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

The Atheist Nothing Monster does not Exist

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
FungusOfHam has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 561 times Debate No: 114505
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Atheists believe a magic nothing monster manifested reality from its magical nothingness.


Ok, so the first issue is the confusion of what athiest means. Athiest simply means non theist, meaning the person does not believe in a god. This does not mean that they believe in the big bang, evolution, or any of those theories, and two examples of religions that are athiestic are Buddhism and Jainism.

The second issue is your use of the term magic nothingness however for the sake of clarity I will simply assume that you are simply misunderstanding the big bang. To put it simply the big bang is a theory that the entire universe expanded from an extraordinarily small volume into what it is now and is continuing to expand more and more (the universal expansion is actually accelerating however this is not relevant to this argument in my opinion).

First, the big bang does not assume that nothing existed before the event itself, there's theories of the universe expanding, contracting, and expanding again going through continuous big bangs. Another theory, somewhat dumbed down, is that the universe was in a continuous loop, going back on itself infinitely until it eventually branched off and expanded in the big bang. The theory of the universe expanding from nothing is one of many theories and, unlike theists, the scientists and physicists will admit that we don't know which theory is true rather than pretending that we do know.

Another point I would like to make is that we do know stuff comes from nothing. Physicists have observed particles coming into existence at random in a near total vacuum, these particles have actually collided with each other and created light and other phenomenon that we can easily see and observe. So the concept of something coming from nothing has already been proven to be true, so why couldn't it also apply in a larger sense if my previously mentioned theories are untrue? This is actually also similar to the theory of evolution that has actually been observed in the lab and yet theists somehow say that it's still impossible in a larger sense despite no evidence to the contrary.

If you are asking why a universe was created that was somehow "tuned to hold life" like many theists argue I would like to demonstrate the puddle analogy. If a bunch of water finds itself in a hole in the ground that puddle will naturally form to the shape of the puddle by gravity. However, that puddle will automatically think that this puddle must have been "designed" for it, or fine tuned in someway to fit that puddle exactly. Why else would the hole perfectly fit the contours and edges of that puddle, and the sad part is that the puddle will continue believing that the hole was perfectly designed for it even while it gradually evaporates little by little. Right up until it's completely gone that puddle will continue believing that simple lie. Now many theists argue that the chances of the characteristics for the universe/earth existing as it is now to create and house life is such and such incredibly unlikely amount. Even if we knew how likely/unlikely it is that everything happened to be like it is now (which we don't), that would simply mean that life or some other form of existence would have come about in a different way if the world/universe was "tuned" differently. Just think if it this way, it may be less than one in 1200 that you would roll a six four times in a row with dice and that's pretty unlikely, however it's also one in 1200 for every other combination of four dice numbers you can think of, in terms of chance there's nothing special at all about four sixes or four ones or any other combination. These ideas in now way disprove the big bang or any other theories of how that event or the universe came about.

The final point that I would like to contest is that all of the arguments used against the creation of the universe through non theistic events could just as easily be applied to the existence of the God that theists say created the universe. Where did He come from, what created Him since everything that exists needs a creator? And if He's eternal and wasn't ever "created" then why couldn't the universe also be eternal and not created like in some of the theories I presented earlier?

I look forward to anyone that could contest these points I have made or to present any other evidence against non theistic creation of the universe.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by 2Simpleender 3 years ago
Atheists have made it very clear, they are not interested in a God or Deity nor anything whatsoever that has a demonstrative message about consequences, causes, and effects concerning the actions of the human nature.

Karl Marx The Atheist, developed his own Communistic theories said - " "In simple truth, I harbor hate 'against all the Gods" ......... Friedrich Engels was one of Marx's greatest personal supporters, He stated that, as a result of the discovery of laws of the Communism, "the last vestige of a Creator external to the world is obliterated" Nikolai Lenin was the founder of the Communist Party. He led the revolution that established Communism in Russia, then became the first premier of the Communist regime. Lenin, who was also an atheist, He said: "Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism" ..... "Every religious idea, every idea of god, even every flirtation with the idea of God, is unutterable vileness."

Nikita Khrushchev, premier of Atheist Russia from 1958 to 1964, stated: - "We, Communists ... are atheists ... Public education, the dissemination of scientific knowledge, and the study of the laws of nature leave no place for belief in God ... We consider that belief in God contradicts our Communist outlook"
The Russian Encyclopedia (1950) lists: "God - a mythical invented being ... and [Communism] is incompatible with belief in God and [Communism] arose and developed in an acute and constant struggle with religion".

The "Ten Commandments of Communism," published for the Young Communist League, says: "If you are not a convinced atheist, you cannot be a good Communist ... Atheism is indissolubly bound to Communism."

I'll bet there are many Atheists who would go full support for Communism, But I know that there are a percentage of Atheists who would not support Communism
Posted by canis 3 years ago
As an atheist I do not believe in the "Nothing monster" created by a theist..
This debate has 0 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.