God Exists

1. Argument for a personal cause: Though I guess it is true that this doesn’t necessarily mean that the cause of the universe is the source of all moral authority from this argument. But it would be a very bizarre form of atheism to acknowledge that there really is a timeless, spaceless, immaterial personal cause to the universe who might possibly be the source of moral authority. A force doesn’t have any freewill, for example when a person sits down he can decide to get up whenever he pleases… However this isn’t true with forces, it can’t decide to do things on its own accord because forces are mindless. If the universe really does have a beginning, it makes sense that a mind started it. Energy can't simply decide to begin to exist. If there is an actual personal cause to the big bang then it is probably all-powerful, what else can expand an infinitely dense singularity that isn’t all-powerful? Correct me if I’m wrong, If the big bang is actually infinite, as you say infinitely dense, you will need infinite energy, which follows infinite temperatures. One can’t cool an infinitely hot thing, not warm an infinitely cold thing. But there does exist things with finite temperatures, for example where I’m at right now it is 53 degrees, 53 isn’t an infinite temperature. So if everything came from an infinite temperature, why is the earth’s temperature finite? This is why I’m skeptic about singularities. 2. Argument for a designer I doubt thermodynamic systems actually make life Heat is not intelligent enough to make any form of life, nor cold. I almost find it as silly as saying one evolved from a rock. Life itself looks designed, and earth is finely tuned to be compatible with life. Are you saying that this just coincidence, or are you denying that things looks designed and the earth is not finely tuned for life? And how would you know no intellectual mind plays any part in this? The observable evidence clearly infers a creator. Con’s arguments 1. The Omnipotence Paradox I don’t really get what’s not computing here. If an omnipotent being can really do all things, then the being can really do all things. It follows logically that since the being can do all things, this does includes paradoxes. It may be a counterintuitive ability of omnipotence, but it logically follows 2. The Omniscience Paradox How can a supreme being foreknows? Oh easy, probably logic. For example if some guy jumps off a cliff a few miles up and you see him falling towards the ground you can put the two evidence together and conclude that he will hit the ground. If a being can predict the future, logic is the best explanation to this phenomenon. To note, logic would be based on contingency, so there wouldn’t be any lack of contingency. Also I’m kind of skeptical 3. Miracles Well it may not be due to his omnipotence, but due to creatorship. According to the Bible, the origin of the universe is scripted, things where brought about through words. When God said let there be light, there was light. I do kind of relate this to software development, you know how like when you have your own forum you would have this hidden control panel for being the admin, or if you’re developing a game you could edit the game’s variables through a command line (assuming that you knew the commands). If this divine agent is in fact the creator of the universe, I don’t see why the creator can’t have created some sort of administrative access like that on the computer. So in a sense, it’s not necessarily because he is omnipotent, but is the creator. If say this being wanted to walk on water, he just simply commands the water to be walkable much like a software developer gives commands to whatever software. 4. Russell's Teapot You could of just simply saved text space here and said the burden of proof is on you. Though I guess it’s interesting to find out why atheists keep referencing a teapot when they’re talking about the burden of proof.