Debate: Is there God?
Side: Yes

It can be, definitely, and in that sense I suppose you could say I am spiritual, but generally spirituality is associated with superstition.Superstition is associated with irrationality and magic. A spiritual person wouldn't consider their beliefs irrational, would they? I think my beliefs are more rational than an atheists, but that's just my opinion. And as far as magic goes, it depends on your definition. If there is a God, it isn't necessarily magic. Maybe by our standards, because we can't personally create an entire universe, but our human capabilities don't really compare to God's capabilities. He wouldn't think of his abilities as magic, I assume.So intelligence exists, without it having to come from intelligence itself?It wouldn't have had to come from anything if it has always existed. It's a difficult concept to grasp, even I struggle with it... But when you realize that something has always existed, it isn't that difficult to think that maybe intelligence has always existed. Our personal intelligence is likely a continuation, or addition to that eternal intelligence.So an intelligence that doesn't need another intelligence behind it?Yes, an ultimate intelligence. All intelligence has an eternal source, no matter how you look at it. The question is, was that source intelligent or was it unintelligent? The latter just sounds silly to think that something unintelligent carried in it the building blocks of intelligence.Unless a reason is provided.Don't wait for people to provide you with a reason. Find one yourself. I see what you are saying here, but by asserting that intelligence needs an intelligence behind it, wouldn't that also apply to an eternal intelligence?Well, lets think of it that way for a minute. A continuous chain of intelligence. God gave us intelligence, something else gave God intelligence, something before that gave that thing it's intelligence, and so on and so forth. So when does it stop? Is it infinite? That would mean that intelligence has always existed. Does it stop at something that is unintelligent? Well, that would disprove my argument that intelligence can only come from intelligence. Can it be that the ultimate source of the higher intelligences is an eternal intelligence? Well, then what is wrong with the idea that the intelligence that created the universe is an eternal intelligence?To assert intelligence needs intelligence behind it, you make eternal intelligence itself a paradox.Our intelligence here on earth needs an intelligent source, is what I am arguing. "God," who has always existed, has neither a beginning nor an end, would not need a source for its own intelligence. Furthermore, we don't have evidence or reason to think intelligence requires intelligence behind it.If we come to conclusions based on our observations, can we say that we have never seen intelligence come from something that is unintelligent? We have not seen an oak tree drop an acorn that grew to be a talking oak tree, or as far as we know, a thinking oak tree.Like the sun and life theory that was falsified in the 1970's, this one can be as well, but as of now, intelligence coming from intelligence seems pretty factual.We have created computers which are intelligent, not conscious, but intelligent, and in some ways more intelligent than us, we actually did come from an intelligence, the organism that we evolved from which was less intelligent, and the organism before that, being less intelligent, and so on.But the computers that we created came from an intelligence, and the intelligence that a computer has acquired is not necessarily real intelligence. Scientists and doctors have found that in order for people to make decisions, they need the part in their brain that creates emotions, to remain functional. A computer does not have any sort of emotion. And the intelligence that is uploaded into a computer, is knowledge that we have, but a computer can process it faster.Intelligence doesn't necessarily need a GREATER intelligence, nor a less intelligence, and thus the most minimal intelligence could result from non-intelligence, no?Whatever it was, had in it the building blocks for our current state of intelligence.If I were to plant an apple tree seed, everything that the tree will become is implied in the seed. I would not see it go from a little tree, to a big tree, and then wonder what the hell happened when it starts growing apples. The seed that had all of that within it came from a full grown apple tree though. This brings us to the question, what came first, the chicken or the egg, but instead of chickens and eggs, it is seed or tree. Well, ultimately a tree came into this world through growth, and then what it grew from ultimately came from the Big Bang. But within that point, was implication of everything. It had the ability to grow into everything that we see today. It is the seed of creation, and what if that seed was planted? However, with God, I do not think that it was a literal seed, but maybe a thought, which is a lot like a seed. If you were to write a novel, ultimately the seed of that novel was your mind.Of course we should find that the conditions that allow our lives exist where we live, that's just logical, but to allude to that being intentional... well... there is no reason to.You just haven't found a reason.99% of the universe will kill us, millions of black holes are flying around the galaxy that would tear us apart, as well as stars that would obliterate us, meteores and asteroids, here on earth, life is about eat or get eaten, do or die, cretures bigger than you that want to kill, creatures smaller than you that can assissinate.Yet our population is growing. There are dangers, yes... But if we truly are eternal, like God, then what do we have to worry about?We have removed ourselves from that to a good extent, but the universe isn't convenient for our existence.It absolutely is convenient. We exist! How can it be any more convenient? Have you experienced anything better? It is easy to look at all the things that are coincidentally convenient and go "gosh this world is so convenient" as easily as one could look at all the inconveniences of the world and go "gosh this world is so inconvenient", it's practically subjective either way.The ego is what makes people look at it as inconvenient.