Does God Exist? (For fun before people complain)

I would like to start by looking at your first statement, "Atheists say that no one can prove God exists, and they're right. But I say no one can disprove God's existence. " This shows a large misunderstanding in the concept of the burden of proof, with the one making the claim has to prove it. As I have not stated that "God is not real," and Atheism is simply the lack of belief in God, I have no burden of proof. In your case, however you have a burden of proof, as simply being a theist is a claim that, "God is Real," therefore incurring a burden of proof upon yourself. Similarly, if I said that unicorns exist, I would have to prove it, and I couldn't say, "You can't prove unicorns don't exist," as one of my arguments. I would next like to point out that your argument commits the God of the gaps fallacy. You attempt to disprove two widely accepted scientific theories that each have a large amount of evidence attributed to them, and then say, "Because this doesn't work, there must be a God. " As I hope that you can now see, this is fundamentally flawed, as even if we accept your arguments in their entirety, they would come nowhere near to proving God exists. "Within 3 minutes 98% of all matter to ever exist had been created as a result of this explosion. This is not believed to have created the first life, that is believed to have come from evolution which I will go into later. " These two arguments both demonstrate your lack of understanding of both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution. Firstly, the use of the verb, "created," is misleading in that statement, as to create requires a creator, which as you yourself stated, a creator is not required in this theory. You also used the noun "explosion," which the Big Bang was not, as it was more of a rapid expansion. You essentially say that matter came into existence after the Big Bang, which is simply not true, as the Big Bang is simply the point in which our current understanding of the laws of physics begin, and we cannot say that all matter came into existence at this point. You then say that evolution created the first life, but this is not true either. Firstly, your use of the verb, "create," is again incorrect, but you also misunderstand the entirety of the theory of Evolution, as it does not claim to explain how life began just how it became as it is today. You also talk about how something coming from nothing is impossible, but knowledge of quantum physics will put this statement into question, as we do see something called virtual particles that rapidly come in and out of existence without explanation or a cause. It is not a huge stretch to say that one particularly dense virtual particle could have come into existence and rapidly expanded. "The complexity of this universe which goes way beyond the scope of the human mind is ridiculous to call chance. " I would like to comment that this may seem logical, but it is simply not true, and does not have the evidence to back it up. "The reason scientists refuse to accept the falsity of the big bang theory is for two reasons. One, is the big bang theory does not require God. " You make this statement and then fail to back it up. Many scientists are willing to change their minds, as this is how science advances. You do state that accepting that the Big Bang theory is false would mean that, "would mean living a life that honors God, not yourself," but fail to explain what this statement means or how it proves your point. You then use the cosmological argument to support your logic, but the Kalam Cosmological argument is at best trivial, circular and begs the question. P1 Everything which has a beginning has a cause P2 The universe has a beginning C Therefore, the universe has a cause "Everything that begins to exist. " The only thing that truly began to exist is the universe itself. All other things came from pre-existing particles. P1 The Universe has a cause P2 The universe has a beginning C Therefore, the universe has a cause P2 Now becomes obsolete, so the argument is simply, P1 The Universe has a cause C Therefore, the universe has a cause As I said, circular and begs the question. You also commit a special pleading fallacy by stating that God didn't need a cause, but fail to prove it. The majority of your paragraph about evolution can simply be ignored for reasons which I explained earlier. "mutations don't add information to the genetic code, it deletes it," this isn't true. Mutations are simply a copying error, which is why everything is unique, and lead to gradual macro-evolution, and mutualism has little to do with evolution as a process, but you mention there being too many "happy coincidences," but that is why evolution takes millions of years to full complete.