EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
2228

Is the Christian God real?

(PRO)
WINNER!
0 points
(CON)
0 points
adminadmin (PRO)
I thank my opponent for the opportunity to do this debate. God debates are always enjoyable, and I love devil's advocating.

My case demonstrates, hopefully, a preponderance of evidence for the reality of the Christian God. There are two elements I should have to prove:

1. I should show that we should believe in God
2. I should show that this God is likely to be the Christian God as opposed to some other God (I intend to use the validity of the resurrection of Jesus to show this, as the single defining belief that sets Christianity apart)

Why we should accept the reality of God

1) The Descartes argument. It is impossible for a being to be all-perfect, all-knowing etc and not exist. Therefore such a being must exist. The existence of God can thus be logically deduced.

2) The Lewis Argument. If there was no God to create the universe, then the universe must have been an accident. If the universe is an accident, so is our thinking. If our thinking is an accident, we have no reason to believe it. This is absurd because we have already established the universe exists but cannot establish our existence as a subset of said universe. The only other two options left are nihilism and God. The existence of God can thus be evidently deduced.

3) The Pascal Argument. Either God exists or it does not. If we believe it exists, rewards are huge or naught. If we don't believe it exists, rewards are negative or naught. Therefore it is a safer bet to believe it exists. The existence of God is thus a worthwhile belief (this argument does not set out to show that God exists, but it's an important point because even if God did exist, that doesn't mean we should accept God, for example if God had become irrelevant).

4) The Kant Argument. Any attempt to refute God that holds any weight relies on logic. Therefore the argument presupposes the existence of logic. Logical truths cannot be proven without reference to God. Therefore any argument against God presupposes the existence of God. The existence of God is thus a precondition for this whole discussion.

Why the resurrection of Jesus is likely to be true

1) The testimony of hundreds of people, written down by the best scholars of the day. If the resurrection had been false, surely the Jewish authorities could have lulled this rebellion by simply producing the body of the crucified? There are more sources for the resurrection of Jesus than there are for Julius Caesar's conquest of Gaul. It is one of the few narratives from ancient times apparently not to have much legendary development.

2) The fact that many of the witnesses during the immediate period after the death were hostile to Jesus, such as Paul. Many were skeptical, and went on fact-finding missions. We do not have any sources for about 150 years that doubt the resurrection of Jesus, despite much research going on.

3) The lack of any plausible competing account that really explains the event of the empty tomb and the post-resurrection sightings to over 500 people near the tomb.

I look forward to my opponent's case.

Return To Top | Posted:
2014-03-03 09:32:20
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
adminadmin
Well, OK, I'll take it...
Posted 2014-02-26 08:25:08
nzlockienzlockie
I'm heading away again in a little over a week so I don't really have time to do this one. Welcome and good luck!
Posted 2014-02-25 21:00:53
adminadmin
I might accept this if I get time. Just a quick note: on EDEB8 there's no such thing as an instigator or challenger. Pro always goes first and both sides get an equal number of rounds. Since you've activated reply speeches there will be a round at the end where the speaking order is reversed and character limit is halved, for summaries. Good luck and I look forward to the debate!
Posted 2014-02-25 16:29:18
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

There are no judgements yet on this debate.

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 4 rounds
  • 8000 characters per round
  • Reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Community Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds means forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 1 week
  • Time to vote: 2 weeks
  • Time to prepare: None
Hi, I'm new here and I guess I'll play the devils advocate for my first debate.

I believe the best way for this to go smoothly would be for Pro starting off, but not putting anything in their last speech. That way we each get the same amount of rounds.

Another reason for this is that the BoP is mostly on Pro. I must refute his or her claims, and whoever shows that their side is more probable "won" I guess.

Thanks Mate.