evidence for Judaism

Response: With regard to my opponent's response to my argument of infinity, I quote: "My opponent does not seem to understand my reasoning. The mass was not in gas form for an infinite amount of time as infinity refers to time and as time had not yet existed, it could not have been." Not only did my opponent not say this, he actually said the opposite in R2 I cut and past his words here "I already argued that time is not a 'creation' but an inherent part of the universe."((I don't know were he "already" argued it, probably with another person.)). I claimed god is not bound by time as we see from Einstein's law of relativity time is not an absolute independent entity my opponent didn't respond to that nor did he retract his claim, now his words are in contradiction. My opponent continues: "My opponent does not seem to understand the definition of infinity". No explanation. I quote now from Wikipedia:" Infinity (symbol: ∞) is a concept in many fields, most predominantly mathematics and physics, that refers to a quantity without bound or end.". Thus I argue if the atoms were in that state for infinite time, by definition it would still be that way. Regarding my argument of 1st cause my opponent gave an analogy to my proof which was based on a paradox I explained that it wasn't analogues as in his case their was no paradox. My opponent asked me to explain, I don't know what needs explaining but I will try. I am saying it doesn't make sense to say there is no god because. If so there would be no way to create and cause the collision of the gas. Going now to the topic of national revelation: 1st my opponent miss quotes me showing that I was not at all understood he quotes me as such ""Judaism has been passed down for generations and generations and has gone from just a few people to millions."" No. No. and No again I tried drilling this point in last round. It was not "few" people it started with hundreds of thousands (if not over 1,000,000) of witnesses this is what makes Judaism diff. from all other beliefs, all other beliefs fit my opponents quote. My point is that this national revelation was witnessed by hundreds of thousands which is what gives it its credibility this is a main point I've been making. Summary: 1) Evidence of god: a) Evidence that the mass didn't always exist in gas form, because if they did they would still be that way. My opponent and I have been going back and forth regarding this, see above. ((b) Evidence of a god from the problem of 1st cause. If the gas was not always there, where did it come from according to the law of conservation of mass and energy.)?) c) Without god what put the mass in motion. This was discussed back and forth before see above. d) Evidence of god from complexity. 1st mentioned in R2, and clarified upon request in R3. e) Miracles: I did mess up on this a little as I forgot to bring evidence for the fact that millions have claimed to experience miracles. I thought it was obvious but my opponent questioned it and I failed to adequately respond. I mentioned some miracles but forgot to give evidence for that point. I mentioned a number of the most spectacular miracles: 1e) Creation of the world: my opponent countered this with the big bang and evolution. I find it not likely that this explains the universe as mentioned previously in bullets a,b,c,d. 2e) Exodus of the Hebrews from Egyptian bondage: I gave 2 pieces of archeological evidence for this from Wikipedia. My opponent objected to my use of Wikipedia as a source but did not respond to my question of why. 3e) Revelation at Sinai: This has been one of the man points of this debate see above and below. 2) Evidence specifically for Judaism: a) National revelation: This point has been a major one in this debate as it is one of the main cornerstones of Judaism. The main point that I've been trying to explain to my opponent is that this is not simply a popularity thing. I'd like to quote from something I mentioned in the message box. "Regarding national revelation, as I explained twice in the previous round as well as in the comments there is a fundamental difference between my point and the point of popularity. If I were using just a popularity reason I would have just said major religions (Christianity, Islam, sikism, Baha'i, and Jews) totaling 3.4bil. or 53% of the world believes in the revelation at Sinai).That is not my main point as I have stated. I myself did not always appreciate this piece of evidence so I cannot blame my opponent; this point took me years to appreciate. I will try again to explain it I ask the reader to think carefully and objectively" I apologize to anyone who gets it already (you can skip to the last section) for spending so much time on it but it is a crucial point, and I don't seem to be getting it across to my opponent I will try one final time I will be brief as I've already discussed it so much, It may help reread what i wrote in previos rounds. I totally agree with my opponent popularity is not evidence. To quote my professor Dovid gottlieb "we count reasons not #'s". Case in point, hundreds of years ago just about everyone, "scientists" included believed the world was flat, is that evidence ? No. why? Because they didn't have very good reason to think so. Point being a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The fact that a lot of people believing something does not make it true, you have to ask them why they believe it,if they have a good reason go with it. If you ask a proper Jew how he knows that there was a revelation at Sinai he should have a reason, "my father told me so". Now according to what I stated before that alone is a pretty weak unless we know why the father believes it. The answer to the question of why his father believes it is, because. His father told him now we play the same game all over again. Until we reach the great great ect. Grandfather who believes because he along with hundreds of thousands of his fellow nationals experienced this. Solid. I apologize for all of this I am extremely frustrated at my inability to get this message across. I am trying every way I can think of. Perhaps it can only be grasped with time or age. If anyone has any specific problems please put it in the comments section and I will respond, but I think at the very least I have addressed all the comments made by my opponent which is all I am supposed to do in this debate. b) Regarding the entire 2nd half of what I wrote in R4 (the 1st half was response), regarding accuracy of predictions made in the bible regarding the uniqueness of Jews (there may have been more I only had room for 3) my opponent did not respond at all.