I am not your god

========== Burden of Proof ========== Pro dropped this argument entirely. He thus concedes that he has the burden of proof in showing that he is not my god. While those 6 criteria I listed might be necessary for me to consider him a supreme deity, he still must prove that he does not meet the other definitions of god. He hasn't: • Proven that he doesn't "control some part of the world or some aspect of life" • Proven that he is not "the personification of a force" • Proven that he is not "a material effigy that is worshipped" • Proven that his is not "a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people" [1] He conceded that he had the burden of proof. He never once proved that he doesn't meet one of these, thus you negate. ======= Contention ======= My opponent still hasn't proven that he is not considered by me to be a supreme being, either. Remember, he must meet 3 of the 6 criteria to be considered a deity worthy of worship by me. 1. Humility Pro simply can't help it. He's just too humble for his own good. He just furthers my point by pointing out: "I do feel that I am not superior to everyone on the planet" "everyone has their own strong points, and their own weak points" "there are people more powerful then me and smarter then me" "I could be just being humble about my humbility" <-- That's doubly humble! --- 2. Subservience to any divine power "I am not subservient to any other divine power" "I believe no other divine power exists" <-- Notice: He says 'other.' He wouldn't if he didn't consider himself a divine power. --- 3. Benevolence He has agreed that he is not malevolent, but argued that this does not necessarily make him benevolent. I agree. However, he has proactively shown his benevolence throughout this debate. While he is clearly god, omnipotent and omniscient, he has argued at the level of a mere mortal so as to give me a chance to defeat him. That is not only an act of great humility but also of great benevolence. --- 4. I was created in his image. "But without proof of my own age being greater than his, I say that if we are both males in our sophomore years in high school that I may have instead been created in his image." Wrong, if you would look at our profiles, Mine: http://www.debate.org... God's: http://www.debate.org... You will note that I am only 15 (I will be 16 next June) whereas god is clearly 16 already. --- 5. Unconditional Love My opponent tries to argue that his profile does not show love for everyone, ismply those of a gender. This is not a shortcoming of His Holiness, merely one of our fallible website. I would direct you, voter, to try to edit the 'interested in' section of your profile. You will notice that there is a box marked 'men,' and a box marked 'women.' There is no box for 'ungendered' or 'neither.' One may check neither, either, or both of these 2 boxes, but they cannot express their love for those without a gender on this website. It is clear that ChaosFlame was expressing his unconditional love to the greatest extent possible, by checking every available box. I assure you, voter, that, given the opportunity, he would check the 'ungendered' box also, so as to further show his unconditional love. --- 6. He dwells in the souls of his believers. "I concede this point." Thus, he meets all 6 of my criteria. I expected no less from such a powerful deity such as Pro. In conclusion, I would like to thank Pro for debating at the level of a mere mortal such as myself to allow me the chance to win, and I urge all voters to vote CON. [1] http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...