azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

I have a question if you guys think that there is no God then who made the earth? Who created us?Why do you assume there is even a "Who" involved? When it rains do you angrily demand to know "Who is responsible for this"? Not everything that happens has an intelligent being as the cause. Some events occur because of non-intelligent forces.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

i know who is doing it. Its God because He made the earth and He exists. No other gods exist like budda allah and all those other gods are fake.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

i know who is doing it.Nobody is doing it. Rain is nothing more than the accumulation of atmospheric condensation, and upon reaching critical mass it falls as precipitation. With all due respect, the idea that we need God to make rain is primitive. Science has rendered such notions obsolete.No other gods exist like budda allah and all those other gods are fake.Buddha is not a god, nor is he regarded as such. Allah is simply the Arabic word for God, it is the same god you worship only under a different name. Muslims worship the same God as Jews and Christians.This leaves me to wonder, how can you be so certain that your religion is correct when you know so little about other religions?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Point of fact there is a sect of buddhism who worship the original Buddha as a god.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: Yes

And what sect would that be? I don't ask because I necessarily disagree but I am curious to know.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

this has some good infohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhism
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

I have a question for you. Who came first Adam and Eve or the Dinosaurs. It is a proven fact that Dinosaurs evolved 200 million years before humans existed and they dominated the earth for 150 million years and we have the fossils to prove it. How long has humans existed? Adam and Eve" were a mythical invention of ancient Hebrew priests who wrote the books later to be edited and assembled by christian scholars as the christian bible.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Why are you disputing me?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

if you guys think that there is no GodIf you clearly read the arguments on the other side, you will see that most of us are saying that we don't have proof of God, not that we "think there is no God." There is actually a difference. It is one of certainty, and the majority of us are saying that certainty in either position (there is a God vs. there is no God) is impossible. Given this lack of certainty, we argue that a standpoint of skepticism is the more logical path, at least until better evidence is provided. then who made the earth?There is no proof that any persona was responsible. Simply some conjecture that has no basis in fact. We do, however, know that many things on Earth and in our universe form via aggregation, and it is entirely possible and likely, given the evidence that we have, that the Earth did exactly that. Also, there is a vast body of evidence that the Earth is FAR younger than the rest of the universe. Who created us?Again, there is no prerequisite for a "who". Its all about cause and effect. Abiogenesis still has some holes to work out, but by testing and observing we can fine-tune our theories until everything fits the observations and current base of knowledge. Sometimes it takes a while, and its possible that some questions will never be answered, but these are not reasons to call off investigative inquiry and anthropomrphize everything we don't understand. If we didnt have a God then there would be no earth and all of us wouldnt be here today."We exist, therefore God" is just an excuse to stop questioning, and not a valid logical statement.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

C'mon people! Is it really that hard to choose? God is real and the only way to eternal life. Seriously, whoever chose "NO" should re-evaluate what they chose. Do you want eternal life, or the other? (ETERNAL LIFE IS THE PERFECT CHOICE.)
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

C'mon people! Is it really that hard to choose?C'mon people, is it really that hard to expect some raw information when it comes time to make a decision? Especially since the being we are talking about can supposedly do anything?God is real and the only way to eternal life.A lot of modes of spirituality make claims such as these. None can make an objective claim properly identifying them as being more true than the others. Seriously, whoever chose "NO" should re-evaluate what they chose.Seriously, whoever chose "YES" should be able to easily and convincingly provide answers to those who chose "NO", without having to resort to a singular, questionable source (the Bible) or their own emotional pleas. Do you want eternal life, or the other?Assuming there is no boredom in Heaven, sure I would take eternal life there if offered. But my emotions don't dictate truth. My emotions don't help me find truth. Evidence does. Without proper evidence, I am not inclined to think that desire is any more likely than my desire to become invisible at will. (ETERNAL LIFE IS THE PERFECT CHOICE.)(How do I know it is a viable choice?)
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Gosh! You only need faith to know that God exists! Apparently imrigone doesn't have any...
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Gosh! You only need faith to know that God exists!A Muslim could say the same thing. Or a Hindu, or a wiccan, or a Sikh. So are they all right, at least as long as you have faith? And if so, how to you deal with the discrepancies? Here's a neat little trick to life, if something is true you don't need faith in it, the evidence ends up being right there for all to see. But you are right, I don't have blind faith in anything. I like to have as realistic a view on things as I can.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Faith is incapable of distinguishing what is true from what is false. Thus the numerous often conflicting faiths, which cannot all be true. So on what basis should we trust what is accepted on faith?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

I'm quoting this, kk?"Faith is incapable of distinguishing what is true from what is false"-Bohemian, createdebate.com;The God Debate: Does he exist? June 11th
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

By all means.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

In the Bible in Revelations John saw heaven it had golden streets
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Srom, you know for a fact that I don't believe in the bible, yet you quote the Bible, to what, convince me?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

It is a question over what is probably true, not a question of what you would prefer to be true.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

"What has your God done for you that you couldn't have done for yourself?" -Jordan T. McQueenYou need to understand something: YOU ARE AN ATHEIST! You don't believe in Zeus, Acuecucyoicihuati, Centeotl, Poseidon, or Brahma. Why don't you believe in these perfectly legitimate religions? Why did you choose yours out of the MILLIONS to choose from?I'll tell you why: because you're mommy and daddy told you to believe in your god, or you happened to have been at the right place at the right time and now you believe in your god. There is no logical reason to believe that your god is good and everyone else's god is illegitimate.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Oh... wow. Thank you.You just told me the word for my faith.I never had a word for it. But you just plainly defined it in one comment. I never thought it would even have a word... I thought it was just me being me. But considering there are 6 billion people on this planet, mathematical probability would show that there are probably thousands of people exactly like me. Silly me, abandoning logic.So thank you, now I know what to call myself. Dunno if that's good or bad. Dunno if I'll remember the word 24/7, but... it was still delightful having an epiphany.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

While I respect the pantheist position, why not just call it nature? Calling it God gives a false impression, I think.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Myself and most pantheists do call it nature. When I have the choice I refer to God as 'It' (not He) or 'the Universe'. I dislike using the term 'God' because it causes confusion and people think you're referring to the traditional Christian idea (which I would say is mythical/analogous of the Universe)... In this particular argument we were discussing the existence of God, so I was making it clear that by nature I meant God. I even advised that people don't call it God! It can be whatever you want it to be, since it is everything!But at the end of the day, it is what God is (we believe) and if people want to call it God they can. Apparently 'God' traditionally meant 'I am', so it is the same concept (that I am God, you are God...and so on). God is a synonym for nature, the Universe, life, matter... If nature is never referred to as 'God', people won't begin to realise they are the same thing.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

I am a panthiest but i also refer to the universe as God, especially when i am trying to convery my beliefs to others, i don't like being categorised but if i had to define my beliefs panthiestism is definitely the closest match. I use the term God and unvierse as i know no matter what religion a person is they immediately recognise the signiirficance of word God.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Well that's why I also said I think it's good to refer to it as God so people know there's no shame in seeing God this way - it's a good thing. I refer to it as God and Nature and whatever I want to really. Most of the ancient Greeks were pantheists - so God was sorta meant to be Nature in the first place, until all the confusion.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

What convinced you that panthiesm was the correct belief system, are there any particular influences or experiences.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Umm. Studying philosophy -- the arguments for the existence of God, etc. Nothing in particular I don't think. It just clicked one day and I realised how obvious it was... Then I reviewed the arguments for the existence of God and realised the pantheistic belief fits in to every one of them. In ways, I think everyone's a pantheist without even realising it. Every philosopher seems to allude to the same idea essentially, even if with fundamentally different beliefs. It's hard to explain what I mean!, since I know they all argue starkly unique things... yet I believe their arguments all derive from the same 'whole' thing, with merely different experiences within it... Like Nietzsche, for example - thinks God is merely a concept, yet speaks of 'eternal recurrence' and everything belonging to one 'infinite whole'. The infinite whole is what most would say IS God. This is why I think 'God' is a concept applied to the whole... as I said in another comment, it's just another, more meaningful, word for the Universe! (I understand Nietzsche is saying that, since God is a concept, when it dies out 'life is meaningless'...but what I mean to say is that 'God' is a concept perceived from something physical -- thus the physical 'God' exists too.... as you may agree, since I read somewhere you hold pantheistic beliefs also)
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

I support the pantheist effort to redefine god. But what do you think about the nature of worship and it's seemingly inexorable relationship with the word god and non-pantheistic or ordinary theism?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Well, religion and worship (as we know) is something that derives from a fundamental concept of God... whether people choose to create a system of ethics AND worship this concept (as Christians do, for example) is up to them and has nothing to do with God itself -- religion and worship is just a way of choosing how to live. Therefore, I think people are entitled to live in what way they choose when it comes to religion/worship, as long as it causes no harm and doesn't enforce its beliefs on others, as some churches do... but I myself don't think public worship is necessary... I think God is personal and the best way to 'worship' is just to live in relation to what we think we know is good for the planet and good for people. Worship should be about appreciation and regard for life itself. In terms of 'redefining' God, it's more 're-re-defining' God, since this initially was the concept of God anyway, until people mythologised it! People may choose to worship a non-pantheistic concept of God, but I think if a religion were to worship this concept, or any concept of God... they would need to be open to the possibilities of perhaps being wrong... I don't think it's ever fair to say 'this is absolute fact, so you must live your life this way and believe that god is this' -- in other words, religion shouldn't take an authoritative role in people's lives, as it's merely a way of living, not the absolute way of living... I would say. It's not necessary and it should be there out of choice, not force.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

My perspective differs from yours in that I see religion as deriving from a desire to better understand events and convey what's been learned to new generations. Worship derives from a tendency to over focus on one perceived "supreme authority"
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

This is not how religion in general operates or how faith operates. Religion is not about better understanding, it is just about understanding. That is to say, religion attempts to explain what isn't or wasn't known. But once there, there is no means by which to improve that understanding or adjust it to newly discovered facts. Religion is more about teaching than it is about learning.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

This is not how religion in general operates or how faith operates.Or rather it doesn't comport with generalizations you make.Religion is not about better understanding, it is just about understanding.Request: Please share some of your thoughts about the relationship between the human tradition of record keeping and religion?there is no means by which to improve that understanding or adjust it to newly discovered facts.To claim that religion is traditionally too change resistant is an observation I can agree with. To claim there is no means by which to improve or adjust it in light of new discoveries is false on it's face.Religion is more about teaching than it is about learning.I think of it as an inheritance of which each individual must decide what to preserve and hand on to successive generations.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Or rather it doesn't comport with generalizations you make.And yet two sentences later you agree with my "generalization".Request: Please share some of your thoughts about the relationship between the human tradition of record keeping and religion?Early human records(histories) were inseparable from early myths, fables and legends. To claim there is no means by which to improve or adjust it in light of new discoveries is false on it's face.Within religion. Individuals acting in defiance of established dogma have created change. Such is not within the means provided by religion. I think of it as an inheritance of which each individual must decide what to preserve and hand on to successive generations.I do not disagree with that sentiment.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

And yet two sentences later you agree with my "generalization".While I do agree that a vast majority of SECTS are too change resistant, I don't agree that the practice of religion itself is necessarily so. Take Open Source Religion or Unitarian Universalism as examples.Early human records(histories) were inseparable from early myths, fables and legends. OK. And now would you claim that modern human records (histories) ARE somehow only now separable from myths fables and and legends?Do you generally agree or disagree with:1. “History is fables agreed upon.” ~Voltaire2. "History is more or less bunk" ~FordWithin religion. Individuals acting in defiance of established dogma have created change. Such is not within the means provided by religion. This is admitting that individuals "within religion" can act in defiance of established orthodoxies and dogmas and over time change them. Your argument is one against overly dogmatic religious institutions but not one against religion itself.I do not disagree with that sentiment.What do you think of the concept of Open Source Religion?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Isn't that basically what I said? At least that's what I meant to imply, sorry. I know religion itself is THAT, but I was saying that religions are centralised around some belief in a God/gods...which are all similar concepts, which I therefore believe all derive from the same thing - human experiences of the Universe.And that's what I meant by arguing 'worship' should be something else, since it's not healthy for people to focus on one 'supreme authority', which might not even be correct in its teachings. I think worship should be shifted to mean 'appreciation' for life/God, rather than merely a way of forcing yourself to depend on God. The only way people will have a truly good life is by doing good themselves, thus experiencing good consequences. If people merely 'worship' then many are forced to feel good will come to them JUST by worshipping. (not everyone, but some...most don't even know why they are worshipping, they've just had a list of reasons indoctrinated into them without question)It's like getting a bowl of ice-cream, enjoying the ice-cream and then thinking you deserved it because you were able to appreciate it. People need to earn the ice-cream, rather than just enjoying it, begging for more of it. In other words, people need to earn good and actively appreciate good... as opposed to just hoping for it all the time through worship. This is obviously a generalisation, but this is one other reason I personally don't worship.... I just think the concept of it is unnecessary and it doesn't have as much use as actively living and learning. I don't mean to say worship is harmful - I understand why some people might participate in it - but I believe it deprives people of true self-enjoyment of life/appreciation for what an individual personally loves... Instead it restricts people and inflicts 'cans' and 'can't dos' - when these 'cant dos' aren't necessarily even wrong... but they don't always get to experience the consequences and make these decisions for themselves.PS. Just to clarify, I AM only very generally referring to people who merely rely on worship. I know most religious people do actively do good AND worship, which is fine if that's what they CHOOSE to do. My concern is that some people (a) don't have the choice and (b) only worship, rely on God and don't do good themselves (thinking that "loving God" is enough to have a good life)
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Why am I struggling to believe that this isn't a copy and paste job....
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Because it is a copy paste job. That, and the fact that nobody uses semicolons correctly.http://www.gotquestions.org/Does-God-exist.html
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

The God I believe in is a universal spirit. I also believe that man is divine and immortal and is rencarnated until he perfects himself into a loving, limitless and spiritual creature, which is what he is supposed to be. jesus was not divine, he discovered this truth and worked tirelessly to teach it. He said " He that has seen me hath seen the father" Of course! It's that way with everyone. God is Life and wisdom! Anything living has God, "the father", in it! Affirm yourself to be divine and claim your power and infinite wisdom that comes with it.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

It is all good advice. Indeed, you are verging on sounding like a Buddhist, which is one of the religions I tend to have no qualms with (indeed I was a Buddhist for a couple years)...but I have a question...Why does it have to be God? God implies...something...existing beyond observable means...why does the beauty of the universe have to be that? What is your evidence/rationale for such a thing...why can't the beauty and majesty that exists around us simply be..that which has happened...? Why imply that it has a consciousness...?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

The Beauty and majesty is one thing, but God is another. God i spirit and love and feeling and we are a projection of that.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

The Beauty and majesty is one thing, but God is another. God i spirit and love and feeling and we are a projection of that.Some of us are anyway...others not so much.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

Those that don't seem it are just repressing it, it is not absent.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

"Some of us are anyway...others not so much."I have to take issue with this, every person is as much a projection of God as another regardless of their class, religion, ethnicity, nationality, the ideology(or lack thereof) they subsribe to, their gender, their sexuality,their level of education, level of intelligence, their behaviour, their age etc. etc. We are all one, no one can be considered less in anyway despite what you may want to beleive. This trancends whatever petty beliefs led you to dispute thuis claim, and i felt obligated to inform you.
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: No

First of all I said this somewhat facetiously, in other words it wasn't meant to be taken as a serious comment.. Second of all, are you suggesting that behavior which involves lying stealing, and murdering is a "projection of love"?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

But my question still remains, what is your basis for believing this? Is this something you know or something you feel?If the former, what evidence or logic supports this? If the latter, how can we establish that the feeling is truth?
Debate: The God Debate: Does he exist?
Side: yes

Something I know and something I feel. jesus was a historical figure and the gist of his teachings as written in the gospel, original text, word for word, fit in with my views. The church has distorted and misunderstood his teacings. He was a man, a Great one and a role model and teacher and a wayshower, but a man nonetheless. I know it because it is the only form of God that makes sense, and I know there is a God because, well... I can't guarantee it. You got me. I will never except that we are here to reproduce and die, though. I believe the universe has no beginning and no end, we cannot comprehend it though, and God has always been there and will always be there. I do not believe God created the universe, nothing "craeted it" beause it has no beginning. Few people throughout history have realized the truth I posted in another comment, including Jesus, Buddha, Thomas, Thoreau and many in that line. I have felt the presence through meditation, have experienced the law of compensation (karma basically) and have gone through every kind of religious belief level from fanatic, reformed, new age, moderate, fundementalist and so on and have experienced the feelings of each. So, in conclusion, you will not find proof through tuition, but through intuition.