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.

[T-mash]

"God exists or God does not exist?"

Any god in particular?

[FinalEnigma]

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.

I'm interested, but I'd like some specifics.

Such as: are we debating the rationality of belief in a particular God, or a god in general?

a god in general is a much more highly theoretical debate than say - debating the rationality of believing in the christian God.

and: is there a particular format that you would like such as the structured, several round format that Mc and Goose adopted? (say both people make their arguments in round one, in round two they address the oppositions arguments in round one, then in round three address that.)


also t-mash, the proposed debate isn't whether God exists, its whether it is logical to believe in God.

[T-mash]

also t-mash, the proposed debate isn't whether God exists, its whether it is logical to believe in God.

I'm aware of that, but the sun has been referred to as a 'God' for thousands of years. Is it logical to believe in the existence of the sun? Of course. Is it logical to disbelief in the existence of the sun? No.

As long as no 'God' in particular is mentioned it can always exists, because we don't even know what the OP is referring to.

Or were you talking about that I only mentioned that part between brackets? If so, I only copied the part where he mentioned 'God', not the entire question of debate.

[FinalEnigma]

also t-mash, the proposed debate isn't whether God exists, its whether it is logical to believe in God.

I'm aware of that, but the sun has been referred to as a 'God' for thousands of years. Is it logical to believe in the existence of the sun? Of course. Is it logical to disbelief in the existence of the sun? No.

As long as no 'God' in particular is mentioned it can always exists, because we don't even know what the OP is referring to.

Or were you talking about that I only mentioned that part between brackets? If so, I only copied the part where he mentioned 'God', not the entire question of debate.

Sorry. As you said, I misunderstood based on the way you quoted. I read it as you asking which god the existence of was to be debated, rather than basically the same thing I asked.

[otseng]

For the debate, God is a supernatural entity that created this universe.

I have no structure in mind for the debate, but I prefer a more casual debate, rather than a formal structure.

[McCulloch]

For the debate, God is a supernatural entity that created this universe.

I have no structure in mind for the debate, but I prefer a more casual debate, rather than a formal structure.

I would not wish to debate God with such a broad definition. As I see it, the word God has greater implications. Intent, will, intelligence

How about God is a supernatural intelligent entity that intentionally created this universe?

[Scotracer]

For the debate, God is a supernatural entity that created this universe.

I have no structure in mind for the debate, but I prefer a more casual debate, rather than a formal structure.

I would not wish to debate God with such a broad definition. As I see it, the word God has greater implications. Intent, will, intelligence

How about God is a supernatural intelligent entity that intentionally created this universe?

I agree with this definition. Merely having it supernatural (if such a thing is even possible) would not imply it actually has a will or wishes.

[Bio-logical]

It seems to have been established now the definition of God, but to avoid goalpost shifting can we define "rational" and also "god does not exist".

I would like to be sure that rationality is the same definition we have always used on this site, so that shouldn't be too hard.

I would also like to be sure that "god does not exist" is not an assertation that god cannot exist, but instead a stance that there is not yet a reason to believe he does.

[FinalEnigma]

For the debate, God is a supernatural entity that created this universe.

I have no structure in mind for the debate, but I prefer a more casual debate, rather than a formal structure.

Though this makes it significantly more theoretical and difficult for me, I am able to debate this.