Instigator / Con
7
1541
rating
3
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#3579

There is an evidence for the existence of god

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
3
Better sources
2
0
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

Pat_Johnson
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
5,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
5
1483
rating
327
debates
40.21%
won
Description

The existence of god is an idea forced upon everybody. Unlike karma believers, astrology believers or reincarnation believers, god believers constantly try to impose their version of belief on others.
__________________________________________________________________________________
DEFINITION:

GOD: Creater [and ruler] of the universe who is considered omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent. (It is my definition. The contender may dispute it in the comments before s/he accepts the challenge)

EXIST: : to have real being whether material or spiritual
did unicorns exist
the largest galaxy known to exist
b: to have being in a specified place or with respect to understood limitations or conditions
strange ideas existed in his mind
2: to continue to be
(Taken from Merriam Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exist)
__________________________________________________________________

RULES:
1) 1 ARGUMENT ONLY:
This debate is dedicated to dispute 1 attempt to persuade people into thinking god exists. PRO has to provide only 1 argument, 1 argument he thinks the best and we will debate that.

2) 3 ROUNDS ONLY:
The debate is set to 4 rounds but only 3 round will be for disputation. In the first round, I will pass the round stating "nothing to be writtin in this round". Similarly, PRO will have to write "nothing to be written in this round". Thus, both sides will have 3 rounds in total.

3) LIMITATION:
PRO has to raise 1 argument only and that must be expressed in the first round. Later rounds will be to dispute that argument, introducing new argument[s] by PRO in later rounds results in automatic disqualification - voters should keep it mind.
CON raises no argument. CON is to rebutt PRO's argument.
CON (me) is not allowed to bring something new in the last round speech of his, as PRO will no longer have round to respond back. CON's last round speech solely has to be focused on rebutting what PRO said in his last round - CON violating this rule results in automatic disqualification. Voters should keep it mind.

4) NO AD HOMINEMS.
Ad hominems or even insulting the opponent results in automatic disqualification.

5) NO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE ARGUMENTS ALLOWED
PRO can raise philosophical argument which we can dispute on the standards we have. Talking like "I have seen god yesterday. He revealed me answers of my next exam and I passed the exam. God exists" results in automatic disqualificaiton.
Similarly, CON is not allowed to appeal to personal issues like "My friend knows that this argument has been refuted." etc. Arguments must be put forth here.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Good luck.

-->
@oromagi

I read you RFT. You talked that con should have head burden of proof in this debate.
If you want, let us debate if the atheist side has (or should have) burden of proof in the disputation about the existence of god.

Also, you made some misleading remarks in your RFT but the jury is you and I am not gonna dispute your spectation.

-->
@Mall

Yes, I did not specify it properly, my bad. Next times I will not make such mistake.

The two known massless particles that are both gauge bosons are evidence for the existence of the Universe being a simulation.

Unless you meant last round of the first round. That wasn't very specific. I don't fully get what the issue is. Maybe because you're on the CON side, PRO side is supposed to argue first. But I didn't see anything specified in that way either.

I think I misunderstood. I believe you were requesting me to put the verbage in the 4th round.

-->
@Mall

Look, I now realized I made a small mistake when typing the rules. This one:

"Similarly, PRO will have to write "nothing to be written in this round". - You have to write so in the last round. I am making it clear in my first round speech.