The Bible has proven the existence of God
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Evidence and confirmation of God's existence shall be given, using the Bible as the main source.
Rules:
1. One forfeit is the loss of a conduct point. Two forfeits are an auto-loss.
2. Sources, evidence, and arguments can only be used INSIDE the rounds.
3. The BOP means that Pro must demonstrate that the bible proves God's existence, and Con has to refute it.
"3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."Continuing on with those that understand what is before them, they believe it's a creation put forth by the word of God.Going back to the book of Romans in chapter one this time."19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them."See now getting to them that know."20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"
Clearly seen is what is empirical.The Bible proves God's existence by explaining the cause of what proves or what makes known God's existence which would be God.The Bible which would be the Word of God, the Word or what is spoken of, spoken from God has made it known, made the proof .
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
"20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"
"3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
So in turn, it's God that has proved God's existence by His Word.
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
Show it from the Bible, the Bible, the Bible. You're trying to shift this on me to present evidence.
Then why create a topic with you against it other than to reject I guess.So let me ask, do you reject or are you willing to believe the Bible?
When you're constantly rejecting, you cancel out having belief .
The evidence is not coming to you before belief does .Faith is what makes up the evidence of things not seen by which one of those things would be the invisible God .It's not science, it's not empirical data , it's your open-mindedness first, then witnessing the empirical world around you .
Pro had a clever Kritik, but it was too poorly executed.
Lines like this "The Bible, the Bible, the Bible, the Bible." cost pro's case the credibility it desperately needed.
Con was able to show that pro's case was dependent not upon the bible proving God, but rather reaffirming to someone who already believes; and pro seemed to double down on this not understanding why it was a problem.
That pro believes he won the debate because the topic is the bible, does not actually make it a victory. There are various biblical commentaries which could have explained how pieces of it are proof, but instead we had a few random passages that say things like we can listen to God as proof of God...
From the description: "Evidence and confirmation of God's existence shall be given, using the Bible as the main source."
This confirms the need for scriptures which support the resolution.
Then using evidence that people hear the word of God as the proof, is only proof if there are follow up to people hearing that; as opposed to reading it.
To the atheists in your closed mindedness so called voters, judges, think you're operating in complete truth , you want proof for God from the Bible, it's not on your terms.
Your standards work for what they call a science book.
You actually have to leave atheism and much of the secular world. Those claiming that evidence converting them to belief, it's in contradiction to what religion is .
I wanted to make a debate "Heroes dont have small dicks" with heroes being defined as people who dont have small dicks.
But then I was like, naah. Too much tautology for me.
nvm. You have purposefully defined God as something inherently contradictory in the outer description. I see what you did there.
Then click accept.
Your time’s almost up.
CON has no BoP? Why bother lol
Define "existence" or I will crush you on the basis that you didn't define it in the description. You have 24 hours.
Ah Ah Ah.......naughty naughty. Almost got me there for a second.
; D
As a Christian, I was considering accepting the debate as Con, until I saw that you had already taken that position. I predict that you will either get a bad debater who thinks that the Pro side is somehow defensible, or a good debater trying to run a trick argument to get around your arguments.
Seconded
This is a trap ;)