God is Imaginary
Debate Rounds (3)
God is a greater nonmaterial mind.
I think Atheist are illogical and purposefully deceptive when they claim, "Burden of proof is only on a positive claim, not on a negative claim"
Well "God is imaginary" is spouted off by Atheist Sheep just as often as God does not exist.
"God is imaginary" is a positive claim so now all you Atheist can present that burden of proof you have been holding on to.
Something imaginary is something that only exists within the imagination. The imagination is "the ability to form new images and sensations that are not perceived through senses such as sight, hearing, or other senses." [wikipedia.org]
So that means something is imaginary when it exists outside of any perception. God has never been perceived by anybody, seeing as there's not evidence for its existence. So where does the image of God come from? Right, the bible. A book describing the God image. The whole concept of God is formed by the bible and not by perception.
I agree with the definition my opponent uses for for imaginary.
I'll summarize my opponent's argument as follows
1. God has never been perceived.
2. No evidence for God's existence
3. The image of God comes from the Bible, a book.
4. Concept of God is formed by Bible not perception.
5. ergo, therefore, God is imaginary.
Rebuttal to 1.
Let's address what perception is. Perception has 2 meanings in the dictionary.
1. the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.
2. a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something; a mental impression.
My opponent offers no prove that God has never been perceived. Absence of Evidence is not evidence. I directly reject this premise.
1. God is a non material mind.
2. Making the substance of God mind in nature.
2a. implied that out of all metaphysical worlds Dualism or Idealism is possible.
2b. Opposing views lack similar explanatory value. (ie. Schrodinger's cat, Regression of reality to none material things.)
2c. Dualism or Idealism is this world.
3. It is congruent with this world that God be felt, or sensed through a mental nature.
4. God has been perceived. (mental impression)
I for one, have a mental impression of God. At Christian Testimonies , People of the Book (Islam) , and other such sites show that other people have mental impressions of God as well. These testimonies are not appeals to authority or population. I make no assertion to the validity of each of these peoples perception. I make no claim that these peoples perceptions of God mean God is not imaginary.
Any one can reject the content of the testimonies. But they are evidence that people have a perception of God.
Rebuttal to 2.
1. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
What would be evidence of a perception? This goes directly to my opponent asserting God has never been perceived. Evidence of a perception would be testimony as I already given. Perceptions can be recorded as chemical signals being processed in the brain.
2. There is evidence God has been perceived.
Volunteers had religious experiences that were recorded by MRI. Dr. Newberg states Newberg explains, “They don’t feel that they’re purposely making it [happen]. They feel that they are being basically overcome by the experience.”
My opponent assumes from an none established materialistic world that these perception are internally generated and not externally caused. There is no difference between the chemicals used the perception is external with when the perception is internal. My opponent has not established the connection that these types of perception are external.
It is not enough to say that a third observer did not experience the same perception at the same time. There are well established experiments that some people are more sensitive to smells, taste, and sight. That some people can taste a chemical 6-n-Propylthiouracil while others can not.  So some people can perceive a sensory experience while others can not.
Rebuttals to 3.
The bible has a description of God. My opponent asserts that all the perception of God are based on this description. This is not the case because some people have not read the bible and yet still have a perception of God. This fact invalidates the premise making it false.
Rebuttals to 4.
This is begs the question where did the first description of God come from and why does it match so many other people's perceptions of God in history. It is much more likely to assume that a particular mental impression, like pain or bright light, are shared between the whole of human beings. And that this human perception of an event is being recorded of in the Bible.
God is imaginary is unlikely, if not just flat out on unprovable making it meaningless as a premise for any argument, and no better than an opinion.
I demonstrate that people perceive of God. being a non corporeal mind, God leaves no physical evidence. Leaving us to discern God's existence from the mental evidence God is being perceived.
RowanM forfeited this round.
I extend my arguments
RowanM forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: ff Con's sources helped his case, and since Pro provided none, sources go to Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.