God Exists And Is Both Omnipotent And Omnibenevolent

Ok, now that was a coherent argument...thank you Pro. So Pro is claiming that the order of the universe is god, and that this order is omnipotent and omnibenevolent.Plus, Pro is claiming that the laws of the universe are also god, and I assume that they are somehow omnipotent and omnibenevolent as well.Pro says:"In Con's definitions in Round 1, there are no restrictions on the creation or death of God."My Response:Yeah, I know. However, we're not arguing the creation or death of god, rather we are arguing whether or not your god qualifies under the mutually agreed definitions of a god in this debate.In this debate, by definition, god is the creator of the universe.So if your god was created after the universe, then your god did not fulfill the qualifications for god in this debate. If Pro did not like the definitions of the debate, Pro had the opportunity to change the definitions, before the debate, in the comments section, and did not.God, in this debate, is the creator of the universe, and if Pro has already said that Pro's god did not create the universe, then we're no longer talking about god in this debate. Pro admits:"The big bang event resulted in order."My Response:If order is the result, then order is not the creator.Pro posits:"What are those "quantum fluctuations" are they measurable or just theory?"My Response:Measurable.http://physics.aps.org...When you remove matter/energy/radiation/wavelengths/atoms/particles with a vacuum, you're left with nothing, but the empty space still has a ubiquitous faint physical field...still nothing.The field is made of quantum fluctuations.To me, quantum fluctuations are what nothing is. This nothing state is unstable, so the expression of energy is inevitable.Quantum fluctuations are sub-nuclear incomplete particles and antiparticles that pop into existence and are simultaneously annihilated by each other. The forces between these particles fluctuate in and out of existence alongside the sub-nuclear particles.Also, the WMAP, which is a spacecraft with a probe that measures the microwave background radiation, has given us detailed radio images of quantum fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background radiation (the proof of the big bang).The images show small thermal variations in the otherwise uniform microwave background radiation.These variations have been measured in detail, and match what would be expected if small thermal variations, expressed from quantum fluctuations, had expanded to the size of the observable universe we see today.http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov... http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov...The current model of the big bang shows order of stars, Pro's example of god's work, about 400 million years after the big bang. Prior to that, particles had gone through annihilation, extreme temperatures, unstable fluctuations, and rapid inflation, which all indicate disorder, or entropy.If Pro wishes to use the "prism of science" to relabel understood natural laws as "god" then Pro needs to account for all of the disorder in the universe from beginning to now. Disorder, entropy, is the negation of Pro's god. Pro also needs to deal with the fact that entropy means disorder in thermal systems.One of the "parts" of Pro's god is scientific laws.Well, the 2nd law of thermodynamics is quite clear.The disorder, entropy, of all closed systems will remain the same or increase ALWAYS.Therefore order is not as powerful as disorder thanks to the second law of thermodynamics. Order is not omnipotent.Pro asks:"Can Con elaborate on the "uncertainty principle" when measuring at the "quantum" level?"My Response:Yeah. The uncertainty principle is:That the certainty of a particle's position is reduced when you determine the particle's movement.Also, the converse is true, the certainty of a particle's movement is reduced when you determine the particle's position.So, by measuring how a particle moves, we sacrifice our knowledge of its position.Imagine we had a large sealed box and we sent photons (light particles) in some direction inside of the box.In this large box, there is substantial space to determine a photon's movement, but determining its position is less certain.Now imagine we had a much smaller sealed box and we sent photons in some direction inside of the box.In this much smaller box, there is less space to determine a photon's movement, but determining its position is more certain.Measuring this principle on the quantum level requires a patterned silicon nanobeam that supports both localized mechanical and optical resonances. By using this device, we can detect the quantum nature of a photon's position fluctuations.http://physics.aps.org...So it would seem that a nanobeam is an example of metrology's maturity with respect to measuring quantum fluctuations.Pro assumes some more:"Without “gravity” not one star could form to create life. Therefore, “gravity” is part of my God and “gravity” is omnipotent.” My Response:Without gravity, not one star could be destroyed to create disorder.Gravity is not omnipotent.Watch a man made space ship exit earth's gravity. How can that be? Gravity is omnipotent!Nope, the thrust created by the rocket ship is more powerful than earth's gravity.Also, take a magnet and hang something on your fridge..how is it that the object can resist the omnipotent gravity of earth?Because magnetism is more powerful than earth's gravity...but I'm sure Pro will claim that magnetism too is his god and is omnipotent.Pro fails to realize that by calling laws of nature omnipotent is a contradiction.Laws of nature allow for more and less powerful things, so, as a whole, laws themselves cannot be omnipotent.I apologize for this debate being in the science category...it was originally a debate about the universe's origins, and so I put it in the science category, but the person for whom the debate was designed declined my debate request.So I edited the old debate, and made the resolution a little more interesting and...I forgot to change the category.My bad.To conclude:We have measurable evidence that the universe began from quantum fluctuations at the big bang, and Pro has claimed that his god came into existence way after that, so his god is not the creator of the universe per the definitions of this debate...Pro's god is not god in this debate.Also, in quantum fluctuations, before matter + gravity were expressed, there were no laws. Instead the laws themselves fluctuate in and out of quantum fluctuations, and aren't actually laws until the universe exists. So laws do not precede the universe. Sorry Pro's god.Pro's god is order in the universe, and, thanks to entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics (one of Pro's gods), all closed systems (any star without an external source of energy, like our sun) in the universe will eventually end in disorder.Order is therefore not omnipotent because disorder is much more powerful. Also magnetism is more powerful than earth's gravity.Omnibenevolence means that something is INFINITELY good/moral.Infinite morality/goodness has not been demonstrated by Pro's god, especially since lots of natural order leads to death, suffering, and extinct species. I reject the claim that Pro's god exists, is omnipotent, and is omnibenevolent...not a creator, not all powerful, not all good.