It is improbable that God exists

I always wanted to debate you and it is a pleasure to finally get to do so. PART 1: A CASE FOR WEAK ATHEISM In part 1, I am going to be making a case for weak atheism; namely, it is a lack of belief in the existence of any gods. This differs from strong atheism because strong atheists assert that no gods, or just a particular god, do not exist. (Matthew) Contention 1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence Undoubtedly my opponent has heard this statement before. It is beyond all reasonable doubt that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In summary, it is this in syllogism form: 1. If a claim is extraordinary, then in the absence of extraordinarily strong evidence in its favor, the claim may be considered false. 2. The claim that a god exists is an extraordinary claim. 3. Therefore, in the absence of extraordinarily strong evidence in its favor, the claim that a god exists may be considered false. 4. There is no extraordinarily strong evidence for the claim that a god exists. 5. Therefore, the claim that a god exists may be considered false. [1] (Krueger) As defined by Krueger, an extraordinary claim is a claim that contradicts accepted physical laws or our common sense, everyday experiences of the world. (Ibid) First of all, this is not to say that miraculous events cannot happen nor is this saying that God cannot exist. Rather, it is saying that in the absence of evidence for God’s existence, the claim that God exists should be taken as false. In other words, atheism is the default position. Why do I say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Consider the following statements: 1. I ate a hotdog for lunch. 2. I am an owner of a multimillion dollar mansion 3. God spoke to me last night and called me to be his prophet. In those three statements, which are you least likely to believe without evidence? Surely, it would be claim number 3. Why? Because I have provided zero evidence that God spoke to me last night and called me to be his prophet. Consequently, you would be rational to reject such a claim—especially if it requires you to change your entire worldview and change how you live. Why is God’s existence extraordinary? Because it is a claim about a being who is vastly different from any known human or animal with regards to power or intelligence. It is a being that is all-powerful; knows everything (even the words I’m typing on this page and the words you are reading now); and a being who exists outside of time, space, and the natural realm; yet, at the same time, can co-exist within that realm and interact with it. As such, we should demand extraordinarily strong evidence before believing that Theism, as defined in round 1, is true. So, is there strong evidence for God’s existence? I will refute my opponent’s arguments and will demonstrate that there is no evidence for God’s existence. For point in blank, many Christian Theists have held that there was not enough evidence for God’s existence. As Dr. James Dobson states: "[F]aith ranks at the top of God's system of priorities. .. . This determination to believe when the proof is not provided and when the questions are not answered is central to our relationship with the Lord. He will never do anything to destroy the need for faith. " (Dobson) PART 2: A CASE FOR STRONG ATHEISM I am a strong atheist. I do not believe that any gods or supernatural beings exist. The next two arguments will layout my case as to why I can say that rather confidently. Contention 2: God is Incoherent This argument shows that God cannot exist because his attributes are self-contradictory in the same way that a square circle cannot exist because it is contradictory. 1. Anything with contradictory properties cannot exist. 2. God has contradictory properties. 3. Therefore, God cannot exist. Remember, the God that I defined in the opening round was that of a Judeo-Christian type God. As such, this extends to ALL attributes of the Judeo-Christian God. As defined by the Catholic Almanac, 1968, God is: [A]lmighty, eternal, holy, immortal, immense, immutable, incomprehensible, ineffable, infinite, invisible, just, loving, merciful, most high, most wise, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, patient, perfect, provident, supreme, true. (Smith) At least two of the above attributes are contradictory; namely, incomprehensible and ineffable. How can God’s nature be known if God cannot be neither understood nor described? So, in syllogism form: 1. God is ineffable 2. God is incomprehensible. 3. Therefore, he cannot be described nor understood. 4. Yet there are many known attributes of God. 5. Therefore, God can and cannot be described/understood. This is clearly incoherence. I rest my case. [1] This was from a formal debate that originally took place on the FRDB discussion board. Douglas E. Krueger, the member defending atheism, used the syllogism that I used in this debate. Bibliography Dobson, James. When God Doesn't Make Sense. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1993. 20 June 2012. <Quoted on . http://www.infidels.org...;. Krueger, Doug. The Krueger-McHugh Debate: Theism or Atheism. 2003. Document. 20 June 2012. <. http://www.infidels.org...;. Matthew. An Introduction to Atheism. 1997. Document. 20 June 2012. <. http://www.infidels.org...; Smith, George H. Atheism: The Case Against God. Los Angeles: Nash, 1974. Web. 20 June 2012. <Quoted on . http://rejectionofpascalswager.net...;.