There are no arguments for God that cannot be refuted.

Regarding the universe creating itself: It did not. The universe came from nothing, uncaused. (This will be expanded upon later) //Premise A: We exist here today. // This may not be true. For example, there is the classic solipsist argument that the only thing one is sure about is one's own mind thus I cannot be sure you exist and you cannot be sure I exist. Also, no one can be sure anyone else exists thus the claim "we exist here today" may not be true. You have not proven that "we" are and thus this is flawed. I urge voters (who may or may not exist) to take the aforementioned into consideration. However, for arguments sake I will assume premise A. //Premise B: Before we existed there were a series of events, one after another leading up to our existence today. // Sure. This serious leads back to the beginning of the universe. I agree with this. **I am going to skip most of the middle paragraphs since they are proving a premise I already accept. ** But I will say one thing, as my opponent claims, "We do not believe, however, that Allah changes". With this in mind, if I show that Allah changes in someway, be it his mind or physically, this argument falls since that means Allah needs a creator which means he is not the "supreme being". Allah changed his mind: There is a story in the Quran where Muhammed was talking with Musa who said that Allah's mandate of 50 prayers a day was too much. Once this was told to Muhammed he convinced Allah to lessen the number by 5. He did the above 9 times until the required number of prayer was 5. [1] This is an example of change because as my opponent's definition agrees with, he is going from one state to another, a state of mind to another. With this in mind we can see that Allah changes so we can substute Allah in argument two (which I will respond to in a minute). 1) Allah changes thus he has a beginning. Then we go up to argument 1; Premise B: Before Allah existed there were a series of events leading to his existence, and then I crossapply my opponent's own argument which means something must have created Allah thus meaning he is not the "supreme being" and is not god. Now on to argument 2. (I will respond to the conclusions of both arguments in a minute) The two premises are fine. The conclusion for both of these is that the universe needs a creator but this is just not so. The universe can come from nothing. This may seem odd but listen. Observation 1: Our universe has 0 net energy. Our universe has 0 total energy due to the fact that matter/energy is positive and gravity is negative thus if you add them, the cancel to 0 exactly. The important thing about a 0 energy universe is that it can come from nothing. This will be shown in subsequent observations. Observation 2: Quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing. Quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing, of course these are quite short lived since they have positive net energy but if a particle, or a universe, were to say, have 0 total energy, there would be no limit upon the longevity of said entity. Observation 3: Since our universe has 0 total energy and quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing our universe can come from nothing. Therefore: Your god is not needed. [2] (I can provide more evidence if needed) Conclusion: Even if one were to ignore my refutation of the specific arguments and to assert that they still stand, I have shown that Allah changes thus using my opponent's own argument against himself. Essentially, my opponent's arguments fall or Allah is not god and I win. [1] . http://www.sunna.info... [2] . http://www.infidels.org...