God Probably Exists

I take issue with just about every point in PRO’s main argument. I ask that PRO correct me if I misrepresent him; I just want to lay it out a little differently to make it simpler to address. As I see it, PRO’s argument is: The universe had a beginning; That beginning must have had a cause; That cause must be outside of space and time; That cause must be an “active agent;” Therefore, the Christian God exists. The Universe Had a Beginning This is a claim which is not supported by evidence. PRO’s own source notes that at the moment of the big bang, “all matter in the universe was contained in a single point” [1]. This doesn’t address the beginning of the universe, it addresses the moment the universe began to take the shape it presently has. The concept of the big bang doesn’t address where the stuff that “banged” came from; therefore, it is not a true discussion of the beginning of the universe. In fact, this whole argument fails because unless you can demonstrate that there was a beginning, there is no need for a first cause. That Cause Must Be Outside of Space and Time While I agree that space and time (as we know them) came to be at the big bang, there has been no demonstration that anything can exist outside of space and time. In fact, the whole concept of causation requires time in order for one thing to occur after the other [2]. Basically, without time for stuff to occur in, one thing cannot happen as a result of (after) another. That Cause Must Be an “Active Agent” This is a claim that must be demonstrated. If there was a cause, why couldn’t it be some natural cause of which we are ignorant? There is no connection between the alleged cause and the necessity for it to be an “active agent. ” This is a fallacy known as a non sequitur [3]. Therefore, the Christian God Exists I did take a small amount of liberty here, because PRO didn’t claim the Christian God in his argument, however, he did claim the Christian God when asked to be more specific. However, this differentiation is largely irrelevant; I include it only to make a more obvious distinction. Similar to the previous section, if we assume an “active agent,” there is no reason to assume that active agent to be a god, or even more so, the Christian God. This again is a non sequitur [3]. PRO’s Overall Argument Not only has PRO’s first premise failed by being an unsupported claim, his 3rd, 4th, and 5th premises fail. Therefore, we need not address this argument any longer. Counter Rebuttal-Unintelligent Design PRO tried to counter my argument about unintelligent design with a claim that the imperfections we see in our bodies are the result of our sin. Not only is this claim unsupported, it lacks a mechanism. How does violating a god’s rules cause the pharynx to come into existence? It also doesn’t address the various examples of unintelligent design found in nature, outside of the human body [4]. PRO’s claim lacks explanatory power; it creates more questions than it answers. Counter Rebuttal-Occam’s Razor Here, PRO made the mistake of stating that claiming a god explains something. Even if we assume a god, we are not closer to understanding the HOW than we were before we made that assumption; all we have determined is the WHO. As I pointed out in my original argument, assuming a god needlessly increases the amount of assumptions, while not increasing the explanatory power, therefore it is a violation of Occam’s razor. Counter Rebuttal-The Hell Dilemma PRO failed to address my point that the infinite punishment of hell is just when compared to any possible finite crime. What PRO did was sidestep the whole issue and claim that God doesn’t send us to hell. This is dishonest, because, according to the bible, God created hell, and the rules by which one gets sent there. God also has the power to forgive. Therefore, God set the system up, and he could stop it from happening, but he doesn’t. He is responsible. Wrapping Up I feel I have adequately dispatched PRO’s argument, and supported my own. I hope PRO has some good points for the next round. [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] . http://en.wikipedia.org...(logic) [4] . http://en.wikipedia.org...