Do I believe in a God? Yes.
Why? Because it is most logical, it is illogical to believe that this Universe is an accident, and if there is no God then that’s what it has to be, because a God denotes a “purpose”.
In fact, God and purpose are interchangeable in ways.
But my argument, never deals with my belief? Why? Because I found an argument that pretty much shows that arguing this is very pointless.
Let’s refrain from calling God, “God”.
From now on God will be called Clouds…ok?
And we are no longer “People debating God”… from now on people will be called Blindmen ok?
In this world, the blindmen are debating whether or not there are clouds. It is theoretically possible that there are such things.
See, the blindmen are bewildered as to where rain comes from. No matter how high they go, they can’t seem to “touch” the “bucket” or such. Some theorize that the rain just falls from up, and that’s all. Others believe there has to be some vessel holding the water, and other say that the water itself is floating up there in a “cloud”.
A cloud being a state of water that is not tangible, thus why the blindmen can’t find it.
No matter how hard these blindmen debate, they will never accomplish anything.
Because no matter how much the idea of there being a bucket seems right, those who believe in clouds and nothingess will refute it by saying, “Then where’s the bucket?”
No matter how much the idea of there being a cloud seems right, those who support the idea of buckets and nothingness will always refute it by claiming that clouds, is illogical. The bucket believers will say, if you let go of water from your hand it falls down, so it can not float way up high. The nothingness believers would say that it doesn’t matter, water falls for ever from an endless source of “highness”, and that there are no buckets or clouds anyways.
And no matter how much the idea of nothingness seems right, those believing in buckets and clouds, would claim that there has to be something. Where does the water come from?
The debate becomes even more involved in fact. Because both the cloud and bucket believers claim that what was written to them long ago about there being “Beings that claimed they could see”, they think that that itself gives them justficication. Each being capable of sight saying that there exists what they want to believe exists. Nothingness believers say this is hogwash, no one can see, there is nothing to see, that sight is not even conceivable to them. As really, in all their societies, sight itself is a much debated concept. Do the items that have form, also have some kind of aspect that could be perceived with out touching or smelling or hearing or tasting? But that’s another debate.
And all these debates will go on indefinately for much obvious reasons.
In case this analogy is not obvious enough I will give a brief summary.
People, debating God, is like blindmen debating clouds.
You can’t as far as we define God, touch, smell, see, hear, or taste him/it/she. Just as blindmen can not see clouds.
You can’t reason his existance. Just as blindmen can not reason the existance of a bucket or cloud, or the lack there-of.
All you can do is choose a belief and stick by it. And indeed, that is the analogy of the bucket and nothingness and clouds, the bucket is one form of God, say Allah. The cloud is another form, say YWHW. And nothingness is Atheism.
And the beings that can see are Angels.
I hope this analogy has been enlightening to you.
I am quite proud of it, I don’t know if someone before me has ever come up with something similar but I did come up with this all on my own just now, from a smaller version I told someone else when they claimed, “I don’t see God so why should I believe in him?”
I told him, if you were blind your whole life, and everyone else was the same, would you disbelieve in clouds?
He of course then got angry proving to me he was an idiot. :rolleyes:
I also feel it is Ironic, that so many in this world would now say that there are no clouds…but yet, those of us who can see know otherwise. 
