The God of classical theism is real.

Let me begin by thanking my opponent for his willingness to put his beliefs on the line. However, twsurber, I would like you to appreciate how odd it is that you must cling to spurious ‘mysteries' and circular arguments in order to keep yourself from tumbling into unbelief. Before I launch into my main arguments in this essay, allow me to make one minor digression. It isn't directly related to the resolution, but it is an interesting diversion nonetheless. ::Do we have the freedom to choose our beliefs ?:: My antagonist has alluded to the notion that people have the freedom to choose their beliefs. However, such a freedom is simply non-existent or incredibly negligible if it does exist. Simply put, people don't have direct control over their own beliefs anymore than they have control over their genetic makeup. This may sound like a rather odd claim, but hear me out. If you believe that humans can choose their beliefs, then you must do the following. Convince yourself that you are at the beach right now. As you are reading this, convince yourself that you are actually on a beach in Malibu. Can you do it? I didn't think so. Of course, you can pretend you're at the beach, but in order to believe you are at the beach you must be convinced that you aren't simply trying to delude yourself. If humans even have any freedom to choose their beliefs, then this freedom is almost certainly minimal. Surely, people cannot believe in propositions that they take to be untrue. =====> Why I Am Still Not A Christian <===== Contention 1: The Evidential Argument From Evil Unfortunately, the primary claims of my argument have gone uncontested. In this section I have argued that the assumption that a benevolent God does not exist is a much better and far more reasonable fit for the data than the proposition that such a being exists. In fact, the evidence of nature's indifference to life on Earth surrounds us. To take just one more example, every year approximately 15,000,000 children die of hunger. [1] That averages out to about 41,095 deaths each day, 1,712 each hour, and 28 each minute. God's ways are, indeed, unfathomable. On a side note, the evidence of the Earth's antiquity is abundant and conclusive. Over the past hundred years, scientists have measured the age of the Earth through dozens of different methods, including radiometric dating, and those methods all point to the approximate age of 4.6 billion years. [2] The notion that the Earth is young is equally as preposterous as the belief that the Earth is flat. It is simply an accident of history that a belief in a young Earth is not synonymous with mental illness. That is, in essence, how detached such a proposition is from the facts. Had Christianity not become ascendant, we would be treating people who believe the Earth is young in the same way we treat people who believe they are in contact with extra terrestrials from an alternate dimension. Contention 2: The Argument From Divine Hiddenness For quick reference, I have put up the argument one last time. 1. If God exists, God: (a) wants all humans to believe God exists before they die; (b) can bring about a situation in which all humans believe God exists before they die; (c) does not want anything that would conflict with and be at least as important as its desire for all humans to believe God exists before they die; and (d) always acts in accordance with what it most wants. 2. If God exists, all humans would believe so before they die. (From 1) 3. But not all humans believe God exists before they die. .: Therefore, God does not exist. (From 2 and 3) I must admit to being genuinely frustrated at this point. My opponent's response to the argument isn't rooted in any kind of logic. "2. Nonconcur. According to Scripture, God does exist. According to Scripture, humans have the free will to choose." -twsurber The argument doesn't have anything to do with free will. If God exists and wants all humans to believe this before they die he could appear before the world in order to demonstrate his existence. According to the Bible itself, God did this with Moses on Mt Sinai and he also revealed himself to other people through Jesus. So, even from a biblical perspective, God could bring about a situation whereby everyone believed in him without compromising their free will. ".: Nonconcur. According to Scripture, God exists." -twsurber Appeals to authority are not a rational basis to reject the conclusion of a syllogism. As of this point, the argument remains completely intact. Contention 3: The Ultimate Boeing 747 Gambit My opponent has conceded this argument in my favor by failing to respond to it twice in a row. Simply accusing an argument of being without merit is not a rational objection to any argument. =====> ‘Why I Am A Christian' - twsurber <===== Contention 1: ‘The Bible Proves God Exists' "My single contention is thus: I accept that the Bible is absolute truth. The Bible verifies God's existence. If the Bible is rejected by any human being, then that human being is also rejecting the existence of God." I appreciate the thoughtfulness behind my opponent's beautifully circular argument. However, I don't find it compelling, and I don't think the voters should find it compelling either. ::Conclusion:: I've given three powerful arguments that demonstrate that God probably doesn't exist. Unfortunately, my antagonist hasn't given a serious objection to any of them. Every single issue my opponent has with my arguments is either scientifically or philosophically lacking. Moreover, the only argument he did give in favor of God's existence is patently fallacious. Quite obviously, the motion has been defeated. ::References:: 1. http://library.thinkquest.org... 2. http://www.talkorigins.org...