Resolved: God Exists

I am equally eager for their rebuttals and arguments. Rebuttals:Your claims have absolutely NO PROOF. You have not fulfilled your BoP, merely directly stating claims. Your BoP is not to prove any properties of God as shown by you in Round 1; it is to show the existence of God. Science is not something that "created the universe"; science is an explanation of what created the universe. You have merely stated that God does not play an active role in the universe. THAT IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO THIS DEBATE. The primary goal of this debate is for Pro to show the EXISTENCE OF GOD. You have randomly stated a property that is completely irrelevant. Getting to the proper rebuttals:You claim that life can be created by only something that was previously alive. Why did a sentient being have to create the universe? A scientific force could have created the universe. The universe may have a source but does that source need to be the source of all moral authority? Not necessarily. It can even be a yet undiscovered force, or a singularity that transcends existence. If God can self-create or transcend creation, so can a force. There needn't be any of the properties described in the definition of Round 1 for this force to exist. According to the Big Bang Theory, the universe originated from a singularity [1], a point in gravitational spacetime with infinite density and zero volume [2]. According to the Big Bang, energy was absorbed from gravity inherent to existence (as God is, according to most theologists), and expanded into photons, that then contracted to form matter and antimatter. [3] [4] The source of the universe need not be an omnipotent, omniscient being that acts as the source of moral authority. Arguments:1. Proof of the Big Bang:B-mode polarization is a polarization signal that acts as a cosmic microwave background, a form of thermal radiation from the Big Bang itself. The polarization signal, when analyzed, showed that gravitational forces before the existence of matter did hold energy, and maximum energy was held at a point of immense energy: a singularity. According to Albert Einstein, these CMBs (cosmic microwave backgrounds) act as "ripples" in gravitational spacetime. This is virtual proof of sudden cosmic inflation, rapid expansion of the universe from a singularity, basically proving the Big Bang. [5][6][7] Prior to the Big Bang's recombination that created the universe as it is today, the "universe" was a hot, dense baryon plasma sea where photons were quickly scattered from free charged particles. The CMBs showed hints of unstable neutral hydrogen contact, but neutral hydrogen primarily became stable during the process of post-Big Bang recombination. Thus, the CMBs were pre-recombination or during recombination and thus are from the Big Bang. [8]2. The Omnipotence ParadoxIf a being can perform any action, then it should be able to create a task which this being is unable to perform; hence, this being cannot perform all actions (all actions include hypothetical one; "all" even includes nonexistent, or incomprehensible actions, which, by the rules of absolute omnipotence, require the ability to perform the same by the omnipotent being objectively). Yet, on the other hand, if this being cannot create a task that it is unable to perform, then there exists something it cannot do. [9] By this debate's definition of "omnipotence", the omnipotence referenced here is absolute omnipotence, meaning that there are no limits to the Supreme Being's omnipotence by the terms of this debate. Thus, omnipotence cannot exist. To further expand on this paradox: Now, an omnipotent being ("X") can perform ANY action whatsoever, even if that action, hypothetically, does not exist [yet]. Now let us say X creates a yet non-existent action Y that it cannot perform. [X has the ability to create even that action by the definition of omnipotence] As Y is conceivable by X, X cannot perform Y, even if the action Y does not exist. "All" encompasses the action Y. Therefore, as X cannot perform Y (which X creates only later), X is not omnipotent. Once X creates Y, Y becomes an existent action that X cannot do. To make this argument more concise, for the sake of the argument, let us take an action. (Disclaimer: This is NOT an action that the Supreme Being according to the definitions given in this debate cannot perform; it has been selected randomly) Now, let X be called "Superman" (just for ease of understanding) and Y be the act of making a dog's curved tail straight. (this is taken from a famous folktale of Aladdin) Now, let us say that all dog's tails are straight. (only for the purposes of explanation) Therefore, dogs cannot have curved tails, so the act of making curved tails straight does not exist. One day, Superman decides to make some dog's tails curved and then uses his powers to ensure that the act of making a dog's tail straight is impossible even for him. Since this action is conceived of, it is a hypothetical action that acts as an idea. This action could not be performed by Superman even before it was created, as it existed as an idea, with the square ground rule that Superman could not perform it. Therefore, Superman is not omnipotent.3. The Omniscience Paradox(1) If God foreknows of some event E, does E happen necessarily, and (2) if some event E is contingent, how can God foreknow E's occurrence? Thus, omniscience implies the lack of contingency, and thus, by the definition of the existence of a Supreme Being, means everything is definite. This definitiveness is proof of the universe being completely entwined by order. But according to the thermodynamic measure of entropy, there is more than one way in which a thermodynamic system (eg: a region of the universe) may be arranged. This arrangement is variable, yet constant in the fact that the varied arrangements may coexist. Thus, there is, by definition, disorder in the universe. If there is disorder, then only one hypothesis of the possibilities of entropy may be predestined, and not more. Thus, foreknowing all the possibilities is impossible. [10][11][12][13][14][15] If you already know how everything will act, then you already foreknow it without deducting it by logic. If one already knows that something will happen, then that action is definite. "Knowing" is the act of having knowledgeability of a certainty. If something is a certainty, it is already predetermined. And a predetermined action lacks possibilities. There is no chance that no event is contingent. Definitiveness completely violates disorder in this universe. If there is definitiveness and God exists, then God is the only free will agent and we are unknowingly being influenced by God. But as there is absolutely no evidence for that, I will discredit this notion. If even one contingency exists, then God cannot be omniscient because no being can have certainty that a contingency can occur. As the existence of disorder is effectively proven by the laws of thermodynamics, lack of contingencies is impossible. The Bible is used as your only source in a rebuttal of yours, so I will use it as a source. The Bible says people must direct their actions on the basis of appropriate moral judgement and describes some as immoral. But if everything is predetermined, then moral judgement and immorality do not exist. Most other religions also believe that morality must be followed by God's law. Therefore, omniscience is impossible.4. The Grand Design QuestionThe question "who/what created the universe? " is often the question posed by theists to cite the existence of God. But, if the answer is God, then the question can merely be deflected to "what created the God? " If something did create the universe, it was a singularity that acted as the starting point of the universe. The singularity was created by the energy inherent to gravity. [16]I now shift the burden of proof to Pro. Sources:[1] Hawking, S. (1996). A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes, Bantam Dell Publishing Group, New York, ISBN 978-0-553-10953-5, Edition 2, based on 1988 edition. [2] Moulay, Emmanuel. "The universe and photons". FQXi Foundational Questions Institute. (. http://www.fqxi.org...)[3] Joseph Silk (2009). Horizons of Cosmology. Templeton Press. p. 208. [4] . http://gotejas.com......; Posts "God Does Not Play Dice With The Universe", "What Is Nothing? " and "E Pluribus Unum". [5] Einstein, A (June 1916). "Näherungsweise Integration der Feldgleichungen der Gravitation". Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin. part 1: 688–696. [6] Einstein, A (1918). "Über Gravitationswellen". Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin. part 1: 154–167 [7] Penzias, A. A. ; Wilson, R. W. (1965). "A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s". Astrophysical Journal 142: 419. [8] Spergel, D. N. ; et al. (2003). "First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: determination of cosmological parameters". Astrophysical Journal Supplement 148 (1): 175. [9] Savage, C. Wade. "The Paradox of the Stone" Philosophical Review, Vol. 76, No. 1 (Jan. , 1967), pp. 74–79 [10] "Purtill on Fatalism and Truth". Faith and Philosophy: 229–234. 1990. [11] Viney, Donald Wayne (Spring 1989). "Does Omniscience Imply Foreknowledge? Craig on Hartshorneby". Process Studies (Center for Process Studies) 18 (1): 30–37. [12] "Carnot, Sadi (1796–1832)". Wolfram Research. 2007. [13] Tisza, L. (1966). Generalized Thermodynamics, M. I. T. Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 47,57. [14] Münster, A. (1970), Classical Thermodynamics, translated by E. S. Halberstadt, Wiley–Interscience, London, ISBN 0-471-62430-6, pp. 49, 69. [15] Bailyn, M. (1994). A Survey of Thermodynamics, American Institute of Physics Press, New York, ISBN 0-88318-797-3, pp. 14–15, 214. [16] Hawking, S. ; Mlodinow, Leonard (2010). The Grand Design, Bantam Books, New York. ISBN 0-553-80537-1