Does God exist? This can be any of the modern religions Gods but please give a reason for your answer with an explanation.

Asked by: DH
  • Of course, I AM.

    The laws of nature undeniably support the existence of a living creator. Science has irrefutable evidence that life only comes from the living. To claim otherwise, is to abandon scientific reason and place irrational/unfounded faith in miracles, because there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that life is created by the non-living.

  • He Definitely Exists!

    What non-believers usually fail to realize is that believers do not blindly believe in God. There is usually a very good reason behind their faith. Personally, I believe in God because I have seen prayers answered -- prayers asked of Him. If it were only once or twice, I could easily call it coincidence. But I have seen this happen numerous times. Twice, I have even seen it spare lives. I've had doctors scratch their heads & admit they could not explain the recovery. One doctor literally said, "Thank God -- not me. This defies everything I learned in Medical school!" When you know God, you have an indescribable peace. Some people need tangible proof. Is love tangible? No. It's felt. Religion, like love, is also felt. But when a miracle happens -- and they still do -- you know that He is real & He does exist.

  • I believe this a god(s). Yes, it is a "belief".

    I acknowledge that it is (at least currently) impossible to prove or disprove a deity. I hold the position that we as human beings will never be able to fully comprehend the universe that we are in. We are simply animals, albeit intelligent ones. We have achieved amazing things, but that does not mean that we are the pinnacle of all life forms.
    As for the reason for my choice on this poll, it simply makes a great deal more sense to me that an intelligent being of some form or another set the universe in motion. This is a belief, and not based on solid supporting evidence. It is based on my reasoning that something does not come from nothing. To me, the assumption that a deity does not exist because it cannot be proven seems arrogant. This is because the assumption is made based on yet another assumption: That we would even be able to comprehend something so grand as a being capable of such feats as are attributed to the god(s) of religions or mythology.

  • Of course God exists

    Sigh, doubting Thomases are at it again. Do you really think your (irrational?) emotions of doubt will make God go away? If you doubt that I exist, does that mean I disappear? The evidence that God exists is seen in creation, Jesus Christ, the Bible, and human conscience. The evidence is all around you and you're saying where is the evidence.

  • History, Cant Go Wrong With It.

    We know for a FACT that before Christianity there was paganism. Its been proven not only in Roman/Greek period shrines but also around the world. Several writings that we still have after years prove that people used to believe in several gods. Therefore, God has to be a myth, a man had to have made him up, it's just historical proof. Also, the Omnipotent Paradox supports my claim of a non-existing God.

  • IT'S totally real

    Now I'm not Christian, or aligned with any religion buy I do believe in god. Here is your proof. You know that time you found yourself talking to someone who isn't physically there, and you just need a listener that's god. Also do you think 95% of humanity really suffers from mass delusion or something?

  • Yes God Exists.

    There are different types of knowledge...And they are obtained in different ways.
    For example: We can say we know what the temperature is --by measuring it with a thermometer. Also a person can know they love their Mom...That is not as easy to measure or prove, but nevertheless a person can know they do. Also a person can know things of God, but this type of knowledge is only available through personal revelation...From God to man directly. I know God exists, because He has revealed to me that He exists...So that is why I voted YES....(since you desired an explanation with our votes)

  • God is Hakneyed

    Faith, by definition, is belief without evidence. Those of us who are skeptics have always placed an emphasis on proof, of which God has none. What sounds like a more plausible explanation for the beginning of the universe: All matter condensed to a single point followed by rapid expansion (The Big Bang Theory), or a humanoid being with a fully developed ego creates it in seven days? Atheists don't believe in God because there is no reason to.

  • Belief in God is just that: a belief.

    If someone told you there was a giant pink dragon that was right next to you, but you couldn't see or touch it because it has magic abilities, you would ridicule their statement. Yet, you couldn't prove them wrong and they couldn't prove themselves right. This is the same situation with God. Nobody can prove that God exists, and you cannot prove that he doesn't, thus rendering him nonexistent for all scientific purposes.

  • There has been no supporting evidence for the existence of a God.

    I know we can't prove without a doubt the theories of evolution or the big bang but they have supporting evidence. On the other hand the arguments for the existence of a God has no supporting evidence or arguments that are undeniable. Therefore I do not think a God Exists.

    Posted by: DH
  • God is Trite

    Atheists don't believe in God simply because there's no reason to. Religion used to be primitive man's way to explain the universe; That is why every society has their own religion. That is why there are so many schools of thought in each one: cultural diversity. Humans have become self-aware and we no longer need a phony god to rely on.

  • God(s) do not exist.

    Though I could just point at the fact that no religion has ever shown actual evidence that their god exists, I have come to this conclusion by using logic and known facts.
    Fact: There have been hundreds of god named around the world.
    Fact: These gods have been known to effect mankind.
    Fact: Not all mankind was effected by any one of those gods.
    Fact: People from areas outside one religion had no knowledge of the other gods until one traveled to the other.
    Example: The biblical god was never known in China till people of the biblical faith traveled there. This is the case with all religions.
    Logic: If a god did existed that could effect all mankind, all mankind would be effected.
    Example: If the biblical god existed then he would have been the source for all mankind. (Adam and Eve)
    Conclusion: Seeing that no god was ever even known in an area before travelers came, no god would have affected all mankind.
    Example: Had Adam and Eve been the first of their faith, all of their decedents would also be of that faith or at least had it in their history. Seeing that they are not part of any other regions ancient history shows that their people where not decedents of Adam and Eve so the biblical god was not their creator. This could be done with all gods.

  • Not the one in the Bible.

    The basis for the existence of God (The Christian God) is the Bible. It describes him and what he has done, but there are so many contradictions in the Bible that I do not know where to begin. Also, most things can be proven wrong with science.

    I'll just focus on Noah's Ark. God supposedly flooded the planet, right? But why do we have religions that exist before and after the flood? The only people who survived were Christian, so how did those religions survive? Also, if only Noah's family survived, how do we explain different ethnicities? What about animals who have a lifespan shorter than the duration of the flood? What did the animals eat to survive? And since everything was drowned, what did they eat to survive after they got off the ark? They couldn't eat eachother, because then the eaten animals' breeds would go extinct. And how did every animal survive in the same climate? Finally, if God drowned the planet once for not believing in him, wouldn't he have done it again by this time because we have thousands of religions and atheism?

    Once you disprove one part of the Bible, the rest comes crumbling down. If one part is false, how do you know the rest is true? And without a Bible, how do you know God exists? You don't.

  • Not remotely likely.

    I don’t believe in God for the same reason I wouldn't believe in anything else for which there is no observable evidence. If God exists, why does he insist on being invisible, intangible, inaudible, odour-free and tasteless? If he cannot be observed by any of my five senses, why should I believe in him? If he wants me to believe in him, why doesn’t he reveal himself in some observable way? It’s no use telling me that God can be “experienced” or that you can “feel” God/Jesus/whoever in your heart, where he “speaks” to you, because experience is purely subjective. You can’t demonstrate it to anyone else so it doesn’t count as evidence because its veracity can’t be proven. You can’t point to God as being the creator of the universe because that immediately raises a question about who or what created God. If God has “always existed” then why couldn't the universe have done so?

  • Almost certainly, no.

    First you have to decipher which God you want to have faith in existing. Then you have to set out the attributes of this divine supernatural entity existing outside of the known Universe that you have knowledge of. Then you have to prove why you know it for be for real. Then if you're Christian in particular (they're all pretty much the same), come up with explanations for all of the completely inaccurate and unbelievable writings in the Bible. If you resort to labelling them as metaphors (resurrection, walking on water, talking snake etc etc) then what makes you think the part about a divine creator to not be one also, and really, what's the point?
    Then on the contrary, things that make me believe there to not a supernatural intervention in the Universe that cares about us, or even one that doesn't intervene. First of all, no scientific hypothesise requires the hand of a creator to explain occurrences, because science finds answers in the natural order of the universe by testing and predicting how things work. To argue away the 'personal God' that created the Earth with humans in mind. The Earth was formed just like all of the other planets and in particular, the 'Earth like' planets we're discovering all across our galaxy alone, by natural processes involving gravity and space dust forming land masses. We have a sun as an energy source, we orbit it along with the other planets in our solar system, we just happen to be in the correct position for water to exist in water, gas and solid form to sustain life. We came about as a product of processes playing in motion for billions of years, and life has evolved through natural selection. There's been extinctions, repopulations, ice ages, catastrophic events and more since the Earth's birth and we're supposed to believe some entity was bothering with all of this just to plonk us on the Earth? You're alright thanks.

  • Complete Lack Of Any Evidence For A Supernatural Entity:

    Actually, there is no evidence for any Superstitions, including Religion's God(s), that religions consistently Assert as Existing. In the last two centuries of reasonably modern knowledge and more critical observations of phenomenon, nothing has surfaced anywhere that can be used to demonstrate the existence of any God.
    Essentially religions have failed their Burden Of Proof commitment and it is becoming evident that the probability of the existence of such a being is extremely unlikely. I would bet that there is less than a 1% chance that a God exists. Some observers think it is closer to 0% chance for God.

  • We Simply Do Not Know.

    Religion is faith, faith a belief and belief, by definition, not fact. As long as we all agree that fact is the closest we can possibly come to absolute truth for or against something, I think it's safe to say that god does not exist. Now before you get enraged at that logic, it is also flawed. Arguably, even something that seems to always be consistent, may change after some time. With that said, fact as stated before, is not absolute. There may or may not be a god, gods or supernatural being. We may or may not have been created. We do not know. Theism is a belief, Atheism is a belief. Both BELIEVE they have enough facts to disprove the other, but in reality...Neither know, therefore are a belief.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Craighawley215 says2014-05-30T14:34:53.333
If you are asking for a logical opinion, then it becomes impossible to definitively say yes or no to the existence of God or any other deity believed on a mass scale. I recently had a full debate on the possibility of God's existence. If we accept the possibility that the universe is limitless, then the chances of God's existence go drastically up.
arthurjeremypearson says2014-06-09T16:24:04.867
Okay, I'm going to vehemently protest now. This is ridiculous.

In China, they have a THIRD ANSWER to any "yes or no" question, and it's glaringly lacking in the last couple "questions" I've read.

The third option is "mu." I translates as "void." In response to a question, it means "you have asked the wrong question" or "this question is unanswerable" or "there is no answer to that question."

I'm new to debate.Org. IS there such an option, and people are just NOT CHOOSING to give us that option? If there's a "yes or no" generic template, I really really really think the people who run this site should consider a "mu" option. These last few questions are ill defined and generic to the point of pointlessness. They're on the edge of trolling, using generic inflammatory keywords like "god" and "religion" and "belief" and "exist."

Agreeing on what words mean is ESSENTIAL to debate! Without it, both sides are assuming THEIR definition is the "correct" one, and everyone is barking like dogs, not getting ANYWHERE.

Forgive me my use of caps. I don't like trying to find out each individual site's "how to bold your text" rules and in stead choose allcaps for certain words to provide emphasis. It allows one to copy/paste and retain more of what I was trying to say rather than copy/paste and REMOVE the emphasis from where I want it.

To whit:

Defining "exist" as "an idea exists" then ALL modern gods exist. They're successful memes, living ideas worming their ways through minds.

Defining "exist" as "are literally true" then the sun is real, and those who worship the sun (like the late great George Carlin claimed to) are worshiping a real "god." Also, those who point to physical objects on earth like a primitive man who worships a "god" of a statue on a beach, that god exists too.

Defining "exist" as "Has the ability to supernaturally influence reality as the one true creator of the universe" then MU. I do not KNOW enough to COMMIT to an ASSERTION one way or the other on ANY god.

Am I being obtuse? Have I been "debating" on crap sites like sodahead and youtube too long, and I'm missing some essential classes in debate?
Sagey says2014-08-09T05:25:58.007
True Mu: LOL, God does exist on the minds of those who believe, but practically/empirically, the answer is No.
So the only God that exists is the entirely Subjective God of the minds of Theists.
No god exists in my mind, apart from the Theory Of Mind of Others, but there is no god inside of or outside of my mind, so to me the answer is definitively No!
If I was using Theory Of Mind, towards a Theist, I would then say yes, it is in his/her mind.