Resolution : God does exist

If there was once a girl named Sarah...... Sorry about that I went off track again.... I had a crush on girl named Sarah Sessano and yeah...... But anyway, 1. Why does God have to be a religious scam ? A Scam meaning that someone decided to trick an entire race into thinking that is that..... What more evidence can I give you ? Faith is not foolish, is not something a uneducated people put their trust in or use. If that is the case, then perhaps all of us are foolish. Foolish to believe Santa Claus exists. Foolish to have Hope. What more can I give you ? I don't even think I need to provide evidence for a Philosophical Debate. And I put this debate in the category of Philosophy which might be my mistake. And what is wrong with what people believe ? It is their personal belief. The fact that I did not put this debate in the category of Religion really tells you a lot........ LOL. It might be a scam to you, but to others it's not. 2. " This refute barely addresses my argument but instead addresses the fact that I used the word religion. " I did not in any way shape or form. You are using Religion to argue a Philosophical case. I don't recall doing such stuff. Am I that stupid to do that ? I should however clarified more. To me, there is a difference between Religion and Philosophy. And since this is a Phlisopihlca Case, I find it interesting that you would bring in Religion...... And besides, the people I mentioned...... these were ATHIEST Philosophers ! They were not famed Christians, or ........ If my opponent thinks that Philosophy is another form of religion and is not a valid branch to study, that is not another debate I want to have..... 3. How do we know God has a Penis ? Once again, my opponent is thinking of God in a religious way. As if God is Material, lives in a Fancy Mansion upstairs. If my opponent has studied Metaphysics or Philosophy in General, his mind of thinking would change a little. Religion is used to tell the why. That's why Christians believe in all of that fun stuff. "Also, what about the fact that it does not have to be a someone, but a something. Someone does not make water flow down the stream, gravity makes the water flow down the stream, I am yet to meat Mr and Mrs Gravity. " That's great ! But that is in the topic of Science. We can have another debate on that. But since we are debating about God in a Philosophical Sense, one does not need Proof, Scientific Proof, I meant. "We agreed this was not to be about a personal god but the god hypothesis that is defined by my terms and definitions. " My opponent is either living in a Time Warp or has no Idea what the truth is. I commented and messaged him many times on what I want for this debate. The Debate to be about the existence of a God in the Philosophical terms. Maybe it was my fault that I did not explain enough. And perhaps it was my mistake, because I assumed that even though I accepted his terms, I thought that he would accept my only term, that is to be a debate about a God, not a personal God of Religion. I was wrong. Instead, he has betrayed what we have agreed on and turned this into the hugest mess since my Birthday Party..... Now I think I know what he is going to say........ but the definition of God in the Oxford Dictionary.... is that not a god of religion ? My opponent has consistently flip flopped. And my opponent brought the religion stuff in of his own will. " The point I am making here is that religion was created by us to full fill our needs and give us meaning and purpose. Each culture formed its own religion to suit its own needs. " This was from your Round 2 Argument. In Context, what my opponent is saying is that God was made up to feed the masses....... "We agreed this was not to be about a personal god but the god hypothesis that is defined by my terms and definitions. " Really ? Really ?! Has my opponent forgotten his own argument ? And my opponent's Defention of God from the Oxford Dictionary clashes with with the quote up above. One can inference from the Definition that God is worshiped..... a personal god............ When was the last time, a unpersonal god was worshipped ? Thomas Jefferson believed that a God existed but he never worshipped the God. And why do I have preconceived Ideas of God ? Show me PROOF that I ever said anything of the sort in my arguments ! Besides...... " the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being" What I did or at least tried to was to expand on that. And why should you depend only on one source ? My opponent's terms to my knowledge never forbade using other sources to expand my argument further. " In no way have I asserted that "as our knowledge of the world increases so does our need for a God.". 4. Thank you for finally responding to that point..... I mistyped. I was being super tired. And no one is a Super Human. That's FANTASY, A SCAM.... LOL...... And why does not one need faith to have Science ? Bob has faith that his evidence for the Big Bang Theory has no problems at all. Are you going to go accuse him of Academic Dishonesty ? And why is it Dishonesty ? Both Religion and Science are in search for the truth. Why is is that some of the Top Universities in the USA are Religious ? University of Notre Dame, Santa Clara University,..... I am just saying that Both Religion and Science are based on Faith. A Faith that there is something out there. There is a reason why Many of the Scientists and Thinkers of our time have a Faith. William Craig, George Mendel, Thomas Aquinas..... And how about the Biblical Scholars huh ? " A man/women of faith can"t also be a man/women of science " Why ? Why is that ? Show me Evidence. What do you say to the Catholic Church who to my knowledge accepted both Evolution and the big bang theory ? One cannot be a person of Science alone. Same goes for Faith. Besides aren't you a person of faith in Science ? Do you believe in the Scientific Method ? Why ? Can you prove it ? If you say no, Then you contradict yourself again. You say you should believe something only if it's proved scientifically, yet you believe that even though it isn't proved scientifically. Why does one look for the truth ? Science and Religion are both looking for the same ending, through different pathways. Why do you look for the truth ? Here is my answer to your question. First off, as a Catholic, I accept the Big Bang, Evolution, and everything else Science has revealed. That's the How. The Why ? I believe that God did all of that because he wanted to share his love. That's what I believe. Perhaps you believe different. But the fact that we both accept all that Science has revealed shows that you are bit narrow minded. We are just different on the why stuff. Your Entire argument against my argument falls apart because we both agree on how the earth was created. Now did God have a hand in that ? Maybe...... But that is my belief.