It is reasonable to believe that God doesn't exist

[7] ----> http://www.youtube.com... Arguments from Scripture Old Testament A summary of my opponents arguments and the ridiculous source he linked me to is this: The Bible contains stories which have some historical information. It refers to people, places and events which evidence suggests actually existed/happened, so the rest must be true. The fact a flood may have occurred thousands of years ago doesn’t mean that a man gathered two of every animal (including the Australian marsupials, unique to that particular continent) and loaded them onto his ark. Add the fact that Hindu and Greek mythology refer to this same flood and you realise that it is completely false. So when my opponent asks me to prove that none of the Old Testaments events happened, he knows that I can’t. However, any sensible person knows that: God didn’t create the Universe in 6 days, 6000 years ago: By studying the Universe and the expansion of nearby Galaxies, we can deduce that the Universe is around 10 billion years old; By studying the radioactive decay of certain isotopes we can deduce the Earth is around 4 billion years old. [1] The entire Earth wasn’t populated by Adam and Eve: We know the effect inbreeding has. [2] Noah didn’t load 2 of every animal on to a ship: It would take a hundred life-times to find two of every creature on the entire Earth, then you’d have the same inbreeding problem that the Adam and Eve story has. Jonah could have survived inside giant fish/whale: Yeah, he would have been asphyxiated in minutes and dissolved by internal bacteria and stomach acids. Need I go on? My opponent’s first source concludes by saying “Apparent inconsistencies fade away whenever the Bible is studied with an open mind.” Yes, you need an open mind to believe obvious fiction. The New Testament “The Bible is there to show from the beginning the relationship with man and God.” o.O; ‘The Bold and the Beautiful’ is there to show the relationships of the Forrester family. Should people of the future believe it to be true because Los Angeles exists? “If one wants to find out more about scientific evidence proving God, there are plenty of modern books out there to prove so.” No, there really aren’t. If one such book existed the world would be very different. The fact remains that Creationists mutilate some scientific theories to suit their knowledge-repressing agendas but generally just completely ignore Science, saying it’s “too one-sided”(SIC). I’ll address this further under the argument from Ignorance header. Argument from Morality “The Bible never states that morals are objective in the world. In God's eyes there is only one right and wrong. “ Yes, that’s what Objective means, friend. My opponent goes on to say that killing and stealing are always wrong, to quote: “God considers it a sin even if one kills for their loved ones.” This is EXACTLY why I oppose the validity of your religion. Why should I allow my family to suffer and die because preventing their suffering by killing some maniac might be a sin? Emphasise on the MIGHT, since there is no evidence to support the existence of God (I’ll address this under the next header) Several times in your rebuttal you talk about “what God wants”, “the power of God”, “the eyes of God” and so on. This leads me back to my Scripture point. You’re getting your information from an ancient source, written before the Dark ages. The Biblical canons vary massively between dominations. You can’t even prove God exists, let alone have any idea of what he wants. Argument from Ignorance “Until science can disprove that life and universe did not get created, the argument that God had created the Universe and life on earth remains valid.” If you allow for varying levels of validity, I suppose this is true. “Believing that there is a creator is not an assumption for there is many evidence to back it up like the evidence of Intelligent design.“ Oh really? Why was the teaching of “Intelligent Design” banned from schools for being Creationism in disguise? [3] “Evolution is the one that assumes things.” Evolution is a proven theory. In 150 years not a single shred of evidence has emerged to disprove it. Here [4] we can see unquestionable proof of micro-evolution. The only difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution is time. We know the Earth is billions of years old. What’s the problem? “But why does a chimp who is 99.8% related in genes with us not get the same kind of traits?” We aren’t 99.8% ‘related’. We share 99.8% of the same genetic information. Look at a chimp and a man. We have lots of traits in common; we have almost identical body structures. “Evolution simply says that it is by "luck" we got it.” No, Evolution says that it is by “natural selection” that we are the way we are. I can’t believe anyone honestly believes Creationism. Next you’ll be telling me there are no transitional fossils. [5] “Everyone knows of intelligent design when they see one, like Mount Rushmore. Even a child knows that Mount Rushmore did not just happen by erosion.” *sigh* this is the very definition of an Argument from Ignorance. In order to say something was created one must have a comparison. We know Mount Rushmore was created because we know what a created stone monument looks like. We know what natural mountains look like. In order to make the assumption that our Universe was created, you must compare it to a created Universe. Take the Universe of the game Spore [6], created by programmers and code. Is our Universe like this Universe in the game Spore? No. My point is complexity doesn’t equal design. “I would like to ask my opponent to prove to me how we got this extensive knowledge and other organisms haven not. If he cannot prove this my argument remains valid.” What is your argument? Intelligent Design? Creationism? These arguments have been repeatedly proven false. You link to an anti-abiogenesis Creationist page and expect me to read 7,500 words of this nonsense; nonsense which has been BANNED from being taught in schools because of its utterly obviously religious agenda. No thanks buddy. I’d never get that part of my short life back. You can’t take what already exists and start making calculations on the odds of it spontaneously generating and say “it’s a kabillion to one, therefore it isn’t true.” If you are interested (which I highly doubt) you can watch this ten minute video. It’s the best explanation of abiogenesis I’ve ever seen. [7] The fact remains, I’m not arguing from ignorance and you are. I admit that I don’t know; you claim you know that God did it. CONCLUSION So far my opponent has: Argued that the Bible is true Stated that God’s morality is the only one that matters, regardless of circumstances Questioned the validity of Evolution I have: Argued that there is no reason to believe the Bible to be truthful Argued that “Objective Morality” is contradictory to reality Shown that Science has much better theories about the origins of things supported by evidence and the scientific method VOTE Pro SOURCES [1] http://curious.astro.cornell.edu... [2] http://evolution.berkeley.edu... [3] http://www.msnbc.msn.com... [4] http://news.nationalgeographic.com... [5] http://evolution.berkeley.edu... [6] http://www.spore.com...