Although I have answered it too, I started have doubts about Why must there be a God? question. My objections are
- Question is too broad
- No one really knows for sure.
FAQ says that:
If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.
And here you can find some of the books trying to tackle this subject.
This subject is too argumentative in my opinion. As you can see on that question, validity of answers are being discussed below almost every answer, but this is not a discussion forum, but a QA site.
The conflicts we see here are reflections of disagreements that stretch back to the seventh century. 1400 years of conflict is not going to be solved on a Stack Exchange site.
How is the question of "Why must God exist" should be any different. Questioning the existence of God goes way back than the topic of that discussion.
Therefore, I think we should close the question as
not constructive As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.
What do you think?