Does God exist

I will summarize your arguments:1. We must look at reality with a wide-angle lens and not a microscope.2. All religions are mostly correct. 3. Consciousness must be developed and expanded and is not something we are all endowed with by our evolutionary history.4. Truth raises consciousness, falsehood decreases it. 5. The spiritual, metaphysical, and unconscious dimensions are only realized through altered states of consciousness such as trances, meditation, ecstasy, contemplation, possession, psychedelic substances (drugs).I will first point out that you responded to none of my arguments, so I will await responses with regard to (1) homo sapiens being created in god's image as opposed to the opposite; (2) the anthropomorphization of god; (3) impact and application of the history of creation stories; (4) the possibility of highly capable and complex beings as a result of billions of years of evolution by natural selection; (5) the role and scope of mental illness and imperfection with regard to certainty and doubt on beliefs in deities; (6) the inability of our species to take general knowledge of the partial and extrapolated to knowledge of the "whole;" (7) the monomania of insisting on answers, answer, answers; (8) the role of the law of attraction within consciousness on any particular individual's insistence on a belief in a deity; (9) the role that the scientific and technological revolution has had on developing our understanding of the origins of the universe; (10) the refusal to accept uncertainty and "the fundamental anxiety of human existence" by those who would prefer to find absolute authority in religious texts and institutions.In response, (1) you provide no reason why a wide-angle lens is the only appropriate form of inquiry nor why both specific and general angles can be used simultaneously; (2) This is a debate forum, so I suggest you provide reasons why most religions are correct rather than simply asserting this and expecting us to take your word for it; (3) Every living human being is equipped with consciousness (yes, even Paris Hilton) and you must provide reason to believe consciousness is a transformative aspect of our psyche instead of something which engages in the appropriate application of the facts of our cosmos; (4) Whether someone believes a truth or a lie does not impact the level of consciousness of that individual, which once again if you wish to argue to the contrary, you must provide evidence for rather than a simple unsubstantiated assertion of your assumption; (5) I will address this below, but you must provide reason to believe that these aspects of the human experience are accurate in ascribing certain factual claims to objective reality as it exists. In other words, you must make an effort to legitimize a posteriori articles of faith rather than, once again, insisting we accept your assumptions.Positive Evolutionary Change is Impossible, while De-Evolution is PossibleYou must provide a reason for this. You have simply stated and asserted what you have been asked to prove. You must address why enormous technological change has been made to create a society of greater efficiency can be labeled as not contributing to "positive" cognitive and intellectual evolution. You must somehow (I can think of no conceptual way you can at this point in time) refute the incredibly large majority of distinguished biologists, physicists, chemists, philosophers, and anthropologists who have come to the conclusion that evolution by natural selection is an observable fact of our universe. To find the enormous number of facts you must dispute, I will provide the following:From Linus Pauling, Nobel Prize Winning scientist:1. You must counter the fossil record.2. You must counter the "chemical and anatomical similarities of related life forms."3. You must counter the "geographical distribution of related species."4. You must counter the "recorded genetic changes of related species." You must further explain the following list of 10 of the signs of evolution's accuracy:1. Goose bumps (Curtis Anserina), a reaction to cold which has been proved to be entirely unnecessary after the processes evolution has caused us to undergo. It can be compared to the appendix, which we are born with but ultimately have come to no longer need.2. Jacobson's Organ, an organ within our nose that detects pheromones that has become entirely useless with the modern development of our species.3. Junk DNA, genetic structures which were once used to produce enzymes which allowed us to process Vitamin C, which has since mutated and become a useless part of the human genome. 4. Wisdom teeth, which at one time allowed our larger mouths to operate more efficiently, until our mouths grew smaller and our diets changed making these extra molars unnecessary.5. Darwin's point (Plica Semilunaris), which at one point allowed us to focus sounds but is now only found in roughly 10% of the human population due to its innecessity. 6. The Coccyx, or what was once the tail that humans had but since has become unnecessary since we stopped swinging from trees, which now is solely used for muscular support. 7. As noted previously, the Appendix, which serves no function in the human body but was once used to better process glucose when our diets were composed mostly of leaves. (http://listverse.com...)The argument you have made in round 2 resembles a rough draft of a self-help book aimed at raising awareness. Your arguments in no way, shape, or form point to the existence of a deity. The Impact of Truth and Falsehood on ConsciousnessYou seem to have fallen into the trap of what I call the insistence on a strict dichotomous spectrum. There is the conscious, the unconscious, and the subconscious. You fail to recognize the importance of the subconscious and its great ability for us to absorb bits of information (often propaganda) without recognizing we have absorbed it. You have also conducted the falsehood of shooting before aiming for the target. You have simply and arbitrarily denoted anti-evolutionist propaganda and theism as the truth, and instead of proving why it is the truth, engaged with such authoritarian phrases such as "accept the truth."It would greatly improve your own consciousness to read People of the Lie by M. Scott Peck, who himself being a Christian recognized the real menace that is our species consistent projection of dishonesty onto others. I must also take this opportunity to get a little personal, and if you wish to deduct "points" for such, be it as it may. I am a gay man, and came to recognize this when I was around 8 years old. I did not come out of the closet until 17. This has instilled in me a great appreciation for what you seem to think is the intentional process of internal dishonesty. I would urge you to learn about things you speak of before making broad assumptions about such sensitive and personal topics of which you have no apparent experience. The role of trances, meditation, ecstasy, contemplation, drugs, etc. on truth.The role of these things on our brains is enormous. However, you must realize that if I see a pink elephant in my apartment when on LSD, it does not mean that the pink elephant actually exists. You seem to lack the ability to discern the role of these things on the truth claims of reality. You run the risk of becoming increasingly dependent on the relativization of truth into the individual, something that is useless on a form aimed at providing evidence of the origins and purpose of our species as a collective unit. I will wait for you to respond to (or actually read if you haven't already) the arguments I have made. And I urge you to engage in proving and providing evidence for the arguments you make instead of simply asserting them and saying anyone who doesn't agree with them just can't "accept reality." By doing so you are engaging in the worst form of personal relativization.