreading its beneficial gene. In order to get a simple high school level grasp of evolution is not something that can be done in 8,000 characters or less so going any further into how certain genes prevail and why just isn't worth it.

Clouds, if you don't know how the water cycle works, it doesn't surprise me that you believe in a god. I'm sorry if that seemed harsh but clouds and the water cycle is like 5,6th grade stuff.

Many creationists also claim something like "look at our world, so complicated it must have an intelligent creator." This gets us no where. Look at a detailed multi-face wrist watch. It's complicated and it obviously has an intelligent creator, we know that for a fact. But also look at videos of electricity traveling through wood and burning beautiful patterns. They are intricate and complicated, but they don't have a creator, it's just electricity doing it's thing.

My questions for you:

Do you know a simple history of your bible and if so why do you refer to it as the word of god if it was written centuries after Jesus's death?
What's your opinion on the corruption of the church in medieval Europe? Specifically in the Holy Roman Empire.
Where did your god come from? Was he always there?
Do you take biblical stories literally like the garden of eden?
How in the world would an ark carry all species on earth, even ones we don't know about?
What about extraterrestrial life if it exists?
How could a flood 15 cubits deep (22.5 ft) cover even the highest mountains?
Debate Round No. 1


Sorry about the cloud analogy, it was a bad reference. You're right about that - it is a cycle. However, it's a cycle put in motion by God. You also have a good point about the "common ancestor" part of it - we do have some similarities, but you're kind of dodging the question. What would cause our common ancestor to lose our tail and fur? Also, about the universe existing forever, wouldn't life have happened much, much sooner if that were the case? Wouldn't we already be advanced enough to have, say, flying cars, or control over gravity (besides centripital force)?

In answer to your questions:

Q. Do you know a simple history of your bible and if so why do you refer to it as the word of god if it was written centuries after Jesus's death?

A. I have read through almost the whole Bible (except for the latter part of the Old Testament) and understand it (although Revelations is pretty tough; it uses a lot of analogies). I'd consider it to be the Word of God because of a few reasons: the Old Testament battles, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, and outside proof.

To start, let's look at the Old Testament (OT) battles. At church, my pastor recently discussed the invasion of Caanan by the Israelites. In particular, he referenced a stone in which was carved a story that exactly matches that of the Bible - same names, same plot, same everything. Of course the Caananites made it sound as if their losses were less severe, but still, that's some evidence. There are also many other Old Testament references that can be verified by outside artificats.

Now for the Resurrection. One of the gospel-writers (I forget who) wrote that two women were the first to see Jesus. Women were not even considered reliable court witnesses back then, so he would only write that if it was true. Also, 500 people are recorded to have seen Jesus after he was raised from the dead, and some of them were still alive when the words were written (In other words, you could have gone and asked them). Also, the Bible was written before and after Jesus' death, but no more than a century after. Everybody that wrote in the New Testament had seen Jesus, even Paul, who saw Jesus in a vision after he was resurrected.

Finally, outside sources. Recently, near the top of Mt. Ararat there were remnants of a large boat discovered. Here's the link:, as mentioned earlier, there's the stone from the invations of Caanan. Lastly, there's the Hebrew slaves in Egypt. Here's the link for more info on that:

Q. What's your opinion on the corruption of the church in medieval Europe? Specifically in the Holy Roman Empire.

A. Ooh, this is a toughy. People wanted power, and they saw an easy way to get it by forcing their religion on people. Just look at the Middle East and how they enforce their religion. You mentioned the Roman Empire. They were wrong to force their religion on people and should have left that for the people to decide. Adding extra sacraments was an easy way to exercise control over people in those days. Now it's raising taxes ;) Corruption is what happens when you get people that are hungry for power, and a lot of the churches these days are corrupted by people that are set on their own agenda (notice that I didn't say that all of them were corrupt, just many of them).

Q. Where did your god come from? Was he always there?

A. I believe that He was always there, like the universe you talk about. He just got sick and tired of being the only living thing around.

Q. Do you take biblical stories literally like the garden of eden?

A. I do, however there are many parts of the Bible that are analogies. Take the book of Revelations, for example. It speaks of dragons and stuff like that, which are obviously not real and should not be taken literally. They're a way of speaking through stories.

Q. How in the world would an ark carry all species on earth, even ones we don't know about?

A. If we'll go with your evolutionary idea, there were fewer species of animals and plants on Earth at the time when Noah's ark was made. Also, most of the species we're aware of live in water. The ark had over 100,000 ft^2 of room on it. There's also the fact that in Genesis, it says "created kinds" and not "species", so it's possible that less than 50,000 animals needed to be on the ark. Here's the link I used for some of the information: read it, as it goes into much more depth that I can right now.

Q. What about extraterrestrial life if it exists?

A. If there is extraterrestrial life, I would just naturally assume that God saw no need to put that in the Bible, as the Bible is the story of how God helped humanity, not ET.

Q. How could a flood 15 cubits deep (22.5 ft) cover even the highest mountains?

A. You have a point. This website vaildates your "15 cubits" reference: also goes into depth about this most likely just being the minimum height needed for the ark to float. Eventually the water level raised higher. As the website says here: "But at least we can know that the depth of water between the ark and any submerged high spot was at least ‘fifteen cubits’."

My rebuttals to what you said:

1. "Many people, even those who trust evolution don't know/understand how the first cell came to be." Exactly my point. People can't explain it because you can't expect complex cell to form by chance and circumstances.

2. "Right now we are unsure where this singularity came from or why it 'banged'." Because there is no explanation that makes sense.

My questions:

1. Do you believe in the Big Bang Theory, even there's not really any evidence to support it?

2. If the world is governed by chance (particles being sucked up into clouds and then struck by lightning), why are we still revolving around the sun? If it's chance, couldn't the laws of gravity suddenly change? Wouldn't genetic mutations be much more common?

3. If you found even more outside evidence, would you believe that what the Bible says is true?

Great discussion so far! Just so you know, I am taking a required course on evolution (not my favorite subject) in my Science class, so I know the basics on that. That's why I mentioned the idea of natural selection. Thanks for debating!



Some of your rebuttals show that you didn't quite understand what I was trying to say.

First re-rebuttal:
When I said most people don't know how the first cell formed, I wasn't saying that we don't know, it's just not common knowledge. To be completely honest. There is no absolute evidence to the hypothesis I gave (hence I called it a hypothesis) but the experiment I discussed is strong, yet not complete, evidence towards that conclusion. Have you ever heard the saying "If you hear hove beats think horses not zebras." because it's a lot like that. Furthermore, the first cell as I described is on the verge of not even being a cell. The scientific community is still deciding whether to call these bubble cells or steps towards early life. I personally think they are cells but the facts are open to interpretation. I will call them cells from now on. These first cells were not complicated. They were empty shells. Organelles like ribosomes and vacuoles, yes by chance, developed inside these shells. They started out as bubbles inside of bubbles and then it became more common. Then, the cells with these organelles became able to replicate and spread the structures inside of themselves. In short, the first cells as I described were extremely simple and over time, in very small increments, developed organelles, structures, and DNA/RNA.

Second re-rebuttal:
There is strong evidence that the big band happened. Background radiation for example. The radiation patterns in space show that it all originated from one very small area. Also, the galaxies around us are moving away faster and faster. This hints that they still moving from the explosion and because they are still speeding up this shows us that the explosion is still new and the expansion won't stop anytime soon.

My responses:

1: I'm not sure what you mean when you say there isn't a lot of evidence. Above I discuss two pieces of evidence that strongly show that at least some sort of explosion gave birth to the measurable universe. And yes, I do believe in the BBT.

2: The statement "The universe and everything in it was made/formed by chance" is true and false. The laws of the universe govern how things work. They dictate how and what will happen. There is even an equation that can be used on pretty much anything. In a particle accelerator, it can be used to calculate precisely where the pieces of the smashed particles will go. However, until we know any better, I would say that these laws developed by chance when the universe started. These laws to change so gravity won't reverse randomly. When you ask about genetic mutation I assume you mean in a evolutionary way. In fact, mutation happen all the time. Cancer in generally a mutation in the P53 gene (I'm not going to go into detail why but I will if you ask). Odds are you have already had cancer once if not more in your life. Your immune system takes care of the mutated cell but almost every time you go in the sun one of your cells gets a minor mutation. The more rare mutations are the beneficial ones.

3: The evidence would have to be very very strong and even then I might need absolute proof of god and the bible. To add, if this were to happen, I would accept the existence of a god but I most likely would not adopt the moral code and other things about Christianity (or any other religion for that matter) regardless of the existence of a creator or not.

4: There are currently three competing theories about how we lost our body hair. 1: Our closest ancestors were moving away from our primate cousins and began to gradually live more around the water. They swam frequently and collected food from shallow waters. They lost their hair slowly because those with more hair had a harder time drying out and swimming fast enough to catch fish. 2: If you didn't know already, humans originated from around central Africa. Losing our hair meant we could regulate our d=body heat more effectively. 3: Sexual selection drove our hair away because we, even today, see clear skin as a sign of a healthy mate. We kept some of our body hair also as a sign sexual maturity and health.
My questions:

1: What evidence do you have that shows that god put cycles (water cycle, rock cycle), laws (gravity, thermodynamics), ect. into place?

2: Why did god decide to make the earth 6,000 years ago if he has been here forever? Why not sooner?

3: You said "created species" which, as I read it, implies that there were not as many species got on the ark as there are today. Does this mean you think more species were created after the flood or you believe in evolution after the flood?

Note: You said I mentioned the Roman empire. I did not I mention the Holy Roman Empire. They are two very different things. It's not very important but I thought I would clarify anyway.
Debate Round No. 2


Sorry I couldn't get back to you sooner, I was busy with other things.

Note to your note: when I said Roman Empire, I meant the Holy Roman Empire, I just didn't type it out. Context, I hoped, would clarify that.

I'll answer your questions first:

1. Think about it this way: look at our Earth. We're "lucky" that it's at just the right distance from the sun for life to "spontaneously appear". If you don't believe in a god, than that's just dumb luck. Have we even come across life other than that on this planet? The answer is "no" because no other planet that we know of houses the right conditions. Not even Gliese 832c.

Also, think about gravity. It's consistent throughout the universe. Why? Just "dumb luck"? It always follows the same rules. Also, there is thermodynamics, like you mentioned. Think about entropy: things begin to be destroyed as soon as they're made. God's a perfect god. There's nothing else that can be perfect.

As for cycles, just look at the Bible and the surrounding cultures. Nobody except the Israelits knew about the water cycle.

All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again. Ecclesiastes 1:7

If the clouds be full of rain, they empty themselves upon the earth: Ecclesiastes 11:3a

He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth; he makes lightnings for the rain; he brings the wind out of his treasuries. Psalm 135:7

Check out the website for more info on this:

2. Like I said, He just got sick and tired of being the only living thing. Scientists may be correct in that the universe was created 15 billion years ago, but time flies for God, and 6 days are not six literal days, but rather millions and millions of years. "One day is to THE LORD JEHOVAH as a thousand years" 2 Peter 3:8

It's impossible to fully understand an infinite God. He doesn't have to wait for anything, since He's not bound by time. He doesn't have to worry about the future, because He's been there.

3. I've always said I don't belive in evolution, but I guess I meant about humans. The evolutionary theory does make sense after the flood. Accidental mutations happen all the time, as you said. However, it's quite possible they were brought about by God.

My rebuttals:

Read this for information disproving the BBT:;

Look at the human bodies. How many mutations would cause a skin cell to mutate into an eye cell, or an eardrum cell, or a neuron? If what you say is true about mutation, would we in the next million years have eyes in the back of our heads? Yeah, it sounds ridiculous and it's a crazy example, but would we have gray skin color, for example?

Ribosomes and DNA formed by chance?! DNA, which makes up our looks and functions, formed by chance?! DNA that has 3 BILLION base codes, formed by chance?! It's like saying computers spontaneously appear in nature, with nothing to build them! Sorry, but that just sounds insane.

Background radiation is just light. When God created the universe, he started out with light. "Let there be light!" It quickly expanded, causing what most see as the Big Bang, when really it was just light moving at the speed of light to the end of the universe. Also, what is the universe expanding into? Nothing?

My questions:

2. If it takes an smart being to write a dictionary, then would it not also take an smart being to produce the equivalent of 1000 encyclopedias full of information in even one-celled living things?

3. What causes common moral codes? If we evolved and soon formed into different packs and spread out, wouldn't we have different moral codes? Why do we have the same moral codes?

4. What makes more sense to you: something making something, or nothing making something? Because the latter is what the Big Bang Theory states. (BTW, this is put into very simple terms.)

Awesome debate, look forward to hearing your response.


My rebuttals in order:

1) Yes we are lucky regarding our circumstances and intelligence. Because of this intelligence we can make decisions and fight our evolutionary desires to reproduce and survive. My atheism isn't chance, it is me using my intelligence and experiences I have had to reach a conclusion and make a decision. You're right, we haven't found any other life yet but the universe is so extremely vast that the chances are almost 100% that there is another life supporting plant out there. Humans at the moment are in an exploration dead zone. We already explored our planet but aren't advanced enough to explore the universe or even our galaxy. just because we haven't found it doesn't mean it isn't real.
It isn't dumb luck that laws are consistent through out the universe, they are laws. When I say the reason we are here is luck and the reason things work the specific way they work is luck I mean, regarding physical laws, the rules form by chance but stay the same. That isn't what entropy is, entropy is the measure/amount of the disorder and chaos in the universe. It also means the decent into disorder. Noting is being destroyed. God's existence let alone his/her perfection is your opinion, and the perfection of something is subjective.
Please don't use holy books as proof. I could right a sentence in a blank bible that says "When one drops a pen, that pen will fall on the nearest surface the so directly below it" and say that my god created gravity. Making observations and stating what you saw In holy book isn't proof of a god.

2) Everything that exists and has ever existed and will ever exist is contained inside the universe. The universe, although expanding at an increasing rate, is not infinite. The concept of something infinite existing in something finite is impossible.

3)Did god choose to give millions of people, believers and not a mutation resulting in skin cancer and sometimes in death? Why?

Re-rebuttals in order:

1)Skin cells are an end product. Skin, nerve, muscle, eye, brain, act. cells all begin as stem cells either as a fetus or in bone marrow. No mutations cause this transition. Over time and development of these cells specific epic switches are turned on/off. These switches change the way a cell behaves. DNA is constant throughout your body except for mutations caused by outside forces and DNA copying mistakes. As far as new major mutations for humans, I personally believe that modern society and medicine is slowing our evolutionary progress maybe even reversing it. Now we can save people with deadly genetic illnesses and allow them to pass on their bad genes. I in no way condone the killing of these people I'm just stating a fact. The first DNA strand wasn't even a strand and it didn't serve a function. 1 maybe 2 base pairs linked together entered a developing "bubble" like the ones I've talked about in past rounds. Over an unbelievably, incomprehensible length of time (roughly +1.5 billion years) these strands grew and thanks to developed Robeson's gained function. 3 billion base pairs didn't just appear one day.

2) Again quoting your holy book doesn't prove anything. And, your idea of the big bang in terribly flawed. I'll go over it one more time. A singularity (a singularity has no dimensions) or unknown origins burst releasing all of the matter and energy of the universe today. Nothing existed outside of the universe. I know it's hard to comprehend but there was nothing. "Outside the universe" doesn't exist. It is lake saying "a fish that talks" it makes no sense. I will go over the most popular theory for the end of the universe. "Heat death" is when all the matter, light, and energy in the universe get so far away from each other (because of the expansion) that no more stars are formed. The last stars die and the universe goes dark, the matter is still there but nothing tangible is there. There is no life.

My answers in order:

1)Like I said above the 3 billion base pairs gradually built up. They did not pop into existence

2)Common moral codes? There are none. Even the basics like don't kill other people are shared by all. Moral codes are a product of our intelligence and a side effect is that they are not consistent. There are tribes in Africa and India and practice cannibalism and a whole underground market in Thailand where rich buyers buy, consume, and distribute dog meat that was gathered from stolen dogs who were beaten, choked, hanged, bled, bludgeoned, burned,. to death. A common moral code may exist between different common societies but there isn't a reprogrammed code that all humans follow.

3)Again you show no understanding the BBT. So think about this, What makes more sense to you? Something gradually turning into everything, or something creating everything out of nothing?
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
Reason for decision.
On the votes.
Posted by sketchb 2 years ago
What do you mean by RFD?
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
Also, how is my RFD bad but the one for you is okay?
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
"There are certain attractions between different atoms and molecules as well."

I should rephrase.
Certain elements/compounds will only bond with certain other elements/compounds.

In the case of ions, however, there are attractions.
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
Elements didn't just shoot at each other to form cells though. There are certain attractions between different atoms and molecules as well.

Have you heard of the Miller Urey experiment?
Posted by sketchb 2 years ago
I understand that carbon is not the only thing that makes a cell. There are other elements involved, such as nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulphur. These, however, actually lower the chance of cell-forming as being random. I just didn't go into too much detail about the subject, and since my opponent failed to mention this too much, as you did, and instead went on about "bubble cells", I saw no need to go deeper into that topic.
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
"Also, my explanation of carbon molecules was meant to happen over a long period of time. But, still, can you expect chance to bring us here? The chance is very slim."

This thing about the carbon molecules was extremely flawed, not just in the time scale. Your actual words were that carbon molecules collided to form life. This is no-where near what happened. Not even close.
Posted by sketchb 2 years ago
I only used some of the explanations from that website; most of them were quite dumb, so I didn't mention them. I only intended to use the ones I actually said in the debate. Sorry about the confusion.

Also, as far as I know, I have never had a direct revelation from God, so that doesn't count. And, by my reasoning, none of those other gods exist in except for in other people's minds.

Also, my explanation of carbon molecules was meant to happen over a long period of time. But, still, can you expect chance to bring us here? The chance is very slim.
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
You can't expect yourself to win if you think thunderstorms and babies are proof of God.
There is zero evidence God is involved with those things.

Plus, one of the "proofs" is easily refuted. It was the "personal relationship with God" thing.
How is that evidence?
Muslims will say the same about Allah.
Hindus will say the same about Brahman.
Vikings said the same about Odin!

By your reasoning, all these gods also exist.

I forgot to mention Ra. That bloke exists as well, according to your logic.
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
"All right, Heirio, those were some pretty bad explanations..."

Your source said that babies and thunderstorms were proof of God.
You argument however DID hinge on your ignorance on basic science (science I was taught in school; basic stuff).

For example: "What are the chance that carbon molecules randomly collide and make complex life forms?"

You also said this: " If it's chance, couldn't the laws of gravity suddenly change? Wouldn't genetic mutations be much more common?"

I mean... seriously? Not many debates make me laugh, but man... seriously?

You're not in a good position to call something else bad. Like... at all.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Heirio 2 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Con gave scientific evidence for his case, whereas Pro gave no real evidence and gave terrible sources (in his link, one of the proofs for God was "Thunderstorm" and another was "Babies". I mean... seriously? That's not even close to good). Pro's arguments hinged on blind faith in the Bible and severe ignorance on how basic science works. Con, however, gave good scientific explanations for his case. Thus, I think Con won.
Vote Placed by princearchitect 2 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Slight advantage to Pro for using more sources. Con did make some key arguments but I think Pro answered them well. Since this is only a 1 vote debate, edge to Pro.