Christianity has no valid basis to exist.

Rebuttals My opponent began round 2 by stating that: "Christianity is not based on any kind of truth but purely on myth." Which he claims is the entire foundation of his position. I covered that perfectly when I said that my opponents arguments can be boiled down to, "that which is seemingly impossible should not exist." It is my hope that the audience will see that I am not mistaken in understanding this resolution. I. Adam & Eve -> JesusMy opponent fails to understand what a circular argument is. I will share briefly a quick example of a circular argument which will prove to the audience that I am not committing such logical fallacies."Circular argument: A sentence or argument that restates rather than proves. Thus, it goes in a circle: 'President Reagan was a great communicator because he had the knack of talking effectively to the people.' The terms in the beginning of the sentence (great communicator) and the end of the sentence (talking effectively) are interchangeable." [1][1] http://grammar.about.com...Aside from my opponent clearly creating false accusations, I have not avoided anything. My opponent attempted to make the point that if Adam & Eve never happened because it is a myth, then Jesus' death would have been for nothing. I showed how under the assumption that Adam & Eve are just a myth, it is equally probable that the story of Jesus' sacrifice is also a myth. This makes my opponents entire point null and void of any meaning or value to this debate. Just because my opponent is unable to see this, does not mean I have avoided anything. I have shown that my opponent committed a logical fallacy himself, and he has yet to justify his reasoning for doing so. II. Virgin Birth To be clear, the only person who has claimed something is a myth or not is my opponent. I have done no such thing. Whether I agree or disagree to the 'realness' of Jesus' miracles are irrelevant to the resolution which ultimately is asking for a valid basis for Christianity to exist. I have already provided that in the previous round under Argument II. III. Resurrection I was merely sharing verses that answered why his body did not decay. This is working under the premise that the Bible is accurate and not just a myth. If I am to work under the premise that the Bible IS a myth then it still does nothing to negate my argument that Christianity has a valid basis to exist. My opponent assumes that because the stories in the Bible are myth or false that Christianity has no valid basis to exist. I have shown previously why that is a poor standard for judging the existence of something. My opponent continues to misunderstand my previous arguments. Regardless of the stories being false or not, the fact that they are even stories still being told or read, in itself, validates the basis for its existence. The only thing "falseness" is relevant to is if the stories are probable or not, the element of "falseness" in this context holds no ground on whether the stories exist or not or whether they have a valid basis to exist. Once again, the fact that the stories of Christianity told in the Bible are spoken or written down as meaningful information creates the valid basis for existence. I hope I have made this clear enough at this point. IV. Miracles I understand that we are focusing on Christianity. The point is that your resolution would affect much more than just Christianity if this House was to adopt your standards for judging what has a valid basis to exist or not exist. Furthermore, I have shown why your standards are inadequate, unjustified, and illogical and am still waiting for your justification for such a poor standard based solely on your misunderstanding of how the falseness of something does not deny nor rebut the existence of it. Nor have you shown why such existence wouldn't have a valid basis when I have shown that it does indeed have one by the very act of transferring the meaningful information to one another. V. Responses to additional Statements made by my opponent."This is not what I'm saying. I am saying that if the claims for Jesus' existence and purpose are founded on myth, then there is no real basis for Christianity to exist either. I have shown why Christianity has a basis to exist. The information that falls under the umbrella term of Christianity is meaningful, meaning that humans attach to the information. We continue to share that information with one another today. The fact that we are sharing such information in our own existence means that the information itself is also in existence, i.e., - it exists because we exist and continue to carry on the traditions and stories of Christianity. This is the basis for Christianity to exist. We are the basis. We keep it alive. To say there is no valid basis would be saying that there is no means for that to exist. But we are those means which keeps it in existence. Humans continuous practice of Christianity and the application of meaning to the information is the valid basis for the existence of Christianity. "Other religions are irrelevant to this discussion. That said, any religion that requires impossible things to have happened are susceptible to this argument." My opponent literally contradicts himself. Furthermore, my opponent is still operating under the assumption that "falseness or impossibility" holds any relevance to the Resolution, whereas I have shown that it does not. I ask that my opponent try to uphold his BOP as Pro. "Greek, Roman and Nordic religions still enrich us but not as religions but as stories. It should be the same for Christianity - that it is the story of a culture that is waning in its influence."The stories of the Bible are just that, stories. [2] [3] [4] Even Christians view them as stories, so once again, your point is null and void of any relevance to this debate. Whether someone perceives those stories as truth or not falls into an extremely subjective realm and ultimately holds no ground in this debate. [2] http://greatstoriesofthebible.org...[3] http://www.biblicaltraining.org...[4] https://bible.org..."But Christianity doesn't exist as a story though does it? It exists as a factual set of claims of miracles and impossible acts being the basis its religion."No, but it is comprised of stories that can be found in Christianity's holy book known as the Bible as I have shown above. The claim of whether it is factual or not falls into the realm of subjectivity as I have also shown above. Once again, your point is null and void of any ground in this debate when attempting to determine a valid basis for Christianity to exist. Additional Arguments I. The 10 commandments found in the Bible also provides a valid basis for its existenceI have already shown that Christianity has a valid basis to exist. An additional justification would be the 10 Commandments found in Exodus 20:1-17. [5]Some of these commandments are still in practice today as modern laws placed into effect by the American Government. Examples would be the illegal acts of committing murder, stealing, giving false testimony or even moral rules still accepted by today's standards including coveting a neighbors wife, using the Lord's name in vane, honoring your mother and father, and keeping the Sabbath holy. The mere fact that these commandments are still upheld today provides yet another example for the valid basis of the existence of Christianity. To claim otherwise would then say that such laws have no valid basis to exist which is a claim that has yet to be justified. [5] http://www.biblegateway.com...In Conclusion I have shown why my opponents claims are poor standards, and ultimately remain unjustified. I've also countered each point and raised further arguments. I've also shown that I committed no circular arguments. I turn the floor back to my opponent. Thank you.