Instigator / Con
0
1587
rating
182
debates
55.77%
won
Topic
#4157
God is real
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
0
1500
rating
9
debates
38.89%
won
Description
The BOP is for Pro to disprove any alternate possibility for God's existence, so that the logical conclusion is he exists.
Round 1
Pro may go first.
Drop this debate. Read my comment.
Round 2
Dropped.
Dropped as well.
Deal.
hey you did a mistake. it is better we both drop all of our rounds, because it is just 2 arguments for each and you have wasted one of your own. It's better for you to create a 4-5 round debate, same resolution and BoP, so as you drop your R1 argument and I drop my R4 or R5 argument in order for both os us to have three to 4 full debating rounds...
and make the world limit 30.000 because it will be a long read...
"God is real". And my burden of proof won't be to PROVE that god is real, something impossible by human methods. My BoP will be to disprove any other possibilities (example: atheism), and thus it will be logically deducted that God is real, by necessity.
"+ one week for each argument because it is a complicated topic. One week, not two days"
You got it.
What would you like the resolution to be changed to?
I'll take suggestions.
+ one week for each argument because it is a complicated topic. One week, not two days
I would like the resolution to be changed. This is a bait resolution that pro can't prove. Proving His existence is not possible and is also different from whether or God really exists. We know he exists because of logical thinking and the lack of any other possibilities (i.g. that all this is natural, uncreated, something impossible). HOWEVER, to PROVE something you have to use scientific measure which is fallible in this case. Science refers to something physical, something that obeys laws of physics, while God is eternal, uncreated, omnipresent, immaterial, all-knowing and isn't bound to any restrictions.
Interested?
Bump
And I wouldn't call this a good bait if anything.
We should change this website's name to BaitArt.
Conflating inability to disprove God's existence as proof of God's existence.
But why?
I would suggest keeping only the last sentence of your description if anything.
That’s NOT how concessions work.
Anyone who accepts assumes Pro’s position.
"If the topic is not the resolution to be argued, clarification should be made in the full description."
https://info.debateart.com/help/debates
If you are really that cocky about the description, I will literally accept it and show that you conceded before the debate started because your description aligns with the Pro position, not CON.
Why are you Con then?