God as explained by all religions does not exist.

Why you should for Con.1.) The claim made in todays debate is that "God as explained by all religions does not exist," but then that raises the question -- how can we disprove "all religions" without actually knowing the existance of every religion? My opponent presents logical problems with current religions, and then applies them to all, but not all religions present the same deity. For that reason alone, you should vote in negation.2.) In his second rebuttal he asks questions revolving around why would some religions know but not everyone. The problem with this is that he's trying to apply secular logic and reasoning to a deity that is not wordly. God in all the religions I know of, is generally very mysterious, as you would expect for a deity infinitely more powerful and capable than a human. These questions kind of remind me of watching Law and Order, you ask a lot of questions throughout the episode, but by the end you come out with a better understanding. Death, in this instance, being the end of the episode. So while logical questions can be asked, it doesn't disprove the idea of a deity.3.) "Firstly why would god want to 'test' our characters? What do get if we 'pass' the test? According to religion it is HEAVEN right? Why does God want to gift us residence in Heaven or Hell in the first place? Just so that he can spend his time doing all these things?? This then implies again that god is depended on us and therefore NOT OMNIPOTENT [If the feature of omnipotence is not a feature of a god of a particular religion,then it proves the 'god' is nothing but merely an entity just more powerful than us]If the true god exists and he created us, how can we then say that he did not create our character too? Then who is it that created our character? If humans have free will to be 'good' or 'bad' or 'ignorant', WHO IS IT THAT GAVE HUMANS OPTIONS TO CHOOSE BETWEEN BEING GOOD, BAD OR IGNORANT? WHO CATEGORISED OUR ACTIONS AND DEEDS INTO THESE 3 GROUPS? Surely it has to be god (would love to know a different opinion of these questions)The point that I am trying to make above is that it is not possible for god to give us 100% free will. There has to be some degree of determinism done by god. This thus implies that in an indirect manner if god exists, our future is pre determined, if not by 100% Here, I once again reinforce my point that THIS PROVES THAT GOD HAS OUR FUTURE DECIDED AND IS MERELY TOYING WITH US (SHOWING THAT HE IS NOT OMNIPOTENT AS DESCRIBED BY MAJOR RELIGION,thus not god)(If the feature of omnipotence is not a feature of a god of a particular religion,then it proves the 'god' is nothing but merely an entity just more powerful than us)"I'm going to give an odd example, but I hope it comes across as semi understandable. Deus Ex Machina in the anime The Future Diaries is a "god." He can control space and time, but he also allows wiggle room for the humans to make their own free decisions in the world. A god, while he might have created the first humans, could allow wiggle room for them to reproduce and create their own societies and develop as people. A residence of heaven and hell (not just in the traditional sense), could help sort out the people based on conditions or standards the God sets. It could be morality, or based on the challenges they overcome, or even just on the people who worship him. Regardless, do these standards actually matter in determining his existance? He could be an unjust God according to our standards, but that doesn't disprove him being a deity.In summation, the Pro has not sufficiently proved that these Gods do not exist, and I urge a vote in negation.