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.
Yes its the right God. The Judeo people are Jews but they believe in God and don't believe that Jesus was the Messiah and they believe in the Old Testament and they don't believe that Jesus came down from this earth and died on the cross for our sins. But when the rapture occurs they will soon realize that Jesus was the Messiah.
It is as right as any other god, including those things that one deems important.
Today when Richard Dawkins recounts how Darwinian evolution enables him to be an ‘intellectually fulfilled atheist’, this only reinforces the idea that there must be something deeply anti-Christian about evolution. But the fact that evolutionary theory has been called upon to justify such a wide range of ideologies as communism, capitalism, racism and militarism, some of them mutually exclusive, should alert us to the dangers of extrapolating scientific theories into arenas in which they actually have little or nothing to say.
Your argument has no relevance to this debate whatever. The motion of this debate presupposes that a supernatural creator exists. The question is that is the Judeo-Christian God the supernatural creator and not whether theism is fallible or logical. Thus, your argument does not hold water, with respect to this debate.
It's not hard to see why you have a myopic view of what "god" means. Even from the link you have cited, there are 5 other different definitions of what "god" means. Does 'Secular Evolution' characterised by any of the other 5 definitions? I contend that it is not.
First, it is not even a being or an entity and thus, cannot be "perfect, omnipotent (and/or) omniscient". Secondly, while I do not doubt that some might worship, idealise or follow 'Secular Evolution', not all claim to do even one of the three actions listed, let alone all three. Finally, 'Secular Evolution' is not an "image" or an "idol", it is a scientific theory.
To have a meaningful debate, I suggest that you stop cherry-picking and start engaging in the full rigour of discussion and argument.
Look at the debate question, is god in capital letters? Then all small cased gods should be considered. No where in the title does it say anything about only supernatural types of gods.
There was an obvious grammatical error which you seem to have not picked up on. The first "god" should have a captial 'G' because it refers specifically to the Judeo-Christian God, who is by definition from their faith the one and true God.
Next, on to your point about "No where in the title does it say anything about only supernatural types of gods." Yes, I agree with you. However, does that mean that supernatural beings are not gods? I don't think so. If you subscribe to this line of logic, then it contradicts your stand about the Judeo-Christian God being the "right" god.
Furthermore, as I have said, can you provide evidence to show that anyone who does not believe that the Judeo-Christian God is the "right" god would worship, idealise and/or follow 'Secular Evolution' (as you have termed)? I do not think so. You are committing a fallacy called the 'false dilemma' because you give no credit to others who believe in supernatural entities other than the Judeo-Christian God. In order to establish that the Judeo-Christian God is the "right" god, you need to (1) show why all other gods are illogical to believe (because the arguments for the existence of other gods do not fulfill truth conditions) and then (2) give logical arguments that fulfill the truth conditions to show that the Judeo-Christian God is the "right" god. Anything short of that and you have not established any form of logical conclusion for your claim.
All I did was post another quote of Dawkins, the author of this debate posted one as well. The author widened the spectrum as to the meaning of god by his quote. Don't blame me, the door was already open.
The point of quoting Dawkins was not to limit the Universe of Discourse (UoD) to Dawkin's world view at all. As compared to your previous statement, at least Dawkins recognise that some believe in other gods apart from the Judeo-Christian God.
Argumentum ad hominem is not going to prove your point at all.
I see that you have continually side-stepped my rebuttals to your views about the Judeo-Christian God being the "right" god.
You have questioned, "Yet somehow I think there is only one god?". Let me get this straight. Are you now claiming that there are more gods that the Judeo-Christian God? If so, where are your arguments and pieces of evidence for such a claim?
Furthermore, if you believe that the Judeo-Christian God is the "right" god, you would naturally subscribe to the view that the Judeo-Christian God is the one, true God. That contradicts your new claim, as implied by your rhetorical question, that there is more than one god. Again, I ask you to provide arguments and pieces of evidence to support your claim. I shall reserve my judgement on your claims until I have heard your arguments.
First and foremost, it's spelt "Buddha". And whatever warped notion you might have of Buddhism, Buddhists do not believe in any god(s).
Second, believe and knowledge are two very different concepts. If you assert that the Judeo-Christian God is the "right" god, then you must necessarily say that you know the Judeo-Christian God exists. That is basic epistemology.
Finally, it is now apparent that you do not understand the concept of "atheism". Why don't you check the OED? In the OED, the definition of atheism is: "Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God."
Whether they recognize it or not Buddha is their god. Just the drunks god is alcohol. The junkies god is cocaine. The gamblers god is poker, slots, etc. For some work is their god. Etc, etc, etc.
"Just the drunks god is alcohol. The junkies god is cocaine. The gamblers god is poker, slots, etc. For some work is their god" [sic]
You've committed yet another fallacy called the 'false analogy fallacy'. When one uses the word 'god' in the sense that you have, they are using it metaphorically. This is vastly different from saying that the god of Jews and Christians is the Judeo-Christian God. The use of the word 'god' here is literal.
You seem to have difficulty comprehending the OED's definition of 'atheism'. As an atheist, I do no believe in a god.
No, it doesn't. This is a 'false dilemma fallacy'. You have claimed that "the truth is then found in bibles". Why don't you provide some logical arguments that fulfill truth conditions to support your claim?
I didn't make this claim, I was mocking you. I believe it was you that said the dictionary has metaphors, I then said the Bible must be a book that contains the truth.
This is a blatant admission of using argumentum ad hominem. Furthermore, when you say that "the Bible must be a book that contains the truth". that IS making a claim. That claim, without evidence, commits the false dilemma fallacy.
I have no troubles comprehending any one that uses English, you on the other hand. "As an atheist, I do no believe in a god."
Atheists do not believe in God, but they have gods. It is you that is confused.
God:
1a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
god:
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: (Money was their god.)
Furthermore, it is not up to you to decide who the gods of other religions are. Just as it is not my place to decide on whether the Judeo-Christian God is YOUR god or not. However, I am entitled to the opinion that the belief in any supernatural entity is false.
This is a matter of faith and free will, it is ridiculous to use modern standards of logic to decide this, evidence can be used for or against the existence of god and debates like this one have never been conclusively decided.
Perhaps one of the most insightful comments I have ever come across was written by C.S. Lewis in 'The Voyage of the Dawn Treader'.
At the end of the journey, Lucy and Edmund asked Aslan if He existed in their world. He responded "I am, but there I have another name. You must learn to know me by that name."
I don't imagine that an all-powerful, all-loving God could love any of His children more than others. I don't imagine that an all-loving God would punish His children for not following the 'right' religion. It seems to me that the only thing an all-loving God would care about would be how we lived our lives according to our knowledge and wisdom.
Perhaps all gods are one and the same, or perhaps none of them exist. But if we all work to be kind and peaceful, then the pursuit of God would be worth it regardless.
God does punish His children because they have to go through trial and tribulations and sometimes God has to test His believers. Also not all the time God punishes His people sometime it was Satan. If you read Job in the Bible, God said that you can take everything except for Job's life and so Satan took everything Job had except his life.
#1 Your argument has almost nothing to do with the topic.
#2 In the Bible, he once tested his believers by telling them to murder their children in his name.That to me is the act of an EVIL being that abuses power, not an all loving creator. There's no way i can believe in something like that.
God does punish His children because they have to go through trial and tribulations and sometimes God has to test His believers.
Why in your opinion is this necessary? Surely as the pinnacle of God's design, we should have no need to be tested. Why would the ultimate designer, design a flawed being on purpose? Bearing in mind, that an all powerful, omniscient being, firstly had to have known, way before he set the wheels in motion, how everything would occur.
Also not all the time God punishes His people sometime it was Satan.
Is Satan not also a creation of God, designed the way he wished him to be? Also in light of this, is Satan not just God's mechanism?
If you read Job in the Bible, God said that you can take everything except for Job's life and so Satan took everything Job had except his life.
Agreed. To quote Friedrich Nietzche, "Wie? ist der Mensch nur ein Fehlgriff Gottes? Oder Gott nur ein Fehlgriff des Menschen?" (Translation: Which? Is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's blunders?).
This is one of the ways to support the Problem of Evil argument for the non-existence of God as well. If the Judeo-Christian God does not exist, 'He' cannot be the "right" god.
So if god is how you say he is (a punisher of his children only to test them) then why do baby's die, why are they raped and starved and beaten and suffocated. Who is God testing there what could possibly be his motivation in your mind? I have always wounder how people who believe in a punishing but just god can explain this?
Because everything within God's character can be loving described as "all" all-powerful, all-loving etc. A balance must be found wherein justice is served and people are given a choice to do the right thing and someday end up in heaven.
