The Abrahamic God is supported by Scientific Proof

I would like to use the opportunity to remind the opponent that the BoP lays solely on him. With this said, this round will be half-dedicated to rebuttals and half-construction of my unfinished arguments, mainly the arguments relating to “evolutionary psychology” and the dualist-monist controversy. 3R1RFC: Yom The opponent has stated that Yom can either mean 24 hours or 1 million years. However, there are two objections I would like to raise. One relates to the version of the Bible that I have used, and the other relates to the concept of the Hebrew word of Yom. Case A: The Geneva Bible is perhaps one of the most widely read and widely acclaimed version of the Bible ever Put together in 1599 by a team of Protestant scholars, it is possibly the most accurate translation and definitely the most important translation of the Bible into modern-day English. In order to understand the accuracies of this version of the Bible, we must understand the process of compiling and creating this version of the Bible. The Geneva Bible was translated from a Koine Greek Manuscript of the New Testament, presumably retrieved after the fall of Constantinople and a Hebrew version of the Old Testament. The scholars which translated the Geneva Bible were possibly the most intellectual wit in the protestant world; some of these names included William Whittingham, an English scholar who fled persecution in England, and Thomas Sampson. Whittingham was educated at Oxford University, a University known for its Hebrew and Jewish studies institute which goes on until today. It is therefore highly unlikely for the scholars, whose knowledge of the Hebrew language exceeds many people, to commit a metaphorical error. Perhaps that is not enough to convince many that “yom” in this case referred to days. Case B: Prose and Poetry As stated before, Whittingham understood the Hebrew language well. Well understanding of the Hebrew language naturally leads to alignment of all words in context with the appropriate situation. What do I mean by this? Genesis 1:1 to 2:4 is written in prose form. Hebrew poetry reflects the heavy usages of “parallelism” to the core. If it were written as a poem, then perhaps “yom” could be taken metaphorically. However, Psalm 78 was written as a poem, yet it literally describes the history of Israel from Exodus to David. Nevertheless, take this following picture into account: If this was written as a poem, then Genesis 1:5 and 1:8 should be repetitive, as all Hebrew poems are written in that form; this form is called parallelism. Apart from this, the verbal ratio of a normal Hebrew Narrative is different from a normal Hebrew poetic phrase. There are four forms of finite verbs in Biblical Hebrew; in historical narratives, one is generally dominant. Steven Boyd, a Biblical Hebrew language expert, then goes on to conclude that the Hebrew word “yom” is in this case used literally, not metaphorically, as Genesis 1:5 to 2:2 are written in prose form. Extension of Case B (Subcase A): Context! Apart from the prose-poem case, the context case must also be used. The word “yom” is used in Genesis 1:1 to 2:4 to denote the following periods of time: “Daylight” as opposed to “Night” The conventional 24-hour day Used as a compound and now means “when” However, it does not mention “yom” to mean periods of 1-2 years or even an indefinite period of time. Laying out this case into a syllogism, we can conclude that: Case A P1. The Geneva Bible was compiled by people with superb understanding of Hebrew P2. With a superb understanding of Hebrew, the context of Genesis is unlikely to be misunderstood by these scholars C1. It is highly unlikely that the word “yom” is misunderstood Case B P1. There is virtually no room for metaphors/similes to be used in prose P2. Genesis 1:1 to 2:4 was written in prose form C2. The word “yom” was definitely not a metaphor TURNING C1 AND C2 AS A PREMISE, WE CAN COME TO A FINAL CONCLUSION THAT: C1. Since the scholars who compiled the Geneva Bible had superb understanding of Hebrew, the probably to the context into account. C2. Genesis was wholly written in prose form, which presents virtually no room for metaphorical analysis FC. The word “yom” was clearly meant in a literal sense. 3R2RFC: FALLACIES? These accusations are false; a fallacy is illogical reasoning. Unless the opponent can claim that I have committed a formal logical fallacy, then he cannot say that I committed a logical fallacy easily. Apart from that, the opponent has committed another fallacy; this one (albeit informal) is called faulty generalization. Because someone has experienced the feeling of God, doesn’t mean God exists. I can sense that the Ghost of My Dog is in my house, but without scientific evidence, then that is impossible. If the opponent is unable to provide quantifiable proof, not just qualifiable proof, that he has experienced such phenomena, then how are we, the audience, suppose to trust that claim? 3R3RFC: “GLOBAL OR LOCAL” Firstly, let us be rational about this; if the flood was local, then Noah and his animals could have easily escaped by immigrating north or south or wherever! Secondly, an ark wouldn’t have been needed in an event of a local flood because, as explained above, Noah could have easily migrated somewhere else. Lastly, the case of a Grand Canyon existing in order to drain the flood water that was given is still absent, unless the opponent wants to make a bold statement and say that Noah lived in the “New World” as we know it. Secondly, let us look at the linguistics of the Biblical Verses that Described the Floods; although previously I have stated that certain parts of Genesis were poems, I would like to now make this bold statement; Genesis is wholly written in prose form. Why do I say this? Firstly, the form of many Hebrew Narrative Sentences is: Conjunction-Verb-Subject-Object We may observe that many, or almost all of the verses in Genesis start with the word “and” and then either the verb or a noun, like “God” This is the normal form of almost all of the verses in Genesis. We can then premise that the Genesis was supposedly supposed to be a literal description of human history accordingly to Christian thoughts. With Noah’s Flood within the reaches of Genesis, then it would be rational to conclude that the Biblical verses were meant to be literally interpreted by readers; the account of Noah’s Flood stated worldwide, and even this verse is written in the CVSO form. Therefore, we can conclude that the accounts for Noah’s flood were global, not local. [3] 3R1NC: A Build On to Dualism-Monism Arguments from Neurology: P1. All decisions are validated and enacted by neurons in our bodies P2. If the mind is a separate entity from the bodies, then these neurons do not move P4. These neurons do move C. The mind and the body are united Neurons are substances in the body that contain a certain electrical charge, which is enacted in order for humans to understand the orders of the brain. These neurons transmit information from the brain to the body via a certain electrical and chemical charge. There are special types of neurons, ranging from sensory neurons to muscular neurons, which put feeling into all the body. Neuron is the substance that keeps my typing right now. Neuron is what unites your brain with your body. Then why is the discovery of neurons so vital in disproving the dualist argument? Because in Dualism, the mind must be able to make and enact decisions on its own; it must not need the help of neurons. However, the discovery of neurons by Spanish Neuroloanatomist Ramon y Cajal has led to the conclusion that the brain and the body are inherently united. [2] 3R2NC: Evolutionary Psychology and “Is God an Illusion? ” P1. All human minds were designed to find design into chaos in order to impose a myth upon reality P2. There is a plethora of evidence that God is a made up story to impose design on the random C. Humans created God as a myth on reality Humans need a story to survive. Humans need a meaning of life to live by, or else life would be pointless. It is not until the material progress that the 18th and 19th century has bought us that the refutation of all findings of the “meaning of life” was developed into a doctrine, formally called nihilism. This is because humans were born not blank, but with the belief that all things on life are purposeful, an Aristotelian view. Defending Major Premise: These fantasies gradually develop during the pre-adolescent stage. In his book, Why Would Anyone Believe in God? Justin Barrett cited the part of the brain called the HADD as the center for the belief of God. “For it is,” according to Justin Barrett “better to avoid an imaginary predator than being caught by a real one. ” Stephan Jay Gould also stated that humans were forced to deal with the concept of mortality because of human consciousness, and religion may have been a solution to the concept. [1] Defending Minor Premise: Even in such abstract concepts, such as God and deities, it is completely necessary for humans to connect with themselves; an experiment showed that humans still believed that God was an anthropomorphic figure, even when many theological doctrines oppose this. If God were real, then one God would exist and be universally acknowledged by all religions. Even now, humans still have yet to come to a consensus about God and the concept. If humans can’t come up with a consensus, then each man has his own “little story” about His existence. [1] Freud's theory is that the ego deals with reality. The HADD is part of the ego in Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory. It is used to compromise the superego and id. Conclusion: GOD IS AN ILLUSION The resolution is negated[1] . http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] . http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] . http://www.ldolphin.org...