Debate: DO GODS EXIST??
Side: No

I'm going to bundle this all into the one thread for ease of access, and this one happened to be at the top of my pile. I think we've got to the point in this debate where your argument has turned more into some sort of desperate flailing. Time and again I have asked you to provide me with even one example of something which required a God to intervene, however you have failed to do so, falling back on “everything” as a specific. In your one attempt, you fell back onto referring explainable chemical processes as “magical”. When asked to define the usage of “magical”, rather than using an accepted dictionary definition, you decided to redefine the English language. It doesn't work that way. The word you used was "magic". You don't get to back out of that one now. You need to provide an accepted definition of your usage, or you need to accept that your argument is complete bull. Because by the same token, I could redefine “God” to “this teaspoon” and when asked how the universe was formed, I could say “This teaspoon did it”. You wouldn't accept that as a valid argument, and neither will I.When attempting to give you an analogy to show you God's required input into this world (the formula I showed you... it's very simple, I think even a first grader could understand the maths) you attempted to find you way around it with “God made the numbers”. That wasn't the issue. The argument may have sounded pretty in your head, but it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how and when analogy is used, or how it fit into the argument. God equalled nothing. I could just as easily slot a big fat “nothing” into the universe where you say God impacts us, and everything would remain exactly the same. I'm not here to argue that there is no God. I don't know that. I'm a minister of the Agnostic Church, I'm not here to argue for atheism, it's my job simply to spread agnosticism and to show that God is a questionable concept. What I'm arguing is that there is no way to support a claim that God exists. If nothing was needed to create God, the same can be said for the Universe. If something larger was required to create God, then we run into infinite regress, and God is not God. I have shown that. You have even in your own way agreed with me on that, by arguing that M-theory (a theory which supports multiple universes) was possibly the way that God did it, thereby placing God external to the Universe and therfore unprovable.If at any point you can think of just one thing that specifically cannot be shown to exist without some form of supernatural force, then by all means I will listen. But you haven't been able to do that. So I can safely say that despite any further attempts from your side of the argument, I have shown your argument for Gods existence^ (i.e. something which exists, see definition for exist below) to be unsupported and unsupportable. ^exist definitionex·ist (eg zist′, ig-)intransitive verb 1. to have reality or actual being; be 2. to occur or be present the qualities that exist in a person 3. to continue being; live the refugees barely existEtymology: Fr exister < L existere, exsistere, to come forth, stand forth < ex-, out + sistere, to cause to stand, set, place, caus. of stare, standTaken from Webster's New World College Dictionary Copyright © 2009 by Wiley Publishing, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio.