The Buddha was an atheist.

Con confirms Pro's argument by telling us that Buddhism does not hold such teachings of a Supreme God like Christianity or Islam. And Con is right to say that the Buddha was silent on such topics however, we can conclude that monotheism was indeed foreign to the Buddha and His understanding on such a topic was limited due to His lack of connection outside of India, into the realm of Monotheism. It's is important to note that Con provides us with an example, by relating the impossibility of an ocean being in a cup, to the comprehension of God for the human mind. I agree that both is impossible to overcome however, this again confirms my point on the Atheistic stance of the Buddha, how He fails to touch on such a subject and then basically tells us that humans are ultimately dependent on their minds to provide them with the necessary means of mental stability. Throughout the verses that Con has presented to us, it's clear to us that the Buddha is iffy on the questions that are asked of Him. These such questions of the same nature, have been reportedly asked of Moses, Abraham, Muhammad, and Jesus Christ, to which they reveal and make the people somewhat understand the Prophet's capabilities. This difference between the Semitic Messenger's of God and the Buddha rests in the timeframe in which they appeared. I'll elaborate: The order in which the alleged Messengers of God came is as follows: 1) Adam 2) Noah 3) Abraham 4) Krishna 5) Moses 6) Zoroaster 7) Buddha 8) Jesus Christ 9) Muhammad 10) the Bab 11) Baha'u'llah We can see now that in this sequence, Krishna is the first alleged Messenger of God that has arrived in India and His Teachings have stayed with the Indian people for almost 3000 years. This 3000 year old knowledge gave rise to the Buddha's Teachings. In between Krishna and the Buddha, we have 2 Monotheistic Messengers who's Messages were in its maturing and growth stages, respectively. My question to Con would be, "if the Buddha claimed Monotheistic beliefs, then why do 2 Messengers appear between Krishna and the Buddha, whos Messages share the same spiritual content and are continued AFTER the Buddha?" This question cannot be answered unless we consider the Buddha to be a chink in the chain of Monotheism. This also confirms that Buddha has no interaction with Monotheism that begins Adam and the only way we can confirm this claim is to separate the sequence in 3 columns: Semitic: Adam Abraham Noah Moses Jesus Christ Muhammad Iranian: Zoroaster the Bab Baha'u'llah Indian/Dharmic: Krishna Buddha So this now shows us that the bulk of the Monotheistic Religions are outside of India and have no connection to the Indian continent at the time of their arrivals. So we can now conclude that Monotheism is officially foreign to the Indians at the time of Krishna and the Buddha. This also answers Con's question which states, "Would Pro also argue that the cosmos do not exist, because the Buddha stated that we could never understand or describe it?" Briefly the Cosmos does and did exist, but the fact that every Messenger of God makes an attempt to describe it, confirms the Buddha's Atheistic approach to such an "unanswerable" question at His time. Had He been in contact with the outside world, His ability to answer such questions would indeed be easier. Con has also stated that my argument regarding the Buddha not relying on God is wrong because the Buddha, as Con writes, teaches His followers to attain Nirvana. Nirvana is a term that relates with the English word Salvation. This Nirvana, is the commonly associated with Buddhism, but not restricted to is as it was present in the time before the Bhagavad Gita (Buddhist Holy Texts) were written. So Nirvana is a term that is again, borrowed, for a lack of a better term. In conclusion, these concepts of God and a Higher Power, may be referenced in the Buddhist Teachings but we must understand that at its core, there is God has no influence on the Buddha's approach to answer such important question of God's existence and such. This tells us that the Buddha may be trying to explain His Atheistic approach through spiritual means. your turn :) PS: I DO NOT believe that the Buddha was an Atheist and I can prove that the Buddha was a Messenger of God who taught the core belief of One God, just like Con can. Everything Con is saying is correct and very accurate, but I am simply replying to his points based on the responses I have received in the past regarding this debate title. Again, the Buddha was a Messenger of God that did teach Monotheism. This debate is for educational purposes. Con's arguments are all correct :))