A Christian God exists

RebuttalCon offers three points of contention that actually do not prove the resolution one way or another. They are all if/then constructs, all of which point to the notion that we would approach the questions differently if we had scientific proof for God. But he does not show that there is no scientific proof. Even if he tried, he would then need to show that scientific proof is the only valid kind of proof for God’s existence, which is strange considering the resolution is metaphysical to begin with.The website Con cited goes into more detail on this contention, but I have no intention on debating a website. I agreed to debate girg, not godisimaginary.com. If Con wants to expound on his arguments further in his next rounds, I’ll be glad to address them.Evidential Argument for God's ExistenceHere is an evidential argument for God’s existence, which is a modified form of Kalam's Cosmological Argument (KCA). This evidential argument is meant to show that it is more rational to accept Christianity as true than otherwise. Any argument for God's existence can be doubted; I simply ask the readers to determine whether any doubts my opponent may offer are reasonable or irrational.P1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence.We have yet to acquire conclusive proof of entities entering into existence without cause. The Causal Principle is rooted in our everyday experiences and cannot be conveniently ignored. I warn my opponent that appealing to matter or energy as contrary evidence is question begging.P2. The universe began to exist.It is certain the universe is continually expanding from a singularity.1 Alexander Vilenkin developed a unifying theory2 in 2003 with Arvind Borde and Alan Guth. This theory, which is independent of our universe, shows that all expanding universes must have a singularity and therefore a beginning.An actual infinite number of things is impossible. Therefore, there is a finite number of events in our cosmos' timeline. Thus, it is rational to conclude that it had a first event, or a beginning.C1. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence. (P1 and P2)P3. The first cause must be eternal.There are two choices for the cause of this universe: another temporal existence or an eternal one. If it is temporal, it also has a beginning (per C1). Since there cannot be an actual infinite number of temporal universes, we must conclude that eventually, there is an eternal cause.P4. All eternal causes of temporal effects must be personal.An eternal cause would be one of two things: teleological (personal/intelligent) or non-teleological (mechanical). An eternal object MUST be in equilibrium; it is logically contradictory to assert an eternal object that is changing. Thus, a mechanical eternal entity is dead and therefore incapable of causing anything, much less the temporal effects of space-time as we know it.A teleological eternal agent on the other hand implies an agent with a will. It is logically possible for an eternal personal agent to freely choose to create effects in time without necessitating change in its own properties. So, by process of elimination, we can conclude that any eternal cause of a temporal effect must be intelligent.C2. The universe was caused by a personal creator. (C1, P3 and P4)P5. Since there is a personal creator, miracles are logically possible.It is logically permissible for the personal creator to intervene in our universe to cause events that defy the normal constraints of the universe, i.e., miracles. One need not believe in miracles to see that this is logical possibility under the circumstances.P6. If the Resurrection of Christ occurred, then Christianity is true.Jesus Christ is the founder of Christianity and claimed to be the Son of God. He claimed to be an ambassador of truth to the people of the world. If he was resurrected from the dead, then his authority on the matter is confirmed and Christianity is true. If he did not raise from the dead, then Christianity is not true.P7. The miracle of the Resurrection of Christ probably occurred.Given the historical reliability of the Bible3, we can conclude that the stories regarding Jesus Christ are testimonies of real witnesses. Given the logical possibility of miracles (P5) and the testimony of so many witnesses, it is parsimonious to accept that the Gospel accounts are probably describing a real event.C3. The personal creator of this universe is probably the Christian God. (C1, C2, P5, P6, and P7)ConclusionSo far, Con has offered no substantiated argument. He’s simply painted an imaginary picture of a world in which we have scientific proof of God, but he doesn’t do anything else with it. He cites a website, but I think the voters will agree that I should not be held accountable to refute a website. If I were, then we could just both post links all day and the one with the most would be declared the winner.On the other hand, I’ve provided a detailed argument for God’s existence.I will now hand the debate back over to my opponent for his cross examination.Sources http://skyserver.sdss.org... http://books.google.com... http://www.leaderu.com...