How could God exist?

[Captain_Shinzo]

Being a Humanist Atheist, I have been asking many Christians how can God exist?
Most would tell me how he couldn't, so I kicked their a**.
The ones that decided to actually ANSWER my question gave me some visionary ideas. They were proven untrue but were cool.
One of them told me that God has existed forever.
I thought about this one for awhile but I'm not sure what to say.

I came to the conclusion that everything must have a beginning if the theory of the Law of Conservation exists.
( My proof to the Big Bang Theory is the Law of Conservation. Matter isn't just made, bishes. >.> A large compaction of matter, or dark matter, had to exist first and exploded from such compression. So, technically, it was nothing but was actually something considering that nothing was energy.
Now is that actually more sensible then your forever existing man in the clouds? )  

[Captain_Shinzo]

Fact: The ideas listed above are theories I have developed over my time of studying life and other religions. They are not fact. However, they might be.  

[Raticiel]

Well, what you say is nothing more than a proof of god's existence (please don't think of "god" as a personified being, but as a metaphysical category).

I'm afraid that's also one of the most solid proofs.

It's easy to reject religion and personified god and say it's irrelevant (because in many ways it is), but to get rid of the foundation/absolute is a different story...  

[alteregoivy]

Raticiel

Well, what you say is nothing more than a proof of god's existence (please don't think of "god" as a personified being, but as a metaphysical category).

I'm afraid that's also one of the most solid proofs.

It's easy to reject religion and personified god and say it's irrelevant (because in many ways it is), but to get rid of the foundation/absolute is a different story...

Yes! That's the mistake almost all religions make! If you think of "God" as anthropomorphic, then it never works. I really truly think that all those sorts of religions are just dead wrong.

However, if we were to redefine God (and some already have), then that could possibly exist.

But usually when I talk about God, I am assuming the anthropomorphic kind, because that's what the majority assumes.  

[Raticiel]

alteregoivy

Raticiel

Well, what you say is nothing more than a proof of god's existence (please don't think of "god" as a personified being, but as a metaphysical category).

I'm afraid that's also one of the most solid proofs.

It's easy to reject religion and personified god and say it's irrelevant (because in many ways it is), but to get rid of the foundation/absolute is a different story...

Yes! That's the mistake almost all religions make! If you think of "God" as anthropomorphic, then it never works. I really truly think that all those sorts of religions are just dead wrong.

However, if we were to redefine God (and some already have), then that could possibly exist.

But usually when I talk about God, I am assuming the anthropomorphic kind, because that's what the majority assumes.

And thinking about this makes me wonder how can religion in it's form today be so much dependent on all ancient/medieval/modern philosophy achievements and theories, and still deny the newest scientific theories which are a natural consequence.
I think it only happened with christianity and similar cults. I don't know much about situation in other religions.
I also think often about god as a person, and I was always wondering how come he can think about so many people at once blaugh watching "Bruce Almighty" helped only a bit rofl