Resolved: The Christian God, as depicted in the Bible, does not exist.
Debate Rounds (2)
EDIT: Well nobody else has responded for a few hours so I'll issue this to my new friend dswd. Although he hasn't completed any debates or done much of anything, we've talked via PM and I'm certain he'll provide a decent argument, and I hope he can completely refute my argument.
Reminder, round one for you is acceptance only. I'll present my argument, then you can form your rebuttals against it.
I know, I know, you guys see this all the time. I've just come up with an argument all by myself (yay me) regarding the existence (or lack of) of the Christian God. My argument can refer to any God pertaining to any religious book, but I'll stick with the Christian Bible to keep it easy and straight forward.
All I want out of this debate is to see if someone can dispute my argument. If you can, fantastic, if not, well rats.
The burden of proof is 100% on me to prove that the Christian God does not exist. I'm not saying he "most likely" doesn't exist, I'm not saying he "probably" doesn't exist, I'm not even saying he doesn't exist "so far." I am asserting that there is a zero percent chance the Christian God did, does, or will exist. Literally all I want you to do is dispute my idea/argument, which I will present when someone accepts. You don't need to be religious or a Christian to accept, if you think you'll be able dispute my argument, please feel free to post in the comments and let me know if you wish to give it a shot.
I'm also not trying to offend anyone by making this claim, I know this topic can get heated. I'm simply looking to see if anyone thinks they're able to argue against what I'm about to say.
I'll give you 10,000 characters to do so, but only a day so you can't spend three days doing research, however anything you find online can be used as sources, arguments, etc. as long as you put it in your own words here.
This debate should be impossible to accept. If you accept it without my approval, you'll forfeit a full 7 points. Just comment on the debate and tell me why you believe you'll be able to dispute what I'm about to say. I don't care about completed debates or ELO or anything.
You'll also forfeit a full 7 points if you attempt to change any definition or use semantics or troll around.
We will use BibleGateway for reference to verses.
God (in general) is the omnipotent omnipresent and omniscient creator of everything. We are not talking about Jesus Christ.
The Christian God is defined as the same thing. Creator of everything.
I will not be asking you to prove that the creator of everything exists. I will be asking you to argue against my argument for the non-existence of specifically the Christian God.Keep that in mind.
I have no idea what else to say here. Feel free to ask questions in the comments. I won't present my argument until someone accepts though.
Anyway, let's try this. Keep in mind you've only got a day to form your argument after I post mine. Good luck! :)
Thanks a lot for accepting, dswd. I'm intrigued to see your response to this.
We've gone over the definitions, and we've agreed on everything in our PM conversation. So I'll just jump right into this.
For the sake of this argument, a divine creator exists. This is to bypass all the arguments for/against a god (in general, not pertaining to a specific religion), and turn the argument into an argument for/against God pertaining to Christianity. So your task is not to argue for the existence of a divine creator in general. For the sake of this argument, a divine creator exists.
But, does a divine creator pertaining specifically to Christianity exist? We have to understand what would make the "God" we discovered to be the Christian God. Well, the main thing Christians (or religious people in general) tend to go on would be the miracles in their holy books. If a divine creator exists, that means the miracles, pertaining to a divine creator, in the Bible are all true. It also means miracles, pertaining to a divine creator of other religions, are also true.
Now at face value, we see it like this: a divine creator exists, and the Bible has not only claimed that one did before we "discovered" it, but it has miracles in it to "prove" that it's the Christian God. But let's actually look deeper into this.
It's pretty clear that the Bible, the word of God, states that there is only one God - the Christian one.
Deuteronomy 4:35 - "You were shown these things so that you might know that the Lord is God; besides him there is no other."
Kings 8:60 - "so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the Lord is God and that there is no other."
Samuel 7:22 - "That is why you are great, Lord God. There is no one like you, and there is no other god except you, as we have heard with our own ears."
It is also clear that this God does not lie.
Titus 1:2 - "...in hope of eternal life, which God, who doesnotlie, promised before time began..."
Hebrews 6:18 - "God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie..."
This God created everything.
(Basically all of Genesis)
Genesis 1:1 - "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth... ...God said let there be light, and there was light."
Genesis 1:21 - "So God created the great creatures of the sea..."
Ephesians 2:10 - "For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works..."
Other Gods created everything.
Other holy books claim that their God is the only God.
If the Bible states that God does not lie, and he was the sole creator of all that exists, that would simply be wrong, as other books claim the same thing, but on behalf of a different God. Which leads us to four outcomes:
1. The Christian God is lying. However this is impossible.
2. The creator of all that exists does not pertain to a specific religion, as each religion is clear that it is not the same God each religion is worshipping.
3. All religions unknowingly worship the same God. However this would also be impossible because more than one religious book (including the Bible) is the word of God, meaning God would have lied, which again, is impossible.
4. There is one separate God for each religion. However again, this would be impossible because the Bible is the word of God, and the Bible clearly states that, at the very least, the Christian God is the only God. And God does not lie.
So, this means the following:
There is an infinitely powerful, knowledgeable creator of everything.
The Bible claims him to be the Christian God.
The Bible clearly states that God does not lie, and that he is the only God.
If God does not lie, the newly discovered divine, all powerful, knowledgeable etc. creator of all would not pertain to a specific religion, and in this case, Christianity, as each religion says the divine creator strictly belongs to their religion and their religion alone.
The "multiple God" idea does not work, as the Bible clearly states there is only one God.
God does not lie, and considering the Bible is the word of God, he would have lied, because he would "exist" in nearly every religion (more than just Christianity to say the least).
If a divine creator existed, it would contradict the Bible, that God's own words, making a God pertaining specifically to Christianity completely futile, impossible, etc.
To summarize this:
If a divine creator existed, each religion would claim he was theirs. This would be impossible as each religion claims their God is the only God, and that their God does not lie. Specifically referring to Christianity, the Christian God would not exist because he does not lie, and he claims to be the only God. If a divine creator, as depicted in the Christian Bible, and other religious texts, was proved to exist, religion as a whole would crumble, as the divine creator would directly contradict the Bible, as almost every religion claims their personal God created everything. If there was more than one God, the Bible would be contradicted and incorrect, meaning no Christian God, as it claims there is only one God. If the discovered God was the same God that every religion refers to, the Bible would still be a direct contradiction as the events explained and done by their God are different than other holy books' God, other than the creation aspect.
I really hope you could understand all that, it's hard for me to even re-read that haha.
Thanks and I'm looking forward to seeing a response!
In my argument I will go through Pro's points and show various flaws in it. Since Pro has accepted that the burden of proof is 100% on him, this is enough to win this debate.
Pro states: "But, does a divine creator pertaining specifically to Christianity exist? We have to understand what would make the "God" we discovered to be the Christian God. Well, the main thing Christians (or religious people in general) tend to go on would be the miracles in their holy books. If a divine creator exists, that means the miracles, pertaining to a divine creator, in the Bible are all true. It also means miracles, pertaining to a divine creator of other religions, are also true."
If a certain god exists and its scripture is true then all miracles described in the scripture must also be true. However this does not mean that any other miracles described in other religions scripture are true. This is only logically sound if the miracles are the same. Then, obviously, they are also true in other religions. However miracles being true does not mean that a specific god exists since the miracles themselves do not point to a specific god and therefore can not be attributed.
In the next paragraph Pro lists Bible citations to proof that the Christian god created everything, does not lie and is the only god, which I all accept.
Then Pro references sources from Islam and Sikhism that claim the same for their gods. Since this argument is about the existence of the Christian god according to Christian scripture and there is nothing in Christian scripture that suggests that any of those other sources are divine and true, I therefore reject them.
Then Pro continues to construct a contradiction based on the unproven premises that multiple gods exist, none of them are lying and all of them claiming to be the only one.
In step 2, Pro claims that "each religion is clear that it is not the same God each religion is worshiping". At least for the god of Islam, Allah, this is not so clear. One could argue that Allah is the same god as the Christian god, JHWH, (the "abrahamic god") but then there still is only one god with a true holy book and a false one which does not lead to any contradiction.
Step 3 assumes that all "holy books" must be true if the respective gods exist. This clearly is not true as anyone can make up a false holy book based on another religion's god.
Pro also states "If God does not lie, the newly discovered divine, all powerful, knowledgeable etc. creator of all would not pertain to a specific religion, and in this case, Christianity, as each religion says the divine creator strictly belongs to their religion and their religion alone."
This is wrong, the Bible does not claim that the Christian god "strictly belongs to their religion and their religion alone". Given that the new testament splits Christianity from Judaism any such claim in the Bible would be ridiculous. The Bible only claims that it depicts the one any only god correctly and in turn all other scripture that depicts a god differently must be wrong.
Pro continues: "God does not lie, and considering the Bible is the word of God, he would have lied, because he would "exist" in nearly every religion (more than just Christianity to say the least)."
Since the existence of a god is not based on scripture describing him, the existence of separate scripture describing the same god differently does not mean that two different gods exist, it just means that one scripture got it wrong. Alternately the mere existence of scripture depicting a different god does not in any way mean that this god actually exists. By arguing this way, Pro directly argues against its own position ("The Christian God, as depicted in the Bible, does not exist.").
Pro's summary starts with "If a divine creator existed, each religion would claim he was theirs. This would be impossible as each religion claims their God is the only God, and that their God does not lie.".
This is totally possible when all but one claims are wrong.
In summary, Pro's argument is based on the false assumption that claiming something makes it true. In specific, claiming that some gods exist does not make them exist. Also, such claims are not tied together so that they are either all true or all false because they are similar in nature. If one such claim can be disproved, this can not be generalized to other god claims. It is absolutely possible that one claim is true and all the others are false. For this argument the true claim can be that the Christian god as depicted in the Bible exists. Pro failed to provide a conclusive argument to support his claim and as he accepted to bear the burden of proof, I rest my case.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.