Does God exist

I already said I agreed with you when there might have been a cause for the beginning of the universe. The problem is that you're giving credit to a God, which you cannot absolutely prove or justify, to the cause of the universe. The cause can be a computer simulation. Imagine this, a software company, say the creator, builds a new game called SIMS and releases out to the public. Each and every time a user opens up a SIMs game, an instance of the universe is created. By following your rules of logic, this scenario can easily be justified and reasonable to believe. Notice the creator, the software company, they are not in complete control of the instance of the universe a player has created. They have merely programmed the game and set some laws and restrictions added to it, but are not omnipotent. Therefore, it would be unreasonable, as an artificially intelligent SIMs character to call out to the creator for help. Furthermore, the player, albeit a little bit more in control still is not omnipotent because of the laws and restrictions set by the creator in the first place. Lastly, for any event to occur, it may be relied on multiple causes instead of one. For example, if one were to make a chair, a series of causes (taking down a tree, gathering a wood, preparing the wood, having the woodworker finish the chair), can make an even occur. For the scenario given, the computer simulation, the causes would be the software company making the game, the computer processor to compute the game, the graphics card to view the game, the player creating an instance of the game, are all causes as to why this even has occurred. I have just given a scenario that is justifiable to believe in, according to your logic, as it suits the need for a cause of the beginning of the Universe, but recognize how there is not iota of a God, an absolute creator, but just a conglomerate of causes. There are an infinite amount of abstract ideas and causes that can suit the logic that you are using. What proves your God more justifiable than the scenario I have just given? Can you absolutely and demonstrably prove such a case? I know that anyone cannot absolutely disprove the scenario that we are in a simulation, that we can be in a game right now, where no entities in the outside realm are omnipotent to save us, nor is there an afterlife, but are we to believe in such a scenario? No, it's unreasonable to believe in such a case, because of how we lack the knowledge of the universe at this point in time. This is your problem, you're equating a cause to an absolute creator, when there are infinite amount of abstract ideas that can fit to the cause of the beginning of the universe. "I have already deductively proven that Creator of the universe has to be eternal, immaterial, and intelligent" No, you have inductively reasoned this because you are only using common sense and reason to bring your point. Had you've been deductively reasoning to me, You would've been conducting an experiment to foolproof prove to me that a Creator exists. Say one deems your logic reasonable, what then? He then asks, "well, which God is the true God," and you would express how your God is the most fitting, but what if he doesn't like your God. Say, this person has now converted to Hindu using all the reasoning that you have used in the first place. Then the most reasonable, who has viewed this whole situation, would believe it's unreasonable to believe either, and unreasonable to try and prove such a case when our knowledge of the universe, is not complete enough to make such assumptions. The problem with the Morality argument is that you imply that only a creator can impose moral code, when man cannot. Throughout history we have seen laws imposed independent from religious beliefs. The United States federal law deems it illegal to smoke tobacco on federally funded elementary schools. This is not a law that has any sort of ties with religious ideas, but we as a society abide to it, because we are intellectually capable of what good this can bring. God did not make this law, man did. Man can make moral code. Also, the atheist community comprises of only 9 percent of the federal prisons, when they are 30 percent in the census. The chances that a lawbreaker or evildoer is a religious person is highly more likely. A reasonable man would recognize this and conclude that religious ideas do not correlate with morality but more with society and nature. Morality does not correlate with religion or a God. Is there a moral good that a religious man can do that an atheist man cannot absolutely do? Is there a moral evil that an atheist man can do but a religious man have not done? "The animals hunt in packs and care for their young to survive as a species, but they rely on instinct, they don't have free will and the consciousness we do" Can you prove such a thing? I would argue that animals have as much free will as humans do, there are emotional and thoughtful creatures besides humans. They love, they care, they fear, they show affection, they are free to do any of this. Oh, we, humans, are closer to animals than you think. I have objectively concluded, THAT WITHIN THIS SOCIETY, it is wrong to kill someone because of the pain and suffering i'd cause not only the loved ones of said person, but the pain of this society. Anyone who cannot come to the conclusion of why killing is wrong, without the notion of a God, needs to seek mental help. If, for the sake of the argument, God was to be ULTIMATELY and ABSOLUTELY disproved tomorrow, would YOU go harm society? If you would and you believe every religious person would also do so, then I think evil comes from religion, don't you think? If you wouldn't, why wouldn't you? Of course, you would reason with yourself how killing is not a nice thing to do, and you would use reasonable conclusions without the idea of a God. You do not need God to be good.