Can Prove the Existence of God and the Validity of the Christian Faith over other Religious Systems

Con's good intent, is taking a basic debate premise to "cast doubt" to dissuade you from believing the evidential and logical truth. Unless there is a clear personal confrontation with God, than everything else is not worth meriting a viable truth. Con has not been fair in his arguments against truths I have made in the "short" time I have to present. So let us look at the many "insults" that Con has presented: 1) "Prophecy in the Bible is false" - Tyre was rebuilt and he leaves the gps pictures of he city. He proved my point, they are the RUINS OF TYRE, the city is now Sour. God said the city of Tyre would not be rebuilt. He did not say to ever build on that land again. See his persuasive language is just like what Satan (the serpent) used to dissuade Eve from obtaining from the forbidden tree. Deception is the cause of most sins in our life Jeremiah 17:9. You see in round 1 he did not point out that Jericho had been rebuilt. IT HAS NOT, JUST AS GOD SAID! This is the theme Con Carry's out throughout this debate. I do not condemn him, but rather accuse him of being "blind" to truth2) The evidence of creation - He uses the "light" on the first day and say that it is already created before the fourth day. It clearly states that the first day was like a flashlight or light bulb, there is either light or darkness. On day four the sun, moon and the stars produce MORE LIGHT or LESS LIGHT and photosynthesis. Go read it!3) He states that "laminin does not have to be created by God" -amazing that we have all of the sophisticated technological advances and we can't create test tube life. But Laminin is just to supposed to "pop up" from somewhere, but not from SOMEONE4) Mature Earth -He wants to point out carbon dating as being so viable a means to date. Well it can only date for 5,730 years. And we have not experience such dating for long, since it was founded in 1940. NOT LONG AT ALL. Elements can be exposed to light, climate, preserved underground or in caves. Things break down quicker bases on exposure. How can this compare to dating things that are not exposed to the elements5) His questioning the "glue" that God IS but wants to discredit. Who did create everything than??? They say "big bang," but what caused the bang, and all of the universes matter was in the size of a pen head. That aces "insane" faith to believe in such a system. It leaves more questions than answers. It is a devoid and broken system. In my lifetime the "scientific system" has changed 3 times in my life. The universe was 1) shrinking 2)growing 3) and now we are a "bible" in a vast bathtub of bubbles. To answer why the universe is so big and GROWING (stars are being created) because they say things are so far away that must be "13 billion light years away," further than I can imagine. Could not the universe not be growing OUTWARD, just like a tree or star. It is capable of growing outward. If stars can be created and we see constellations being swallowed by other constellations (I put this in to pre-empt Cons weak arguments), but can not constellations have a universe that is FIRST created?6) Medical leeching - yes, I and we know that they do this today on extremely limited basis. I was provoking thought that the many or the masses practice something that is WRONGFUL to practice. And trys to cast doubt because it is practiced in a limited way today. The point was that "science" of the day was wrong and has continued to be wrong7) Just because our finite mind does not think that 100% of 2 equal parts are impossible, it is so. Con presupposes that our knowledge in FULL. That is not true. Even in the early 1900's civilization thought all things were created and no more "things" were out there to create. How drastically wrong. Does Con suppose that all knowledge has been obtained by man. That would be a false assumption to think that all knowledge is known by man. Technology, science and innovation are growing in leaps and bounds. 8) Genesis is not a 'Metaphor" or "allegorical" story. God said it, and that settles it! If the account is not in proper order as he states, than GOD IS A LIAR, and his character is imputed to be FALSE. That is not the case. Con can state "theistic" beliefs since there are so many. Why, because man screws up everything in due time. 8) To accuse me of baseless sexist statements is insulting beyond a blood pressure measurement. Bad Form!9) Saying that Jews claim that he has not fulfilled all of Messiah claims make Jesus void of being the true Messiah -Con does not preface that Jews do not view God other than a monotheistic being. A triune "blows" their mind out of the water. JESUS COULD NOT FULFILL ALL MESSIANIC PROPHECIES AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY. Yes, the disciples wanted him to set up a kingship, but we must remember what he came to earth to do. The Gospel of John 1 tells of the KEY reason for Jesus coming to earth in verse 29 "John saw Jesus coming to-ward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! Con focuses on Millennial Kingdom Messiah ship and not the "real" reason for His needed arrival to earth. It is just like this, I go to a hospital with a severe wound that needs immediate doctor attention and they only want to do administrative paperwork and making me comfortable in a room. The essence of the moment calls for a DOCTOR! Not paperwork. This is the theme that Con goes for in his debate. Without a means to obtain forgiveness of our sins from the Father, it does not matter what kingdom God sets up on earth!!10) Con wants to point out that rape is a means that God must intervene into our lives. Why?? He thinks it is unjust suffering?? Well many positions can be taken to overcome such erroneous thinking: 1) God must impede or stop WRONGS - how wrong do they have to be? Con can't compitulate that killing, stealing or lying are moral wrongs. But rape is, sounds rather contradictory in his positions. But says God should intervene in murders, rape, robbers, abuse or he is not a "moral" quality character. How can Con make such a judgment? Where does he have the right to call God out? God is in control and obviously not us. Since when do the peons tell God what is RIGHT? They cannot, because we are not in the same "league." My children don't tell me how to raise them. Employees don't tell the employer how to function or the tasks they are only going to do. Principals run schools not the kids. How dare Con attack God's character. You see this is the important point I want to add, God is only GOOD. Man is mostly BAD. God made all things "good" in Genesis. All things were perfect. Man and his FREE WILL made BAD come into the world. Con "blames" God for no intervening against BAD, but as I said how far does God go to stop bad? Does he punish lies, idol worshippers, foul language, covetousness, bad thoughts. See God wants man to come to him on God's terms and seek God freely. Love that is free is much better than love that is forced on someone. That is not TRUE LOVE, but Con will find some minuscule reason for this not to be right. Pure love that is mutual is the BEST! God wants our admiration, and when this is done it is mutual. God loves us in spite of all of our BAD! Just like I love my children who are far from perfect, just as I. God is not our cop, but in the millennial period we will be his cops for him. I want to finish with another proof of God. I have heard of two profound accounts of people dying for an elongated period of time and being revived. Only to tell of entering heaven. I want to tell of a young boy, maybe 7, who tells his father that he saw Grandpa in heaven. Father shows a late picture of him because the son never saw Grandpa in his OLD stage. No recognition by the boy given. The father is curious an finds another picture of his father with a group of YOUNG comrades. The boy picks out the Grandfather immediately. Or the Pastor dead for 1 1/2 hours that should have died account. Of course Con disagrees someway.