It is reasonable to believe that God doesn't exist

Rebuttals for the arguments The Old Testament "The Old Testament is widely regarded as almost complete fiction. " I respectfully disagree with my opponent's statement. It is quite evident that most if not all of the Old testament events happened: . http://lavistachurchofchrist.org.... I would like to ask my opponent to provide some proof of this. "The advancement in Science in the last 400 years has disproven the possibility of almost the entire account. " Again I would like to ask my opponent for some proof of this. I, having read the whole Bible more than three times (now reading it the fourth time around), have not seen any contradiction with the Bible and the development of science. As a matter of fact, I think it supports more than it disproves the Bible. "However, given that most of the Old Testament is horrific and at times contradictory to what Jesus later taught, its presence in the modern Bible is confusing. " I can see why my opponent thinks the Old Testament is horrific and contradictory to what Jesus later taught however, if one looks ever so closely, it is not contradictory, but rather together in unity on a line so fine that if one takes out or puts in information, it becomes contradictory. Once again I would like to ask my opponent to provide proof of this to me, so that I can see why it is "contradictory". The New Testament "Again, the gospels are hardly scientific record. " Whether the gospels have scientific record or not does not matter. The Bible is not a science book nor is it a book that gives one answer to anything and everything they need. The Bible is simply God's words that we can reflect upon and believe. "This is not the case with the Bible. Unchanged for nearly two thousand years, have modern things been added to account for well, modern things? What does the Bible say on the Internet, or Cardiology, or Genetics? The answer is obviously, nothing. In fact, in terms of functionality the Bible is very lacking. It only serves the purpose of furthering Christianity, not proving that it is factual. " If we look at a book of trees will we find things about the Internet, or Cardiology, or genetics? Or if we look at a book of Genetics, will we find something about the stock market, the history of the presidents, or what the big news is in the celebrity world? Of course not. Every book has a specific subject it touches on. The Bible is there to show from the beginning the relationship with man and God. If one wants to find out more about scientific evidence proving God, there are plenty of modern books out there to prove so. Argument from Morality "If every man, women and child felt the same guilt about the same things, we might have a reasonable argument for objective morals from the divine, but they don't. " The Bible never states that morals are objective in the world. In God's eyes there is only one right and wrong. However in people's eyes there are multiple rights and wrongs. It is up to the people whether to see it God's way or their way. "The ability to see what is right and wrong doesn't exist, since a constant example of right and wrong doesn't exist. Most things that are thought of as wrong might also be ok in a certain context or in a different culture. " But in God's eyes there is only one right and wrong. Even if others think it is okay to kill for any reason, God considers it a sin even if one kills for their loved ones. Stealing is not okay in any context even for a starving child. If one truly believes the power of God, they do not need to steal to give. Despite whatever the culture says or does, if it is wrong in God's eyes, then it is wrong. The ability to see this right and wrong does exist and it is called the Holy Spirit. Only then can you see the rights and wrongs in God's eyes. "My point is that both the Bible and the existence of a moral God are contradicted by what we see in our environment; massively varied moral codes between cultures made up of almost identical organisms. " This is not a contradiction at all. God gave humans the freedom to do whatever they like. Whether they follow Him or not is totally up to the person him/herself, but the action they take on earth, they will pay for in the end. Argument from Ignorance "The fact that we don't know the answer to these questions doesn't support the existence of a creator. In regards to these questions, it is better to continue to further the accumulated knowledge of mankind on these subjects and accept your ignorance, rather than make assumptions. " 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. 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. Evolution is the one that assumes things. Humans have the ability to think beyond any other organisms. We are able to analyze other organisms and also have understanding of the world and why it happens. But why does a chimp who is 99.8% related in genes with us not get the same kind of traits? Evolution simply says that it is by "luck" we got it. 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, but rather that there was a creator involved. In the same way we can see that us humans are different from other organisms. We have succeeded in ways no other organisms have. We have languages and technology. Also we analyze and understand other organisms and nature. What other organism can do things like that? We cannot simply assume it is by luck, but conclude that there must have been a creator involved in this. If there wasn't a creator than other organisms should have come to our level for evolution permits adaption. 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. Also check here: . http://www.creationism.org... There are many things pointing to the evidence of a creator, and therefore it would not be reasonable to believe that God does not exist. Thanks for reading.