Instigator / Con

AvgAtheist

1500

rating

debates

0.0%

won

Topic

#6365

The classical theist god isn’t necessarily extant.

Status

Finished

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

Winner & statistics

Winner

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Mall

Tags

theology

Parameters

Publication date: 06.30.2025 03:59PM
Last updated date: 07.10.2025 12:21AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: One day
Max argument characters: 9,500
Voting period: One week
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

Mall

1382

rating

446

debates

45.74%

won

Description

No information

Round 1

AvgAtheist

07.01.2025 10:29PM

Con

Forfeited

Mall

07.02.2025 12:52PM

Pro

So let's go through the topic and help out the folks in the comments because they're severely thrown off.

The topic is :The classical theist god isn’t necessarily extant.

Whatever "classical" is. Most known, typical, traditional, etc.

It is not necessarily or that the god of theism, whoever ,is needed to exist.

I take the position that there is no evidence on the natural scientific side known that the god of theism exists, so there is no mandate that there is an existence.

There's no reason or cause to claim the necessity. That's it .

The opposite side takes the opposite position that there is so show the proof of that.

I'm not saying the god of theism exists, doesn't exist. I'm saying there is no apparent cause to prove the necessity of existence.

It's like saying there has to be a cause. There's a necessity for a cause you might say. Ok where's my basis for the necessity?

I don't have one. For a short round debate, I don't think I have to go much further.

Round 2

AvgAtheist

07.02.2025 10:15PM

Con

I am new to this website, apparently according to the comments I’m not even on the right side. My apologies. I might just need to make an entirely new debate page.

Mall

07.03.2025 12:21AM

Pro

Atheism is a religion.

Case closed.

Sidewalker

07.01.2025 01:13AM

-->

@Mall

@AvgAtheist

Topic and Pro/Con is confusing:
I'm thinking the Pro and Con are backwards based on the title of the debate, if AvgAtheist is "con" to the topic, then isn't he arguing that classical theist god "is" necessarily extant. And then Pro should be arguing God "isn't" necessarily extant. Maybe I read Mall wrong, and don't know AvgAtheist, but based on the name, and on what I know about Mall, I think they have it backwards, I don't see an atheist arguing that God necessarily exists, and I don't see Mall arguing God doesn't exist..