In regards to possibilities for the creation of the universe, Deism logically precedes Theism.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IntroductionI would like to begin by restating the precise question that is being debated. This question being; “In regards to possibilities for the creation of the universe, Deism logically precedes Theism. ” Being the affirmative, I must obviously demonstrate that this is the case. Point One Firstly, I would like to emphasize that the broad range of possibilities mentioned in the resolution can be classified under two categories, namely; Natural, or Supernatural. Natural – Occurs within the laws of the universe. Supernatural – Exists outside of these laws, and indeed, despite them. This categorization leads into my main point, which shall take the form of a logical progression. 1. We have established the need for a cause, namely for the big bang theory. 2. Any proposed cause shall come under one of the two aforementioned categories. For the purposes of the resolution, we are moving forward with the assumption that the cause is supernatural by nature. 3. As, for arguments sake, we have proceeded with the assumption that a supernatural force/entity is subsequently responsible for the creation of the universe, we have now arrived at deism. 4. We shall now ascribe the supernatural force responsible for the creation of the universe with the traits associated with a ‘personal’ god. These may include, but are of course not limited to; an entity which cares about our sex lives, an entity that cares about what we eat, an entity that cares about what we say and believe, and in general an entity that concerns himself with the affairs of human life. This is the overlying concept of theism, and is what differentiates it from deism. I would draw your attention to the resolution at hand, which states that “deism logically precedes theism”. It is clear that, following the logical progression that gives us grounds to present possibilities for the creation of the universe, deism presents itself at step three. Another step, one that derives from deism, is required in order to reach theism. This takes the form of step four. It therefore resoundingly obvious that 'deism logically precedes theism'. Point Two I would remind everyone that my opponent’s assertion includes the phrase “that Deism and Theism are equally basic possibilities”. This is obviously not the case. The affirmative position of that statement indicates something along the lines of; 1. We need a cause for the creation of the universe. 2. This cause could be a supernatural force or entity. 3a. This force or entity is personal, cares about the actions of humanity, and suspends natural laws with the purpose of intervening in humanities affairs. 3b. This force or entity is impersonal, does not cares about the actions of humanity, and does not suspend natural laws with the purpose of intervening in human affairs. This is obviously fallacious, as it ignores the crucial step of ascribing the entity or force with the characteristics of a personal god, which would produce theism. It also ignores the fact that an impersonal god is inherently the default position, and as such logically precedes any alternative.