atheism vs God

Ok first of all I would like to say that people like to have religious debates on here which I feel is ridiculous because it is all just opinions. The one source most of these people will use is the bible, but what you don't realize is that the bible makes no sense and you can not just believe a book written so long ago that we have no real proof of anything in it. That being said I would like to make it clear that sense science is proven and accepted in our society both I and Pro can use it as a way to prove our points. My opponent argues that I did not supply and rebuttal to his claim but this is simply because he did not supply any ideas for me to argue against. There are many religions that have different interpretations of god. My opponent simply stated a claim that one was better than the others and the others did not exist. however he did not supply any evidence or facts for me to counter, the layout of a debate is arguments and evidence first round and then rebuttal but how am I supposed to make a rebuttal without any arguments. Even with this predicament I will try to supply evidence that shows that my opponents claim is incorrect 1. my opponent said that the Bible is 100% true but we have countless ways to prove that it is not true, many from science therefore I will post a quote from an article showing just some of these http://www.atheismresource.com... "The bible has been proven wrong about a great number of things, not the least of which is its central idea: that a man rose from the dead. We know this is impossible. The bible makes a magnificent glory about such an event"s impossibility: otherwise, why would god be required? The problem is that there"s no evidence that it occurred. The same can be said for walking on water, living in the belly of a fish, staffs turning into snakes, people turning into pillars of salt, etc. This is not even mentioning "prophecies" like the city of Tyre never being rebuilt (Ezekiel 26:14"Tyre is still around to this day) or a global flood (which was completely missed in the historical records of civilizations like Egypt"s Sixth Dynasty, which should have been destroyed." Ok now that you have read that I want to remind you that my opponent's claim is that the bible is 100% true therefore in order to prove me wrong he must supply EVIDENCE that all of the above things are actually possible (walking on water,rising from the dead, etc...) 2. I am not even sure what to say to pro's first claim "The one true God by the name of Yahweh created everything that exists" except for the fact that it is such a wild claim to me that without any evidence I do not believe I need to even talk about it. And that for Pro to prove it correct he would have to prove that every other god of every other religion is not "true" and that "Yahweh" created everything. 3. unfortunately my opponent has only supplied those arguments and their last point is just dissing other religions and beliefs, however I would argue that due to the fact that you show no proof for "Christianity and Judaism are two middle fingers in God's face." Also this is just such an inappropriate thing to say in a mature atmosphere people do not discriminate against their enemy's. (I personally would count this as conduct in the voting stages) 4. finally I want to address the fact that you said "Atheism, Buddhism, Islam, and every other religion is a lie" which is so broad that it would be impossible for you to prove in this debate. I want the voters to think about how broad and non factual a debate this is. And how pro has not even tried to prove one bit of his claim, and I want them to see that Pro has also made discriminatory remarks about other beliefs which is not appropriate to do. And even if the voters do agree with Pro on this subject I would ask that they make their decisions based on who debated better, because after all this is a debating website and to be honest Religion is not an easy subject to debate without opinions it is like a debate on "Which is better skiing or snowboarding" that debate doesn't work because there is no facts to prove that one is better than the other so you must judge the debate solely on there debating skills. I am sorry for straying from the debate topic but I think it is important that the debate not be judged or fought over opinions.