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.
It is easy to make an argument for God’s existence from a cosmological standpoint. As the years have gone by, a growing amount of scientific data has accumulated which negates atheistic assumptions about how matter and the cosmos came into existence and how it has arrived at its present condition. I have been impressed with an increasing awareness on the part of many scientists and theologians that science and religion are symbiotic disciplines.
One question which inevitably comes up in a discussion of this nature is what the origin of God is? If God created matter/energy and designed the systems that have propelled matter into its present arrangement, who or what accomplished that for God? Why is it any more reasonable to believe that God has always been than it is to say that matter has always been? As Carl Sagan has said, “If we say that God has always been, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always been?” (Carl Sagan, Cosmos, [New York: Random House, Inc., 1980], p. 257).
From a purely scientific standpoint, it is easy to demonstrate that matter cannot be eternal in nature. The universe is expanding from what appears to be a beginning point in space/time, which appears to be a one time event. Hydrogen is the basic fuel of the cosmos, powering all stars and other energy sources in space. If the fuel of the universe has been used eternally, that fuel will eventually be depleted; but the evidence is that the cosmological gas gauge, while moving toward “empty,” is yet a long way from being there—a condition incompatible with an eternal universe. The second law of thermodynamics insists that the cosmos is moving toward a condition of disorder, sometimes referred to as “heat death.” Even in an oscillating universe, things ultimately run out of energy and “die.” All of these evidences, and several others we have not made reference to, show that matter cannot be eternal, as Dr. Sagan and his associates would like to believe. However, this does not mean that we automatically accept the hypothesis that God is the Creator. Why is it not equally invalid to suggest that God has always been?
The problem here is that many people have a mistaken concept of God. If we conceive of God as physical, anthropomorphic (like man) being, the question of God’s origin is valid. However, such a concept of God is alien to the Bible and to common sense. Consider the following descriptions of God from the Bible:
John 4: 24
God is a Spirit: ...
Matthew 16:17
... for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven.
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should ... ;
Obviously, the descriptions and concepts of God given in these passages are that God is a spiritual entity. He exists outside of the three-dimensional physical world in which we live. The Bible further supports this concept of God in the following passages:
Jeremiah 23:23-24
Am I a God at hand, saith the Lord, and not a God afar off? ... Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.
2 Chronicles 2:6
But who is able to build a house, seeing the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him? ...
Acts 17:28
For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; ...
Not only is God described as being outside space, but He is also described as being outside of time. Consider the following:
2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
Psalm 102:27
But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.
Acts 1:7
...It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his power.
If God is a being that is unlimited in time, and if He has access to every piece of time as if it were now, the question of who created God is an invalid question. The problem is like asking a student to draw a four-sided triangle. The terminology is self-contradictory.
When asked “Who or what created God?” we are making the assumption that God was created. If God exists outside of time and space, and if He is the Creator of time and space, He obviously was not created! God began the beginning! This is why He says, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last” (Revelation 22:13).
God created time. The statement of Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” is making reference to the creation of time. The reason that things like heat death, the expansion of the universe, and the depletion of hydrogen do not apply to God is because He is outside of time. God has always been. He did things before time began (see 1 Corinthians 2:7). He not only began time; He will also end it. When time ends, all matter and all mankind will enter eternity—a timeless condition free of the negative things that time brings upon us now.
2 Peter 3:10-11
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness.
Revelation 21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
The agnostic position that there is nothing that can be said to support God’s existence that cannot be said against that existence cannot, in the opinion of the author, stand in the face of this evidence.
I would say the argument presented is not so much an argument for god's existence as for the possibility of his existence despite concerns about temporal matters.
The same argument can be made concerning the "big bang", with minor modifications. Since the "speed" of time is related to the density of mass in an area.
It doesn't really deductively lead to god's actual existence, but merely states that if god exists it is in a way which makes concerns about temporal matters misplaced/invalid. It is more of a counter to an argument against god's existence than a proof for his existence.
There are also a few things I could be nit picky about, like:
If God exists outside of time and space, and if He is the Creator of time and space, He obviously was not created!
That assumes something can not be created outside of time and space, which outside of such things we really don't know much about. If something outside of our plane of existence could create it, then could something of created god's timeless plane of existence with him in it?
There are also a few other things I don't really care to point out at the moment which I find fault with.
Still, one of the better ones on this side, and thus it deserves up top; upvote.
God was before man came into being. Anything that is not apart of God is apart of death. We were made in Gods image therefore we have been given life. These words to not come from man but from God himself.
we come from our parents....then gods came from??????there is nothing called god it was just created by our ancestors to instill fear in the minds of future generation..........god is immortal
*btw I'm not down voting you, I think if someone down votes another person they should at least have the balls to dispute them. I dispute, not down vote.
Ah right ok, yes someone is going around down-voting every post I make but I'm getting it sorted anyhow.
I have not actually studied this topic so I may be wrong but I am hoping someone will have something interesting that I have not yet considered. Perhaps He created Himself, but often the Word tells us that time is something very different to God therefore He always existed thus there was no "creating God". It is a very interesting subject and what it really comes down to is that if no one else created God (which they didn't of course) then He created Himself/was always 'there'.
So, if I'm correct, you are either saying God created himself, or that he was always there, I will address both of those claims. For the God created himself claim, that does not make sense, how can something create itself? If I made the claim to you that I was my own father, and you pointed out that that was physically impossible, and I said that us self fathering people are above the rules of physics, genetics and pure logic as you understand it. You would call me a liar and I would absolutely deserve it, no concept can be exempt from reality simply by claiming to be above the rules. And for the claim that God created everything and was always there, it just avoids Ockham's razor, why does it have to be that God was always there and not that the universe and everything else was already there. It seems rather unnecessary to me, what evidence is there to suggest that a deity, and specifically your deity, was there before everything?
but often the Word tells us that time is something very different to God therefore He always existed
can you explain what you mean by time suggests the existence of God. I do happen to know quite a bit about time and general relativity so if you would like to elaborate that would be great
. For the God created himself claim, that does not make sense, how can something create itself?
You cannot create yourself, I cannot create myself, an animal cannot create itself, but God is not any of these things. Perhaps God was always there therefore never created Himself as He was always existant.
why does it have to be that God was always there and not that the universe and everything else was already there.
Thats like saying, why are oranges orange - they just are and we have to deal with that. Many will always want something different and can never be satisfied with the way things are. Well, this is the way it is; God was before us, He is the Alpha and the Omega, our Creator.
It seems rather unnecessary to me
As does the fact that people cannot accept His love and all that He has done for us.
what evidence is there to suggest that a deity, and specifically your deity, was there before everything?
Whatever I say here will not sit well with you so why don't you tell me what evidence there is that disproves this.
can you explain what you mean by time suggests the existence of God. I do happen to know quite a bit about time and general relativity so if you would like to elaborate that would be great
Surely. We are not told much about what time is to God but however we are told a little. I explained that since time is very different in God's eyes, we have to take this into account when wondering if He has always existed as opposed to creating Himself at some point. For example, we die but God is everlasting, we are born now but God has watched us, our families, our ancestors and whoever else before that come into this world then pass on. Time for Him is something very different to what time is to us. There are many examples that present the differences here. This relates to this debate in question as since time is different to God, we wonder if He has always been there, and "always been there" implies time whereas time is something very different in God's eyes. The past day or so I have been reading more on this matter and am leaning more toward God always being there as opposed to Him creating Himself which I noted someplace. It is an exceedingly interesting topic but one that us humans are out of our depth in. However, it is fun to discuss it anyway ;)
God created himself? That is very hard to comprehend. The reason we are told this is because the people who made up the story didn't want to have to come up with too much detail. For example, "Who created God?" "Bob did" "Who created Bob?" "Ron did" "Who created Ron...?". You get the point? It would have to keep going on and on. Saying that he "always existed" or that "he created himself" was the easy way out. The bible is a very old book. A book written by men none of us have ever seen. How do we know that these men were honest? Religious beliefs have been passed from generation to generation. They started a long time ago when many people were not educated and we did not have the technology we have today. Without science, the theory that there is a God, was easier to believe. Remember that these are our ancestors, they passed this knowledge on to us. This is why so many people believe in God today. Look at the world around you. We have wars, illness, starvation, natural disasters, homeless, and millions of people dying everyday. There are people suffering all over the world, yet this God is considered "loving". Not only does he allow his "children" to suffer, but he sends the people that don't believe in him to the flaming torture chamber called "HELL". That does not sound like a loving God to me. If he wants us to believe in him, why doesn't he just show himself or at least give us some proof that he exists?
You are asking me the exact same question several others are asking plus making exact same points as others are making and I don't have time to be debating the exact same debate with several people at once so just read my other debates. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Haha my bad. To be honest, I only read a few responses. Sorry about that. Believe what you want. You don't know any of us personally, I seriously doubt we could change your mind. Look from both sides and figure out which makes more sense to you. Heaven, hell, or nothing... we're going to find out eventually... Well, we won't know anything if we're just dead but we will if there is an afterlife, which by the way the bible says we don't go to immediately. So according to the bible, everyone that has died, is not in heaven or hell yet. Everyone is just dead. So whenever someone says "They're in a better place now", they obviously didn't read that part of the bible. I don't know if you knew that, I just like to make sure people know what they're talking about before they reject others opinions.
Why, thank you :) Like I said, I am unsure of the matter and I find it both intriguing to discuss but also I feel that us humans are very out of our depth discussing such a matter.
What does it really fucking matter? If you believe in Him, that's great. If you don't, that's fine too.
Why in the hell do so many of the "oppressed" atheists seem to feel an overwhelming need to attack others (simply because they believe differently than the atheists do)?
If atheists are really as "amused" by Christianity and religion as much as they claim; why in the hell do they always seem so fucking angry?
yes actually, religion is tied into politics, companies, social lives, etc.
Most atheists view such "attacks" as a playful game, or are tired of religions interconnections to the rest of their lives.
Its doubtful atheists always seem angry, but if they are it may be because of the pressure to be something other than an atheist. People tend to push back, I find it amusing that so many religious people assume that other people are themselves religious, such assumptions can create an atmosphere of religious pressure and pointing out that your nor religious or that you would prefer a different atmosphere can often lead to heated argumentation.
So what you're saying is, no; it doesn't really fucking matter.
People (ALL) people are stupid as a box of fucking rocks and no matter what will always seek to crush others they feel are opposing them, even if no one is.
because we were all made in the image of God and in every person deep down their is a piece of them longing to reach out to life. Longing for something more. This longing is what creates frustation in the mind of an atheist. Because day by day it is a war amongst good and evil.
I don't find it to be a "longing for something more" when someone feels that the best way to say, "We have a difference of opinion on this subject" by screaming at me that I'm a "fucking idiot nutjob" because I happen to believe in God.
God has no need to have been created, since He exists either outside time (where cause and effect do not operate) or within multiple dimensions of time (such that there is no beginning of God's plane of time). Hence God is eternal, having never been created. Although it is possible that the universe itself is eternal, eliminating the need for its creation, observational evidence contradicts this hypothesis, since the universe began to exist a finite ~13.7 billion years ago. The only possible escape for the atheist is the invention of a kind of super universe, which can never be confirmed experimentally (hence it is metaphysical in nature, and not scientific).
I believe that we created God. If we live, we are forced to face our human conditions. I believe nature has given us the ability to ask questions about our condition but has forgotten to give us the ability to find an answer. I refuse to create an answer. Others prefer to create an answer because incomprehension is too hard to bare. God was born from our desire to understand.
...Or from our desire to cope. I don't believe religion truly helps in understanding, since so much of it is itself pretty incomprehensible. Rather religion seems to be an area which many people have a limited ability to rationally consider, probably due to an emotional need being satisfied by the religion. The brain is a beautiful thing, which seems to be able to protect itself from even itself.
In another debate you basically claimed his omnipotence is actually bounded by logic.
LOL, err, what I said was that you were failing to produce any kind of logical explanation which is why you chickened with the excuse of "I have lost motivation with you". Get back to me or quit bullshitting. I backed you up against the wall in each post and you finally backed down when asked for the millionth time for a logical explanation that supported your supposition other than algebra or examples of kids with knives.
Actually, I started to believe you weren't worth my time and was going to start flaming you if I continued, mainly due to your attitude. So I was waiting till one weekend when I was bored and wanted to try to find a way to explain it to someone who finds what I find as simple as incomprehensible, often a daunting and annoying task. Any ways, you have anything against my argument other than claiming you yourself don't have an logical explanation by your own standards?
Lol! Hey, you started out with your debate and all I did was ask you to produce a logical explanation for it and you have failed in every post. Turning it round on me only further shows your inability to produce a logical argument. You say you were going to start flaming me due to my attitude, do you seriously blame me for getting impatient when you fail post after post to provide a logical explanation and talk about algebra and computers instead? Like I said before, such examples cannot compare to God.
It's not so much that God made Himself. God just is and was. Why does everything have to have a beginning and an end? That seems the result of mortal human thinking.
If god always is and always was, then couldn't energy be something that always is and always was? occam's razor would lead us to see that energy always existing is more likely, if we grant that the two propositions have the same empirical evidence.
It just means that existence itself isn't evidence for god. Ultimately either something always was or something came from nothing, the universe is absurd in that regard. The concept of God and religion can possibly serve to abstract and make more complex that absurdity so that its out of notice, but it still exists there as well. This means we will have to turn to other information than our understanding of the beginning of the universe and time to determine if we came from god, or god from us.
God seems to be something noticed only by the human animal, why do we not find religion amongst other animals if god created all things? Is it only humans he wishes to be worshiped by or is all of creation supposed to glorify him? It seems religion is a product of an advanced mind, a human mind; in part due to the lack of it in less advanced minds.
"It seems religion is a product of an advanced mind, a human mind; in part due to the lack of it in less advanced minds."
Yes, the entire Creation is supposed to glorify God. But, as the animals don't speak English, let alone the trees and the mountains, than they're probably glorifying God by the only way they know how: Doing what God made them to do.
And this seems to be contradictory to humanity, who tend to do what they feel would be right , or what others tell them to do, or what others are doing. Which is probably why we're told to glorify God using simple things: Dancing and music.
And no, not tribal, sacrifice-peoples'-hearts-around-a-fire dancing. I'm sure God wouldn't mind a disco. :P
If the rest of nature glorifies god by doing as they do naturally, assuming there is nothing special about the human animal which makes it such that doing what it does naturally is undesirable for a god to watch, than there seems no reason for a god to ordain a religion or even make his presence known to us if he is satisfied with our natural state. If there is such a god, than wouldn't there be no such thing as sin? Meaning sin as we know it, and much of religion is man made. Sure a god may still exist, but if it is a god just described than the one millions believe in is man made(assuming there is only one god).
The concept of god(s) is a product of the human mind in an attempt to explain that which we couldn't explain at the time: Storms, wind, child birth, sickness, etc. Nowadays, people use god as an emotional crutch to try and diminish their fear of death or being alone.
AGREEE AGREE AGREEE!!!!!!!!! WE CREATED 'GOD'. HE IS JUST A RANDOM FABLE THAT PEOPLE WENT WWWAAAAYYYYY OVERBOARD WITH!!! (SORRY ABOUT ALL THE CAPS.....CAPS LOCK IS ON :) )
I know the order, I have read the bible, probably more so than many so-called 'theists'
That is a claim and assumption that you have no right to make as you have no idea of the billions of Christians out there that read their bibles or how much they read.
No, I made an argument to probability. A statistical inference based upon the hundreds of Christians whom I have met, spoken with and debated, this is how statistics works. You use the data from a sample to draw information about a population.
A statistical inference based upon the hundreds of Christians whom I have met
And these hundreds of Christians all confessed that you read more than they did? Unlikely. Even if this is so, you fail to produce evidence therefore I still believe you to be making an ignorant assumption to justify your stance.
this is how statistics works
Statistics or lies?
You use the data from a sample to draw information about a population.
And in order for those to believe this they need the evidence that proves your claim that you drew from the population.
Almost all of them spoke to me about how much/little they read the bible, their faith, habits and what they believe. Comparing the amount that I have studied with the amount of the bible that they have read, yes, I can then make the argument that I have read the bible more than the Christians I have met.
Provide evidence? I can hardly give you a recorded conversation with every theist I have met, but in order to substantiate my claim of having knowledge of the bible, I could take a couple photos of my annotated bible, and the certificate I have after I attended a Christian course on theology, that I voluntarily attended as an Atheist.
You do not seem to be making any substantial arguments, or even arguments against the position I hold in regards to this debate.
Almost all of them spoke to me about how much/little they read the bible
cough lies cough
can then make the argument that I have read the bible more than the Christians I have met.
Sure you can, because they could have been only about 2 of them if that. Furthermore your argument was somewhat different to the one you are presenting now. You clearly stated "I have read the bible, probably more so than many so-called 'theists'" which implies theists all over the globe whereas now you are only talking about a couple hundred that you have met and spoken to (which I predict you are lying about and will continue to believe this until you prove me wrong which also I predict you will fail to do).
I could take a couple photos of my annotated bible, and the certificate I have after I attended a Christian course on theology, that I voluntarily attended as an Atheist
That would prove nothing other than you were a Christian who knew other Christians and you studied alongside them, nothing more. It certainly would not prove they told you you read more than them.
You do not seem to be making any substantial arguments, or even arguments against the position I hold in regards to this debate
Thats because it was so perposterous and dumb yet I still posted the true version beneath your own little invention.
Not lies, I do not lie to children in order to scare them into holding a false belief, that is know to be the behaviour of another well known institution...
I stated that from the hundreds (yes I can use bold too) of theists I have spoken to, it seemed from a qualitative analysis of their experience and knowledge of the bible, that I have indeed read more, and experienced more.
Did you not comprehend my post regarding statistics? I stated that from a sample of theists, I could maybe make the inference that a lot of Christians have read the bible less than I.
That would prove nothing other than you were a Christian who knew other Christians and you studied alongside them, nothing more. It certainly would not prove they told you you read more than them.
I have never been a Christian, but it would show that I am willing to learn about a faiths doctrines. And whilst no, I concede that my own experience would not prove the inexperience of others, it would show that I am not lying regarding my own studies. See my first argument (which you reject on the grounds of "lies", you've not shown anything to prove I am lying).
It was not preposterous, or dumb. The human species has been known to invent god after god. If you do not concede that these thousands of gods were man made, then you accept that you believe that they all created themselves, thus violating the first commandment. If you reject these thousands of gods of having created themselves, then you accept my argument that I posted first.
I stated that from the hundreds (yes I can use bold too) of theists I have spoken to
Wrong, you just said "many so-called theists." and said nothing more. You did not say you had met them; you generalized and steryotyped about theists you had never met then speedily changed your argument.
Did you not comprehend my post regarding statistics? I stated that from a sample of theists, I could maybe make the inference that a lot of Christians have read the bible less than I.
Yes, you quickly changed to this after I caught you out. Before that you said something quite different.
I have never been a Christian, but it would show that I am willing to learn about a faiths doctrines.
Granted.
See my first argument (which you reject on the grounds of "lies", you've not shown anything to prove I am lying).
Well your lack of evidence for starters.
The human species has been known to invent god after god.
This debate is speaking about the One True God, not numorous inventions.
If you do not concede that these thousands of gods were man made, then you accept that you believe that they all created themselves, thus violating the first commandment
These gods that men have created over the generations were man-made, yes of course they were. When did I say they weren't? Stop talking about those they are irrelevant and talk about the One True God this debate is focussing on.
you reject these thousands of gods of having created themselves, then you accept my argument that I posted first.
What on earth are you rambling about, when did I ever even talk about plural gods let alone reject they were man-made???
I think that humans in the early years of humanity created gods, mythological creatures/stories, and other such things to explain the unexplainable. Now that we know so much (evolution) I believe we are too smart to believe in God, or any other celestial beings.
The human primate evolved in the fertile basin of Africa. An area where there were many threats from other species'. As such, our primitive ancestors needed to maintain a social contract, through which they could guarentee that no individal Athroprimate would dare to try to usurp the group for their own autonomous interest.
Many of the leaders of these very early tribes realized that merely saying 'we will punish you' would not work in it's purpose, though inventing some transcendant deity would have that effect, as the deity would work as a multilateral surveillance and conscience. Thus the original religions were created.
The more effort people put into the religion they have, the more dedicated they feel to it, as they will findit harder to accept that their efforts were on a wasted cause and such. Therefore, early religions demanded greater blood sacrifices, which caused people to become dedicated to said convictions.
Throughout history, society has further developed more of these dreadful false impositions known as religions to maintain the corrupt social order.
there is nothing called as god in this world. everything happened, is happening, and will happen according to the laws of physics, chemistry, mathematics. And something which cant be understood using existing laws will be finally understood when we make our laws and understanding about the universe more refined.
Its us who created GOD, god is not a thing. it is just a man made source of inspiration, which a person can rely on when his is low in confidence and inspiration. GOD is nothing more than that. GOD cannot make thing happen for u. its us who have to get inspired from some inspirational source called as god and make thing happen.
if u cant get inspired from god, u can always get inspired from some other thing, like ur mother, wife, kids, enemies, rivals, friends. etc.
its absolutely not compulsory to pray to god or worship. just concentrate on ur duties, perform thm well.