Does God exist ? (part 2)

I accept Illegalcombatant's terms for the debate and hope to do this debate justice. Introduction Per Con's parameters, I am permitted to argue for any theistic position. I will be arguing for the existence of the Christian God. I therefore submit the following, more complete description of God quoted from the Westminster confession of faith: [1] There is but one only, living, and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions; immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will, for His own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him; and withal, most just, and terrible in His judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty. God has all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which He has made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them. He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things; and has most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever Himself pleases. In His sight all things are open and manifest, His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent, or uncertain. He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands. To Him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience He is pleased to require of them. In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. I realize the definition I put forth is long-winded, but it's a more complete depiction of the God Christians profess. I do this for the benefit of both myself and my opponent. It would be unfair to Con for me to accept his starting definition only to add to it later in the debate. Evidential Argument for God's Existence. I have a two arguments—one logical and one evidential, but since we have five whole rounds, I'll start with my evidential argument, which is a modified form of Kalam's Cosmological Argument (KCA). This evidential argument is meant to show that it is more rational to accept Christianity as true than otherwise. Any argument for God's existence can be doubted; I simply ask the readers to determine whether any doubts my opponent may offer are reasonable or irrational. P1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence. We have yet to acquire conclusive proof of entities entering into existence without cause. The Causal Principle is rooted in our everyday experiences and cannot be conveniently ignored. I warn my opponent that appealing to matter or energy as contrary evidence is question begging. P2. The universe began to exist. It is certain the universe is continually expanding from a singularity. [2] Alexander Vilenkin developed a unifying theory [3] in 2003 with Arvind Borde and Alan Guth. This theory, which is independent of our universe, shows that all expanding universes must have a singularity and therefore a beginning. An actual infinite number of things is impossible. Therefore, there is a finite number of events in our cosmos' timeline. Thus, it is rational to conclude that it a first event, or a beginning. C1. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence. If whatever begins to exist has a cause (P1) and the universe began to exist (P2), then the universe has a cause. P3. The first cause must be eternal. There are two choices for the cause of this universe: another temporal existence or an eternal one. If it is temporal, it also has a beginning (per C1). Since there cannot be an actual number of temporal universes, we must conclude that eventually, there is an eternal cause. P4. All eternal causes of temporal effects must be personal. An eternal cause would be one of two things: teleological (personal/intelligent) or non-teleological (mechanical). An eternal object MUST be in equilibrium; it is logically contradictory to assert an eternal object that is changing. Thus, a mechanical eternal entity is dead and there incapable of causing anything, much less the temporal effects of space-time as we know it. A teleological eternal agent on the other hand implies an agent with a will. It is logically possible for an eternal personal agent to freely choose to create effects in time without necessitating change in its own properties. So, by process of elimination, we can conclude that any eternal cause of a temporal effect must be intelligent. C2. The universe was caused by a personal creator. If the universe has a cause (C1), and the cause must be eternal (P3), then the universe has an eternal cause. If the universe has an eternal cause and all eternal causes of temporal effects must be personal (P4), then the universe must have been caused by a personal agent. P5. Given a personal creator, miracles are logically possible. It is logically permissible for the personal creator to intervene in our universe to cause events that defy the normal constraints of the universe, what we would call miracles. One need not believe in miracles to see that this is logical possibility. P6. The personal creator probably intervened in this universe by resurrecting Christ Given the historical reliability of the Bible [4], we can conclude that the stories regarding Jesus Christ are testimonies of real witnesses. Given the validity of miracles (P5) and the testimony of so many witnesses, it is parsimonious to accept that the Gospel accounts are probably describing a real event. C3. The personal creator of this universe is probably the Christian God. If the personal creator can intervene in the form of miracles (P5) and the miracle of the Resurrection probably occurred (P6), then the Bible is probably the revelation of this universe's personal creator. In which case, the creator of this universe is probably the Christian God. Rebuttal to Con's Contention 1 Careful examination of Con's first contention reveals that it is simply a restating of the general skepticism one should have when faced with any unsupported claim. His right to say that any claim, if unsupported, is unlikely to be true. Since I am now providing such support, this makes his first contention moot until that time that he is able to show all my arguments to be utterly lacking. At any rate, I do not see how this is an argument for Con's position as much as an argument against mine. Per his own rules, he is to argue positively for his position, not merely negatively against mine. Conclusion So far, we have general opening statements, so there is not much to summarize. My first argument should show that it is more rational to accept Christianity as true than to not. In my next round, I will offer a logical argument that will show Christianity as necessarily true. So far, Con's burden is somewhat lacking, but I think it is prudent that the readers not hold that against him until he has had opportunity to offer more evidence in his next round. Sources 1. http://www.reformed.org... 2. http://skyserver.sdss.org... 3. http://books.google.com... 4. http://www.leaderu.com...