Debate.org is closing and the website will be taken offline on May 30, 2022.
Members can download their content by using the Download Data button in My Account. For more information, please refer to our FAQs page.
The Instigator
anc2006
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
itdobelikethat
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Atheism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/6/2019 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 264 times Debate No: 123150
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

anc2006

Pro

Atheism instead of seeing religions as religions, See them as the pre-science in which are explanations.

Atheism are more free nowadays as there are no worn-out old rules you have to obey that is developed 1800 years ago. NONE.
itdobelikethat

Con

Hello there.

First, I would like to preface this with a question, What is the topic you are defending? Is it that atheism is more prevalent today, Or that there is no god? Either way imp going to assume its the more common debate and begin from there

I'll be attacking from a standpoint of the widely accepted big bang model and using it to prove how a divine influence is necessary.

The big bang theory claims that the explosion that created our universe was caused by quantum particles gathering speed and energy exponentially until the big bang occurred. This however is not possible. No particle, Atomic or quantum, Can do this. If there were atomic or subatomic particles that could generate the literally infinite amount of energy needed to cause the big bang to occur, All of our scientific laws would be disproven. The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The big bang violates this. Through Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2, Energy can be converted into matter. With this, The big bang would also violate the law of conservation of matter, Which states that matter cannot be created or destroyed.
Debate Round No. 1
anc2006

Pro

Atheism is good as a system. If christianity explains the universe better than science ever will, Then it would be better as a system, Even if it isn't the truth.

I am not arguing as that if atheism is right or wrong. It is just good as a system consider it is:
-Real Freedom
-No need to cite a part of scripture 3 times a day
-can live as you, Not under god's shadows
-no old and useless rules
-Science is more of a more important job than church. Science, Most likely is atheist.
itdobelikethat

Con

-"real freedom" Neither Atheism nor Christianity states that there are legal bindings. (Islam is the exception, Because they hold theocracies in the middle east which are based around a power scheme)

-"No need to cite a part of scripture 3 times a day" I'm assuming you mean prayer or something by this, But again, There is no binding forcing you to pray 3 times a day

-"can live as you, Not under god's shadows" How would living in a world with a God keep you down, If anything, It pushes you up. If you know that no matter how bad you mess up none of it will mater because you can experience a sense of euphoric bliss for eternity after death. In atheism you are limited to one try at existence, And if you mess it up, Congratulations! You are now stuck to either live out the rest of your life in misery or just give up and quit playing the game of life.

-"no old and useless rules" again, There are no legal bindings on things like the commandments or other additions to them. They are a moral handbook of how to be a good person.

-"Science is more of a more important job than church. Science, Most likely is atheist. " first, Both can coexist. I am Christian and yet I love the sciences (except biology, Because that's more about what is than what could be). Second, This is due to a bias that leads to discrimination that probably will never go away. Religion is considered "unscientific" because of there being "no solid evidence" (there is solid evidence, But it gets swept under the rug as "coincidence").
Debate Round No. 2
anc2006

Pro

Atheism is more free. That is a fact. You are more as yourself as then as a creation of god.

Atheism can't be worse than religions. It may only be equal to them. Atheism is not bad.
itdobelikethat

Con

you have presented no information to back up such bold claims, Therefore I have gained the advantage.

If atheism is more free, Then how come it creates the perfect opportunity for nihilism, Where you feel worthless via rejection of any and all religion. You no longer feel like yourself because you feel that you don't matter, Nor does anyone or anything. So why bother then? If you are a just a grain of sand on the beach, Why even bother being free? Just conform to standards and make all the other grains of sand happy.

also don't just claim something's a fact when it can be easily disproven

And how is atheism not a religion? It requires faith in something that you could never experience firsthand. It has many, Many flaws, But so does the Jehovah's witness cult but it's still considered a religion.

Therefore how could a provenly flawed system be better or even equal to a tried and tested flawless system?

tl;dr, Don't make big claims and then proceed to not back them up.

Vote con because all points I made still stand, While pro's points have fallen due to little to nothing were holding them up.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Leaning 2 years ago
Leaning
Hm, So is the debate concerning whether atheism is good or bad?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.