The following arguments against the existence of God are valid.

This is my first debate, so I will do my best. First, I must note that I have not been asked to argue that God does not exist in any form. Rather, my opponent has asked that I present valid arguments that refute the existence of the Christian God. I am not really very clear on the definition my opponent presented for the word valid. The one I will use for my argument is the one found in the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy: An argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true and, at the same time, the conclusion false. Secondly, when dealing with the Christian God, I will be referencing the concept as it is presented in the Bible. There is much debate over whether the Bible is the word of God, if it is perfect, if it is to be taken literally or metaphorically. Since each Christian must face these questions as a part of their belief system, and many come to different conclusions, it is difficult to pin down an exact definition of the Christian God in the eyes of his believers. Therefore, the best I can do is look to their Holy Book when constructing my arguments. Argument #1 The Paradox of Omnipotence Omnipotence: all-powerful, or possessing unlimited power. Just for "funsies", here is a paradox that would seem to refute the possibility of Omnipotence: Can an all-powerful God create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift? Of course, if he cannot create such a rock, then he is not all-powerful. However, nor can he be all-powerful if he cannot lift said rock. Therefore, no being can truly possess the quality of being all-powerful. The Bible says God is all-powerful (In theï¿½Authorized King James Versionï¿½of theï¿½Bible, as well as several other versions, inï¿½Revelationï¿½19:6 it is stated "...the Lord God omnipotent reigneth") . If a being cannot be omnipotent, then the God of Christianity cannot exist as presented in the Bible. Argument #2 Even if Omnipotence could exist, the Christian God could not possess that quality. This argument was taken from the wikipedia article on Omnipotence, but it is so succinctly put that I will post it as is. Full credit to the author: 1) If a being exists, then it must have some active tendency. 2) If a being has some active tendency, then it has some power to resist its creator. 3) If a being has the power to resist its creator, then the creator does not have absolute power. The very act of a God limiting his own power by giving humans the free will to defy him removes the possibility of his Omnipotence. Were God to exercise absolute power over his creations, his action would negate Free Will. The Bible clearly states that humans have the power to accept or reject God. An all-powerful deity would have the power to prevent his creations from rejecting him, and yet if this power was exercised it would prove that humans do not actually have Free Will. That Christianity presents a God that is Omnipotent (all-powerful) and a humanity that has Free Will is a contradiction that it cannot escape. The Christian God has been called all-powerful AND has been said to have given his creations the freedom to reject him. My argument has demonstrated that both cannot be the case. Therefore, the Christian God, as presented in the Bible, cannot exist. Argument #3 Let us examine the argument that the Christian God does exist. In order for an argument to be good its premises must be adequate, acceptable, and relevant to the conclusion. The Bible sets for the premises intended to prove the existence of the Christian God. I will say the the Bible is full of contradictions, inconsistencies, and outright impossibilities. I would argue that it is not a very accurate source for anything. Questions that arise about the validity of the Bible, which contains all relevant supportive evidence for the Christian God, make it a questionable source. Therefore, I would say that it is not adequate in supporting the conclusion that the Christian God does exist. While a lack of proof of existence is not the same as proof of non-existence, there are only two possibilities. If one does not accept that the Bible is adequate in proving that such a God exists, then one must either form the belief that he does not exist, or seek more evidence. I will ask that my opponent remember that we are not arguing the existence or non-existence of God. Rather, my opponent should remember that their rebuttal should attempt to illustrate how my premises could be true and the conclusion false since we are arguing validity. Sources http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.amazon.com...