The Christian God is Fake... Prove Me Wrong... I dare you.

Hello there. As an atheist I have participated in many religious debates. And won all but two, And those two ended only ended in a draw because they had to leave. Now. I want an educated response. There will be five rounds of the debate. At the end of the debate the voters will decide who won. I understand that most of the people on this site are Christian. Therefore, I want the voters to vote as neutrally as possible. If you are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Or atheist, Please put some thought into your vote before casting it. Who gave the better evidence? Who has actual proof? Don't vote based on YOUR religion, Vote based on who has the best evidence. Now, To begin the debate, I would like to hear proof from whomever I am debating against that god is real. Now, Send me your proof.

Thank you to my opponent for making this debate! I expect to have a very entertaining exchange. My job is to prove that God exists (I am arguing specifically for the Christian God), although I should say that making a reasonable case for that should be sufficient.
1.       The Kalam Cosmological Argument
2.       The Moral Argument
3.       The Proof of Jesus’ Divinity
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
 
The kalam cosmological argument has its own set of premises:
1.   Whatever begins to exist has a cause;
2.   The universe began to exist;
3.   The universe has a cause.
 
Through empirical observation, we have never observed something simply “exist.” Anything and everything has been caused. The first premise is very simple.
It’s when we arrive at the second premise that things get a bit trickier. Many people will say that the universe has always existed, and therefore the second premise is invalid. However, we know that infinity has logical contradictions. For example, if I have an infinite amount of apples, and I give you all of the odd-numbered apples, infinity-infinity=infinity. However, If I give you every apple numbered 3 and up, infinity-infinity=2. It’s contradictions like this that show that infinity doesn’t exist in reality. In fact, Fred Hoyle, a Cambridge astronomer, said “The big bang theory requires the creation of the universe from nothing.” [1] Through astrophysics, we know that not only the universe, but matter, space, and time itself was all created about 15 billion years ago. All of this shows us that the universe did indeed begin to exist.
 
Finally, this leads us to know that the universe must have had a cause. We know this because nothing just pops into existence; it is caused by something else. A table doesn’t just appear in your house built; it is made in a factory in a shop and then shipped there. Likewise, we can reasonably infer that the universe didn’t just pop into existence, it was caused by something or someone.
 
Now, of course, the Kalam Cosmological Argument doesn’t lead us to the conclusion that the cause is God. However, it does tell us a few characteristics about the cause. Mainly, it made materials, so it must be immaterial, it made time, so it must be timeless, it is the cause, so it must be causeless, it made change, so it must be changeless, it made the beginning, so it must be beginningless, it made space, so it must be spaceless, and it obviously must be extremely powerful.
 
The following parts of my argument will work with this to show that the cause is the Christian God as described in the Bible.
 
The Moral Argument
 
The gist of this argument is that God created objective moral values and it is through those that human beings know what is right and wrong. If there is no God, literally all we are are atoms going through chemical reactions with each other. There is no “right” and “wrong,” only electrical charges, acidic reactions, and other various physical interactions. But because we know certain things are wrong, such as torturing children for fun, we can infer that something, or someone, created standards by which we know that those things are wrong.
Some may say that things like rape are wrong because they harm another being. However, if one can escape the consequences of such an action, there is no reason not to do it. However, if God created moral standards, then we do know that such an action is wrong.
Of course, that doesn’t mean all moral decisions are easy (as evidenced by the trolley problem or similar dilemmas). However, it does mean that we all know when we should or shouldn’t do one thing or another (with the exception of small children).
And before I continue, I am not making the claim that atheists cannot be moral. I am simply saying that, without a God, no one can make truly moral decisions.
 
The Proof of Jesus’ Divinity
 
Jesus, as we all know, was an essential figure in history and was very influential; not only did he start the most famous religion in history, with over 2 billion followers, but our very dates revolve around him.
The Bible claims that Jesus rose from the dead. First, allow me to establish the reliability of the New Testament, where this claim is made.
To do this, scholars put together the interpretations we have now to establish what the originals were like. The more copies there are, the easier it is to reconstruct the originals. Another factor is how much time exists between the writing of the originals and the copies. Many documents that we’ve reconstructed with high certainty that they are accurate only have a few copies and can span over thousands of years. An example would be The Jewish War, which only has nine surviving manuscripts dating about four centuries after the originals. As you can see, historians are able to do a good job with this.
In comparison, the New Testament FAR outweighs any secular document. The one with the most is Homer’s Iliad with 647 copies. The New Testament has 5,366 separate Greek manuscripts. These were all written within a few hundred years of the originals. As you can see, we can have very high confidence that the New Testament is reliable. [2]
 
Now, having established the reliability of the New Testament, I will look at the various theories used to try to falsify the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I would like to say that the existence of Jesus as well as his crucifixion are facts and are not arguable. Unless my opponent asks me to, it is a waste of time to discuss that. I am focusing on what is debated over, which is the resurrection.
1.    The Swoon Theory
2.    The Hallucination Theory
3.    The Conspiracy Theory
 
The Swoon Theory
 
The swoon theory states that Jesus never died on the cross. Let’s first examine the facts of the situation. We know that Jesus was severely beaten, stabbed, pierced with spikes and nails, was bleeding, and he even had a spear thrust into his side. The possibility that he could have survived this is ludicrous. However, besides that, he would’ve had to wake up, roll the GIANT STONE DOOR over the tomb not a little bit, but all the way out, and he would have had to do all of that without alerting the guards who were posted outside.
Some people say that the guards fell asleep and that the disciples came and stole the body. However, in those times, a guard could lose their life if they did that, so that is simply not true. And even if they did, they would’ve been awoken by all of the noise.
 
The Hallucination Theory
 
This theory states that the people only hallucinated Jesus appearing to them after he had died. Hallucinations are individual events and cannot spread beyond just one person. Here is a list of all of Jesus’ appearances:
 
Luke 24:39 Jesus’ Own Testimony
Revelation 1:18 Jesus’ Own Testimony
John 20:14-16 Mary Magdalene
Matthew 28:9 The Virgin Mary
Luke 24:34 Peter
Luke 24:13-16 Two Disciples On a Road
John 20:19,20,24 The Disciples (except Thomas)
John 26-28 All of the Disciples
John 21:1,2 Seven Disciples
Matthew 28:16,17 Eleven Disciples
1 Corinthians 15:6 Over 500 people
1 Corinthians 15:7 James
Acts 9:3-5 Saul
Acts 1:3 Saul
 
That is over 10 appearances to over 500 people. Quite obviously, it is impossible for 500 people to hallucinate the same thing. The hallucination theory is false.
 
The Conspiracy Theory
 
This one states that the disciples stole the body themselves and fabricated the entire story. First of all, there are absolutely no records of this ever happening. Second, the accounts of Jesus appearing to over 500 people disprove this. Third, they had Jesus appear to women. Women were not considered reliable in Jewish culture, so if they were to fabricate it, they wouldn’t have included women. Fourth, a lot of the Bible is made up of personal letters that are clearly not meant for the public eye. If this theory were true, the personal letters would indicate the exchange between the people trying to determine the logistics of the whole ordeal, but this is not the case.
 
So, as shown, none of the theories about the resurrection of Jesus holds up; except, of course, the fact that he did rise from the dead and appear to people afterwards. [3]
 
This has all led up to show that Jesus himself rose from the dead and therefore is the Son of God as he claims. This proves that there is a God, and we can reasonably infer that this is the same God that created the universe as well as an objective moral standard. This is proof that God exists.
 
Sources
 
[1] Fred Hoyle, Astronomy and Cosmology(San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1975), p. 658.
[2] https://www.str.org/articles/is-the-new-testament-text-reliable#.XPAzZIhKi00
[3] https://www.josh.org/resurrection-theories-debunked/

Okay, to begin, I would like to completely disprove everything you have said. Okay? Anyway, the Kalam Cosmological Argument is an interesting way to prove the existence of a celestial being, except it's not. See, if everything has a creation... What created God? See? I pulled a little sneaky on ya.

About the moral argument, when you said that we are just random atoms moving and firing, you are right! That's exactly what we are! And until someone finds a way to disprove that on the physical level, and not by "THE WORD OF GOD" then maybe I'll believe it.

Proof? What proof? There is none. You forgot one major piece of evidence. What if Jesus died and never came back? What if he never existed? Hmm?

So, got anything else?

My opponent's only response to this argument is to ask what create God. If he had read what I wrote, he would see that I said that the cause that caused the universe must itself be causeless because it created cause. I also said that it must be immaterial because it created all material and that it created everything, which would include the laws of physics. That would mean that the cause itself is not subject to the laws of physics necessarily because it created them before they existed. This means that the cause was not created, it simply was.

My opponent seems to misunderstand my argument. I will include premises this time to make it clearer.

1. Every human has an objective moral standard.

2. Objective moral standards cannot originate from chance or evolution, but from agents.

3. Therefore, a creator must exist that created the objective moral standard.

My opponent seems to be ignoring the fact that the New Testament is my proof. No respectable historian disputes the fact that Jesus lived and died on the cross; it's all there in the Bible as well as in the Greek manuscripts. I will ask my opponent to respond to the points that I made in this section.

All arguments extended.

I admit that my last response was not necessarily my best, but I was in a hurry, and now I'm not, so lets go! Anyway, the whole "cause was not created, it simply was" thing? Where was that in the Kalam Cosmological Argument? I never read anything remotely similar to what you said. And anyway, what more could I say about it? Also, what if the universe is an endless cycle? It'll just bang and crunch over and over again. That is what is widely accepted among people who do their research as proof. And the moral code? The human brain consists of thousands of neurons firing electricity at each other at the same time. The "Moral Code" is something we humans created to keep each other from feeling needless pain. And using the new testament as your proof is not really the smartest Idea, seeing as it was written by the followers of Jesus Christ, who would do anything to make Jesus seem more divine than he actually is. Believe it or not, Jesus's teachings aligned more with Buddhism than Judaism. Just because someone says something in a book doesn't mean it's true. The bible might as well be "Mr. Rainbow Fish's Guide to The True Fish Tank". And about Jesus being in the Greek Manuscripts? Do you mean Roman? Because he was, but there was nothing about him being resurrected after his execution. So when you say that he died and came back to life, you might need a bit more proof than a book.

I thoroughly explained it in the first round. The cause is necessarily required to be like this in order to be the cause.

That is not even close to being true. Fred Hoyle said, “The big bang theory requires the creation of the universe from nothing.” I said this in my first round as well. This is because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that entropy is constantly decreasing, which means that the universe can't have existed forever because it would have reached its state of equilibrium an infinite amount of time ago.

As I discussed in my first round, evolution works to benefit the individual, not the group. If there is no God, there is no motivation to not rape or kill someone or to refrain from doing all sorts of immoral acts if one can get away without any consequences. However, seeing that we still refrain from doing such things, that indicates the clear presence of an objective moral standard, and therefore a God.

I already addressed the conspiracy theory in the first round. Here is what I said:

I did an entire section on the reliability of the New Testament, so stating that using the New Testament "is not really the smartest [i]dea" does nothing to rebut my case.

I meant Greek. As to the Roman ones, you gave no evidence for that. However, even if that's true, of course there isn't anything about his resurrection! The Romans didn't want Christianity to spread, so they had every reason to limit the story.

The New Testament is completely adequate to explain this, as I stated in my first round. All of history is based solely on "book[s]." However, they are mainly based on the manuscripts and fragments of these books and documents that are built up to make the complete story.

All arguments extended.

Thank you for the :) at the end! :)

Anyway, since we have been tossing around your evidence for a while now, I think we should move to mine. I would like to begin at the so called "beginning". Genesis. The story of Adam and Eve. Now, I may offend some of you, because I'm going to be a bit unprofessional, but at least listen to what I have to say. So, Adam and eve... oh my god... This is literally the most ridiculous bible story ever. So, let's start with their son Cain. Boy oh boy. So, Cain killed his brother, and as punishment was sent to leave his home near Eden. So this guy ends up going to a place called the land of Nod. He marries and has kids and- hold on... Weren't Adam and Eve the only humans besides Cain and his brother? Who did Cain marry? A dinosaur? Oh wait... Dinosaurs don't exist in the bible. Neither do early humans. But, as we all know, skeletons of dinosaurs and early humans have been found by professional archaeologists. People deny evolution existing (even though it's basic knowledge that evolution does in fact exist) just to say Adam and Eve were the first humans? BOI. Counter THAT! Anyway, good luck, Speedrace! :)

He married one of his sisters. Adam, Eve, Abel, and Cain weren't the only people who were on the earth because Adam and Eve had other children.

Genesis 5:4: "And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:"

And before you say "Hey, incest is a sin," the Law of Moses had not been established at that time, so it wasn't a sin then.

Looks like I countered that, "BOI."

Just because the Bible never mentions dinosaurs doesn't mean it says that they never existed. The Bible never mentions pandas, but that doesn't mean that it is saying they never existed.

My opponent dropped all of his other arguments.

All arguments extended.

Arguments extended. Please vote Con.