if god exist, then you cant show me a sample
Debate Rounds (1)
I contend that if God (or god) exists, then I can indeed show a sample of a characteristic of God"s nature, or some other attribute associated with God.
In this debate, I will be assuming that an omniscient God exists. I will use the following definitions:
God " a necessary, omniscient being.
Sample - a representative part or a single item from a larger whole or group especially when presented for inspection or shown as evidence of quality.
Argument 1: We can know some things that God knows.
This is to say that we can have a sample of God"s knowledge. God, as an omniscient being, would know every sum to every equation in mathematics. When we discover that 2+2=4, we have a sample of God"s infinite knowledge without detracting from the nature of God. This seems to be logically coherent, given God"s existence.
Argument 2: Given the existence of an omniscient God, the existence of material objects are upheld by that God"s knowledge. Thus our continued existence might be considered a sample of something God thinks about. This logically follows, because an omniscient being knows what exists. For anything to exist, this being would have to know about it.
Argument 3: The universe and all it holds might be a sample of God"s creation. Students of Dr. William Craig know about the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) and its purported validity. The KCA is stated:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
C: The universe has a cause.
This is to say that the universe was made by God. Some atheists may wish to debate these two contentions, but I believe they are fairly strong because of the implausibility any alternatives that I know.
An infinite amount of prior causes cannot exist in this possible world. It seems that material might be created by a necessary agent.
If any of the Abrahamic religions are true, then God most likely created all matter. For instance, if the Christian God exists, we read in the Bible that God created all things.
Now this does not prove that God created the universe, just that it is reasonable to believe God did. So if I gave my opponent a blade of grass, I might be giving my opponent a sample of all of God"s creation. I believe that it is self-evident that the delivery of a material object to my opponent is logically possible.
Now my opponent may object and say that he/she was actually talking about alternatives, like Dualism or Pantheism. Let me just say that if Pantheism is true, then I can directly show a sample of God by giving pro any object within the universe. If Dualism is true, then I can show my opponent something morally evil or good, and claim that this is a sample of something one of these gods would support.
In conclusion, we have 2 certain arguments that make my opponent"s view false, and one claim that makes my opponent"s view probably false. I have shown that if God exists, I can give vi_spek a sample of something that is associated with God. To deny this claim, vi_spek would need to deny my existence. But I know I exist. So any claim to solipsism on my opponent's side is refuted by my own personal knowledge of myself, or our voter's own personal knowledge of themselves.
Because the BOP has never been fulfilled on my opponent"s side, I claim victory.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by persianimmortal 1 year 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:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: "Because the BOP has never been fulfilled on my opponent"s side, I claim victory." True statement 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.