God is Real.

First off, are you certified to be criticizing the Bible? What I mean is, have you taken a class such a Disciple or another type of Bible Study? If not, I am not going to argue the issue with you, for you do not have a clear understanding of the Bible and therefore have no right to criticize it. "Because we as Humans created this idea of God." No we didn't. God sent messages to the people of the ancient world. They recorded them and created the Bible. How do you explain the artifacts found in the Middle East? Or how do you explain Jesus Christ? Just because we are humans does not mean that we are correct. No matter what you say, nothing will make us right and the smartest of life. We created theories and explanations because we felt the need to explain our world and why things happen. How do you explain miracles? How do you explain the phenomenon of life? Also, millions of people world have experience God in their life. How do you explain their answered prayers??? These are just some of the things that prove God's existence. Although, we have no scientifically proof for God, science is man-made. Again, how do we know that we are correct when stating that something is proven in science? How do you think that these prophets al got messages from a God? Did they all wake up one morning and say "I am going to write a book and it will be a chapter in a book called the Bible." No, it is not just a coincidence. Scientifical proof, again, is man-made. Humans invented the study of science. We invented ways to do this. Again, prove to me that we are correct. "But of course, you can disprove Evolution and the Big Bang Theory, so disprove it." Okay, so according to evolution, every life form is supposedly related to bacteria. Well, compared to the bacterial genome, human genomes contain a lot more information. So, if evolution occurs by mutations wouldn't human genomes and any other genome in that case contain less information? Through mutations, information is lost, not gained. You will attempt to reply or answer to this comment. But, just so you know, your answer that you create that seems to be correct, or sound smart, may not be so real. I am not stating that you are automatically wrong, but scientists that are involved in the NDT cannot reply or comment on this statement. And if you argue, well information can be gained though mutations also, how come pretty much no life form is simpler than bacteria? That is just one statement of proof I believe can prove evolution to be wrong. Also, how do we know that certain species evolved from certain species? We were not around to see it happen. For the Big Bang Theory, I will take an excerpt from the magazine Creation. It talks about how there are small errors in the theory. "Most evolutionists and progressive creationists believe that the big bang occurred 13.7 billion years ago. So how big would we expect the universe to be? Even if the universe expanded at the speed of light, then the radius of the universe should be 13.7 billion light years as an upper limit, so the width of the universe is 27.4 billion light-years, right? Wrong! From new data collected from a space probe examining the Cosmic Background Radiation, astronomers estimate the universe is at least 156 billion light-years wide. Actually, it's long been known that the universe was a lot winder than 27.4 billion light years; the latest research tells us how much wider. According to researchers writing in the journal Physics Review Letters, the universe must have expanded much faster than light at its early stage. An atheist physicist, Alan Guth, proposed this over 20 tears ago- the ‘inflation' model. It's no wonder that 33 leading scientists have published an ‘Open Letter to the Scientific Community' rejecting the big bang. They refer to ‘fudge factors' such as the ‘hypothetical' inflation idea, which needs a cosmic density 20 times larger than that required for the big band to make the light elements." That in itself shows that not all scientists believe in the big bang, and proves it to be wrong. There you have it, I have answered your challenge in proving both wrong, and have rebutted your comments about God and "proved" Him to be real. I await your response. As to why I didn't reply in time last time, I do not sit around on my computer waiting for a chance to debate. Not that you do, but I am just saying that I have other things to do also.