The Instigator
Zetsubou
Pro (for)
The Contender
popculturepooka
Con (against)

A Gnostic/Deist God is the most likely theological choice.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Cancelled
This debate was cancelled by the Instigator. If you are Zetsubou, login to see your options.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/14/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Cancelled by Instigator
Viewed: 1,763 times Debate No: 12408
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (0)

 

Zetsubou

Pro

A Gnostic/Deist God is the most likely theological choice.

This is a debate on the subject of Gnostic Deism, Con is to debate an prove that Gnosticism is not the most logical choice in the debate of theistic philosophies. Con can either disprove Gnostic Deism or take a side of another religious philosophy and prove it is more likely than Gnostic Deism.

>>Definitions
Gnosticism - The belief in an imperfect deity. (Omnipresent nothing else)
Deism – The belief that believes in God on the basis of reason without reference to revelation.
Primum movens - The First Cause, is a term used in the philosophical and theological cosmological argument for the existence of God, and in thinking about cosmogony, the source of the cosmos or "all-being", and spontaneous generation of life.

>>Argument<<
->Ex nihilo nihil fit Part I, the Thoery<-
From nothing comes nothing, in our world we are confided to certain Metaphysical laws, of which is "From nothing comes nothing", a nonexistent input variable cannot result in anything other than nothing, 0 =/= 1,2,3,… infinitum or -1,-2,-3,… infinitum, everything in our world needs a start. There are no creditable cosmological arguments that disprove this law. There is reasonable evidence that our world isn't the only world but one of many, if Con disagrees, state so. If this is the case then it is fair to assume that there are various metaphysical worlds with various metaphysical laws. This is where the cosmological argument ends with the assumption that a god of the gaps fills this void. I think it is reasonable to believe that our world, or atleast it's roots, come from another world, a point in which one piece of matter moves from one universe to our Pre-universe. After an unknowable chain of matter moving from world to world we find a world of omnipresence, a space where what is, what has and what is to come are one the same, the domain of the Demiurge, "creator" of the material. In Gnostic determinist belief it is from here that all start from.

->Ex nihilo nihil fit Part II, the Proof<-
The basics of this is argument:
>Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
>Nothing finite and contingent can cause itself.
>The Causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
>Therefore, a First Cause must exist.

The Primum Movens is a deity, a being, I contend atheism to the belief that there is no God/Alpha Deity. I contend Agnosticism as the fact that there it is the uncertainty thought. I contend religions that show a human like god as the probability of the Demiurge being humanoid or antromorphic both, mentally or physically, is highly improbable and fall under the negative proof fallacy. I contend the omnipotent, omniscience and omnibenevolent gods because though the Primum Movens is the First Cause it is deity that's nature is unknown, the state of omnipotence and omniscience are complex and improbable, again, negative proof fallacy. Panentheism is unjustified and doesn't answer the problem of god; nature was created by the Primum Movens at the start so therefore he is not nature. I am open to other contentions from Con or any other religious movements that I have failed to negate in some way.

Notes:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 18 records.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 4 years ago
GeoLaureate8
You didn't address my post. You said that Gnosticism is the belief in a deity. Not true. Ever heard of Theism and Deism?

It involves a deity, but its knowing that a deity exists. You always deny the religious version of Gnosticism and deny the Gnostic Gospels.
Posted by Zetsubou 4 years ago
Zetsubou
-Gnosticism ( gn&#333;sis, knowledge) refers to diverse, syncretistic religious movements in antiquity consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that the cosmos was created by an imperfect god, the demiurge with some of the supreme God's pneuma; this being is frequently ...

-The doctrines of certain pre-Christian pagan, Jewish, and early Christian sects that valued the revealed knowledge of God and of the origin and end of the human race as a means to attain redemption for the spiritual element in humans and that distinguished the Demiurge from the unknowable Divine Being.
Posted by Zetsubou 4 years ago
Zetsubou
"Gnosticism isn't a belief in a deity"

O.o?
Posted by GeoLaureate8 4 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Zetsubou, Gnosticism isn't a belief in a deity. Gnosticism in this case, is certainty that a deity exists. Mere belief in a deity is Theism or Deism. Adding Gnosticism is no longer belief, but certainty.
Posted by Zetsubou 4 years ago
Zetsubou
Also, I tried my hardest (main reason as to why it took so long) to make my argument in the form of modal logic.

Result... that stuff is hard. It's like all modal operators even unary are the most F'd things ever.
Posted by Zetsubou 4 years ago
Zetsubou
It's mainly Deism. It's Deism that just happens to be Gnostic. I didn't use Deism before because, like I told Geo, Hume and Kant F'ed up my sense of definition.

As for style, I'll review it, I'm a crap writer anyway.
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 4 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
Your opening argument is logically flawed, terribly written and you don't know what Gnosticism is. All this time we have waited for you to pull your finger out and substantiate your "gnosticism" and this is what we get?
Posted by popculturepooka 4 years ago
popculturepooka
I'll take this soon - I'm just trying to figure out what angle I'm going to use...I have a couple of ideas. ;)
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.