Instigator / Con

SethBrown

1525

rating

debates

58.33%

won

Topic

#6032

There is evidence supporting the existence of a god

Status

Finished

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

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!

Tags

Religion

theology

Parameters

Publication date: 03.25.2025 03:33AM
Last updated date: 04.12.2025 05:03PM
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

1495

rating

debates

56.67%

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

03.26.2025 02:35AM

Con

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

03.27.2025 04:19AM

Pro

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

03.28.2025 01:02PM

Con

The Apple? The Apple is a specific “category” of fruit?

AnonYmous_Icon

03.29.2025 03:28AM

Pro

yeah ofcourse "apple " define it

Round 3

SethBrown

03.29.2025 03:30AM

Con

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

03.29.2025 05:03PM

Pro

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

TheGreatSunGod

03.26.2025 12:48PM

#11

-->

@SethBrown

Thanks ^^

SethBrown

03.26.2025 12:44PM

#10

-->

@TheGreatSunGod

Alright I’ll make it an put you as the contender

TheGreatSunGod

03.26.2025 08:07AM

-->

@SethBrown

It means not being limited by logical laws.

SethBrown

03.26.2025 02:39AM

-->

@TheGreatSunGod

Apologies for how late this is, got somewhat busy after school but I’m active again. I’m in the process of making it but what exactly do you mean by above logic? Does this being just have some type of dominion over logic or does it exist separate from the existence of logic?

TheGreatSunGod

03.25.2025 01:49PM

-->

@SethBrown

Anyway, define God as "supernatural being above logic".

That is more appropriate.

SethBrown

03.25.2025 12:09PM

-->

@TheGreatSunGod

Apologies someone has already accepted it but I will make another one for you as well once I get out of school

TheGreatSunGod

03.25.2025 04:21AM

-->

@SethBrown

Could you set argument time to 1 week? I am thinking of accepting this.

SethBrown

03.25.2025 04:21AM

-->

@TheRizzler

Although I’m still gonna leave this open for anyone that’s curious, the definition I laid out for evidence leaves a bit of wiggle room for me I believe

SethBrown

03.25.2025 04:13AM

-->

@TheRizzler

I could certainly make a debate over that, although given the fact it’s late I’ll probably make it tomorrow and I’ll make sure to tag you in

TheGreatSunGod

03.25.2025 03:40AM

The mere faith in God changes the way people think.

TheRizzler

03.25.2025 03:35AM

Obviously there is at least some evidence for there being a God. IMO The debate should be whether the evidence is strong enough to constitute a higher probability of a God existing than not.