The question of the existance of God is the most important question.

Thanks for accepting, Con, and welcome to DDO. As far as etiquette goes, (this is not a rule for this debate since I didn't mention it in the first round), I've found it helpful and considerate to confine new arguments to all but the last round so both opponents can respond, and wrap things up in that final round. But we should probably leave further discussions about that to the comments tab.On to the arguments:I have a minor contention with my opponent's definition, in that it must be 'most important: of most or greatest significance or consequence.'My opponent admits not knowing what the most important question is, but offers a question that he thinks is more important. I find this an acceptable method, as my opponent does not need to find the most important question, just one that is more important, or by some other means show my question is of lower worth than I have given it."What makes you happy?" has an obtainable answer for most people, as they know they have achieved it when they feel happy.However, if the substance of the answer is unobtainable, wouldn't the question be moot?For instance, if someone in severe pain, with an incurable condition were asked "what would make you happy," the answer may be unobtainable. Certainly, from an atheistic standpoint, death would end the pain, but also the possibility of all emotion, let alone happiness. Unconsciousness would have similar results. There's no guarantee of happiness, even in sleep. The best possible outcome is lack of sensation in this case. If there's nothing that can be done, what's the point of trying? If there's no point in trying, what's the point in asking? Not that happiness has no importance, but a person in this condition would have more important questions to ask themselves than that of enjoyment.Is there a God? What are the implications of the two possible answers? If yes, there may be an afterlife, the Bible might be right, and now there's all that stuff about redemption and Heaven and Hell to think about.If not, just pull the plug at this point.I'm not trying to cherry-pick hypotheticals, after all, the fountain of youth has remained elusive, and we'll all end in a terminal position someday.Is "does God exist" a question that cannot be answered? I'll have to guess at what Con means by this, as he didn't provide any sources or explain his logic.Looking at this from another perspective, if there is a god of any consequence, we would think that he would interact with his creation and his worshipers or enemies on some level or another. The universe would most likely not match up to a purely material explanation for it's existence. So we would have social or at least scientific evidence of his interaction or initial creation.On the other hand, if there is no spiritual presence of any consequence in the universe, there would be no good evidence for his interaction with people or the universe, and it's processes would have complete naturalistic explanations from start to finish.Of course no person can know everything, but if all knowledge is necessary to come to any conclusion, no conclusion could ever be made. Based on all of what we do know, I believe one can come to a reasonable conclusion that one of the above scenarios is accurate, and the other is not. i.e., an answer.