The Generic: There is no God

"False. A being with unlimited power and the Big Bang are clearly not the same. God has given each of us free will, and what we do with that free will is our decision, not His."I don't see what is so different between the two (Big Bang and God)...If God gave us a "free will" and doesn't care what we do, then all he is, is a being that created a Universe. Since the Big Bang created a Universe and doesn't govern how we live an everyday life, wouldn't God and the Big Bang be of equal value?"I'm not really sure what you're referring to here."I am simply saying that if you believe God created a Universe with his unlimited power, then the Big Bang (with unlimited power) must also have created the Universe. Saying otherwise would be short-minded and ignorant."I do not believe that God exists within time. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever met anyone who believes such a thing."In a real debate, no one cares about what you think. Your statement is a straight up opinion (as is most of your statements). I presented a credible source and a theoretical scientific explanation of the Universe's creation. You tried to refute it with an opinion. Your claim is flawed." The argument says that certain acts are objectively right or objectively wrong, independent of human opinion or feelings toward them [...] those who have an erred sense of morality ought not present an issue for those who can "see" just fine. "Are you suggesting that people who can't tell right and wrong don't have God? Therefore, is God even with us? Or is right and wrong simply a result of evolution? Evolution seems to make more sense is this argument."One could argue that there are plenty miracles in the world today, but that they are simply ignored. Also, this verse from the New Testament may be relevant to this question:"Miracles are simply statistical coincidence. Example: If you were to flip a coin over and over, eventually it will land on its side. () If humans were to die over and over, eventually someone will beat the odds. God has no play in this. Not only that, there is no proof that God spiritually helped write the Bible."The being that holds these properties is the being I call God. I'd be interested in seeing your rational as to what it was that caused the universe."I already gave an analogy:If the post-Universe was a plain, and you wanted to create a Universe, you need to dig a hole and make a pile. The pile is the matter that makes us up, the hole; the vacuum of space. Makes sense right? The digging of the hole/making of the pile is what scientists call the Big Bang (http://en.wikipedia.org...). "You seemed to agree with my source when you acknowledged that the universe had a beginning, so I'm not sure why it is you think that my source ought to not count."Because:It works both ways... You may have proved that God was there at the beginning. But you also proved that the Big Bang is a real possibility; and a better possibility than God. Thus, you provided nothing to help your argument."My opponent has thus far failed to knock down any of these arguments." In what way did I not manage to knock off your arguments? If this was true (which it isn't), you wouldn't need a refuttal; but you have one anyways... Your statement is negated. And you say:"I'm not sure I set up any "rules" to begin with."Yet you just accused me for not doing what you told me to (which I did anyways but you were too ignorant to realize)!:"I challenged my opponent to refute each of my arguments and in their place put forward arguments of his own in order to win the debate."This is America! I can do what I want! I provided facts, explainations, and refuttals. Even if I didn't do it the way you wanted it done, I still refuted your arguments and provided my own!"0 sound arguments against God."Yeah right....