Head-to-head against otseng

[otseng]

There has been some interest shown in debating me head-to-head on the evidence for God.

Here is what we'll debate: Which is a more rational position to hold - God exists or God does not exist?

If you are interested in debating me, post here in this thread. If there is more than one, then you can choose among yourselves who will debate me.

[McCulloch]

Proposition: God is a real actual thing, not something merely imagined or written about. God is intelligent and has intentionally created the universe.

Otseng will argue that belief in the truth of the above proposition is more rational than disbelieving it. McCulloch will argue that disbelieving the truth of the proposition is more rational than believing it.

Are we getting closer?

[otseng]

Proposition: God is a real actual thing, not something merely imagined or written about. God is intelligent and has intentionally created the universe.

Otseng will argue that belief in the truth of the above proposition is more rational than disbelieving it. McCulloch will argue that disbelieving the truth of the proposition is more rational than believing it.

Are we getting closer?

Sounds good to me.

If there is no objection with McCulloch and I debating head-to-head, then we can start at the beginning of the year.

[otseng]

OK, McCulloch and I will then be debating head-to-head. I've added you to the h2h usergroup (though it's not really necessary since you're an admin).

I've created the thread - Which is more rational? God is real or imaginary?

[InHocSignoVinces]

Both views, when viewed fully, seem irrational:P
The very idea of a supernatural entity makes many atheists cringe.
On the other hand, what created the universe? Many scientist have theories that two atoms or two matter particles collided and through the chemical explosion and conversion "sowed the seeds of life". But, I wish to muse on a much asked question: How did those two atoms come to be? Were they always there? Created? Before they were there, what was there? Nothing? Indeed, that is a debate for the existential philosophers!:)
I think the very idea of a God, or indeed a being od god-like power isn't in itself irrational.
But one could argue that God always was, or that there were many gods, or that god evolved from a lesser being. The possibilities are endless!
I know that my next statement will make atheists and theists alike cringe, but perhaps the most logical thing is to not dismiss the possibility of God's existence.

[InHocSignoVinces]

Both views, when viewed fully, seem irrational:P
The very idea of a supernatural entity makes many atheists cringe.
On the other hand, what created the universe? Many scientist have theories that two atoms or two matter particles collided and through the chemical explosion and conversion "sowed the seeds of life". But, I wish to muse on a much asked question: How did those two atoms come to be? Were they always there? Created? Before they were there, what was there? Nothing? Indeed, that is a debate for the existential philosophers!:)
I think the very idea of a God, or indeed a being od god-like power isn't in itself irrational.
But one could argue that God always was, or that there were many gods, or that god evolved from a lesser being. The possibilities are endless!
I know that my next statement will make atheists and theists alike cringe, but perhaps the most logical thing is to not dismiss the possibility of God's existence.

[open mind]

I know that my next statement will make atheists and theists alike cringe, but perhaps the most logical thing is to not dismiss the possibility of God's existence.

I agree with this statement somewhat. The possibility of A "god" should not be dismissed. However, when evidence and debate show that a specific deity in it's own definition can not exist, then it should be logical to no longer recognize that particular deity as being such.