It is better to live as a Christian than to live as an atheist.

There is one thing you won't ever catch me doing in a debate, and that is flippantly ascribing points of view I don't understand to "fear". My opponent mentions something about intellectual laziness being part of conversions to Christianity. Whenever I hear atheists ascribing faith in God to "fear", I always think it's one of the more intellectually lazy explanations I have ever heard. Atheists who have found God report years of personal growth, of view shifting, of navel gazing, and of having their previously well ordered view of the godless universe changed by Something. Summing all of that up as "fear" is beyond ridiculous. All of the supposedly frightening things that atheists assert keep us "tied down" in "superstition" are not really scary anyway. Overwhelming freedom? "Oh no, we're so FREE!!! Chain us, Lord, with thy holy manacles!" Please. My opponent's response, unfortunately, continues his various misconceptions about Christianity. He keeps repeating that you don't have to question or think about anything. I believe I addressed this well enough in the last round, and I believe my opponent has not successfully refuted me. To summarize my arguments, history is full of Christian thinkers who made it their life's work to question everything, including faith. I mentioned theologians. I didn't even mention the multitude of philosophers over the centuries, like Descartes, or Kierkegaard, or Kant (in his early life), just to name a few, who were Christian, and who would have laughed my opponent out of the room if he suggested that they, due to their faith, were not interested in questioning anything, or don't feel the need to research anything (Isaac Newton? Anyone? Smartest human to ever have lived, discovered the laws of gravity, and was also devoutly religious?). This argument of my opponent's is an abject failure. In an attempt to understand at least a part of what my opponent *might* be saying, I will concede that the bible does teach us not to worry about certain things. But not worrying about things is a completely different idea from not thinking about things, and Christ wasn't referring to math, science, or philosophy when he made that statement anyway. Also, it's true enough that God does not command me to study cosmology (for example). So, I suppose in a sense of speaking, my opponent is correct if he wants to say that Christians don't "have" to think about the origins of the universe. But if that is his point, then I will point out that nobody *has* to. Atheists don't have to either. Nobody is commanding atheists (or anyone else) to be scientifically literate, and while you can argue that you should be scientifically literate in order to be a "good" atheist, it's largely a personal choice. Indeed, my younger atheist friends don't know the first thing about the origins of the universe. All they know is that God doesn't exist, and that weed is, like...really good. My opponent continues his issues with God's judgement. He asks why God "deserves" to be a judge of humanity. It's simple- God has all authority that can be had. He can see everything that can be seen. He knows everything that there is to know. If humans can judge, not having any of these qualities, then so can God, having all of them. He can disagree with God, calling his judgements "immoral" and "cruel". Again, I would say that he is deliberately focusing on God's fire and brimstone, and not at all on the legion examples of his forgiveness and benevolence, but that's fine. Whether you agree with his judgements or not, the fact is that God has the power, the will, the perspective, and the authority. The job belongs to him. Period. By the way, sending homosexuals to hell? I don't think God automatically does, but I can name more than few atheist regimes that have been happy to kill gays, ie, various atheist communist governments. God sending unbaptized babies to hell? This is a catholic belief, one that I don't hold and, thus, will not defend. I don't think God does anything of the sort. But many atheists often have had no problem with sending children on to the afterlife. I'm thinking those same regimes I already mentioned, as well as the seemingly high support among atheists for abortion. I wouldn't complain about God doing all of these things, when atheists have done them aplenty. My opponent then triggers a Godwin's Law -like scenario, where he enters into the portion of every God debate where a list offensive scriptures is given. I will not defend them, though I could make a decent run at it. I've done it a million times before in every dark corner of the internet. But the reason I will not is the point I have already established about his assertion...that whether or not you agree with God's values is irrelevant. God has the authority to judge, being ultimately in charge. He has the requisite knowledge, and vast perspective that being a judge demands. He cannot successfully deny these facts. He goes on to make a "problem of evil" response to my correctly pointing out that his "nothing-but-judgement" God is an atheist invention, and not a God I recognize, and not the one shown in scripture. This is not a response at all. My rebuttal is that God does not simply callously issue judgements all day. Bringing up the so called "problem of evil" does not obscure the fact that my opponent was blatantly wrong in his characterization of God as a being who desires to do nothing but engage in judgement and wrath. As an aside on this last point, he accuses Christians of cherry picking the bible. That is rich criticism coming from someone who has done nothing but present a one-sided view of God's actions, posting nasty, wrathful scriptures with pleasure, while glossing over literally every other scripture where people turn to God for knowledge, guidance, comfort, nourishment, salvation, and forgiveness. Christians are the only ones who see the whole picture of the biblical God. Atheists generally only see the qualities of God that they love to hate. My opponent is the one who is guilty of cherry picking, not I. All I have done so far is refute my opponent's arguments. To make points in favor of the Christian lifestyle, I give my opponent a distinct advantage- I will promote his own values. Thus, I will argue with him on his own level, but I will show how Christianity encourages what he values farther than atheism does. I am running out of room, so I will have to be extremely brief- As to questioning everything, and intellectual pursuits, the fact that God created the universe makes me want to study it more deeply, not less. I will assert here that an appreciation for God's work can motivate you to study nature more than what we can very commonly distinguish as a philosophical nihilism founded upon atheist notions. The attitude I have expressed here about a lust for learning is not only mine. It is the attitude of every Christian who bothers to take an interest in being knowledgeable and well rounded, and it is boosted by my faith, not hindered. It is the attitude of every Christian who is famous for contributing to the scientific advancement of history, of which there are multitudes. If God is the one that knitted atoms together during the moment of creation, why shouldn't I want to study them? As for "freedom" and the self development of atheism, I would simply point out that these "freedoms", which I have sampled and tested myself, are more like opiates. Christianity is not the only belief system to say this. Philosophers predating Christianity by thousands of years, as well as many an average person living today, would say that the sex/drugs/rockn'roll freedoms atheists like to brag about actually inhibit true development of who you really are with distractions. Christianity's prohibitions of these things lead to what I would argue is a distilled and concentrated state of personal being, less inhibited and less adulterated by pursuits of base pleasures.