Christianity is an Irrational Religion

I accept. I thank my opponent for offering this topic for debate and I welcome a solid exchange. I agree with the outline he has provided and I accept the definition of "irrational" offered. Christianity – Due to the size of this religion, I will focus on the belief in the existence of the Christian God, who is omnipotent and omnipresent. This God created the universe and everything in it (Genesis, do I really need a link here?). This God is depicted in the Judeo-Christian Bible (although I do not find exclusion of many books to be proper, I will try to focus on the canonical books if need be, but others can be relevant). This same God, through a miracle, brought his son into the world via a virgin birth and this son was named Jesus (New Testament, I'm sure my opponent has access to one). Jesus was executed via crucifixion (Ibid). After said event, Jesus rose from the dead and "who so ever believes in him …." (Ibid) and Christians are eagerly awaiting his return to earth to take them to heaven before all hell breaks loose. Short, sweet, and to the point. Pardon my brevity and crassness, but we both know what we are talking about in respect to Christianity. Rationality – "n philosophy, rationality is the exercise of reason, a key method used to analyze the data gained through systematically conducted observations." http://en.wikipedia.org... If my opponent wishes to add anything to Christianity (the Trinity, young earth creationism, Mormonism, etc) then I ask that he do so in his 2nd round response so I can reply. Stipulation 1: I don't care which sky daddy/daddies, mammas anyone worships, and I don't ask. For the purposes of this debate, my opponent can assume what he wishes about my religious leanings. My beliefs are not relevant and I am not overly concerned about my opponent's beliefs either. Contentions Offered: Per my opponent's request, I offer these contentions supporting my Pro position: Christianity is not a rational religion. Contention One: The Christian God, per definition, must exist outside the natural realm (If he created the natural realm then this statement must be true, or we are not talking about the Christian God). Because he exists outside of the natural realm, he must be accepted by faith. This faith is not contingent on observation, experimentation, or testability. Accepting the existence of a non-testable, unobservable, unfalsifiable being is not rational since rational inquiry (see above definition) involves data (material evidence) based on systematic observations. By definition, belief in the Christian God is irrational. Contention Two: Because the acknowledgement of the existence of this being is irrational, then Christianity, based on this irrational belief, must also be irrational. Contention Three: In order to believe the son of this being existed, one must accept: 1.A supernatural being impregnated a human female. 2.The human/god, resulting from the birth, must have died and must have been reborn in a physical sense. Neither of these two events can be verified, and by their miraculous nature, neither is subject to known laws so no inductive reasoning can apply. I cannot formulate a model to test these events. Only through faith can these events be accepted; faith, not based on systematic observation or reasoning, just simple "because I believe it". Such a position, whether right, wrong, true, false must still be irrational. Contention Four: Humans are born with sin, period, according to the Christian religion. Before they make their first sound, they are sinners. These humans are "without excuse" in reference to God. No matter their age, upbringing, etc. all humans are subject to punishment for not believing in a deity that refuses to walk his omnipotent self down here with the rest of us to ensure we all have a viable chance to understand him. Hell is eternal torment and children born outside the scope of Christianity are expected to know the Christian God by the world around them, or face this hell. To believe that a child never exposed to the Christian belief is without excuse to believe in a God that requires special pleading from other humans to even seem viable, is a completely irrational position. Conclusion: All of my points are stock arguments, and my opponent should be familiar with them to some extent. I have heard some of these myself so I picked the best ones. I am playing devil's advocate (devil, get it?) and look forward to Con's response. Very Truly Yours, Sherlockmethod.