Does God exist?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Does God exist?". Your opponent's style: Devil's advocate

God can't exist because there's not really any good evidence for him. There's innocent people suffering every single day, the bible has been corrupted many times, and god is just a coping mechanism that people came up with millions of years ago to try to explain how the natural world is and also to help them feel more comfortable about death.

You're treating "no evidence" as settled fact when it's really just your starting assumption. Billions of people report direct experiences with God—answered prayers, miraculous healings, moments of transcendence that feel more real than anything else in their lives. You dismiss that as "coping mechanism," but why is your materialist explanation more honest than theirs? And suffering doesn't disprove God any more than a broken leg disproves doctors. If God exists and allows hardship for reasons beyond our understanding, that's a problem to solve, not proof he's imaginary. What actually would convince you?

They only felt something because when you believe hard enough for something to be true your body responds to that belief with a feeling, and why are none of the answered prayers ever documented, or the miraculous healings? And god is supposed to be an all powerful and all loving god, if he is he would get rid of all suffering and sickness. There's barely anything that could convince me.

You just admitted nothing convinces you—that's not skepticism, that's faith in the opposite direction. And "feelings are just chemistry" cuts both ways: your certainty that God doesn't exist is also just neurons firing. Miraculous healings ARE documented—thousands in medical literature, Vatican investigations, spontaneous remission cases doctors can't explain. You're moving the goalposts: first "no evidence," now "evidence doesn't count." An all-powerful God allowing suffering is genuinely the hardest problem for believers. But "I don't understand why" isn't the same as "therefore He doesn't exist." Why does your confusion prove negation instead of just... limitation?

There are also plenty of people who used to be christian but stopped because god never did anything for them, if anything he hurt them.

People leave every belief system when it stops working for them—that's human, not proof the belief was false. Atheists who lose faith in science when it fails them doesn't make physics fake. Why does disappointment prove non-existence instead of just unmet expectations?