God, heaven, and hell only exist metaphysically, not physically. Therefore, are only ideas.

You are still overlooking everything I said about subjectivity. Yes! What if we cant prove this, what if we cant prove that. That's when we must act on impassion and emotion to answer the question. I believe we are using subjectivity to give us the validity that you are there, we are debating etc. If we cannot prove anything, we must be subjective about it. I'm not saying I do not believe in intelligent design, I'm saying I do not believe in intelligent design by god because both you and I know all the inconsistencies that have been covered in every other god ebate. No. I did not overlook what you said about subjectivity. I stated clearly that I totally disagree with what you said. Certainly I can point to things in my life which have completely convinced me that God does exist. But those things were subjective. While they offered undeniable proof to me they would in no way shape or form would be proof to you. I totally disagree that if we cannot answer the question "we must act on impassion (sic) and emotion" to answer it. That completely rules out logic and reasoning. As I pointed out that just because something does not exist physically, and no one can point to it, does not mean it cannot exist except as an idea. Many atheists are fond of bringing up unicorns and comparing them to God. Unicorns are, of course, physical beings rather than the supernatural being that people believe God to be. To be called a "unicorn" they must have the physical characteristics of a unicorn. If it had the horn AND wings it would not be a unicorn. But even there there is no way of saying for certain that unicorns have not existed here in the past, that they may well exist here and now hidden in a lost valley, or they exist in abundance on another planet. You are saying that the fact that something cannot be proved to physically exist means that it only exists as an idea. As I pointed out this is completely incorrect as something can exist without me knowing about it... such as the unicorn on a different planet. The exact same holds true for God. Your point about inconsistencies should be totally ignored by judges as you are bringing them up in the fourth round rather than the second. And no, I do not know what you are talking about when you refer to them. You likewise present them as an established fact ("because you and I both know...") without any evidence. That would be a different debate.But if I don't exist, why or how are you debating me? The thing is you're still debating me, therefore I still retain value in your mind, so I exist as a subjective idea. I've come to the realization the true meaning of this debate is not regarding metaphysics. It simply comes down to this: We cannot prove god rationally, because god has no OBJECTIVITY. The truth about god can only be answered with SUBJECTIVITY. EVERTHING IS SUBJECTIVE.e I disagree. The only way that God can be proved IS rationally because as you said He has no objectivity. The contradictory statement made by so many atheists is that they want physical "proof" of a non-physical being. Sorry, but that is illogical. But as I said the fact that His existence cannot be proved does not mean He cannot exist or exists only as an idea. The fact is that you cannot prove to me that you are actually debating me or that you exist. You could very well be a dream, and when I wake up I will see reality for what it is. In my mind anyone who has watched the movie "Matrix" should understand that possibility. Deductive reasoning is the path to truth when subjective reality leave us hanging.Let me ask you a question, "Why should we love mankind if this may all be a dream and they mean nothing?" You're just contradicting yourself. This "deep" love you speak of, I've never felt it, so how does it exist? The evidence you are simply providing only affects you and not me. It's like when somebody says " Oh yes, I always feel that god is with me everywhere I go." That's you, not me.You are getting into the whole purpose issue which, trust me, you don't want to approach right now... if you think I am long-winded now wait until you see me on that subject. Suffice it to say that I fully believe that life does have a profound meaning and purpose, but that meaning and purpose are non-existent without God. And yes, that is subjective. You said: "This "deep" love you speak of, I've never felt it, so how does it exist?". You are still arguing that the only reality is what you have experienced. It is as if you are trapped in your inexperienced 16 year old body. You do not see what is real beyond your own senses. But the fatal flaw you are making is that reality exists whether you are aware of it or not. I'm sorry if this sounds patronizing, I am not trying to be, but you are 16, I am 65. Which of the two of us do you think has had more life experiences? The point I am trying to make is that because you have not had an experience so far does not mean you will not in the future. A typical sixteen year old is often too wrapped up in his/her own life to be concerned about the lives of others. Often they may feel sad for a moment about the starving kids in Africa, but they will not let that affect their going to the mall with their friends. But guess what? That could very well change as they gain more maturity. Eventually they do see the big picture. My first encounter with this love was when I was a 19 year old atheist taking a rest while mowing the lawn, and looking at a blade of grass idlely. I cannot explain it but I was simply completely overwhelmed looking at its order and symmetry, an order that I then sensed all around me, and then felt His complete overwhelming presence. When I read your question the first thing that popped into my mind was a lyric from a John Denver song ("Spring"?)... "A part of everything is here in me." Probably not your style but you should listen to it: http://www.youtube.com.... When you can quiet yourself and then open your mind to realize that you are one with every living thing, every person, whether they be of this world or not you will sense the oneness which is He. And yes that will be a completely subjective experience, but universally true nonetheless. So yes, it could very well be that one could "feel that God is with me everywhere I go." I cannot help but feel that now.TRUTH IS SUBJECTIVE, which makes it definitive to you or I. You cannot determine if my definition of reality is reality, so you are forced to draw conclusions SUBJECTIVELY. Absolutely not. We may not know the truth and we may have completely different ideas of what the truth is. But no matter what I think the truth is does not change what the truth actually is, and with most things there can be only ONE truth.I'm not saying that rationality cannot deduce anything, this would be absurd. But Rationality is limited when it comes to the god debate, due to the fact that there is no objectivity. What I'm saying is Science and rationality have no consideration for ultimate purposes. Nietzsche said this in "Human, All Too Human." I would agree that that science has no consideration for ultimate purposes but that simply means that it is limited. Science is the study of the physical universe. It cannot hope to discover what lies beyond. It can point to the possibility of other dimensions but it will never be able to describe them because they would fall into the category of supernatural rather than natural. Rationality however can take us anywhere we want to go. Deductive reasoning is what led me from the atheist looking at a blade of grass to a theist believing that God exists, to a deist believing that God was in some way responsible for creation, to a non-denominational Christian seeing the truth in Christ message but not being a part of any church, to Roman Catholic where I see the greatest amount of what to me rings true. My beliefs are certainly subjective. But that does not change the fact that there is a REAL truth that does exist and is not an idea.Very good point. Every invention does start as an idea does it not? The inventors want this idea to exist, so they make it exist. THIS IS SUBJECTIVE, and the same could be said about god. Again, god can be proved subjectively, not rationally.I would like to point out that "proof of God" was not the issue of the debate. It was whether or not something non-physical can exist as more than a mere idea. I think I have fully explained that it can. In as far as your inventor, once his invention exists it is no longer a mere idea; it has a reality of its own and is no longer subjective. If another inventor had created the exact same thing before he had his idea, his idea does not change the reality of the object existing already. You still seem to be missing my point that because someone has his/her own thoughts or ideas of what reality is does not change what reality actually is. God can exist no matter what you or I think about His reality. More and more evidence seems to be piling up that points to His existence. Just as with science just because no one has yet discovered the "missing link" does not necessarily prove evolution false. It simply means we can't yet see the big picture; we don't yet have the full truth. The exact same thing is true with God. The fact that we do not have all the pieces to the puzzle and cannot point to a completed picture does not mean He exists only as an idea. Like you said in the previous sentence, ideas could be incorrect. The real truth is subjective, not objective.Sorry, but you are totally wrong. The real truth has nothing to do with what we imagine the truth to be. No matter what our ideas are the real truth exists despite them. God can exist as real no matter what I, you or anyone else thinks about it.Thank you for this debate.... I enjoyed it thoroughly. Good luck to you in your life's search for answers.