A creator of the universe does exist.

To mock the annoying style of debate you have become accustomed to, I shall copy and paste your arguments in quotes and refute them as well. : ) YOU - "First of all, that doesn't prove anything. There goes an ad populum fallacy among Christians, believing that a creator of the life on earth implies a creator of the UNIVERSE. For example, we create computers with "hard coded logic," but does that necessarily mean we created the UNIVERSE. And still, how does logic imply a creator in the first place?" ME - We created the "hard coded logic" and that means we created the computer. However, one could argue that someone or something first gave us this logic to create a computer in the first place. This extends my argument that logic can only derive from logic. Logic cannot come from material and if you trace this theory as far back as possible, you have to believe in a creator. Logic cannot simply come into existence without some other logical force acting upon it. Also, I could argue that your belief is "ad populum" because the education system teaches these theories to the masses. I'm actually anti establishment and you are the one conforming to popular belief. YOU - "No..... Where the heck are you going with this? This doesn't make any sense. First of all the creation of the world isn't what the big bang theory talks about. Second of all, you contradicted yourself as before you stated that DNA (which of course is made out of matter) is logic while going about how the matter that makes it up came afterward." ME - The first sentece for Big Bang under Wikipedia states "The Big Bang is a cosmological model of the initial conditions and subsequent development of the universe. " How is this not talking of the creation of the world? Of course DNA is made of matter. So is all the information you store on a computer. It is all saved on a hard drive. But this is not the important stuff. The important stuff is what the information means. This is why I argue there must be a creator. The logic is so perfect in DNA, that only a universal creator could bring it into existence. ME - If you believe in primordial soup, then you have more faith in Atheism than I do in my religion. It seems as though your coming up with any excuse to deny the existence of a God. YOU - "Explain to me how this has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Also, you might want to reconsider your whole "logical" argument, as you are constantly putting the term out of context." ME - Believing logic came before matter has everything to do with a creator of the universe. That's what i've been arguing the whole time. That a supreme creator had to be logical in order to create such a perfect universe. I'm a software developer and we use "logic" in place of code or a certain way of thinking. Defintion: http://www.merriam-webster.com.... As you can see, there are many different interpretations fo the word. Why do liberals always try to argue what words mean instead of actually debating? YOU - "Life's creator = Universe's creator That argument is terribly invalid. Life's creator could have been part of the universe. Heck, that's like saying WE created the universe just because we create computers. Also, the existence of patterns or mechanical systems doesn't imply a creator as well. I gave the water cycle as an example." ME - Of course I believe life's creator = universe's creator. As I said before, logic came before matter. If it we're the case that they we're different, I could not say that. Your implying by believing the two are different that matter just came into being all of a sudden, and somehow a creator of life was created out of this matter. It is not feasible to believe that. I believe that God was in existence first, and through his power (or logic) he created the universe. I refuted the argument of the computers earlier in this round. You are correct when you say Nature creates patterns. But I believe that Nature was created by God anyhow. Once again, logic must come before logic. I'm getting ttired of stating that principle but it backs all of my arguments. After all, nature can create patterns but only God can create logic. Here's an excellent youtube video of a Harvard professor extending my argument: http://www.youtube.com...