It is impossible for God to not exist!

Who is Eminem comparing himself to in this rap? What makes being a rap God good to an atheist audience? That's right he's comparing himself to the God that we all wish we were and must cower before for this omnipotent narcissist runs reality and there's no doubt about it: http://www.youtube.com...Okay! What does that nonsense poopy nishnash mean?^ yours Con! (it is a conjunctive so it can't lose me conduct mark) v with the atheists!Gv~ is this debate. It doesn't matter if you use symbols or not okay fancy boy smartypants! Okie dokie.Time to activate my inner soul chakra that God has blessed me with to defeat this opponent once and for all!God made everything, so if God doesn't exist then you don't exist! If you don't exist, you can't read this debate!If there is no god, then what made water turn into wine? Who was it that Muhammad spoke with? What is it that fuels all the demigod forms of Hinduism? Truly we see that god is needed for all these events.Do you know what happens if you pray to God to not exist? He removes his existence but simultaneously recreates himself because he is a thing and thus apart of everything and he created everything so thus he is impossible to stop existing. It's like in a game of SIMS, we all know that SIMS can't run around the screen if EA games (the God of SIMS) didn't exist![http://www.thesims.com...] Same way we can't exist if God wasn't there since we are his creation.God is also the basis by which we judge anything, without God we can't strive to make anything better. Inevitably all that isn't god is bound to be imperfect, since God is the benchmark of perfection but if God never existed we'd never know to strive for anything whatsoever. We strive to debate this and win purely because we want to maintain a win record closer to perfection (meaning infinite wins). We all know to be God is impossible for mere mortals and limited systems but regardless without God there's absolutely nothing to strive for and the entire concept of improvement and adapting would be obsolete. Con would have no reason to win this unless he was trying to be more like God than me.God is not just a human invention, this is a common misunderstanding. Regardless of this, if we invented God then you are saying God exists since we invented him. If God doesn't exist then we didn't invent him and you just created a paradox. Checkmate atheists!Analyze this: Is a creation of the mind existing or not? There is no such thing a an analogous measure of the degree to which something exists, it's a digital variable that either is or is not. God is real at least as a concept and if a concept exists, it can't simultaneously not exist as this would make all logic fall apart and mean that we may as well say pro=con and this debate is a tie.Now, what is left to argue? Oh yes, these sneaky atheists always have tricks up their sleeves... The 'burden of proof' argument.Let's just stop you there for one moment. You call use the imbeciles for believing in God without concrete proof that he exists, but I tell you this you are saying it is even possible for God to not exist without any proof that a reality without a creator of some kind is even possible to begin with. Atheists always beg the question[http://begthequestion.info...] when they say that God doesn't exist because he hasn't been proven to the people existing in a reality that was never created. That's just so ridiculous I almost coughed up my black market pork while I was having my sin-fest before my prayer rave.I mean seriously think about it for one second (or longer if you have an attention span greater than most atheists); how could you say that the creator of a creation doesn't exist because the creation has people stupid enough to think that it's possible for the creation to have no creator? You cannot. The burden of proof is actually on atheists to prove that a reality of no creation is possible in the first place.