Instigator / Con
SethBrown's avatar
0
SethBrown
1525
rating
23
debates
58.7%
won
Topic
#6032

There is evidence supporting the existence of a god

Status
Voting

The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.

Voting will end in:

11
DD
:
09
HH
:
39
MM
:
07
SS
Tags
Religion
theology
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
AnonYmous_Icon's avatar
0
AnonYmous_Icon
1495
rating
13
debates
53.85%
won
Description

To start I should define the most important terms in this debate;
God - a spirit that is worshipped as having power over nature and human fortunes
Evidence - an available body of facts to support a view

**if you don’t like this definition feel free to say so in the comments and we can change it for the debate**

Pro: there is evidence for the existence of god
Con: there has been no evidence for the existence of god presented yet

Burden of proof will lie with pro due to them claiming there is evidence for the existence of god

Round 1
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
Con
#1
As a initial formal greeting I would like to thank my opponent for this debate and accepting it so we can discuss this eternally standing question

My position
My position on this question of “is there evidence supporting that a god exists” is that there has been no evidence presented to me that has only god as an explanation for it, I.e god is not the only “theory” that could explain facts presented by my opponent 

The method
As allured in my previous topic the method I will use to disprove any evidence presented by my opponent as true is to provide reasoning as to why a naturalistic world (important to note I don’t exactly believe in a purely naturalistic world but that’s a debate for another day) could also explain it. Of course it is nearly impossible to prove 100% factually that an piece of evidence doesn’t prove a god, because of course ontologically there is a possible world where that could be an explanation for evidence presented.

Addressing my opponent’s bop

Given the nature of the bop here I will leave it to my opponent to present evidence(s) for me to attempt to attack
AnonYmous_Icon's avatar
AnonYmous_Icon
Pro
#2
I prefer to thank  to  SethBrown    for     initial formal greetings    to  ballpark
as i  like to    play   fair     by ur grace 
 
i like  u  to  define      the apple    ?  if u can  then just make 
Round 2
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
Con
#3
The Apple? The Apple is a specific “category” of fruit?
AnonYmous_Icon's avatar
AnonYmous_Icon
Pro
#4
yeah ofcourse  "apple " define it 
Round 3
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
Con
#5
Yes I just defined it as a category of fruit. We can be more specific as define it as the round fruit of a tree of the rose family

AnonYmous_Icon's avatar
AnonYmous_Icon
Pro
#6
category of fruit ,   define it as the round fruit of a tree of the rose family   
if i  consider  it  as  definition   then   something according to it     called  apple    ,  but  no  that's not true at all  ,    Quince , Peaches.....    r apple  according to that  definition 
my opponent    SethBrown     have good   humor     but  its   unsatisfied    maybe or  maybe  not    .....   alright   let  go 

  
There is evidence supporting the existence of a god
Description :
God - a spirit that is worshipped as having power over nature and human fortunes
Evidence - an available body of facts to support a view

In  Ans  : 
i  can    say one word     imagination    
imagination   is  the evidence    that  we've    to support  the existence  of   a  god  ,   god exist  in our   imagination ,  imagination  is   the god     ,   our  imagination    have  power  over nature  and  our  fortunes   through  perception 

i know u know what   i  mean