Does God exist

I seek refuge with Allah (swt) from Satan the Rejected, in the name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful Conclusion: "No, I do not. I accept the possibility, but I do not absolutely believe in such a case. The wisest will remain skeptics until they are absolutely and demonstrably proven otherwise. The wisest will say, "It is not possible to know, in our current state, what may or may not have caused the universe." And if it were the case that one were to demonstrate a specific case, say Islam, then it would be their burden to prove this case supernaturally, as using reason and logic to demonstrate the supernatural is contradictory." I already did prove there had to be a cause for the universe, because the universe can't be infinite because it is made up of bits and pieces of matter, while the infinite has to be indivisible, because what is infinity divided by three? It leads contradictory answers The universe therefore either came from nothing, which is impossible, it created itself, also impossible, or it had a creator, which is possible The only possible origin for the universe is that it had a creator, and I already proved this creator must be eternal, so it too doesn't require and explanation, it must be immaterial so it can be infinite, because matter can't be infinite, and it must be intelligent so it could create the universe, all these sound like the God of Islam and logic and reason require the supernatural since logic and reason are immaterial abstracts "Pro failed to recognize my argument of the computer simulation in its entirety. The computer program was programmed by the creator, however it is the user that starts the instance of the simulation, and it is the user that is "playing" therefore one cannot grant anyone in this scenario the title of "creator." Nor does this case include an afterlife and an absolute omnipotent being to be worshiped, therefore recognition of the outside realm is irrelevant. This case is just as believable as your case." Con failed to identify the creator of the computer simulation, Con's theory of a computer simulation universe is hypothetical and con cannot prove that there is no afterlife just because the universe is a simulation, also I said the creator of the simulation must be, God, the devil, aliens, robots, or people. Only one of those is eternal and that is God, and only God could be the creator of the universe because any finite thing such as aliens or robots such as in the matrix movies would create an infinite regress of explanations, Occam's Razor requires us not to multiply entities beyond necessary proving God must be the creator of the universe, and this God has to be eternal so it too doesn't require an explanation. "Have you ever seen anything immaterial create something material. Logic and reason dictates that the number "1" cannot create a chair, nor can any other immaterial object create a material object, so therefore the creator of this universe, which is material, cannot be immaterial." Just because we haven't seen anything immaterial create something material doesn't mean it can't happen, also Con missed the point why God is immaterial, which is so He could be infinite, because matter can't be infinite because it is made up of parts, only God can be infinite because He is immaterial and indivisible. "Again, I address this issue, you cannot use logic nor reason to explain the supernatural. You must prove and demonstrate that supernatural things can happen in order for credibility. Nor can you use the argument that something immaterial can create something material, because we have never observed such a case." Logic and Reason require the supernatural because logic and reason are immaterial abstracts, and as I already said just because we haven't seen something immaterial create something material doesn't mean it can't happen. "Again you say "someone" as in referring to an absolute creator, when I have expressed numerous times that the cause of an event does not necessarily mean an absolute creator. The cause of this universe can be the case of an omnipotent entity, but not recognizable as a single object and is conscious normally you would think a god would be." As I already said the Creator of the universe has to be conscious to make the decision of creating a universe. "You keep on equating the cause of the universe to an absolute creator, which is a faulty assumption. It is within reason to believe that this universe may have a cause, but to believe a certain cause without proof, is unreasonable." I already proved the universe must have a cause, and that cause must be conscious to choose to create a universe. "It is faulty to use religious text to address the credibility of believing in God." The creator must be eternal, immaterial, and conscious as I already proven which is just like the God in the Quran "You are only one of hundreds and millions of humans on this planet that believes their faith is the one true faith." but my faith is the only faith which worships the creator and not the creation, Hindus worship potatoes, and Christians worship a man, we worship the creator, Whom I already proved is eternal, immaterial, and intelligent. "You did not prove anything. You are just trying to make unreasonable belief reasonable. If you think your logic is correct, then you must assume all of these scenarios can also be correct. 1.It is within reason to say our creator can be material 2.It is within reason to say the entity that created us is omnipotent, but not conscious like a God. 3.It is within reason to say the entity that created us is omniscient, but not omnipotent. 4.It is within reason to say that the entity that created us is a conglomerate of causes instead of one. 5.It is within reason to say that entity that created us does not exist anymore. 6.It is within reason to say our creator can be material, but their creator is immaterial 7.It is within reason to say the cause of this universe does not care for us." 1. I proved He has to be immaterial 2. I proved He has to be conscious 3. how so? 4. Occam's Razor goes against that, we can't have more entities than necessary 5. There is no proof of that 6. Why can't we say the creator is immaterial? 7. How do you reach such a conclusion? Morality "You have a fundamental flaw. You assert that law is not moral code when that is just what it is. How does man make law if he does not know what is moral? God did not instruct not to smoke tobacco on school buildings, yet why did man find it compelling to make this into a law? You have a fundamental flaw in your morality argument. If God only knew what's wrong and what was right, then it is only he who is able to instruct man to do things, however man has found whats wrong and what's right independent from a God." Smoking ins school may not be legal but how is it immoral? If God doesn't exist why can't I kill people? I can get away with it? "flaw 1 - you equate the well being of society to the existence of a God. flaw 2 - you assert that humans can only moral things in fear of punishment or reward. flaw 3 - you equate killing yourself as a no-loss situation, when if there was no God, and if there was no afterlife, every moment you spend in your life should be deemed precious. flaw 4 - Moral code(law), can be made by man." 1. Who cares about society without God 2. yes 3. every moment will be forgotten so who cares about this non existent life? 4. Only legal codes can not moral codes "There is no absolute evil nor is there an absolute good. What is moral is relative to the situation and society you are in. If i'm in a civilized society, i will remain civil because this is what i was taught. If it was a dire situation with the means of life and death, my morality will change accordingly to survive. My morals aren't absolute, they are relative." If morals are relative then killing people is ok, also who cares about a civilized society when we are all going to die? Transcendental Argument- Con tries to say the laws of logic are subjective, they are not, or else Con's argument is without foundation, because he doesn't believe in logic but is trying to use logic Logic is real and immaterial disproving the atheist/materialistic worldview Quranic Argument- "This is an issue of belief. Honestly, if you think, because some object is so complex that it can't be replicated, then there must exist a God, then I must say you're just a very gullible person. I can agree with you that the Quran is very complex, but in no way will that argument will ever bring me to believing in God. Furthermore, i do not see the correlation of how something so complex brings the idea of a creator." Con did not answer the question how can a man who knew nothing about poetry such as Muhammad (saw) have created a masterpiece? where did it come from? And why couldn't the poets of that time create something better or at least as good? They really needed too for Mecca's economy's sake, and did try their best but still they couldn't do it, Therefore the Quran couldn't have come from an arab, nor a non arab, only from God, proving that God exists It is reasonable to believe in God Well that's it for now I had a wonderful debate, Jazakallah everybody and may God bless you all inshallah Salam