The existence of God is a logical truth.
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
| Started: | 5/22/2008 | Category: | Religion |
| Updated: | 6 months ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 225 times | Debate No: | 4142 |
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (16)
|
God: the supreme deity of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam
logical truth: something that can be proved logically existence: occurrence Your move CON.
It is neither logical nor true that the deity worshipped by the abrahamic faiths is "God". First, the whole notion of divine creator is unnecessary, religon is a throw back to the time before science and reason, since that time, we have gained a rather good understanding of our universe, and the natural laws that govern it, the "God of the Gaps" and metaphysics have been replaced by knowledge and understanding. Furthermore on the off chance that "higher beings" exist,they would not be like the one(s) described in the error-ridden, self-contradictory holy text of the Abrahamic faiths. "God" is described as prefect, how can "perfect" beings make mistakes, let alone grieve over them. The faithful of the Abrahamic faiths claim that humanity was made in "God's" Image,but upon reading the holy texts, a more logical conclusion would be that man, and it was most certainly men, created a "God" in their image. |
![]() |
|
Okay, I'll present my case, a variation of St. Anselm's ontological proof.
I'll write it in syllogistic form, so its easy to follow. 1. God is either real, or he is a figment of the imagination of a religious person. 2. God is by definition, unimaginable. 3. He can't simply he a figment of our imagination. 4. God is real. Also, from St. Anselm (variation, again) 1. God is the greatest conceivable thing. 2. It is greater to be existent than not. 3. God must exist. Here's another popular one, also variated, it is influenced by St. Thomas of Aquinas and Avicenna. 1. The universe is made up of many beings. 2. Each being must have come from another being. 3. This would continue endlessly, unless there was one being that was the original creator. 4. There must be an original creator. Finally, this is from me just now, influenced by Descartes, but I'm sure someone has come up with something similar. 1. God is perceived to exist by many in the world. 2. This perception is certainly existent in the minds of those who perceive it. 3. God certainly exists in the minds of many, if only as a false perception. Quod erat demonstrandum My opponent's case: "First, the whole notion of divine creator is unnecessary, religon is a throw back to the time before science and reason, since that time, we have gained a rather good understanding of our universe, and the natural laws that govern it, the "God of the Gaps" and metaphysics have been replaced by knowledge and understanding." Yes, we have good understanding of our Universe, through empiricism. Empiricism is not logic. You cannot prove anything using empirical evidence. For example, I see paper is white, but I cannot prove that to be true. There is the possibility that I am hallucinating. However, some things, like God, can be proved with logic, and I just did that. Anyways, the rules of logic are natural laws of our Universe, and I used them to prove the existence of God. "Furthermore on the off chance that "higher beings" exist,they would not be like the one(s) described in the error-ridden, self-contradictory holy text of the Abrahamic faiths. "God" is described as prefect, how can "perfect" beings make mistakes, let alone grieve over them. The faithful of the Abrahamic faiths claim that humanity was made in "God's" Image,but upon reading the holy texts, a more logical conclusion would be that man, and it was most certainly men, created a "God" in their image." I completely agree that much of the Bible, Quran, Torah, Talmud, and almost all other religious texts are horribly inaccurate. They were written by men, they are bound to have mistakes. Logic however is no more inaccurate than the laws of physics or mathematics. I used logic, and the inaccuracies of holy texts cannot prove me wrong. HarmonyAlexandria forfeited this round. |
![]() |
|
Extend all my points across. I await my opponent's reply.
100 character long debate posting. There we go. HarmonyAlexandria forfeited this round. |
![]() |
|
Extend all my points across. I await my opponent's reply.
100 character long debate posting. There we go. HarmonyAlexandria forfeited this round. |
![]() |
|
Mary had a little lamb, little lamb, little lamb, Mary had a little lamb whose fleece was white as snow.
Vote PRO HarmonyAlexandria forfeited this round. |
![]() |
Loading voting charts...
Show people this debate by sending them this public link:














I made my R2 post at 1 in the morning, and I just posted all the arguments I could think of, and I paraphrased them, so whether they a) proved my point b) were valid or c) were written logically, is due to that fact. But, I do agree with your objections to the first and second proofs, I was trying to see what good objections there were to them. The third one doesn't prove the Abrahamic God, sure, but I think it has more worth than you give it credit for, it is more inductive reasoning rather than deductive if I phrase it right. The fourth one was mainly for fun though.
If God is in fact made-up, then the way people choose to define him does not matter. If I define unicorns as not being able to be imaginary, then they would have to be real by your standards. But that's probably not true.
Also, since when is God, by definition, unimaginable?
Second one:
For the first one, point 1 relies on the conclusion being true. If god doesn't exist, then he isn't the greatest thing evar.
Third one:
Since when can beings only be created by beings? Also, this argument only argues that there is a first cause, not that the first cause is the Abrahamic God, which is what you're trying to prove.
Fourth one:
That only proves that a thought about God exists, not that God exists. To say that imagining something constitutes that thing existing requires a twisting of words such as in this point. You defined God as
"the supreme deity of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam"
not as
"the perception of the supreme deity of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam", ergo by your definition, this does not prove that God exists.
All those logical proofs contain errors in logic, and therefore do not constitute a logical truth.
Either way, CON forfeited, so a vote for PRO it is.
in re Spiral
Dreams are false perceptions, yet they exist, I mean that argument was slightly based on semantics, a last resort if you will. It is certain though that God exists as a perception, the real question is however, does He exist in the physical realm?
So god exists as a non-existence? Hardly a logical certainty.