The Existence Of Everything Including Life Is Unavailing WIthout God

I will begin with some definitions and clarifications, followed by rebuttals to that which he has already stated, and will close with additional arguments. Clarifications Since my opponent is Pro, he needs to show, beyond doubt, that "The Existence Of Everything Including Life Is Unavailing without God. " On the flip side, I will negate the resolution by showing that a belief or concept of God is not necessary. By God, I am assuming Pro means the Christian-Judea concept of the Abrahamic creator God and will form my initial rebuttals and arguments to that. DefinitionsExistence: reality as presented in experience. [1][1] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...Life: the ability to grow, change, etc. , that separates plants and animals from things like water or rocks; the period of time when a person is alive; the experience of being alive. [2][2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...Unavailing: not useful or successful. [3] [3] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...ArgumentsI. Is there even a God? Pro started this debate under the assumption that there is actually a God. Normally, I wouldn't place the burden on someone to prove God's existence, but based on the fact that his entire resolution is based on God's existence, in order to affirm it he first needs to prove that God exists. The difference between believing in a God, and actually stating that he exists, are found in "knowledge". If someone affirms that God exists, he must have knowledge of such an existence. If my opponent merely "believes" that God exists, then he has absolutely no grounds whatsoever to claim that everything in existence and life is unavailing without God's existence. I look forward to seeing Pro prove the existence of God. If he cannot do so, then he fundamentally fails to affirm the resolution he's presented based on the fact that he is literally saying life is useless or unsuccessful without one. II. There are many people who live useful and successful lives without accepting the existence of a God. According to a Pew research study done in 2012, there are currently more than 13 million atheists and agnostics, as well as nearly 33 million people who claim no religious affiliation whatsoever. [4] [4] . http://www.pewforum.org...I, for one, do not feel comfortable assuming that nearly 46 million Americans lead useless or unsuccessful lives even though the don't acknowledge the existence of God. It's a very foolish position to take, and is currently the position Pro is trying to argue for. This is where Pro's burden comes into play. Now that I've presented numbers from a well-respected organization, my opponent has the burden of showing just how each of these 46 million Americans necessarily lead unsuccessful or useless lives. Let's also keep in mind that this number only represents Americans. .. if we included everyone else in the world, the burden on my opponent would be even greater. For example, Stephen Hawking is an atheist, and yet he is very successful and has lived a very useful life! Not just for himself either, but actually the entire world has benefited from his scientific discoveries which led to him receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom among countless other awards. [5][5] . http://en.wikipedia.org...There are literally countless atheists and agnostics who lead successful and useful lives, for the sake of space, I'll simply share a compilation of 25 of them, all of whom are highly distinguished, successful and have provided the world with useful accomplishments. List of 25: . http://www.superscholar.org... III. Existence of everything (else)I can't believe my opponent is actually saying the "existence of everything". As far as I know, the only creatures capable of even holding the complex idea of a God concept are humans. Thus, literally nothing else even depends on such an existence. I do not see rocks committing suicide because there is no God. It's just absurd to even think about. Furthermore, I don't think that non-human beings can really be deemed successful or useful except under subjective human values that we place on such things. Like, a dog isn't successful because he is a dog, but rather because he won a local dog race and was thus successful in winning a race. Useful would be more appropriate, and I'd argue that many non-human creatures and objects could be deemed useful without a dependence on a god. My car is useful, for instance, when I need to get to school. My car does not depend on the existence of acknowledgment of a god. Rather, it depends on use by it's owner, and creation in a manufacturing plant born from the ingenuity of mankind. RebuttalsIV. Without God (a necessary being) the strive to survive in life is only avoiding the inevitable (Death) and is unavailingI feel my opponent fails to realize that the strive to survive in life is always avoiding death (unless someone desires suicide, in which case they embrace death). God doesn't need to be there for this to be known, and on the flip side, even if God is in the picture we are still striving to avoid death. I don't see Christians committing suicide to join God quicker. Everyone avoids death as much as they can. God/no-god plays absolutely no role in this either way. No-one is successful in avoiding death - so ultimately, it can also be argued that your resolution is a contradictory statement since there is no possible way of being successful in the attempt to avoid death. While literally everyone is unsuccessful in avoiding death - that doesn't mean they didn't live a successful or useful life though. This is Pro's largest error, the fact that he believes that without God no-one can have a successful or useful life before death. V. why continue to surviveSome people might subscribe to Buddhist tenets and in that case don't wish to live a life so they can go to Heaven. Instead, they might desire to be reborn as something else, and would live their life according to that desire - thus they have meaning and purpose in their life without the need for a God or Heaven. Another person might live their life meaningfully through their children or spouse. The belief that God is the only thing that gives meaning to life is incredible short-sighted and not something that is held by every living person in this world. Christians are a minority, keep that in mind, and then re-consider that the majority is living meaningful lives without following the minority religion of Christianity. VI. Unitarian UniversalismNot every Unitarian universalist is a theist. The theology of individual Unitarian Universalists ranges widely, including Humanism, Atheism, Agnosticism, Pantheism, Deism, Christianity, Judaism, Neopaganism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and many more. [6] [6] . http://en.wikipedia.org...