Linking to previously unsuccessful attempts to convince people isn't going to convince them doodThanks for posting a link at least.
I'll try to keep this brief and I'll post links to more in depth answers which interestingly enough I've already answered. These go in order, so if you want to know what I’m talking about, go to the link that’s quoted directly above mine. I did skip some since its quite obvious the arguments have nothing to do with gods existence—in fact, they can’t even be considered arguments.
• “Inconsistent Revelations” do not necessarily prove that a God doesn’t exist. In fact, if we are trying to prove only that A god exists; not allah, or YWH, or something, then the multiple world religions we see today would lend credit to the idea that perhaps the idea that a deity exists is based on a common truth that has been changed over time. I myself choose to believe in Christianity since it interprets God in the best way.
• The Problem of Evil: In what way does this have anything whatsoever to do with God’s existence in any way shape or form? You have gone from the existence of God to his characteristics; this isn’t an evidence against gods existence, its evidence against his characteristics. See my rebuttal here: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...=1#post1755652
• Destiny of the Unevangelized: Again, what does this have to do with the existence of God?
• Poor Design: Give me an example of this poor design; additionally, what does this have to do with Gods existence? Just because humans make mistakes in some computer doesn’t mean they don’t exist, does it? See my rebuttal here: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...ed#post1807993
• Occams razor: The naturalistic theory can’t adequately explain all of the origin of the universe, or life as I’ve posted on several times. If you want a specific example of this, just ask me and I’d be happy to post.
• Russells Teapot: This fails to have anything at all to do with Gods existence; its just an argument about the burden of proof. See my rebuttal here: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...t.#post1895831
• Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit: See rebuttal here: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...pt#post1895127
• Omnipotence: As stated previously, God cannot do everything; he is a perfect deity. He is all powerful; all powerful means he cannot make mistakes since only weak, stupid beings such as humans make mistakes. The very fact that God does not make mistakes is what makes him all powerful. Perfection is not the ability to do anything; rather, it is the characteristic that allows you not to make any mistakes. God is all powerful; not necessarily 100% omnipotent.
• Problem of Hell: This is actually one of the topics I haven’t rebutted in great detail on this thread. Please go to this link since it explains it much better then I could: http://crusadefortruth.com/links/PDF..._for_Faith.pdf Go to the sixth Objection: A Loving God Would Never Torture People In Hell.
• Free Will: Again, as with the majority of alleged arguments against God, this argument fails to disprove the existence of God; all it does is argue against a certain characteristic of god. See rebuttal here: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...ke#post1895123
The arguments after this become even more sketchy and even less convincing, so I didn’t quote them. If there is a certain argument you want me to explain, or answer just give me a link.
As for the what created God argument, please go to this link: http://jiggmin.com/threads/55500-Doe...=1#post1895831