These Arguments Against the God of Christianity Are Valid - 1C.

Also, I want to say that I agree with my opponent's sentiments: omnipotence does not mean God can do logically impossible things. =====Counterarguments===== 1. Argument from Evil >>>You can sweep this problem under the rug entirely by saying its impossible to psychoanalyze God; you can't exactly sit him down on the couch and ask him about his mother. <<< ---->Which would then mean a Christian can't say God would want for humans to have free will, thus neutralizing their argument. So yes, gladly, you didn't argue this. 1A. Free Will. My opponent's argument for justifying free will is, quite simply, not justification at all. He first proceeds to demonstrate that we are inferior versions of God - we have morality, power, and knowledge. However, he just because we can be nice to people, learn about the truth of things, and have technology as our tool of power doesn't mean we are some bastardized version of God. We eat to survive and have sex for reproduction and pleasure - does God do the same then? My opponent arbitrarily chooses traits and qualities of humans that God conveniently shares, and then tries to conclude that God must have bestowed upon us these qualities. Secondly, even if it was true that God bestowed upon us a "lite" version of his qualities, my opponent has yet to justify why God prefer for us to have free will rather than NOT. To simply say that he gave it to us because he wanted to would be saying God is irrational - which I doubt you are claiming. If we perceive God to be rational, then we must conclude that if he existed and gave us free will, he would have a good reason to. In fact, his desire for us to have free will would OVERRULE the existence of potential evil that springs from free will. My opponent hasn't stated what this is, or what this could be, so until then my argument stands. 1B. Natural Evils >>>Presumably, God gave us the ability to feel pain for a reason, so short of pumping endorphins into our brains 24 hours a day, there would always be room for God to eliminate the "worst" suffering. <<< My opponent fails to give the reason for why God would want us to experience these worst of natural disasters. My opponent has stated before that it is possible the universe could have been created with an ultimate formula which excluded natural disasters. I agree with this. Unless my opponent can show how it's logically impossible for God to create a universe without natural disasters, then we can move on from this. My opponent hasn't shown why God would want us to suffer from these natural disasters. Many times, Christians would justify suffering by saying it helps us in the long run, it's a test, etc. However, what possible benefit can you gain from getting killed in a tornado? What possible benefit does a baby get from contracting a fatal virus only 3 months after it's birth? There could be benefits for the parents (they grow stronger in Christ, etc. ) but not for the BABY or whatever person is the victim in this situation. Hilariously, my opponent states that the suffering on this world does not compare to eternal life. True, but does this mean God can make us suffer with no good reason? That's like me saying I can rape you and tell you heaven will be eternal - so just suck it up. DANG, if this was true I'd be having a hay day with Christian girls. Seriously, just because infinity is longer than our time on Earth, doesn't mean unnecessary suffering is moral. UNLESS, my opponent can rationalize the existence of natural evils, which he has YET to do. 2. Argument from Non-Belief The analogy of the teacher, and for most real life counterparts, is erroneous. The point of teaching is to inform and educate children. If a teacher were to easily give you passing scores, then it ruins the point of teaching all together (unless you are a fabulous teacher who hates tests). My opponent essentially uses the Free Will Defense (FWD), which is quite common and I'm not surprised. However, I will give several rebuttals to this defense: A. Revealing knowledge to someone does not hinder their free will. Otherwise, our free will would supposedly be "violated" every single day. In fact, wouldn't it be part of our will to have our beliefs confirmed or for truth to be revealed? B. Many occurrences in the Bible show that free will doesn't seem to be a major thing. For example, Jesus doing miracles. In the Bible this has happened many times, with the result of many people coming to believe in him. So what now?