>Just because a theory isn't proven doesn't mean that
>it is incorrect.  You tell me the flaw in the theory of God creating the
>universe that makes you not believe it.
>
>Bobby Mozumder

Ok, here are several flaws.

1.  The statement "God created the universe" presumes that there is some
knowledge of God.  To contrast, the statement "Julius Caesar created the
universe" is meaningful because we have some knowledge of who Julius
Ceasar was, sufficient to know that the statement is false.  We have no
such knowledge of who this "God" is.  When pressed, the exchange is
something like "God created the universe" -> "Who is God" -> "God is the
creator of the universe", which is a circular definition.

2.  The use of the word "created" is, at best, a very weak metaphor for
an unknown process.  We use the word "create" in the sense of "Mozart
created the best opera of all time" or "Bobby creates high hilarity on
alt.atheism".  All of our direct experience with creation involves
antecedent objects and processes in operation over time, and is
intricately involved with our ideas of causality.  We have no experience,
and no way to describe, a process in which matter, energy, time, and the
laws of their behavior arise out of nothing.

3.  As has been pointed out to you before, saying "God created the
universe" begs the question of "How did God get created".  Postulating
that some "being" who does not exist in the same way that every other
being exists is, at best, unnecessary; and, at worst, an obstacle to real
knowledge.

So, the statement "God created the universe" says nothing meaningful,
because the subject is meaningless, the predicate is meaningless, and it
assumes other facts which are never explained.

Now that you understand the flaws in the statement "God created the
universe", I trust that you will never discuss it again on alt.atheism.