CreateDebate


Champybeat's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Champybeat's arguments, looking across every debate.
2 points

I believe there is a spiritual, immaterial realm (e.g., God, angels, heaven/hell) - which we cannot experience with our senses. However, I believe God alone is prime reality; for he is existence, and is self-existent and self-sufficient. He is the necessary being and everything else is contingent and completely dependent on him for their existence; for he is the Creator of all things.

1 point

As for the definition concerning existence, I believe God does existence. For he is existence (he is prime reality - all other things are contingent and dependent upon him as the necessary being).

As for the synonyms such as ‘breathing’, I would deny this; for God created air, and created organisms to breathe it. He himself is not an organism and is self-sufficient.

Comparing him to other religions, no, not all religions can offer us a foundation for such things as the laws of logic (see the evidence I gave on the other side). Zeus is not omnipotent and not transcendent; there’s no logical reason to believe he could make the universe (he is more of a ‘superman’ rather than a Creator God [the Christian, Triune God).

Also, the historical evidence supports Christianity more than any other religion (e.g. most historians would agree there was a man named Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified on a Roman cross under the sentence of Pontius Pilate, and his disciples proclaimed he rose from the dead three days later [e.g., Josephus of the first century proclaimed the younger brother of the of our Lord Christ, James, was killed for his faith in his risen brother]). Of course, any of these points could be talked about more, but the debate topic was ‘Does God exist?’, and if the evidence points to a Creator (which I am convinced it does [see other side, as mentioned]).

1 point

Please see the evidence I gave on the other side (and perhaps offer your thoughts).

1 point

By ‘God’ I believe in a transcendent being who is the Creator of the universe, sent his Son to die on the cross and be resurrected so if we put our faith in him and his saving work we will be forgiven of our sins, rescued from God’s wrath, and enjoy God now and forever, bringing glory to him.

And I do believe there is evidence for a Creator God (perhaps you could give it thought, which I presented on the ‘pro-side’).

We need to follow the evidence where it leads; let us be careful to not let naturalistic processes become our ‘god of the gaps’. (E.g., I believe the evidence points toward God concerning the laws of logic, life and it’s origin and complexity, origin and uniformity of universe, etc.).

And I believe there is evidence specifically for Christianity (e.g., most historians agree [Christian and secular] that there was a man called ‘Jesus of Nazareth’, who was crucified by the sentence of Ponius Pilate of the Roman empire, buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimetha, and his disciples claimed he rose again very shortly afterwards [and went to their death proclaiming it; we have evidence for this too (e.g., Josephus of the first century claim Jesus’s younger brother James was killed for his faith in the risen Christ)]). (All these points of course could be talked about further, but I suppose that would be more of a debate concerning ‘Is Christianity true?’.)

1 point

Now, now, friend, there’s no reason to be a smart alleck.

Your dodging the question, or either you completely misread the question.

I asked how you this is evidence against God - I’m very certain I know what it is to exist.

1 point

With respect, this is nonsense. If it can’t survive in its own it is not alive. A baby who is out of the womb depends on its mother (e.g., milk). It is utterly dependent on her. And the baby staying alive is more precious and basic than not being pregnant. And if objective moral values exist, abortion is indeed absolutely wrong (for those in the womb are formed by the Creator and are made in the image of the Divine). And so, apart from God, morality is subjective. And so, who are you to claim that abortion is absolutely for human rights - as morality in your worldview is an opinion? Humans, apart from a Creator, are chemical reactions dancing to their DNA (as Dawkins puts it). And your argument is fallacious (‘if you are pro-life, you are not American and against humanity!’ - a slippery slope fallacy. Also no, I believe it is more important to keep a human alive in the womb than it is going to perhaps live a full life of 80 years, than it is to kill it so a woman can selfishly not want to raise it [or not want to be pregnant]).

3 points

It is not a strawman to claim that the ultimate reason people want abortions is because they just don’t want to raise a child. And so, they murder a child in the womb that could have had lived a life of 80 years: childhood, experience, education, marriage, raise children on their own, and have a relationship with their Creator. But they don’t. Why? Because the one responsible for their existence (secondarily at least; the primary reason they came into being is due to God) decided they didn’t want to raise a child, and did not even see the need of putting them for adoption. This is disgusting to the utmost. We have so much evidence that the baby in the womb is an actual human being (e.g. humans alone have their genetic code complete from the start). When one is conceived, a Being comes into existence that will exist for all eternity - an image-bearer of the Divine. We know what we are doing. Morality is not subjective. We have a Judge, one who made us, and we must uphold the sanctity of human life. Abortion is murder.

1 point

If you are arguing that I can’t use this to solve the ‘problem of evil’, I would disagree to the utmost. This is an argument of worlsviews. Of course it can’t be technically proven that there will be a final judgment (just as God’s existence cannot technically be proven nor disproven). But just because we die also doesn’t prove we cease to exist. We need to see if the Christian worldview has a response to this problem - why evil exists, if it is part of God’s perfect, sovereign will (which it is), and what will happen to it; which it does offer a response - perfect response.

1 point

Can you please clarify how this evidence against God?

Brayden

1 point

I would strong disagree; I would like you to see the evidence I provided on the ‘pro-side’. (And perhaps offer thoughts.)

1 point

The Christian God has most certainly not been disproven! (See evidences I have on other side.)

1 point

The Big Bang cannot explain the cause of the universe - it was the effect and the event. What caused the Big Bang, my dear friend? I assert one who is existence - the timeless, spaceless, immaterial Creator.

1 point

With respect, no, they are not the same thing. God created energy. Energy wears down over time, and it has no creative power (it is not personal and cannot consiously decide to make a universe.

1 point

Greetings.

1. You did not address their existence. Apart from God, we have no foundation for them existing - for they are conceptual. Science cannot prove logic; it presumes it. Apart from an immaterial Creator, we have no reason to believe these laws. Also, humans did not create them; we ‘discovered’ them. Before humans came into existence, the sun could not exist and exist at the same time (this would violate the law of non-contradiction).

The very definition of a materialistic universe is that all that exists is ultimately physical - therefore the immaterial cannot exist. I find it strange that you are asserting the immaterial do exist in a materialistic universe - most would disagree with you (e.g., as for ideas, many believe they are ultimately physical, as they are reactions, for physical or chemical reasons, inside our brain). But the laws of logic are not limited inside our skull (otherwise they would be subjective to everyone). Whether you are at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, or in London, England, the laws of logic exist (contradictions cannot exist anywhere, and there is no ‘middle ground’ for a yes/no question).

2. You missed the point. We believe in uniformity, but have no foundation for doing so. We just accept our brains that evolved naturally are trustworthy. Apart from God, we have no reason to think the universe should have to be regular, logical, and orderly at all times.

God did not create the laws of logic, because he has always been a logical Creator. Rather, when we observe the laws of logic and uniformity in our universe, we see reflections of the hand of a logical Lawgiver and Creator who made all reality that is secondary (with him being primary reality).

3. The probability of the universe being fine-tuned for such things is impossible (see numbers I gave). These constants which are perfectly fine tuned (which generally all physicists agree the universe is fine tuned [e.g. Stephen Hawking]). They point to a Designer - I.e., a Fine-Tuner.

4. Most cosmologists would agree the Big Bang is when time and space began - and matter. And so, I believe it is very reasonable to believe the cause would not consist of time, space and matter (immaterial, spaceless, and timeless). And I believe we should have a cause who is uncaused; who is necessary rather than contingent - one who is existence, and prime reality (God). As for personal, the personal Creator could decide to create the universe, fine-tune it, create life, etc. if it was impersonal, it would never make such a decision to cause the universe. And if it did bring the universe into existence, since it can’t consciously decide that, it would need something else to cause it (and we fall into a ‘turtles all the way down”).

5. information in DNA:

You are not addressing anything. The DNA molecule contains instructions to build life. It carries information and meaning - information that can give a seal whiskers, or give me green eyes. But what gave it these instructions and meaning and information in the first place?

6. Abiogenesis:

Concerning abiogenesis, with respect, all you did was throw in a few ad hominem and baseless assertions (as for the baseless assertions, this is primarily what you have done throughout your post). We observe the law of biogenesis (life comes from life). The burden of proof lies on the one who claims life can come from non-life. This is pure speculation.

7. Morals:

Yes! We do generally agree. But this still makes it an opinion apart from God. For example, Nazi Gernamy believed it was good to exterminate Jews. But what transcendent laws are we to look to for us Americans to decide they were absolutely wrong? None. It is up to the subject (human) to decide what is right/wrong in subjectivism.

8. No, you cannot just throw in any word. For example, if we said ‘since the idea of a maximally great island exists, it must exist’. But it can’t exist, because you could always make it ‘better’. For example, what if you added one more fish, or a grain of sand? But concerning God, you cannot make him any better; for he is infinite in his attributes.

10. I do not believe so. Apart from God, we have no meaning ultimately. Sure, claim you can find it, but apart from a Creator, we will ultimately stop existing (remembering nothing that happened to us), and there is no hope (hope for life, and no hope for justice [‘evil’ will never be judged (though the word is an opinion apart from God anyways)]). Purpose is subjective apart from God, as someone could purpose in anything that suited them (whether it be giving to the poor, or capturing children to rape and murder them - which is not objectively evil in atheism, since we are mere chemical reactions dancing to our DNA [as Richard Dawkins puts it]).

Brayden

0 points

Evidence was given on the other side, sir, by Champybeat (i.e., me). We can indeed discuss the existence of the Triune God of Christianity, but first we must look to see if the evidence points to a Creator.

2 points

1. I must address, I do not believe in a deity who lives merely in the sky. I believe in an immaterial God who is omnipresent, but is also beyond space/time - i.e., transcendent - as he created space and time (and is therefore spaceless and timeless).

2.you dodge the assertion: you still fail to account for the immaterial laws of logic in a naturalistic worldview. The laws of logic are evidence for God, because he alone offers us a foundation for them.

3. We are referring to a Creator in general. But I do accept the existence of the Christian, Triune God. And the point was, such immaterial entities point to a logical, immaterial Lawgiver of the laws - the Creator God.

1 point

To claim the universe can come from nothing is logically absurd. And that’s the point: we need a prime reality, one who is existence. For the universe is contingent, and so we need an ultimate, transcendent necessary being - the Creator, whom we mere humans generally refer to as ‘God’.

0 points

The problem of evil is easily solvable:

If it is even possible God has a purpose for suffering and evil in his world, then it is debunked. Which in Christianity, God planned for its existence knowing ‘the best of all universes’ so to speak. And we believe Christ Jesus will one day return to eliminate evil and suffering, establish the eternal kingdom of God, and restore creation for all eternity.

2 points

1. laws of logic:

The laws of logic are evidence for God. For they are conceptual, transcendent, logical, and work at all times in places - they are also immaterial. In a materialistic worldview, these laws cannot possibly exist.

2. uniformity in nature:

The laws of logic and nature continue to work in an orderly, regular way. But why must the universe ‘obey’ these laws at times? What determines it to be a logical and orderly universe.

3. fine-tuning:

The universe is perfectly fine tuned for planets, stars, and life. (E.g., if the constant of gravity was different by 1 in 10 to the 60th power, stars, planets and life would not exist).

4. cosmological argument:

The universe had a beginning and therefore has a cause; since the universe is caused, and consists of time, space, and matter, the cause of the universe must be timeless, spaceless, immaterial. It also must be personal, and unbelievably powerful - the Creator - God.

5. complexity of life:

The complexity of organisms is mind-boggling. But observe even a ‘simple’ cell. It consists of many, many organelles within it that must work for it to be useful. The cell is intracately made, and extremely complex. We also observe layer upon layer of explicitly on even the smallest of creatures (e.g., lightning bugs, worms, lizards).

6. information in DNA:

DNA contains instructions to build life. The materialist must explain how immaterial information could possibly come about by physical, natural processes alone.

7. origin of life:

Abiogenesis (like the multiverse) has not a shred of empirical evidence. We have only observed life originate from life. And so therefore, I believe all life comes from one who is existence - the I AM - who has life in himself.

8. Moral aegument:

If God does not exist, evil does not exist - it is a mere opinion in subjectivism (which no one wants to live in a world of relativism).

9. ontological argument:

1. It is possible a maximally great being exists.

2. It thefore exists in some possible world.

3. For it to be maximally great, it must exist in all possible worlds.

4. It therefore exists in the actual world.

5. God therefore exists.

10. Our craving for the divine:

When there is a desire for sex, there is sex. When there is a desire for food, there is food. When there is a desire for happiness and purpose, indeed, it can be found. But we can only have an objective meaning and purpose in life if we were designed by the Divine. And when we put our faith in the Christ and his saving work (his death and resurrection) to save us from our sins, we are saved from the eternal wrath of the Almighty, and are forgiven of our sins; we are saved by the grace of God alone through faith alone in the Christ alone (the Son of God). And in Christ, we find purpose. For the chief end of man is to glorify God but enjoying him forever. Through, Christ we can find the supreme treasure of the universe - God himself - and be satisfied in him forever.

0 points

There is evidence, indeed. (E.g. laws of logic and nature, fine-tuning of universe, biogenesis, complexity of life, information in DNA, moral values, etc.).

Evidence need not be physical - for God is an immaterial being.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]