The Christian God Does Not Exist
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
After not so many votes...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- One week
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
Please provide sources for all claims.
Christian God - the God described in the Bible. He is supernatural, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent.
Exist - To have current and objective reality.
1 - Main Argument
2 - Rebuttals
3 - Rebuttals
4 - Rebuttals
5 - Final Argument
- Omniscient, or all-knowing 
- Omnipotent, or all-powerful 
- Omnibenevolent, or all-good 
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
"A God can be found, particularly situated and placed within the Christian Bible."
"A God can be found, particularly situated and placed within my head and also within my opponents head."
"We assume that the limited knowledge that we have available is fairly accurate, but given the assumed vastness of the universe, what we don't know is considerable greater. So in this context both my opponent and I can only ever surmise that a God might or might not actually exist."
"So by definition a God that might exist could be either a real or an imaginary living entity."
"God undeniably can exist in imagination."
"Well; no one knows what the Christian God is, as no one ever sees God. So God is actually indeterminate."
"Words and language are imprecise and therefore easily manipulated."
"Biblical scripture is more likely to be purely conceptual rather than factual."
"One of the most interesting aspects of my opponents argument was their constant references to a God that they propose to be non-existent.39 times in fact. So quite clearly God exists somewhere within the realms of my opponents conscious mind."
"The three Omni's are, once again open to all sorts of interpretation, because of the imprecise nature of language and words. My opponent simply assumes one definition and meaning that is suitably relative to their particular argument."
"All knowing: Could simply mean knowing everything to be known. All powerful: Could mean a variety of things, dependant how one chooses to interpret the word powerful. All good: Only God would have the authority to define goodness. Humans assume that there is a distinction to be made. We also assume importance and this would not necessarily be the case."
"Epicurus Alternative:God does everything that needs to be done. Therefore God is omnipotentHe is able and does what is necessary? Then he is self-confident.He is both able and self confident? So hence all is good.We are not able to judge him? So call him God."
"Epicurus was just a bloke, who manipulated words and language in exactly the same way that my opponent and I do."
"My opponent openly admits that a higher power could possibly exist.Christians assume the existence of a higher power and they refer to it as God.In both of these two instances the higher power is unknown.Therefore my opponents possibility and a Christians assumption are one and the same."
"My opponent has not proved anything."
"All pertinent words used within their discourse, such as exist and the three omni's have variable and alternative definition."
"So my opponent flogs a dead horse, whilst I present a perfectly reasonable argument primarily centred around the impreciseness and alternative definitions of the word exist."
"We cannot monopolise words and language, therefore I would strongly assert that as long as I utilise words and language within the parameters set by accepted lexical convention, then my discourse on the existence of the Christian God as an intangible entity, is wholly valid."
"Proving all of those things to be impossible does not prove that a God is not possible. God might not possess those characteristics. Given that those characteristics are only a Christian assumption."
- Con has changed the definition of the Christian God with no Biblical verses to back this definition up.
- Con has changed the definition of the word exist with no evidence that shows his definition is correct.
- Con has changed the definitions of the words omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent with no evidence that shows his definition is correct.