The Biblical God is more credible than the other religions' gods.

Rebuttals: -True "christianity" is NOT a religionI will disregard this point as he said he didn't use my definition of religion. -The Bible is a story about love. The love of the bible is irrelevant to its credibility,and i disagree with it being a story about love. The bible doesn't tells only the story of Jesus,many of its stories tell about genocide(Noah's Ark,Sodom and Gomorrah,etc.)[1][2],infanticide[3],slavery[4][5][6] and other abominable things. And Jesus sacrifice(if it really happened) was meaningless if he isn't in hell now,and even that way it was not needed. First,God is omnipotent[7][8],so he didn't need to sacrifice his son,he could just make it happen without killing Jesus. Also,hell is eternal and Jesus' pain was finite,and he is probably in heaven now,so it doesn't really pays for anything,and Jesus knew he was going to get killed so i don't think it really counts as a sacrifice. Jesus may have had unconditional love but i don't think your God does,unconditional means without any condition or requirement,and to be loved by your God you need to believe in him,the resurrection and that you are guilty of your sins,or he sends you to hell,apart from being omnipotent and being able to remove you from there or not put you there in the first place,and i don't think that act condones love.-Second, i'm going to go out on a limb and say that everyone here agrees that it is the year 2014 (AD).I have to disagree with this too. There are different calendars that use another historic events as epoch[9].One example i can give is the Islamic calendar[10],it uses the immigration of the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Medina. Also,it is completely arbitrary,and it made sense,since at the time that epoch was adopted Christianity was really powerful and no one wanted to read the years based on someone who persecuted against Christians[11].We wouldn't have a major reason to change it now. I never saw a single atheist that is annoyed by the epoch we use.-Thirdly, geologic and archeological evidence backs up the Bible.It doesn't disproves evolution,there are a lot of different theories of why the Cambrian explosion occurred,like the increase in oxygen that happened,the formation of the ozone to shield the earth from UV rays,the snowball earth theory,etc.[12],and it doesn't disprove other theories,this is a God of the gaps argument[13],and life already existed on earth before the Cambrian explosion,and it wasn't the cause of every phylum known[14],so who created the life before it?And it wasn't "almost over night",it took millions of years,what is small compared to other evolutionary stages,but it wasn't over night,and in my opinion,it was enough to evolve creatures fast enough to not leave a lot of fossils of transitional species in optimal conditions,with high extinction rates,oxygen,ozone,etc.About the Noah's Ark,many mythological stories tells about some person that built a giant boat and are older than Noah's story,like the ancient Greek myths[15] or the Gilgamesh flood myth,so i don't think Noah's Ark is credible,the similarities are incredible,and the stories are older. Also,this seems cherry-picked,i googled i didn't found anyone scientifically proved that was an ark and the one of the bible,then i headed to wikipedia and found out that after expeditions and tests it was disproved[17][18]:"In the 1980s and 1990s the Durupınar site was heavily promoted by Ron Wyatt. It receives a steady stream of visitors and according to the local authorities a nearby mountain is called "Mount Cudi" (or Judi), making it one of about five Mount Judis in the land of Kurdistan. Geologists have identified the Durupınar site as a natural formation,but Wyatt's Ark Discovery Institute continues to champion its claims.""After a few expeditions to the Durupınar site that included drilling and excavation in the 1990s, Fasold began to have doubts that the Durupınar formation was Noah's ark. He visited the site in September 1994 with Australian geologist Ian Plimer and concluded that the structure was not a boat.He surmised that ancient peoples had erroneously believed the site was the ark.In 1996, Fasold co-wrote a paper with geologist Lorence Collins titled "Bogus 'Noah's Ark' from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure" which concluded that the boat-shaped formation was a natural stone formation that merely resembled a boat. The same paper pointed out that the "anchors" were local volcanic stone."Arguments:I will try to keep them short because of the character limit.The bible is not credibleThe bible has a lot of contradictions[19],and it was changed a lot of times through all those 2000~ years,mainly in the time the church was really powerful,one of example i can give is the Nicene Creed[20].Wouldn't the word of God be consistent with what it is saying,so God can communicate easily with his followers. God is omnipotent and omniscient so he would be able to make his word without any contradiction,but it doesn't happens,what leads me to believe that the bible was created by men and that they were not inspired by God,what makes it almost impossible to be 100% correct.God's existence is illogicalIf God is omniscient,omnipotent and omnibenevolent,free will can't exist. He knows the future because he is omniscient,if he doesn't he is not omniscient,so he would be able to know every action of everyone,so how can free will exist?Also,if he knows every action of every person before they do it,why he create Adam and Even if he knew they were going to sin,or why he would create them,and punish them because he created them,or why he would create Lucifer if he knew he was going to be betrayed?Why would God do this if he is omnibenevolent,why would he create someone just to go to hell even knowing that creating them would lead to it?And wouldn't an omnibenevolent God create evil?If he didn't,why not prevent it?Sources:[1]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[2]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[3]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[4]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[5]: https://www.biblegateway.com... [6]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[7]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[8]: https://www.biblegateway.com...[9]: http://en.wikipedia.org...(reference_date)[10]: http://en.wikipedia.org...[11]: http://en.wikipedia.org...[12]: http://en.wikipedia.org...[13]: http://en.wikipedia.org...[14]: http://en.wikipedia.org... [15]: http://en.wikipedia.org...[16]: http://en.wikipedia.org... [17]: http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_Ark#Modern_searches_.281949_to_present.29[18]: http://en.wikipedia.org... [19]: http://sciencebasedlife.files.wordpress.com... [20]:http://en.wikipedia.org... Well,i see this debate is going to be interesting.