My name is Soren Sorensen and I would like to debate the existence of "God" with you!

However, before we can effectively debate the existence of "God", it is imperative that we define exactly what the word "God" means for the purposes of our debate. If our debate is to be of genuine value, "God" can not be allowed to be a "moving target". After all, we will be debating the existence of something; not the meaning of something.

Of course, we could first debate the meaning of "God"; but, no doubt, it will be far more efficient to let you define the meaning as you wish. However, I will not agree to debate the existence of anything that is not concretely and clearly defined.

Otherwise, what is the point?

Which brings me to my point in creating this web site!

I have always been shocked and saddened by the irrationality of those engaged in debates about the existence of "God", whether a believer (traditional Theist) or a non-believer (traditional Atheist). While rationality is not generally expected from traditional Theists (sorry traditional Theists!); it is generally expected from traditional Atheists. But, when it comes to discussing anything related to the word "God", I am more often dumbfounded by the emotional irrationality of traditional Atheists than not.

What is so difficult about separating a word from that which it represents? Isn't it extremely obvious that a word is just a symbol for something, and that it is very likely to function as a symbol for many different, and potentially unrelated, somethings?

I do understand the endless emotional baggage that comes with the word "God"; but, seriously, don't most traditional Atheists generally promote themselves as being unemotional in their reasoning? Surely, the typical Atheist reaction to the word "God" will eventually come to be seen as quite an historic embarrassment!

It makes me wonder if traditional Atheism isn't a lot more like traditional Theism in its closed-mindedness than most traditional Atheists realize. (sorry traditional Atheists!)

In case it is not entirely obvious, I do not consider myself to be either a traditional Theist or a traditional Atheist. Nor am I an Agnostic, still undecided about "God". Instead, I consider myself to be both a Spiritual Atheist as well as a Non-literal Theist. I promote using the word "God" to refer to the personification of the infinite and eternal universe.

Therefore, that is the only definition of "God" that makes no sense for me to debate against, as I am already convinced of the infinite and eternal "oneness" of the Universe. However, I am eager to debate against the existence of anything else you feel that the word "God" represents. Especially, the existence of an entity that supposedly exists outside of the Universe and/or an entity that supposedly created and rules the Universe.

Ultimately, my intention is to help some of the most intelligent and creative people on the planet see the error of their ways. There is a lot of profound wisdom buried deep within spiritual symbols that could only have been put there by intelligent and creative people. It is time that intelligent and creative people recognize this, confront their emotional pain and fear, and take back guardianship of this invaluable legacy.

The golden baby has been thrown out with the dirty bath water.

If you would like to debate the existence of "God" with me, please send me your specific definition of the word "God" and I will get back to you as quickly as possible. All debates will be posted in full at this web site for the benefit of all truth seekers.