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

Why do people think that God is not real

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 1/21/2019 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 796 times Debate No: 119981
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)




So many people on here think that God is not real.
1. State one reason why you think that god is or isn't real
2. Prove your point
3. State a strong reason why we should believe or not believe in God


Pro has not given a set of rules nor definitions for this debate. I will thus start my arguments in R1. Firstly to definitions. God is defined as the locus of creation and all it contains. He/they/she/it (it used for convenience) is unseeable, Unknowable, Immutable, Timeless, Spaceless, All loving, All good, All powerful and all knowing conscious entity, That is maximally free to act and that seeks a special relationship with humanity, With which it imbues freewill. God is a hypothesis proposed by various religious thinking as an explanation to unknown answers of a Universal origins and immaterial existence. Hopefully I have not wrongly defined god, And it is acceptable to Pro. But given Pro did not define god I feel entitled to do so.

I offer 3 arguments for the non-existence of god.

1) Argument from the Primacy of Existence. Existence, Exists and is an objective reality. Denial of existence is both self- refuting and commits the fallacy of the stolen concept. Consciousness exists and is the identification of "existents" within existence itself. To be conscious, Is to be conscious of something. Thus existence is prime, Absolute, Objective and precedes consciousness. This gives the god hypothesis 2 problems: 1) consciousness (a god) cannot be either a-temporal or a precursor to existence. This would require god to be unconscious, But the claim is that it is conscious. 2) the god hypothesis requires that IT can change existence at a whim. But existence is prime and objective and denying it is a fallacy. Believing in god effectively is the same as believing you live in a cartoon that a master cartoonist can whimsically change. Thus the concepts themselves used to bootstrap god concepts would be subjective (and thus inconsistent). The God concept effectively self destructs.

2) Argument from the meaningless of the god concept. All existents within existence have positively identified primary fundamental attributes (material), Secondary (powerful) and tertiary-relational attributes (creator). These have meaning against the framework of existence so in the bracketed examples this may describe Marcus Aurelius a Roman Emperor and himself described as a god. However god has no positively identified primary attributes. IT is immaterial, Timeless, Spaceless, Immutable, Invisible, Unknowable etc - all negative attributes telling us what a god is not, And not what a god is. However we are left (given ITs definition) to conclude it is a void existing within a void and is thus non-existent.

3)Argument from inconsistent properties. The god concept is replete with contradictions. Contradictions cannot exist (Aristotles law of non-contradiction). Just to pick out one. The god concept is said to be maximally free and all good. But being maximally free requires god to be able to choose evil and thus IT can either be free or good but not both. There are of course many others and this isn"t meant an exhaustive list.

The above points are not intended to be fully fleshed out philosophical speaking given space restrictions. If true they constitute positive reasons to reject the god hypothesis in favor of atheism. The arguments are not inductive, But deductive. If true then god does not exist.
Debate Round No. 1


I believe that he is real because many things happened in the past that can not be explained by science. One of those things was when the red sea split in half and let thousands of people through. If god isn't real explain how miracles happened without science


Thank you to Pro for the response.

I have clearly laid out my case and addressed the challenge put up by Pro in full. Unless and until Pro addresses the substanative points in this debate, My arguments stand and disprove god/gods. Thus Pro is defeated unless he/she can offer something and my job is done.

There is thus limited utility in a rejoinder as Pro is entitled to believe in magic (miracles) if he/she wishes. It just isn't worth wasting electrons defeating the point, As I trust the reader to understand it is merely a rather inept argument from ignorance (and not a well thought out argument for Theism).

Good luck Pro and thanks for the debate.
Debate Round No. 2


God is a real thing no matter what you believe so many people on here question god. I was not asking if you believe in him but simply if you can guess why people don't believe


Thanks to Pro for her concluding remarks.

I think the best thing to do at this point is merely underline the naked bare assertion fallacy of Pros final argument. However to conclude Pro asked me to:

1. State one reason why you think that god is or isn't real
2. Prove your point
3. State a strong reason why we should believe or not believe in God

In my R1 opening I have met all conditions laid out by Pro. Pro has failed to rebut these point or offer anything other than fallacy ridden commentary. Pros positions therefore falls.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by RationalMaterialist 3 years ago
Why do people think God is not real?

To 'believe' means a person thinks something is true or real without evidence.

Everything that is real is a fact. Facts require that we first sense something, Then it registers in our mind as an idea that corresponds exactly with what we sensed. That is a fact.

The reason why people don't believe God is that they don't sense God, Then as a consequence have an idea of God. This is how we all think. First we sense something, And then and only then do we know it's real.

Belief only requires imagination and guessing. So we are not honest to say be believe God is real. Only real things are true. Only things we can know are true are facts. Only way to know a fact is to sense it.
Posted by missmedic 3 years ago
Gods are by default invisible, Inaudible, Intangible entities that don't do anything.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago

"God is a real thing no matter what you believe so many people on here question god. I was not asking if you believe in him but simply if you can guess why people don't believe"
You have no point by the way. You provided a claim with no evidence and explanation.
Posted by britishperson10 3 years ago
give me one reason god is real
Posted by PointProven 3 years ago
"I believe that he is real because many things happened in the past that can not be explained by science. "

Isn't it great how when we don't understand something we just shrug our shoulders and go "Well, It must have been magic! "?
Posted by Surgeon 3 years ago
@ Hayley2004

I agree with your sentiment. I would however be careful with how you approach this topic. You are leveraging your expectations of what a god is or should be. The god hypothesis framed by the religious is generally impervious to such attacks, As they can either point out that you do not "really" understand the concepts in full (they are after all suitabley vague enough to be maleable to whatever position they wish to take), Or that any two apparent contradictions are not contradictions if they are consistent with a third proposition (classically enunciated by Alvin Plantingas Free Will Defence). You are far better attacking the god hypothesis at its root, The Ontological status of the hypothesis, And using deductive reasoning to bring the edifice down.

It comes down to a basic principle. If you do not accept there is Absolute Truth, Then you are making a self contradictory statement. Absolute truth exists, And either you believe that is a God, Or Existence itself. If you deny that it is Existence, And accept the God hypothesis, Then the very concepts you are using (integreated and differentiated from Existence) cannot be relied upon. Thus your attack on Existence withers and fails.
Posted by hayley2004 3 years ago
I absolutely agree with The Contender (I am a non- believer myself)

1) Why should we believe in something that was written over thousands of years ago? Or was it? It could have been re-written multiple times.
2) How do we know if he is real? The Instigator said something about scientific things happened in the past and that is one of the reasons to believe in God. If dinosaurs were alive 245 and 66 million years ago then went into extinction, And Humans started to exist after that, How did we know what they sounded like if we never saw or heard one?
3)If "God" was the only creator, Why did he make Satan? How could he do that if he was good?
4) If you want people to worship your "God" try not to make him sound like an narcissist a-hole. Most believers like to criticize LGBTQ+ members, But I thought God loved everyone and made them the way they are for a reason? No.
5) If "God" was really real and was really the author of the Bible, It would probably be less full of atrocities, Contradictions, Plagiarisms, And absurdities for sure.

These are my reasons, I have more to debate on.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
Not everyone is used to complex thought. He may or may not be at troll, But there are people out there like that.

Best to argue in a simple manner rather than work on complex ones. Saves you time in case he is a troll, Helps him understand if he is not.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago

Great job with your arguments in Round 1.
Heard of the third one but not the first 2 by the way you framed it.
Too bad Pro is not that much of a challenge.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by omar2345 3 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: One supported argument with explanations. Another mostly only made claims.

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