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

is God 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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Jeffrey_Rocks has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 389 times Debate No: 106828
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

jackgilbert

Pro

Con goes first.
Jeffrey_Rocks

Con

There is not proof that god exists. There is also no proof that flying unicorns exist.
Therefore believing in the existence of god without any prove is the same as believing in the existence of flying unicorns.

The existence of god is written in books. The existence of superman is also written in books.
Therefore believing in the existence of god, is the same as believing in the existence of superman.

Therefore god is as real as real as flying unicorns and superman.
Debate Round No. 1
jackgilbert

Pro

Cons reasoning to prove that God does not exist is faulty. These are the premises and conclusion of his argument.
p1 God is written in books
p2 Superman is written in books
C therefore, believing in superman is the same as believing in God

If this were true than here's my argument

p1 evolution has not been seen
p2 flying trees have not been seen
C Therefore, believing in flying trees is like believing in evolution

I used the same reasoning as con did, so unless he wants to go on using these types of arguments we have to throw them out the window.
Now into my arguments. My first one is that the universe is continually running out of usable energy. This has been happening for a long time. The universe could not sustain itself for very long without usable energy. This means that because the universe is still sustaining itself, there has to be an outside force providing it with energy. If you said another unknown source of energy provides energy for the universe, than there would really be no answer for how that source of energy got it's energy. There has to be an outside force that will never run out of energy. The only omnipotent force is God. God is what sustains the universe for all of these years. If there was no God, the universe would have run out of energy a long time ago.
Here's another argument:
p1 Life as a whole shows a whole deal of complexity with the many things a single life form does in such an orderly way to sustain itself.
p2 This is either the result of intelligent design or probability
p3 Chance would be unreasonable because chance cannot create life especially if all of the functions work together so perfectly within the cell.
p4 This universe was created by intelligent design which requires a designer.
C Therefore, this universe was created by an intelligent designer.
To support my third premise let me just say this. There are so many functions a cell performs. A few are such as Osmosis, cellular respiration, intercellular respiration, reproduction, meiosis, mitosis, protein synthesis, aerobic respiration, anaerobic respiration, Krebs cycle, Calvin cycle, cellular diffusion, photosynthesis, and many, many more. It's unreasonable to say it came from dead matter that designed this cell so perfectly with all of it's systems working together. It doesn't make sense.
To summarize my argument, the world must have a beginning that reflects the complexity of itself. If life was created from dead matter, than we would not be as complex as we are.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by canis 9 months ago
canis
Come on ..Why those spam-debates ?..No one cares about those "god-dreams"...But the dreamer..
Posted by MRAAJ.evil 9 months ago
MRAAJ.evil
I AM GOD, therefore Logic 101.1,point goes To Pro. Nuff said, go to sheep sleeple
Posted by Pill_Junkie_Monkey 9 months ago
Pill_Junkie_Monkey
Saying con goes first is shifting the burden of proof. You've made the posit that God exists, therefor you must prove the claim. Logic 101
This debate has 2 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.