In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

There are two problems with the interpretation of scripture here:1) It's vague whether it means it literally or not. Yes, we may argue that it is a unovical interpretation of the scripture, but that is a minority opinion among major scholars and theologians and trained priests, the majority opting for either an analogous or symbolic interpretation of the Bible.2) My opponent has the wrong Holy Book. Clearly, zoroastrianism is the correct religion. The third problem is also the largest, unsurprisingly. Zoroastrianism is the correct religion. There are a number of reasons for this:1) "Then, out of Infinite Time, He produced forth Time which is the Lord of duration -- there is someone who calls it Finite Time -- out of Time which is the Lord of duration, Impassability arose, that is, the substance of Ohrmazd will not pass away; out of Impassability, the Progress of prosperity became manifest, -- that is, the, unhappiness owing to the Devs may not come; out of the Progress of prosperity, spiritual Intransformability became manifest, the Spirit owing to whom the substance of Ohrmazd will not alter from that which was produced, at the original creation; out of spiritual Intransformability, the complete Will of the creatures of material existence became manifest, the righteous creation of the creatures and conformability."[1] Amazing!The Yasna clearly states that there was nothingness (or infinite Time) and from that came substance. As Zoroastrianism is the correct religion, that means there was nothing then God (Ahura Mazda) created the world!2) Zoroastrianism agrees with all the facts we know of the world. a) "A child is said to be formed, and a soul added to its body, after a woman has been pregnant for four months and ten days"[2]. Also the third trimester, when the majority of people not clouded by false religion agree the beginning of life starts.b) "How is existence brought about? Just as one substance is evolved out of another according to its own laws and in the finite time (fixed for it.)"[3] Hence evolution.c) Zoroastrianism predicts its own lack of success in old times, and for 3000 years will be unsuccessful. However, after that period, after another 3000 years will become more successful and then eventually the triumphant religion, without ever dying out. Zoroastrianism has existed for almost 3000 years, and its numbers still exist, yet it is unsuccessful, proof of its validity. d) "It is the desire of Ahura Mazda from people is this: 'Know me', for he knows: 'If they know me, everyone will follow me'. The desire of Angra Mainyu is this: 'Do not know me', for he knows: 'If they know me no one will follow me'." Aghura Mazda (good) and Angra Mainyu (evil) battle for supremacy in this world. Angra Mainyu is successful to begin with (the first 3000 years). However, as we develop we become less violently anarchic (states develop and become stronger and less crimes come about, which is true on a large scale), and we develop reason (evident by the promotion of reason and success of new technology), we become a better society and more inclined towards good. Moreover, all philosophical arguments point to Zoroastrianism. The arguments for God conclude Ahura Mazda, Hume's teleological argument concludes panentheism. The problem of evil concludes Ahura Mazda is not omnipotent. By contrast, Hume's teleological argument and the problem of evil does not conclude the Christian God. Moreover, none of the properties of the Christian God are inconsistent, while Ahura Mazda is limited in his omnipotence and the god system is henotheistic, which makes more sense.3) Hume's teleological argument is not specifically an argument from Hume, but its inspiration can be taken from Hume. Firstly, we accept the teleological argument, that the universe's design entails a designer. However, we get this conclusion analogously: thus, for the argument to remain valid, we must continue the analogy as far as is reasonable.We know that the bigger something is, the more work is put into the design. However, this only goes so far. If the design is massive, like we can point to the Olympic Ceremony, we need an incredibly skilled designer to design it. However, even this only goes so far as well. When it comes to something as big as the Olympics, we neeeded many designers to design it. As such, it is only logical to conclude that something as large as the universe had many designers. The pentateuch denies this, but Yasna accepts this logical conclusion.4) Problem of Evil is quite simple: An omnipotent omniscient omnibenevolent deity, can intervene in the world if there is evil, and should intervene in the world, and therefore there would not be evil. However, the fact that there is evil goes against the possibility of this God. As there is no deity in zoroastrianism which falls for this problem, this justifies zoroastrianism.5) Inconsistent properties in God exist on a large scale. For example, God is omnipotent. This omnipotence is summed up in the Bible verse "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”[4] and "For nothing is impossible with God". He rhetorically asks "Is anything too hard for me?" implying there is nothing that he cannot do. However, we know for example God cannot lie. This may seem minor, but clearly there are many situations where lying is advantageous to everyone (giving a silly example: if you lie to a man about which button will end the world, and tell him it's the one that saves the world, it is moral to save the world). Moreover, it creates the contradictions such as "Can you make a rock too heavy to lift", as God should be able to lift it, yet cannot lift it. We can claim he cannot break logic, but nothing is impossible without God. We can claim the object does not exist, but God can make it exist, for nothing is impossible without God - and its existence in concept means it has the capacity to exist at the least. 6) Finally, the Bible contradicts, makes things up, and is wrong on many issues. It contradicts itself, saying firstly that: "Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: “For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”[7] but later saying "But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”[8] This is a clear contradiction. The Bible also makes things up, like the ahistorical events of the census of Quirinius, as well as the Jewish exodus from Egypt. Finally, the Bible says things that are scientifically wrong. For example: "Yet these may you eat of every flying creeping thing that goes on all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap with on the earth"[9]. There are no flying things that go on all fours. Moreover, the Bible says that the moon projects is own light: "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."[10]I think that is enough, so with that I'll pass the round over to my opponent to conclude.1 - Yasna 44 2 - Antequil II, 5633 - Denkard 44 - Matthew 19:265 - Luke 1:37 6 - Jeremiah 32:27 7 - Genesis 32:308 - Exodus 33:209 - Leviticus 11:2110 - Genesis 1:16