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

Some deists are irrational

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 667 times Debate No: 40840
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Deism is a belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind.

I derived these contensions from a dictionary and the bible to support my argument.

If God no longer assumed control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomina, and giving no supernatural revelation, how did he open up space in the Jordan river for Jesus to cross.

There could possibly be an exception:
If their definition of Deism is not precise and very specific.


You can NOT say that this particular religion is irrational because of the premises of another religion.

Deists do NOT take the word of God.
Debate Round No. 1


Well, maybe some do.


No, they don't.

Jesus is a religious prophet who may or may not exist. He definitely exists in the Bible or in the faith of individuals. THAT IS CHRISTIANITY.

So like I said, you can not say that Deism is irrational based upon the premises of a different religion.

According to Deism, God does not intervene.

Debate Round No. 2


TheAmazingAtheist1 has forfeited this round.


Unfortunately, my opponent has forfeited the final round, as he conceded (via Private messaging) that he has lost the debate and that:

"i dont wanna f*king debate u again.

trying to be a gigantic smart*ss"
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by MikeNH 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: As far as debates go, this one was one of the worst. There were essentially no significant arguments made and it was almost entirely incoherent, but I still have to give a few points to Con as Pro forfeited, although both were rather childish about it.