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.
You did not do a single thing I asked of you. People claim that they have evidence that points to his nonexistence. So show me the evidence. That is all I ask. You answered in the "Here is the evidence" column so be productive and give me some evidence. Otherwise don't bother saying anything.
He actually made a reasonable point. It's common folk logic that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but that that idea is incomplete. Absence of evidence isn't deductive evidence of absence, but it's actually true that absence of evidence can be inductive evidence of absence.
So to be a little less technical this means that if I have searched my room for a diamond the size of a fist for the last couple of years, then I have inductive evidence that there isn't a fist sized diamond in my room. What it doesn't mean is that I can be sure that there isn't such a diamond in my room, i.e. I don't have deductive evidence for the absence of the object.
For more than two thousand years we haven't seen reproducible evidence for the existence of God. That amounts to a strong inductive claim that there isn't a God. It doesn't however, mean that we have deductively shown that God doens't exists.
All the confusion we see in these debates arises from the fact that theists believe they have deductive proof that God exists. Deductive proofs inherently out compete inductive proofs, so theists tend to think they have the stronger position. Theists on the other hand haven't ever been able to reproduce their deductive evidence, and that's why atheists are skeptical. Because of the amount of opportunities theists have had to reproduce their evidence, atheists have a strong inductive claim against the existence of God as discussed earlier.
Useless information. Are you going to show me the evidence that makes God non existent or what?
So a little less technical this means that if I have searched my room for a diamond the size of a fist for the last couple of years, then I have inductive evidence that there isn't a fistsized diamond in my room. What it doesn't mean is that I can be sure that there isn't such a diamond in my room, i.e. I don't have deductive evidence for the absence of the object.
Comparing a diamond to a deity? Idiotic. A deity has many more capabilities than a diamond.
or more than two thousand years we haven't seen reproducible evidence for the existence of God. That amounts to a strong inductive claim that there isn't a God. It doesn't however, mean that we have deductively shown that God exists.
I am asking you what evidence actually points to his non existence. I dont care about this nonsense. Are you going to show me or not?
All the confusion we see in these debates arises from the fact that theists believe they have deductive proof that God exists. Deductive proofs inherently outcompete inductive proofs, so theists tend to think they have the stronger position. Theists on the other hand haven't ever been able to reproduce their deductive evidence, and that's why atheists are skeptical. Because of the amount of oppourtinities theists have had to reproduce their evidence, atheists have a strong inductive claim against the existence of God as I discussed earlier.
Atheists find contradictions within the bibles account of God and claim he doesn't exist. Thats it. Now stop bullshitting and give me some evidence. His argument does not stand as evidence. Even if God didn't say a word does that mean he doesn't exist? No. That is why his claim is bullshit. Stop bullshitting. Give me evidence or I will ban you.
Sure. You are being unproductive. You cant even give me evidence. Everythin you said is rhetoric boosted bullshit. Either give me the evidence or dont post at all.
No miracles,that science can't explain,the flu every year adapts to our medicine and over comes it by evolving,religious people pick and choose what they like from science,and say god created the time of day.
So god created a world,planted some oil and coal in the ground,so you could destroy the earth with pollution.
It would of been easier to create a perfect population and put them straight in heaven,so he make us perfect and eve fucked it all up,god knows all but he didn't know that his second human would betray him,sounds to me that he is an all unknowing!!!!!!!
Prove that it is just their imagination, because this occurs on a massive scale so how is that even possible? How is it that people can be filled with the Holy Ghost? How is it that people speak in tongues?
Church puts religious stuff into your imagination. It's the same reason that kids who watch Superman think they can fly..
Church is simply an institution for worship. Divine intervention comes to those who believe. It is not just imaginatory. Unless you wish to disprove every single experience that people have had so far.
They are not.
Such a non productive answer. Give me an answer or I will ban you.
Anyone can speak gibberish.
How does it happen? Why does it sound similar with all tongues? Mind proving that it is just gibberish?
How does it happen? Why does it sound similar with all tongues? Mind proving that it is just gibberish?
Just some advice, tread carefully when talking about speaking in tongues, the real speaking in tongues is speaking in your own language and everyone understands I'm their language, or someone can translate extremely well with no training. Either way, it is not random gibberish to seem spiritual, which Paul warns about in Corinthians.
Such a non productive answer. Give me an answer or I will ban you.
If I say, "How is it that I can be 10 feet tall," the answer is that I'm not 10 feet tall, right? So when you say "How is it that people can be filled with the Holy Ghost," the answer is that they are not.
How does it happen? Why does it sound similar with all tongues? Mind proving that it is just gibberish?
We can't really explain it yet, though Wikipedia suggests mental illness, hypnosis, and learned behavior as possible explanations.
If I say, "How is it that I can be 10 feet tall," the answer is that I'm not 10 feet tall, right? So when you say "How is it that people can be filled with the Holy Ghost," the answer is that they are not.
You are comparing height to a spirit of influence. It doesn't work like that. Prove the Holy Ghost doesn't exist.
That is my point. I want people to leave it as a possibility. Let people believe what they want. Do you get what I am saying? I wouldn't care if Gid didn't. I just want to be able to do as I please. You know?
Science isn't about proving why something doesn't exist, it's about proving it does exist. That's like saying Flying pink elephants can exist on a far away planet, because science hasn't disproved it. Silly thing to say. has science proved it? No, then don't say 'it exists, and that is a fact'.
And so far, science has by no means proved God's existence.
Failed to produce any evidence. I did not ask for what science does. People claim to have evidence that points to his non existence. Show me the evidence. You posted on "Here is the evidence" so show it to me. Otherwise don't bother responding.
Science isn't about proving why something doesn't exist, it's about proving it does exist. That's like saying Flying pink elephants can exist on a far away planet, because science hasn't disproved it. Silly thing to say. has science proved it? No, then don't say 'it exists, and that is a fact'.
And so far, science has by no means proved God's existence.
Jesus the son of a carpenter,seen a wharf one day and on his travels came across a village where the boats were always beached,so the fisherman could only fish when the water was high,to get their boats out.He built a wharf,so the fisherman could go out when ever they want.Jesus walked on a wharf,to the villages,that was a fucking miracle.
Ruazenith, the Onew responsible for creating Earth and some other parts of our universe, is evidence that shows the Christian god doesn't exist, because Ruazenith created Earth not the Christian god.
You may think planets were created by God. Evidence shows that planets can be created through natural processes.
You may think that God performs miracles, but natural processes would result in the same thing.
Science continual finds explanations for how the world works without need for a God. Your only claim is that you don't want to find a better explanation, so you go with God.
You may think planets were created by God. Evidence shows that planets can be created through natural processes.
Not my belief.
You may think that God performs miracles, but natural processes would result in the same thing.
Not my belief.
Science continual finds explanations for how the world works without need for a God. Your only claim is that you don't want to find a better explanation, so you go with God.
Ok, so God doesn't exist because He doesn't do anything. What is the point of getting everyone to agree that a being exists when you think that God doesn't do anything?
Yeah, you did when you continually say it is not your belief when I talk about God doing stuff. I said people think God does stuff, and you said that you disagree. Therefore, you believe that God does not do stuff. So, why should we believe in God?
I said it is a belief that God does something. You disagreed. If you disagree with the statement that God does something, that means you believe God does nothing. You haven't said that He does anything, so I can conclude that you believe He does nothing. Apparently, that's how it works. Your rules, not mine.
I said it is a belief that God does something. You disagreed. If you disagree with the statement that God does something, that means you believe God does nothing
Incorrect. You said I think Gid made the planets. I said no. You said I think God performs miracles. I said no. I still never said that he does nothing.
You haven't said that He does anything, so I can conclude that you believe He does nothing. Apparently, that's how it works. Your rules, not mine.
Not my rules at all. I never was asked what I believed. You are just hopelessly trying to be correct in saying I believe he does nothing. You can keep trying if you wish.
Incorrect. You said I think Gid made the planets. I said no. You said I think God performs miracles. I said no. I still never said that he does nothing.
You have not said He does anything, therefore you believe He does nothing. I am an Atheist too, welcome to the club.
Not my rules at all. I never was asked what I believed. You are just hopelessly trying to be correct in saying I believe he does nothing. You can keep trying if you wish.
When someone doesn't give evidence that God doesn't exist, according to you that means they have no evidence. So, using your logic, since you have not presented anything that you believe He does, I am allowed to conclude that you believe He doesn't do anything.
You have not said He does anything, therefore you believe He does nothing. I am an Atheist too, welcome to the club.
That makes no logical sense. I have to reject his existence in order to be an Atheist. You never asked me what he does. So I never had to say anything. So that is just random of you to say that.
When someone doesn't give evidence that God doesn't exist, according to you that means they have no evidence. So, using your logic, since you have not presented anything that you believe He does, I am allowed to conclude that you believe He doesn't do anything.
Funny. I claim he exist yet he does nothing, but existing is something.......I dont know. I will just leave you now to finish. I believe he exists. Thats final.
Science isn't about proving why something doesn't exist, it's about proving it does exist. That's like saying Flying pink elephants can exist on a far away planet, because science hasn't disproved it. Silly thing to say. has science proved it? No, then don't say 'it exists, and that is a fact'.
And so far, science has by no means proved God's existence.
Ah I see. Well we live in a world where science has taught us that gravity exists, evolution exists, the universe is immense, and very very old, and that the world is spherical, not flat.
Now, if we decide that science is right in all these things, then that is all due to the laws of physics. And the laws of physics do not allow there to be a God. Further more, science has disproven many biblical things, like the age of the earth, wine magically turning in to wine, walking on water e.t.c.
If you think God, and everything that comes with him/her is possible, then you deny the laws of physics, saying that they are incorrect. Which is possible, humans may have totally gotten it wrong, but as far as most people, including myself, are concerned, the laws of physics exist, and we've been right about them so far, pretty much!
So there is compelling evidence that shows God does not exist yes, but I think it is more important for science to find ways to prove God does exist and end this once and for all.
I can't think of any evidence that God doesn't exist. What makes Atheists feel strong in their convictions (or lack thereof) is that they say most evolution and other adaptive rhetoric is evidence against an all powerful being. This isn't true because an all powerful being would have created creatures that can adapt.
There is no evidence of his non existence or existence. I'm just curious why do people tell kids Santa Claus is fake but tell them god exists? The same reason God should be believed in should allow for people to believe in Santa yet no one believes in Santa Claus but a lot of people believe in God hmmmmm inconsistency at its best :P
