The Idea of Heaven, Hell, and God is Irrational

The resolution of this debate is simple enough. Resolution - Religion is irrational. This includes most branches of religion specifically Christianity. God - a spirit or being that has great power, strength, knowledge, etc., and that can affect nature and the lives of people : one of various spirits or beings worshiped in some religions[1]. Also by pros definition we can see that this is strictly related to Christianity in his mind. Irrational - marked by a lack of accord with reason our sound judgement. [2]Simply enough he is claiming that believing in a God is not reasonable or is lacking sound judgement, or irrational. Note : This is not a debate about whether or not Christianity is true but that the belief of a deity that oversees the universe is lacking reason. reason - fair and sensible[3]DeismSo lets approach this logically. Deism is one belief that can offer a logical explanation for a God. It still appeals to a God whom created the universe, but does not go as far as Christianity with the claim that he meddles in every day affairs. This is an appeal to Theistic Evolution and intelligent design on a deist level EvolutionThe first major point we must acknowledge is that God and evolution are compatible. Theistic Evolution - The belief that God guided evolution I am not stating this is an empirical scientific source but simply showing it is rational for some people to believe in it. This is essentially saying the probability of evolution occurring due to random variations and mutations in almost impossible within the realm of logic in some ways. It would take a complete "miracle" excuse the pun, for it to occur. "Assume that, at each mutational step, there is equally as much chance for it to be good as bad. Thus, the probability for the success of each mutation is assumed to be one out of two, or one-half. Elementary statistical theory shows that the probability of 200 successive mutations being successful is then (½)200, or one chance out of 1060. The number 1060, if written out, would be "one" followed by sixty "zeros." In other words, the chance that a 200-component organism could be formed by mutation and natural selection is less than one chance out of a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion. Lest anyone think that a 200-part system is unreasonably complex, it should be noted that even a one-celled plant or animal may have millions of molecular "parts."[5]MoralityAn appeal to God is also an appeal to morality. If you assign an objective object such as God to be the source of morality, it solves the problem of what is right and wrong. Essentially what makes killing for fun wrong or right? If there are objective truths that we acknowledge, then there has to be a way we can gauge it. God is a perfect example and expatiation for morality. If anything this is the home run point for religion and theism. Belief in a God is the perfect explanation for why people accept universal truths. Intelligent design. This is an argument that even Steven Hawking acknowledged. It in short states that if the expansion rate of the universe changed by 1 part in one hundred thousand million million one second after the big bang, life would not be possible (you can see why I did not type the number out, it would have taken up the entire debate). There are also other constants that are the same way. If you change the gravitational force in the universe by 1 part in 10 to the 40, we would not exist. Again I will not type this out numerically due to space, and I could not keep track of the 0s. I will give you a mathematical comparison. If you were to take an aircraft carrier that weighs 110,000 tons and were to change the weight by less than the trillionth of the weight of an electron, we would not exist. Remember this is constant. This is not a onetime dice roll. These are physical properties within the universe now, that are constant. If at one point anything changes, the universe will cease to exist. If this does not point toward the universe be fine-tuned I do not know what else can[6]I believe the exact quote from him is" If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size"[7][8]Specified Complexity. Simple and short argument. We are pattern seeking creatures. If you are walking along the beach and see "HELLO" written in the sand, you are logically going to assume that someone wrote this. You are not going to assume the formation and time of the tide made this happen by chance. You are not going to assume something blew up and made this message appear. You are going to assume someone wrote it and that it was left there by an intelligent being. You can automatically see where I am going with this. Anthony Flew a former well known atheist and front liner of the atheist movement recently converted to Christianity. This is due to his own research. He found that one single cell can carry more data than all of the volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica put together.After he converted and found this out for himself he said this“It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”In ClosingWhile believing in a God may not be empirical or factual, it is not safe to call it illogical. Using some of the previous points that I have mentioned (leaving out many more points), we can clearly see why a majority of people believe in a theistic/deistic God. It can explain the way the universe was formed, explain the impossible chances of evolution and the constants within our universe, and even explain how and why we exist.Why there may not be merit to this argument, it is safe to assume that it is logical. Again it may not be accurate or correct, but it is a rational belief and a competing theory for why we exist. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...[3] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...[4] http://www.reasons.org...[5] http://www.icr.org...[6] http://www.hawking.org.uk...[7] http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...[8] Steven Hawkings, A brief history of time