I accept this debate and wish Tejretics good luck. I am sure this will be a fascinating debate.
Clarification:
First I would like to remind my opponent and those reading what this debate is not about. This debate is not about the social impact of religion. It is not about the ethics of the Bible or Koran. It is not about religion at all. This debate is simply about the existence of God. That is to say the existence of a “Supreme Being ... includ[ing] attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, intelligence, and eternal and necessary existence ... the creator of the [contingent] universe” I will show that such is likely.
I would also like to be clear that my arguments are not entirely or even mostly my own. I will be citing arguments made by men much more intelligent than I. I will do …show more content…
Craig that he is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheist.” In this debate the same will occur for my opponent and all reading.
Argument 1: Kalam Cosmological argument (KCA)
(Heavily influenced by Dr. Craig’s presentation on the subject)
P1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause
“Nihil fit ex nihilo” That is to say that nothing comes from nothing. Things do not just pop out of nowhere. Believing in magic performed by a magician is more practical than believing that out of nothing comes nothing. At least with a magician the rabbit pulled from the hat is claimed to have come from a hat as opposed to have just materialized. This first premise is rationally intuitive and a fundamental principle of science. Thus we see the first premise is true.
P2: The Universe began to exist
There is consensus in the scientific community that the universe is not eternal, that is to say has not always existed. Rather it is clear that the universe had an absolute beginning around thirteen billion years ago in the event known as the Big Bang. Thus the second premise is
Clarification:
First I would like to remind my opponent and those reading what this debate is not about. This debate is not about the social impact of religion. It is not about the ethics of the Bible or Koran. It is not about religion at all. This debate is simply about the existence of God. That is to say the existence of a “Supreme Being ... includ[ing] attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, intelligence, and eternal and necessary existence ... the creator of the [contingent] universe” I will show that such is likely.
I would also like to be clear that my arguments are not entirely or even mostly my own. I will be citing arguments made by men much more intelligent than I. I will do …show more content…
Craig that he is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheist.” In this debate the same will occur for my opponent and all reading.
Argument 1: Kalam Cosmological argument (KCA)
(Heavily influenced by Dr. Craig’s presentation on the subject)
P1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause
“Nihil fit ex nihilo” That is to say that nothing comes from nothing. Things do not just pop out of nowhere. Believing in magic performed by a magician is more practical than believing that out of nothing comes nothing. At least with a magician the rabbit pulled from the hat is claimed to have come from a hat as opposed to have just materialized. This first premise is rationally intuitive and a fundamental principle of science. Thus we see the first premise is true.
P2: The Universe began to exist
There is consensus in the scientific community that the universe is not eternal, that is to say has not always existed. Rather it is clear that the universe had an absolute beginning around thirteen billion years ago in the event known as the Big Bang. Thus the second premise is