GodSand's "proof" of God is not logically valid

You haven't even touched upon my argument of DNA. And I still do not understand the unicorn argument of yours. IT MAKES NO SENSE. I understand the rest though. I like the super kitchen appliance argument. Surely like God this super kitchen appliance exists without being plugged in, right? Otherwise how do you plug it in? Like the super kitchen appliance, God is personal and to be quite honest here, you really need Jesus to understand God existence to it's full. Like the super kitchen appliance is persoanl, no one knows it exists but the person who knows about it. Give me evidence of that God is not like the super kitchen appliance, being plugged in for some people but for others they haven't heard about it. God works in the same way. God is free, there is no cost, and because God is the centre of the argument, the kitchen appliance is free too. Who would say no to this super kitchen appliance if it was free? The problem is, that it seems too good to be true. So people in both cases will not believe in God or in this super kitchen appliance, where you simply plug it in and wola. Like God, it seems too good, not of God's existence but that we can connect to God. You can like all atheists agree somewhere out there, there is a God like being. But its the fact that God can connect to us. Just like someone saying, "Yeah I believe the super kitchen appliance exists, but for me to have it for free by simply plugging it in is too far fetched." The characteristics of God: It is that I can say God exists from a personal veiw, look like I siad in my other debate. That you are your own god because your brain is the core nervous system and with out it you wouldn't be here now. But who told you, you had a brain, so that person becomes your god and so on....in till the day where two scientists discovered the brain by dissecting a dead body, then surely that dead body is God because if you did not know about the brain, we would think that God was controlling our thinking etc... God does not of course control our mind and brains. And like I have said, (and I will not stop mentioning this, I have all the right to) DNA proves the existence of God like I have said it my first round. You unicorn argument is just annoying, I barely understand it. I don't think you do either. Just to get to the pizza argument you made. The pizza with out topping still has charateristics, just dull ones. And God needs to exist if people from the Bible talked and wrote about God, and that so many years later people, including my self have exsperience God comming into their lives, just like the Bible discribed. I could say the Christian God is personal, but there is, without any doubt a God exists. The debate is not whether God exists but whether is God a personal God. That is what gets all you atheists, you couldn't actually care if God exists if God didn't have power over us and the control to send us to either heaven or hell. So Kleptin say it for them, why are atheists, atheists. I want proof FROM you Kleptin against God's existence, so stop avioding this question, because you if you did question your own self, you may come to relise God isn't that far featched. So Kleptin THINK deep around God. No whether I can or can not prove God, but logically think about how the universe began, from God or from the Big Bang which was already apart of the universe, those are the only two options. Just like you have said to me, "You need to prove the existence of God first before you add what God can do." You said along those lines. So you need to find out what caused the universe, before saying what the universe can do. Thanks, Kleptin the next round will be about you giving me proof against the existence of God, but do still relate back to previous arguments.