CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Hitchens' Razor is 100% true! It just doesn't apply to Christianity! The testimony of the apostles, who would have directly known if Jesus was or was not divine, even in the face of excruciating pain and death, is evidence.
Jesus was a believer in Hitchens' Razor!
John 5:31 “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is true."
Is this the third or fourth time you have made a similar comment against me with no argument. If a man chooses to be flayed alive instead of admitting a lie, you should start to wonder if it was the truth.
Your powers of observation continue to serve you well.
If a man chooses to be flayed alive
What? Who is choosing to be flayed? And what type of flayed?
instead of admitting a lie,
I understand how you feel. It is tough for Christians and theists alike to admit that their "god" is a lie made to make them feel important on a greater level.
you should start to wonder if it was the truth
Unlike many mental patie- I mean Christians, I have the capacity to rationally analyze information and to sort the truth from the fake. The "fake" in this case being your god...
I don't understand... giving me a link to a wikipedia page about some fake character in your immoral Bible does nothing to "clarify" whatever you are trying to say.
Engineering is physics applied to the real world. It is gleaning knowledge of physics and other sciences to produce something useful for the real world. Engineering is what gives physics a meaningful existence.
"“If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true. There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is true."
... so, first he says: If I talk about myself, I'm a lair and you should believe a word I say, but if someone else talks about me, and I like what I hear, then I'm telling you to believe it all. However, if someone talks shit about me, even if it's true or not, then you shouldn't listen to these lairs!
My conclusion is that Jesus was acting all modest and humble, but actually was an enormously arrogant, narcissistic douche.
But hey... can you prove Jesus even existed without any religious writings? So first things first, AngryGenX (Nickname doesn't seem to be very christianny to me.. more of a TROLL) .. provide evidence of the existence of these lead characters in the Bible, without the Bible. No circulate arguments like the bible says it's truthful, thus the bible is truthful.
... so, first he says: If I talk about myself, I'm a lair and you should believe a word I say, but if someone else talks about me, and I like what I hear, then I'm telling you to believe it all. However, if someone talks shit about me, even if it's true or not, then you shouldn't listen to these lairs!
If someone walks up to you and says, "I am a really great person, you should love me because I say so" What is your reaction going to be? Probably not very positive. If one of your friends walk up to you and says, "Hey, you know that guy? He is wonderful! I love him and you would love him too if you got to know him." You first impulse would probably not be disbelief.
When muslims try to convert Christians, they always bring up "well when did Jesus stand up and say "I am God, worship me."" And the short answer is "never". The reason why is because it would be a meaningless statement. How many nutjobs in the world step up and make grand declarations that they are a god of a prophet? Jesus was not a Jim Jones or a Muhammed or a Warren Jeffs.
Well, take the book of mormon for example. There is only one person ever to have lived who knew if that was a lie or not, Joseph Smith. While he may have experienced some persecution, he benefited from his own book. The quran is anoter example, pure circular logic and again the only person who knew for sure if it was a lie or not benefited from the lie and never had to die for it.
One good reason is because the bible is written over hundreds of years by many different people. It is a narrative that stretched over many generations. The quran is written by one man in one lifetime. If the bible is false, dozens of different authors had to be liars, for the quran to be false only requires one man to lie. The quran sames some pretty incredible scientific and historical errors, like that Mecca was founded by Abraham and the sun sets in a muddy pool of water that burns people living near it every day. These errors have no equal in the Bible... I know some things seem non-scientific, but they can't be proved wrong. You can almost certainly prove Mecca was not founded by Abraham. The sun for sure does not set in a muddy pool of water, Alexander the great for sure never traveled there.
Finally, read some stories in the hadith. Like when Muhammad's wives were mad at him for sleeping with a slave girl, suddenly "god sent down" a verse that said if he were to divorce all his wives Allah would find him better and more submissive ones. No author of any of the books of the bible wrote anything self serving like that.
One good reason is because the bible is written over hundreds of years by many different people. It is a narrative that stretched over many generations.
How do we know this true?
These errors have no equal in the Bible... I know some things seem non-scientific, but they can't be proved wrong.
"Can't"? Are you saying that it cannot be proven wrong, even hypothetically?
The Bible is filled to the brim with contradictions. I can list you the most significant ones, if you want.
I'm not saying this necessairly proves the Bible to be true. However, I think it is natural to be more suspicious of "holy books" written by only one person.
"Can't"? Are you saying that it cannot be proven wrong, even hypothetically?
If you assume there is an omnipotent God, who isn't intentionally trying to deceive people, the Bible contains no falsehood. Could the world have been made in seven days if there is an omnipotent God? Yes. Could there have been a flood that covered the whole world if there was an omnipotent God? Yes. Could Alexander the great have traveled to where the sun sets in a muddy pool of water? I don't think so, not unless he set up a parallel universe for Alexander, then told Muhammad about it for absolutely no reason.
I get that there are discrepencies between what science says and what the bible says. I embrace that and think we should explore that as much as we can. But the Bible never comes out and flat out says "the moon is made of wood" or "the Earth was created on June 7th 3483 BC"
The Bible is filled to the brim with contradictions. I can list you the most significant ones, if you want.
Your statement saying you are thirsty IS evidence. Now if I just sat here and said "I think 4real had a steak dinner tonight..." is it, or is it not perfectly logical to say, "... on the other hand, maybe she didn't." ???
Yes, of course. Your claim is a personal experience and therefore not evidence and so, I can dismiss it. Change the word "thirsty" into "Jesus", "God", "Thor" or "Unicorn" ... and still the burden of proof is on you. Why should I care that you're thirsty? Claiming to be a deity comes with a follow up, like "now, kiss my feet and surrender all your virgins to me so I can have my way with them" ... claiming to be thirsty is like equally intrusive in people's lives as claiming to be a sheet of toilet paper!
Hitchens' Razor is the fact that anyone making a claim has the responsibility of said claim. If I claim the flying purple unicorns exist and we should all worship them, I bear the burden of proof and my claim can rightfully be dismissed unless and until I produce such evidence.
" It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected"
Even though occams razor is hard to use within religion...
Pretty sure believing in god consists of less assumptions than believing the big bang just popped into existence somehow while it was existing without time or space, it somehow just magically introduced time? well when did time start if it didn't exist at one point?
There are MANY MANY MANY more assumptions to go with when you dont believe in some type of creating force, so according to occams razor, god DOES exist.
EDIT: Idk if the debate was supposed to intend something about god or whatnot, but you didnt really specify anything just if we agree with it or not, so no i do not agree with it because its a contradictory term within itself.
No, believing in God is a massive massive assumption. It requires all of the assumptions of the Big Bang, plus the assumption of God. God is a convenient explanation. The most convenient explanation will have the biggest assumption. You don't have any knowledge of how God did anything. Therefore God had to magically introduce time, etc. Plus the extra burden of not knowing where God came from. Does that explanation at least make sense to you?
i used to wonder as a child how could god have created himself, and ive recently learned in my life, whatever god is (i really hope you dont think of some old man with a white beard) it exists outside of time and space.
Youve seen how our universe is "circular" in the sense that if you keep going you will pop back up at the same location (i read that somewhere and saw it on something like through the wormhole http://io9.com/what-shape-is-the-universe-949025028) )
If you think about it, what exists outside of the universe? Or, what if you go to far out in the universe and the natural laws of physics that we are aware of cease to exist?
Obviously these are all theories and i will never claim to know god exists 100% for a fact, but i have a very strong feeling it does, and through past experience i would say it exists, i strongly believe some type of guiding/creating force exists, that exists outside of our universe in a timeless, spaceless dimension.
You have failed to bring this back to Occams razor which shows you didn't understand what I posted. You can believe in your God all you want, but stop dismissing the Big Bang Theory as crazier.
i used to wonder as a child how could god have created himself, and ive recently learned in my life, whatever god is (i really hope you dont think of some old man with a white beard) it exists outside of time and space.
Look, you have now created something that exists outside of where everything you know exists. This violates Occams razor.
If you think about it, what exists outside of the universe? Or, what if you go to far out in the universe and the natural laws of physics that we are aware of cease to exist?
Do you wonder how people outside of a movie theater experience the movie? You are saying words, but in the end it is illogical and asking doesn't make any sense.
Obviously these are all theories and i will never claim to know god exists 100% for a fact, but i have a very strong feeling it does, and through past experience i would say it exists, i strongly believe some type of guiding/creating force exists, that exists outside of our universe in a timeless, spaceless dimension.
In all likelihood, we have a natural guiding/creating force that exists inside the universe. There might be what you described, but it can't be the easier option in Occams razor.
All i was trying to do was show you that there is a simple explanation for god, it may be highly irrational, but its simple.....
i just wanted to explain to you to show you that god is the simpler of the two theories, therefore it has the fewer assumptions, it was never created, the big bang somehow was
Right there we have to assume way more things about the big bang than we do about god
Everything that you claim needs lots of assumptions for the Big Bang Theory, had to be done by God. That doesn't make it simpler. That makes it equivalent. God had to do something to create the planet, sun, and stars from nothing. The God concept requires just as much assumption for creating the universe as the Big Bang Theory. The God concept then adds the additional assumption of God causing it to be eliminated by Occams razor.
The Big Bang Theory includes details, the God concept doesn't. Having actual details doesn't make something more complex. How does God create the universe? You say God always existed, then He created everything. That doesn't provide any of the "how". You need to compare at similar level. So, if we go with God, it needs to be compared to nature. So, God always existed, then decided to create all of nature. Compared to natural processes formed into the stars and planets. So, with that comparison we can see that God loses to nature in Occams razor.
i just wanted to explain to you to show you that god is the simpler of the two theories, therefore it has the fewer assumptions, it was never created, the big bang somehow was
It is the more convenient answer. If I say God, all I need to do is wave my hands and say it was done by God. Choosing a natural process means you need to come up with an explanation. The Big Bang Theory is not more complex, it is just more detailed.
remember when he told adam not to eat from the tree of life?
Because god is not something simple to believe in, you have a scientific mind i have a spiritual mind, left brain/right brain, you're logical, im irrational, neither is wrong, yin and yang, light and dark, they mix together, how about instead of knocking off god completely you embrace the other side of your brain?
I don't think you understand what convenient, answer, or even what God means. At least in this conversation. Look at how detailed the Big Bang Theory is. Now, let's look at how detailed the God idea is: God said let there be stuff, and there was stuff. What is more convenient than leaving out all of the details?
remember when he told adam not to eat from the tree of life?
No, I don't sorry pal, I wasn't able to connect Adam with Occam.
Because god is not something simple to believe in, you have a scientific mind i have a spiritual mind, left brain/right brain, you're logical, im irrational, neither is wrong, yin and yang, light and dark, they mix together, how about instead of knocking off god completely you embrace the other side of your brain?
How come it is ok for you to tell me to embrace the other side of my brain when you refuse to embrace the other side of yours? You haven't put any thought into what I said. You don't even realize that I am not even knocking off God. I am pointing out that Occams razor can't be used to demonstrate God.
How come it is ok for you to tell me to embrace the other side of my brain when you refuse to embrace the other side of yours?
I use the other side of my brain, with string theory and quantum physics, those are very interesting things to me and i sort of somewhat understand them, but i can still put a spiritual side to it.
You cant put logic into irrationality but you can make logic irrational.
No, I don't sorry pal, I wasn't able to connect Adam with Occam.
Youve never heard the story?
weird.
yes i understand occams razor cant be used in a theological discussion, it can be, but it wont be very effective, but still, assuming a creating force of some type exists seems to have way less assumptions about it than no creating force existing.
I literally can not think of no creating force existing, like my brain LITERALLY wont let me.
Whats weird though is you know how when you lay down and lay on your side you can "feel" the side of your brain you are laying on, like the blood is rushing to it? Idk if you know what im talking about, but anyways, i literally cant feel anything in my left side brain when im just in a upright position.
I took a test once, it determined which part of your brain you use more i use 80% of my right brain, which i know isnt good, so i am trying to be more logical to get a 50-50 balance because that kind of blew my mind lol...
But yea, i know im not very logical but im not just gonna stop believing in god lol i literally can not not believe in god, my mind will not let me, i can think of what no creator would be like or having no god, but i can not convince myself it doesnt exist. i literally can not.
I use the other side of my brain, with string theory and quantum physics, those are very interesting things to me and i sort of somewhat understand them, but i can still put a spiritual side to it.
You didn't talk about string theory or quantum physics in this debate, so according to your logic you never use the other side of your brain.
Youve never heard the story?
weird.
I haven't heard how it has anything to do with this. I guess I don't know it well enough.
yes i understand occams razor cant be used in a theological discussion, it can be, but it wont be very effective, but still, assuming a creating force of some type exists seems to have way less assumptions about it than no creating force existing.
Just because using Occams razor makes you wrong, doesn't mean it can't be used.
I literally can not think of no creating force existing, like my brain LITERALLY wont let me.
Nature.
Whats weird though is you know how when you lay down and lay on your side you can "feel" the side of your brain you are laying on, like the blood is rushing to it? Idk if you know what im talking about, but anyways, i literally cant feel anything in my left side brain when im just in a upright position.
I haven't experienced this.
I took a test once, it determined which part of your brain you use more i use 80% of my right brain, which i know isnt good, so i am trying to be more logical to get a 50-50 balance because that kind of blew my mind lol...
Doesn't have to be a bad thing. But, keep improving, good for you.
But yea, i know im not very logical but im not just gonna stop believing in god lol i literally can not not believe in god, my mind will not let me, i can think of what no creator would be like or having no god, but i can not convince myself it doesnt exist. i literally can not.
You go right ahead and believe in God, but don't try to claim Occams razor supports you.
it cant really be used with god, as you can tell from mine and cartmans debate, theological issues just go to deep and are too personal for that, but it can be kind of used
Hitchen's razor can be applied to the physical world. We don't have evidence for the outside world beyond our own small part of it. I choose to deny most of our world exists because I have no evidence.
