God, as defined by the (Christian) Bible, is not real.

Good day Con, readers and voters. Thanks to Con for a quick response, it is greatly appreciated. This have gone downhill in to the realms of semantics, I want to go back to the summit. To clarify, Yes, given the nature of the resolution and positions we are in, I am in the affirmative that the 'God of the Christian Bible' does not exist - however, some clarifications: 'has a job to AFFIRM the resolution, which he is trying to get out of. ' - I have offered argument against God's existence, Con has offered none for God's Existence. 'So his difficult task is only his own fault as he accepted this debate, not I. ' - See my round 2, I have made no complaints, Con is making whole cloth fabrications of what I am to have said and done in regards to my own position. 'He has instigated it,' - It looks to me as though my posts appear after yours. You take the first turn in each round as you are the instigator. Con is shifting all matters of actual debate because in hindsight he has realised he made a booboo in choosing whether to be Con or Pro. Bible Validity. I have not used the Bible as a reason against God, as Con still has some actual debate to bring forth, I merely he asked (and he agreed - 'This, as I stated, is quite possibly, and probably true. ') that he refrain from using it due to it's nature of being known to not be as accurate as it once was in relation to the original scriptures. Please leave it at that, Con, your point in a non sequitur. Omnipresent Everywhere = Everything - If you are everywhere, you occupy all spaces and permeate all things, making you everything. Con's Point refuted. 'So I can see a whole room on camera, and be (partially) omni-present' - You are not even partially omnipresent, your are just bearing witness to a room you do not occupy. Con's attempted refutation of my 'Creator's creator' arguments can be justified thusly - . http://www.debate.org... This link will take you to a debate where Con has (it seems history repeats itself) adopted the wrong position but argued from the other side (To which his opponent agreed, though did note the flaw in the resolution and his position) Though I used Ockham's Razor against Omnipotence, Con used it prior against Omnipresence. As per Con for further reading. 'Occam's Razor dictates: "Do not multiply entities" This means that when given a situation, the simplest answer is most likely the answer. So it is much more likely that choice (1) is the answer as it is simplest. The extra medium of some God is ridiculous, as no evidence is for it. ' I would like Con to stick to his own words 'I would also like to point out that must because my opponent's asserts something as fact, does make it fact without logical or evidential backup. ' - So prove the God of the Christian Bible exists. Omnipotent Ockham's Razor still stands - ' In laymen terms, it means that you shouldn't pick a more complicated reason if a simpler one already exists. ' Even from two sides of theistic argument this refutes itself. To extrapolate your point further - 1. God is infinitely powerful Vs 2. God is powerful enough. Using Ockham's Razor which one do you choose? As per Con for further reading - 'The God of the Bible is supposed to be omnipotent (all powerful). An all powerful God can do anything. This creates an inherent paradox. For example, can God create a stone He can't lift. If he can't create the stone, he is not omnipotent. If He can create the stone, he won't be able to lift it, and is not omnipotent. The idea of omnipotence is impossible, therefore God is impossible. ' Omniscient Bravo to Con for trying to be dastardly :P You concede in this point that God would know he can ruin himself. Thanks. Con's point refuted, my argument still stands. As per Con for further reading - 'The God of the Bible is said to have free will and be all knowing. An all knowing God would know the future. This would mean he would know His own future actions. Because he knows His actions, they are determined and He can't change them. So he is a slave bound by His own omniscience. '