CreateDebate


Debate Info

96
69
Atheists Theists
Debate Score:165
Arguments:155
Total Votes:171
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Atheists (80)
 
 Theists (64)

Debate Creator

Emperor(1348) pic



Why do you believe what you do?

Atheists, why do you trust the scientific method and your observations? Scientists have lied about false or distorted evidence in the past.

Not to mention, everything you see is interpreted by your brain, which is quite susceptible to delusion and bias.

Why do you believe what you do?

 



Theists, why do you trust your holy books and churches? Religious leaders have lied and taken advantage of people in the past.

Not to mention, there is a completely lack of evidence for any god. There have been hundreds of gods invented by humans throughout time. Why is yours right?

Why do you believe what you do?

Atheists

Side Score: 96
VS.

Theists

Side Score: 69
5 points

I'm atheist because i trust facts more than a 2000 year old book

Side: Atheists
Assface(406) Disputed
2 points

Are you aware of non-Christian gods?

What facts point explicitly to the non-existence of a (G)od(s)?

Side: Theists
Emperor(1348) Disputed
1 point

The fact that there are no points pointing to the existence of those gods.

Do you believe in the tooth fairy because she might exist? Because some people used to believe in her? Some still do?

No, unless my parents are nearby, I will not ever get money for leaving teeth under my pillow, regardless of whether I believe or not.

If I had never heard of the tooth fairy, but accidentally left some teeth under my pillow after a drunken brawl, I would not wake up to find money.

If I had heard of the tooth fairy, and needed some extra money, if I extracted my own teeth and put them under my pillow, believing with all my heart that she'd leave me $5000 cash, I would wake up quite disappointed.

So no, it is not a good idea to believe things just because the idea of them exists. Better to believe things for the opposite reason, believe them because they exist. Observation. Science.

Side: Atheists
2 points

Well, here's how i see it. I see no proof in there being any sort of God or divine being of any sort, no matter what religion. Even if there were, and i was told " Convert, or go to hell" I am afraid i wouldn't I am sorry but if there truly were a God, why isn't this world a happy place. It is filled to the brink with pain, misery suffering, untold millions of children every year asking "why." Well, if there were a God, from the descriptions i have heard, he/she would have done something about it by now. And so far, things have only gotten worse.

Side: Atheists
Emperor(1348) Disputed
1 point

Not sure how it's gotten worse.

Just 500 years ago you had no electricity, no toilets that you poop into, then POOF no more smelly mess, no light bulbs, you needed to light a candle, which doesn't give off much light, and books and information? Only in libraries or churches.

Most books were religious in nature, or fiction, because science was very rare, and often contradicted the Bible.

And of course, no reading. You need to be educated if you wanted to know how to read.

The common man had no idea of books or education. He grew food or made metal objects in a smithy or another simple trade.

There was no education, no microwave food and no computers. It's a LOT easier today.

Also, back then if you argued against religion, you got burned to death by the people who believed in it. Or beheaded. Depends which religious people you offend, I suppose. But to say things like that today?

Now, you have that freedom!

Side: Atheists
Jungelson(3959) Disputed
2 points

Unfortunately, whereas then you didn't think about how computers would be so much faster than horse back, and how flushing lavatories would be easier. No you didn't think about that, and you were happy the way you were. Also, you could simply go in to the woods (not the kings!) And simply catch your self a dear. You needn't worry about what other people might think of you because of the way you dress or what you eat e.t.c. We are all slaves to modern democracy. If one person does something, then everyone else has to. Things like Fashion e.t.c. We are currently living in some pre- apocalyptic version of'1984 ( i assume judging your by your other comments you have read the book.) Sooner or later we will all be wearing the exact same things, all speak the exact same, all eat the same, look the same. Places like Brazil, where farmers just have small farms keep some livestock, pop in to the village to see friends and buy a few essentials, and go back home, is a nice peaceful way to live. Not all cramped together in grey dreary sky scrapers.

Side: Theists
Emperor(1348) Disputed
1 point

Of course, that also all appears to be things that mankind did to change stuff.

Nothing any god did. God doesn't help us at all.

In fact, if you saw religious people as the working hands of God, then they are actually hurting us.

Sad.

Side: Theists
1 point

I'm just saying: agreed. If there actually is a God, and it is the one Christianity preaches, well, I want nothing to do with him, and I think he is a manipulative being. "Born with sin"? That is so offensive, I don't know where to start! I was born with the burden of all humanities mistakes before even having the chance to get a parking ticket, it's like being put in jail as an infant because your father was a criminal! And the only way to save my soul is to believe in a being far above who only reveals himself when it suits him, often on barren hilltops!

If he doesen't get my scepticism, and wants to punish me for my own thoughts, which he in fact (presumeably) made possible, then I say: Dude, thanks for life and all, but leave me alone, and if you want to burn me in hell when I die, fine. I'll bring some marshmallows with me.

Side: Atheists
VinRokk(6) Disputed
1 point

"...If there truly were a God, why isn't this world a happy place." You postulate that if there were a God, then bad things would not happen. Then you are suggesting that God is a force that causes only good things to happen. Well, as a Christian, I believe that man operates according to his own free will. However, man's free will operates under God's will, which governs everything. God's will exists in three parts: 1) God's permissive will, which allows man to act out his free will; 2) God's perfect will, which is how God intends for man to live (his plan or outline for how man should live; 3) God's direct will, in which God directly governs events and outcomes in the physical realm.

Side: Theists
2 points

I am an Atheist of Logic. I dismiss the belief in (a) God, because the idea of God itself was created by men to explain natural phenomena. This explains why polytheism dominated the ancient world, because there were so many things they did not understand. For example, there were harvest Gods, Thunder Gods, and Water Gods. They existed to explain why there were good and bad harvests, what Thunder really was and why it occurred, and also why there was water in the sky and on earth. As we learned more and more about our surroundings we believed in less and less Gods, because we no longer needed the old ones to explain the things we had come to know about. The idea of a monotheistic God came later in history, because it was then that we knew enough about the world around us to start concerning ourselves with human matters, like ethics and good and evil. This is why the monotheistic Gods of todays religions have rules of living, and proverbs of human nature. Our Gods got more philosophical as we did, because the Gods were invented to explain the questions that people of the certain times asked themselves. This is why there are few if any polytheistic people, because polytheism is based on answering questions of nature and we as an "advanced" species have come to answer those questions. Most people are monotheistic, because philosophical questions are still valid to us and those Gods concern their followers with Good and Evil and other human experiences. In short, we came to explain our physical reality, but we still have yet to answer our spiritual/actual reality, this is the only reason why the idea of God is still valid to some people. God is a way to explain; it is only a matter of time until we do not need it as an ideological crutch.

Side: Atheists

I don't have any reason to believe in more than what I see. I wish there were more to the universe than there is, yet I will not turn to the false shoulder of religion to cry on.

Side: Atheists
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
2 points

"I don't have any reason to believe in more than what I see"

Why not?

Side: Theists
Emperor(1348) Clarified
4 points

He is not referring only to vision.

He is referring to all the senses, and everything we can observe with current scientific techniques.

The universe is extremely vast, filled with amazing things. Black holes, quasars, billions of huge galaxies, stars, planets, life.

That is what he means by what he sees.

He does NOT see souls or gods or demons or angels or hell or heaven or psychic powers.

No one sees that.

You know how I know? ONE MILLION DOLLARS.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

Prove that the supernatural exist, and get a million bucks.

Yes, as always, I will say "If you feel you are too pure to accept or test the supernatural, then do it anyways and donate the money to build a better world."

There is no reason a person would not want a million dollars. A pure, unselfish person would give it away, someone else might keep it and live a good life.

The only reason you wouldn't be able to get that money is if you didn't actually have any powers.

That's why me and ChuckHades do not believe beyond what we see.

Because we can't see, because even if it did exist, I cannot sense it, so to assume it exists is lunacy.

Why stop at god? Why not claim the existence of a legion of unicorns, trained to murder all Christians on April 13, 2013.

If no one can see it or sense it no matter what, then my faith can justify that.

What if my faith was a more common faith, such as a militant muslim's "All heathens must die."?

Is that alright? That's what their God and their holy book says.

What about the Christian god? Is that why you hate gays?

If I believed in things I didn't see, then what am I believing in?

I have nothing to say except thousands of years ago, a bunch of confused people made up stories to explain things they didn't understand in order to enforce rules and gain control.

What other explanation is there? There is nothing you can prove or back up.

Side: Atheists
dkforizzle(175) Disputed
3 points

God is not evident in nature, so there is no way to consider a Gods existence only by observing the Earths natural phenomena. With this said, it would have to be excogitated by man with no basis, because nature was the only basis for logical thought in the ancient world. "I don't have any reason to believe in more than I see" is a valid statement, because the only reason a person would believe in more than what they see is if they were told to by another person. Nobody naturally contemplates God because it is a human idea.

Side: Atheists
ChuckHades(3197) Disputed
1 point

I live by the laws of logic and rationality. To impose the supernatural into a universe explained satisfactorily by the natural, would break my laws.

Side: Atheists
1 point

Many aspects of science may have been disproven in the past, but that is not to say that every aspect of science is wrong. I think that most areas of science, and what we know about them, is right.

Side: Atheists

why do you trust the scientific method

The scientific method doesn't involve trust at all.

Side: Atheists
VecVeltro(412) Disputed
1 point

Actually it does require trust. Science is not some dogma, it's a constantly advancing and self-correcting process. While there is very good reason to be sure of the truth-value of the theorems and hypotheses we have now - there is no guarantee that our understanding is actually correct.

Scientific paradigm shifts happen and when they do, they completely revolutionize their respective scientific field and the theories we previously held on to are either discarded or re-analyzed to fit the new paradigm.

I would suggest you read Kuhn's book - The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Basically, while we have a very good reason to consider our current scientific knowledge as true and factual - we can't discount the possibility that our understanding is actually incorrect based on false or partly false theories.

Kuhn says that if we encounter an anomaly that goes against all scientific knowledge and which cannot be explained in the framework of the current scientific understanding - then we have a paradigm shift i.e we see that our current theorems and hypotheses are inadequate and they require extensive over-evaluation. In extreme cases we may even discard these faulty theorems and begin all over with a new theorem that can explain what we currenty know + the anomaly as well.

So yeah, while there's a good probability that it's true, we can never truly be certain. It does require trust. To some degree.

Side: Theists
1 point

Mine was just a semantic argument - perhaps I should have been more clear:

The scientific method does not require trust, it is "the current scientific understanding" that we are trusting.

Side: Atheists
1 point

Atheist, because we are at the point that we need to give up our fairy tales and stories, and get on with fixing the human race and our world

Side: Atheists
2 points

Theists, why do you trust your holy books and churches? Religious leaders have lied and taken advantage of people in the past.

Not to mention, there is a completely lack of evidence for any god. There have been hundreds of gods invented by humans throughout time. Why is yours right?

Why do you believe what you do?

I trust the holy book, because it earned my trust. I've learned a lot from it. And if you guys try to read it, you will know that there isn't just silly fairy tale stuff in it. A lot of wise quotes we know, are from the bible.

The bible is a very good book, and even if you don't believe it, fairy tales can still be entertaining to read ;) So I will recommend you to read it :)

Even tho there is a lack of evidence that there is a God, there is also a lack of evidence proving that there isn't a God. So that tells us nothing.

I believe what I do, because I felt God.

Even tho atheists want evidence and explanations and blablabla, I can only say that the fact that I've spoken to God, and he responded, that is enough evidence for me.

Side: Theists
Emperor(1348) Disputed
3 points

No, in a debate, personal experiences don't hold very much water.

Also, please try to understand logic, "there is also a lack of evidence proving that there isn't a God."

That statement does not prove a god, and on a debate website, you cannot try to make someone else prove a negative.

Also, your Bible is extremely violent and hateful. You are aware that it mentions putting people to death, right?

Not for things like stealing or murder, but just things like witchcraft or being gay.

If the Bible was Holy, not just any book, but a book that you could really put your faith in to get you through life, then why does it contain rules like that?

I'm not going to look up every single violent Bible passage for you. If you don't know what I'm talking about, despite being a Christian, then I am not going to go on.

How can you still believe in such a violent and oppressive religion?

Side: Atheists
_deleted0_(850) Disputed
2 points

Also, your Bible is extremely violent and hateful. You are aware that it mentions putting people to death, right? Not for things like stealing or murder, but just things like witchcraft or being gay. If the Bible was Holy, not just any book, but a book that you could really put your faith in to get you through life, then why does it contain rules like that? I'm not going to look up every single violent Bible passage for you. If you don't know what I'm talking about, despite being a Christian, then I am not going to go on.

How can you still believe in such a violent and oppressive religion?

I believe in God, not the bible. There is a big difference.

The bible contains a lot of horrible stuff, but not all of it came from God. There were hundreds of people who participated in writing the bible.

So the gay thing, I believe it came from some of the people who wrote the bible.

I know that the flood was God, but I believe God did horrible stuff, but I also believe that those people who died were going to Heaven, and not to hell.

I don't live my life like the bible tells me to. I know that it is not always right. The bible tells people to stone naughty children and stuff like that. Of course I don't believe that is the right thing to do.

But I also think, that a lot of the terrible stories in the bible are only stories. There are not only laws you know, not everything in the bible should be done.

A lot of the stories in there are just stories, for us to read. You know... ?

I don't believe in a violent and oppressive religion. I believe in a loving God.

Also, please try to understand logic, "there is also a lack of evidence proving that there isn't a God."

That statement does not prove a god, and on a debate website, you cannot try to make someone else prove a negative.

I know that isn't proving anything.

I wasn't trying proving anything. I was trying to make you understand, that you have just as little evidence supporting your belief, as I have supporting mine.

And please do understand this; I'm not trying to prove anything, I am not trying to convince you to believe anything, and I know I don't have any evidence behind me.

You think you know so much about debating? A debate is when you discuss, you don't try to convince each other.

And it seems, like your obsessed with making me realize that I'm wrong. That is not a true debater :)

Side: Theists
2 points

First, before I begin, I have to apologize to all my allies for my unusually long hiatus from this site. I'm glad to say that I'm back, but my responses and comments will still remain sporadic.

Right, on to my counter-argument.

I trust the holy book, because it earned my trust

How did an inanimate object earn your trust?

I've learned a lot from it. And if you guys try to read it, you will know that there isn't just silly fairy tale stuff in it. A lot of wise quotes we know, are from the bible.

None of which lends any support to the claim that the Bible is factual.

The bible is a very good book, and even if you don't believe it, fairy tales can still be entertaining to read ;) So I will recommend you to read it :)

Yes, and so are The Da Vinci Code, Harry Potter, Jurassic Park, Les Miserables, etc. Still, it would be ridiculous for anyone to claim that anything that occurred in these stories are 100% true.

Even tho there is a lack of evidence that there is a God, there is also a lack of evidence proving that there isn't a God. So that tells us nothing.

Ah, so if there is a lack of evidence pointing to a celestial being, why say that it exists? Furthermore, there is evidence suggesting that there is very probably no God - the fact that there is a lack of evidence that there is a God.

I believe what I do, because I felt God.

Even tho atheists want evidence and explanations and blablabla, I can only say that the fact that I've spoken to God, and he responded, that is enough evidence for me.

Charming, but hardly a good argument. Any con artist can say that a made-up deity or supernatural power spoke to him/her. Does that justify a con artist's actions if he/she were to pillage and plunder?

Side: Atheists
Axmeister(4322) Disputed
1 point

"How did an inanimate object earn your trust?"

Because it is a record of our history. In the same way that atheists use fossils and layers as evidence for their beliefs.

"None of which lends any support to the claim that the Bible is factual."

Why does the Bible need to be disproved? It has been at the foundations of many nations of the world.

Side: Theists
_deleted0_(850) Disputed
1 point

How did an inanimate object earn your trust?

I don't see it much of an object, more like God's words.

None of which lends any support to the claim that the Bible is factual.

None of those lends any support to the claim that the bible is not factual either.

Ah, so if there is a lack of evidence pointing to a celestial being, why say that it exists? Furthermore, there is evidence suggesting that there is very probably no God - the fact that there is a lack of evidence that there is a God.

You say: there is evidence suggestion there is probably no God.

How is this different from when I say there is a God? You have no evidence supporting that statement.

And I never said there is a God, I say I believe there is a God.

Charming, but hardly a good argument. Any con artist can say that a made-up deity or supernatural power spoke to him/her. Does that justify a con artist's actions if he/she were to pillage and plunder?

Yeah well I'm not a con artist, and that was not an argument. I was asked why I believed what I did, and I told you guys why. So that was not an argument, more an explanation of what I believe.

Side: Theists
dkforizzle(175) Disputed
1 point

Atheists want evidence and explanations, because it is the only valid basis for accepting anything. You use toothpaste, because it is proven that it keeps your teeth healthy and the vast majority have experienced that. All of the things you have ever done and used were tested by you the first time you did them. You use and do the things that worked still, and the things that didn't have the expected result are not used. With this said, I do not know why everything else in this world you utilize has been tested and used accordingly, yet you mindlessly accept God as a theory of existence when there is no proof or reason to believe it.

Side: Atheists
1 point

For that reason, the atheist should test God's existence, spiritually. They should tap into the most innocent, sacred, furthest points of their heart, and seek that which confuses and frustrates them more than anything else. For if God's existence did not boggle the atheist so much, they would not even bother to question, challenge, or even discuss God's existence -- the nonexistence of God would be absolute. Someone will read this and be blessed!

Side: Atheists
1 point

I believe in Christianity because I find that belief that atheism can be dangerous for people. Atheism causes a void in people in which they have no fixed moral code to live by.

And at the end of the day, I would rather have spent my life believing in God and find out there isn't one, than to spend my life not believing in God to die and find out he exists.

Side: Theists
marcos(74) Disputed
1 point

Well that's the thing. The God of Christianity isn't the only god that is worshiped. I mean sure, there could be a god, but what if it's not your god? What if the Olympian gods do exist?

Side: Atheists
Assface(406) Disputed
1 point

Just so you know, this argument is particularly susceptible to Atheist objections. A noteworthy feature of Pascal's wager is its indifference to the objective existence of God: the wager isn't intended to convince people that God exists, but that they should believe God exists because it is in their best interest. Can that belief solely for the sake of avoiding negative consequences really be called belief?

It also creates a false dichotomy: either there is a God, specifically the Christian God who offers rewards for those who believe, or there are no gods at all. But why should this single, narrow concept of a god be the only one considered? Pascal's wager fails to account for other gods and other religions. Islam has a system of rewards and consequences similar to that of Christianity. So wouldn't it be in your best interest to become a Muslim, just to be safe? And wouldn't it be even safer to believe in every god, to ensure that there's no chance of exposing yourself to the consequences of nonbelief? But what about those gods that demand you only believe in them, to the exclusion of all others? Do you believe in one of them, and jeopardize your chances with the rest of the gods? And if so, how do you choose which one to believe in?

Side: Atheists
1 point

First off, there is no scientific evidence against the existence of God. There is scientific evidence of things once claimed God's province, that ours is increasingly considered a "god of the gaps." That conception implies, though, that knowledge can be completed and that, as more questions about the nature of reality are answered, more, less-easily answered questions won't take their place. Potential questions about the universe are infinite, and only infinitude itself can answer them.

Side: Theists
Emperor(1348) Disputed
1 point

You're right. There is no scientific evidence against it.

If fossils didn't exist, we wouldn't know dinosaurs existed.

However, we know dinosaurs exist because of fossils.

That is evidence.

What evidence is there of God? God is a feeling in your heart, isn't it?

It is that feeling that there is a higher power. Yet, why?

Tell me why there is a god. Is it just for the big bang? Or only creation? Those can both be explained without a god.

Why add a god when there is a working explanation without one?

Is it because of Jesus? You cannot know he died for us. Even if he did exist, you can't know that his suffering meant salvation.

Why does it only save you if you believe? Why can't Jesus say "All mankind is guaranteed to enjoy heaven, even heathens, even murderers, they are all human, no matter their mistake. They will learn through knowledge in Heaven, not pain for all eternity. God himself will take each sinner and educate them using kindness and love and compassion."

However, Jesus did not say that. No matter how nice that would be, that is not how it happened in the Bible.

The Bible's God in the Old Testament is violent and angry, for he is based on a pagan god of war.

Why?

Why is your god based on previous mythology?

What happened for the several billion years before mankind existed?

Without mythology, without the Bible or pagan myths, before cro-magnons had their primitive burial rituals, not to Yahweh, but to a god that is now unknown, how did Yahweh exist?

Christianity is not how the world works, or everyone would be Christian, prayer would work, children would not die and Christians wouldn't be so easily defeated in debates.

Why does your logic not add up? Why do you think I am atheist?

Can you really defend your position without saying "I believe because I believe"?

You need to think about it. You need to realize the Bible was written by humans, edited by humans, parts deleted by humans, parts added by humans, and then advertised and used as a tool to control people by humans.

Why are you a Christian?

Why am I atheist?

Side: Atheists

Im spiritual, becuase if anything has taught us anything, its spiritual truths, without shamans, we would not be where we are today (which would probably be in a worse setting) and spirituality can back up its claims and you can test them yourself. It takes a lot of practice and focus, but its the most proof you will ever receive, direct experience beats out all books, and all "historical facts" that we have learned about our past

Side: Theists