azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

That is a ridiculous argument and every atheists on this board is proving you wrong, unless you beleiee we are all off murdering people.Religion is the cause of too much hatred and death. Without it, I truly believe that mankind can become more civilized. Unfortunately, it will take thousands of years for the ignorance to be driven out of our world. Today, religion is the root of evil!
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: YES!!

To be truthful, it is not religion itself that has actually caused much of anything. It is the people who commit the acts of hatred, using the Bible as something to validate themselves. It is nothign more than abuse of a system of belief. Nothing more, nothing less. What is the root of evil? the fact that people are too closed-minded and foolish to deal with anybody having a difference of opinion.But to dispute your claim:By your logic Religion is the root of evil. This would mean that Religion is the only cause of evil (IE it's root). If this were true, would it NOT also be true that since Religion only causes evil, those who are not religious would not be evil themselves?Therefore, this logic is found to be incorrect as there are plenty of evil non-religious people. Stalin and Pol Pot for example. Chairman Mao for another.I am not saying that all atheists are evil or something (since I'm SURE someone would try saying it) but there HAVE been evil atheists in the past.Therefore, becasue of this, the entire logic is thrown off.Please stop trying to tag conspiracy to an argument that has nothing to do with it :)
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I believe your point is best made by amending your closing proclamation to read: "Today, religion is a significant and unnecessary root of evil!"
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I don't want to go with an ad ignorantum, but can you DISPROVE the existence of some sort of creator?One might have great difficulty in disproving that which does not exist.Without the fear of hell or another sort of retribution, humanity could easily be swayed to pursue acts of evil.So fear of divine punishment, in your view, is the sole motivator for not doing atrocious acts?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

So because something's complicated means god exists? There's no evidence god exists, and never will be any. Everything that's here can be explained by evolution and chaos. You guys can keep arguing the same baseless points, but I'm not going for it until a big glowing dude in a toga steps out from the clouds and does something crazy, like turn the ocean into bubble gum for a day.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I affirm this, we forget the logical flaw of attributing somethings complexity to God. "Well, it looks really complicated, THEREFORE something beyond our realm of physics must have done it". It's a very vague premise that if something currently unexplainable happened that something beyond all explanation did it.Note also that words like "complicated" and "beautiful" are self-assessed and subjective. It's statistically a random chaotic mess, it's easier to gradually learn to like something then have the entire universe arranged specifically to our enjoyment.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

If it is impossible to prove God's existence, it is also impossible to disprove God's existence. Just because we can form an explanation for the workings of our world does not mean that the underlying order that we, as humans, study does not exclude the possibility that God set that order out for us to discover. Perhaps evolution is a process that does occur, there's no reason to say that God didn't set the whole thing in motion. The same can be said for the Big Bang.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

First off, There is no reason to disprove God's existence, because his existence was never proven. Science doesn't go around disproving every unproven possibility. Secondly, without even citing the proof of the Big Bang Theory that exists....The Big Bang Theory is just that...A THEORY....no one says "the God Theory", they just that god definately exists.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

That line is perfect. The people against Big Bang and other methods of scientifically proving our creation call them theories and "God" theories remain absolute. Questioning them or calling them theories just gets hate in return.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

My point wasn't that the Big Bang did occur, it was that if it occurred that it can be explained scientifically, but it can also be attributed to a divine power. I was making the point that God's existence cannot be proven by the very nature of God, and that science and God are not mutually exclusive. Finally, there are plenty of people who maintain that God does not exist, therefore your final point, that is that "they just say(?) that God definitely exists" is moot. Finally, what then, is the point of science if it isn't to prove theories? After all in order to prove a theory without any doubt one must also provide proof that disproves all other theories.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

you wrong about this line: "After all in order to prove a theory without any doubt one must also provide proof that disproves all other theories."That is not how science works at all. In fact, you couldn't be making a more wrong statement by saying that. Science works with facts and creates theories based on those facts. They don't waste their time trying to disprove everything. Science only proves things. In the case of Is there a god?, it would be science's job to prove if he exists. Not prove that he doesn't, that makes no logical sense! How can you ever disprove that something exists when you don't have access to the entire universe? I mean if I told you that unicorns or fairies existed...how could you possibly disprove that? You couldn't! I do, however, accept your point about people saying that "God does not exist" without adding theory to it. It is true, that one could never definately say that as much as one who says "god does exist" can.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

In order to prove a theory there has to be enough evidence to convince a very large majority that all other alternatives are false. There's two ways to do this, one can disprove all other alternatives (which is obviously impossible) or provide indisputable proof of the truth of the theory in question. Finally I disagree with your assertion of it being science's job to prove that a god exists. Science studies the universe, god falls under the category of theology and it seems to me that theology and science are mutually exclusive only in so far as people choose them to be.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

The issue I take with the whole "god is a viable explanation for the origins of the universe" argument is that there's absolutely no basis for that statement. Why even bring it up? There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate any type of involvement from some "higher power" that's beyond our existence and understanding.All the arguments for the existence of god, such as the universe is too complicated to exist without a creator (to this I argue that a universe coming into existence through natural forces and gradually producing complex lifeforms is a lot more plausible than a complex being already existing and manually creating a universe through incomprehensible mechanisms); the universe is magnificent/beautiful/wonderful/etc.; or "I feel the baby Jesus in my heart", are all based on subjective opinions. We have evidence for the big bang, yet don't know what came before it. Theists are of the OPINION that the universe is too "perfect" for us (a futile argument in and of itself) to exist without a conscious creator. This is an assumption, born out of personal bias, with absolutely no hard, empirical evidence to back it up with. Therefore, the possibility of a god shouldn't even be on the table for discussion.Let's think about this: would scientists really spend their time not looking for the natural causes of the big bang, but rather searching for some scrap of evidence to hint at the existence of a theoretical being that allegedly exists beyond this universe's existence even though no empirical evidence has turned up to even consider it as a scientific possibility? It's a wild goose chase because there's no incentive to chase the idea in the first place; only personal, biased beliefs.Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the subject, and I do not try to debase someone else's faith if it gives them comfort (provided they aren't annoying or harming other people because of it), however don't try to bring the idea of a conscious creator being into the scientific realm for debate, because there's nothing to go on. No reason to disprove it if there's nothing indicating it was even partially "proved" in the first place. The god idea isn't even a theory. It's an idea, a belief.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I asked before and didn't get an answer, but are the laws of this universe complex?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

Depends on what your standards of "complex" are, and if they are, then god would be even more complex, thus requiring a creator, itself. If your argument is complexity cannot come about without consciousness, then what about your precious "god"? Where did it come from?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

But if they are complex, where did they come from? Were the laws once simple and evolve to become more complex? Did the laws just all of a sudden exist?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

If god exists, then god is even more complex then the laws. Thus, the questions you have just asked would have to be applied to god as well, making god existing no more likely than the laws existing, by your logic.Humans created the concept of complex. If conscious minds were not capable of fathoming complexity, then it would be a non-issue. The laws of the universe are not complex, nor are they simple. They are only either based on how we choose to describe them, how they appear to us. It is a subjective opinion we form, therefore it cannot be used as proof of god's existence.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

muaguana, you keep creating straw men arguments. I'm not claiming anything about a God being complex or not, or who defines complexity. I asked questions. If you're up to date on the latest evolution thinking, especially along lines of the evo priest Richard Dawkins, its evolution that makes the claim about what is complex and what isn't, and uses the idea that only simple forms come from nothing, and then evolve to complex forms. I'm trying to follow such thinking, and you keep attacking the idea of God. I'm asking questions about evolution and you answer by attacking a God you don't believe exists. Hmm, sounds like, a fanatic.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

"you keep creating straw men arguments."Look up the definition of a "straw man" argument, please. Thank you."I'm not claiming anything about a God being complex or no"I never said you did; you, however, are pulling a tactic I've seen again and again: asking where the "complex" laws of the universe came from to give the answer that "God done did it". I'm merely anticipating your coming argument and getting it out of the way so we won't have to waste any further time on that."If you're up to date on the latest evolution thinking"Wow, that one came out from left field. Since when are we talking about evolution?"I'm trying to follow such thinking"No, you were talking about the cosmological constant, gravity, electromagnetism, and all the other laws of the universe. Biological evolution had absolutely nothing to do with the conversation."I'm asking questions about evolution"There's a pretty HUGE dichotomy between the theory of evolution and the physical laws of the universe - I really hope you realize that. No, you were not talking about evolution."you answer by attacking a God you don't believe exists"Please explain how I can "attack" something I don't believe exists in the first place. No, seriously, explain it to me, it sounds fascinating."Hmm, sounds like, a fanatic."Not really; I consider myself a moderate if anything. I'm not persecuting you, I'm not insulting you because of your faith, I'm not discriminating or hiring ninja assassins to murder you in your sleep. I'm trying to have a discussion with you, and if you think that's fanatical behavior, you've obviously never been to the DEBATE FAITH room on Stickam.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

"I'm merely anticipating your coming argument and getting it out of the way so we won't have to waste any further time on that." That's my definition of a straw man argument, you're welcome. Anticipating something, and attacking it, rather than answering the question. Which, you still haven't. Where did the laws of this universe come from?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

The laws of the universe were formed at the instant of the big bang (actually it was more of a big expansion, but whatever). I thought that much was obvious.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

Gotta tell you, I hear that so much. In truth, what a horrible argument. "It happened this way, I thought that was obvious". If its obvious, please explain how the laws came about.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

True, and it's also completely possible that the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Invisible Pink Unicorn exist. We have to be totally open minded and give every possibility equal value, disregarding the total lack of evidence for some options.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

Actually, evolution's copout is that it doesn't explain how we got here. And order out of chaos, I don't believe that has anything to do w/science. Wishful thinking maybe.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

True, we don't know how we were created, but believing that someone/something just poofed us into existence even though there is proof that the earth is older than the bible teaches is just plain crazy. There is clear proof that we evolved. Where is your clear proof that God created the world?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

What is that clear proof? And what did we evolve from?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

We evolved from microbial growth that managed to cling to the surface of the earth. I agree that evolution is not the answer to everything, however you must realise that making decisions based on new evidence is much better than sticking to the 'truth'. Aren't you constantly changing in order to meet new, everyday challenges?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

That's a pretty shallow answer. I asked, what's the clear proof, and what did we evolve from? What specific "creature" did the first human evolve from?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

Are you asking for what form our ancestors took? In that case, a whole range, from microbes to insects to reptilians to primates. Take your pick.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

That's not a cop out. Evolution isn't meant to explain the origins of the first life, it is meant to explain diversity and adaptation. Calling it one of evolutions cop-outs is as absurd as saying "General Relativity's major cop-out is that it doesn't explain why the sky is blue."Abiogenesis is the topic of how the first replicators emerged.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

The theory of evolution is not meant to explain how the universe was created or how life originated on Earth. Sure, we don't know the answers to these questions today, but that's not a good reason to provide an explanation that doesn't really make sense.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

You're right, evolution claims not to talk about how life started. It builds its house on a foundation it can't explain. The bible speaks about building a house on shifting sand, only a fool would...
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

That doesn't mean that evolution is flawed. It's a biological theory, and the creation of the universe has more to do with physics. As to the origin of life, how is the interference of a divine being more likely than chance? Just because evolution does not explain the origin of life does not mean that God is the explanation.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

Religion itself is a "shifting sand". It was thought that God created the world in 7 days - nowadays this view is passé, held only by fanatics; most claim that "7 days" means "7 periods of indeterminate time", or that the entire thing was just a metaphor. But the content of the Bible hasn't changed; just our interpretation of it - that is, just the religion itself.The fact is, there is nothing wrong with admitting lack of knowledge about something, and science does this in many areas. Indeed, science is nothing but an attempt to fill those gaps in knowledge, which one cannot do without acknowledging their existence. Religiously denying them by saying "god did it" is called "god of the gaps", and is a tricky proposition what with science going around steadily filling them.So despite your derogatory analogy of scientific endeavour (such as the theory of evolution) to "building a house on shifting sand", science is actually going about things the right way by acknowledging its limitations, while religion takes one of two paths: escaping into having only "personal meaning" and taking its holy books to have only "metaphorical" meaning, or remaining in denial and believing in "god of the gaps".
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

If you ask me why the ball falls to the ground and I tell you about this thing I call "gravity", would you dismiss it as a cop-out because it doesn't explain how the ball was created in the first place to have it drop to the ground?
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

Uh... no.On two levels. Lack of logical possibility and evidence, and secondly, the overwhelming presence of alternatives.We've all experienced real-life probability before, it took about 14.7 trillion (or some ridiculous number of) years for chaotic matter to cool down and form life on our planet and Earth is only going to be around for a few more millenia. Not very miraculous to me. I'm sure we're all versed on evolution. We've observed the processes of which in nature, and there's a clear fossil record which tells a story untouched by mankind millions of years back. And in case you're going to refute this with the incredulous statement that "life came from nothing". That's not the case, it gradually developed over a LOOOONG time, and the basic compounds that make us exist all over nature and are generally stable. Ironically, Christians believe that we were pressed from dirt.This eliminates the need for a God to have intervened. Then there is the supposition that a physically impossible being just magically created us, with no possible ability of knowing this except that people from 1000's of years ago who were studying, at best, witchcraft, alchemy, and astrology (not astronomy) were telling the absolute truth when we simultaneously discredit 2,999 other religions based on the very same credibility.This really has nothing to do with facts and evidence at all. We are trapped into believing in God and Heaven because we don't like the alternative of permanent death, that noone is watching over us, and that you've wasted your life in Church. This principle of "faith" is simply the emotional refusal to grasp what appears to be a harsh reality.We live in a very sheltered country of America. I'm not cynical, but we swim in water while people in Africa (mostly Christians by the way) are begging for it while being slaughtered, we work effortlessly while near-slaves at home and abroad manufacture our basic goods while we exploit a useless service sector economy. It is to be expected of us to gate ourselves with our dream world.I accept no. 1. Morals aren't that hard to figure out. 2. I'm okay with dying because living forever, if you think about it, would be true hell and it is the fear of death and limited exposure to life that makes life so precious. 3. Having accepted these things, I don't really need a God nor credit one.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

this god character(s) was made just to make people feel more secure about the things they cannot explain hundreds and thousands of years ago humans could not explain what some things were and why they happened it is just to cover up peoples fears of the world and giving them something to use to shove in peoples faces trying to prove that they are the smarter and the nonbelievers should be the scared ones even though most of the time they are the ones with the actual answers
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I don't believe in God if you write it with a capital "G". That implies a proper noun, a name, something or someone distinct, defined - known. It's like is said in the Tao Te Ching, "The name that can be named is not the eternal Name". The reason that the concept of God exists is precisely because humans, conscious of their own selves and their own death, are aware of their lack of answers to the most fundamental questions. I believe God evolved in man's thinking to be a storehouse for a the answers that satisfied man's need for answers about 'life after death', 'the purpose of life', etc. Without such answers I truly believe the burden of consciousness would have been and still would be impossible to bear. If you consider god with a small "g", I believe to the center of my being. We are humble creatures, making many things, doing many things, knowing many things, but essentially misguided or unguided. The only answer is humility, the worst sin is hubris - the sin of thinking we know God which can only lead to the most prideful, disastrous results.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

what can be asserted without evidence can be also dismissed without evidence.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

Interesting. But then, this could go for ANYTHING really. Even in science, the 'evidence' used to support a claim is actually more subjective than people usually believe it is. Science has proven in the past to be just as fickle when supported as Faith has. Therefore, while faith can be dismissed without evidence, so can science, and therefore it leaves everything for speculation by the individual.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

I do not believe in any god or gods. I am a strong atheist, because I have never come across a definition of god that could possibly exist. There is no reason to believe that the gods of any bibles are real, and many reasons why we know they aren't. A being outside of existence is by definition non-existent. If a being is existing, it must be detectable. In order to be detectable, it must be logically consistent.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

The universe in all it's complexity created by an even more complex being that doesn't require creation...sounds like pure lunacy to me.I love Occam's Razor...the theists ought to check it out.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

The simplest explanation is that everything came together by random chance? really? if there was a perfect being, time could be meaningless to him. He could come to be from the husk of a dying universe and Time paradox himself to the beginning where he set the whole thing off again.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: No!!

Honestly, until I see proof of the existence of any God, I will remain with my opinion that there is no God. This doesn't mean that God can't exist to me, it's just that I won't believe any God exists until I see it with my own two eyes, or see some pretty damning evidence that disproves the more factual and evident theory of Evolution.
Debate: Do you believe in God?
Side: Yes!!

the result of evolution is Human, don't u think that its somehow strange. Evolution or Haos are not able to create humans like me and you we all created by God in its image.