Prove a "Judeo" Religion

First of all I just wanted to say that I had all of these links I wanted to add to support my claims. For some reason I forgot to include them at the end. But that will be the last time I make that mistake. 1. Morality is essential when looking at evidence for Christianity. The Bible argues that God is moral and when we look at the world and see morality playing a part in it we can know that God is moral. Now, my opponent says "I am not completely sure whether or not I believe in a God, but I accept my opponent's offer of ignoring the subject of God's existence for the purposes of the debate." This makes things really complicated because if a person is not convinced that a God exists then it is impossible for them to accept any of the three Judeo Religions. The only way I can convince my opponent of anything is if I first convince him that there is a God. By the way, I recommend that my opponent changes his profile religion because it is incredibly misleading. 2. TheRussian claims "Our modern society may find certain behaviors to be immoral such as cannibalism, "foot binding", slavery and forced polygamy, however such behaviors were condoned in various societies before our time."This does nothing to disprove that morality is objective, it just proves that people are evil. My opponent also asked me to support the claims I have made and now I will ask him/her to do the same. They claimed that "there have been (and still are) so many different moral codes around the world that one cannot conclude that there is a single, Universal Morality." Again, my opponent has proven nothing except that people behave immorally. Which by the way is ironic considering "the moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other" (Lewis 13). In other words, when you look at the immoral actions of societies, you are comparing them to a real morality recognizing that there is a real right and wrong. If morality were purely subjective, you could not say that cannibalism was wrong for a fact. You could only say that it was wrong in your opinion which would be meaningless considering your opinion does not create an ethical standard in which people have to follow. 3. My opponent admits that he is a believer in the Big bang Theory as well as Evolution. I assumed my opponent believed in the existence of a God because his profile said that he/she was a deist. That said, believing in these theories does not mean that a God didn't do anything creative in the creation of the universe. The Universe still shows that something created the beautiful creation and that something produced this moral law. You can still believe in these theories and be a Christian. 4. Here are some links supporting that almost all scholars in our age believe in the existence of Jesus. http://www.is-there-a-god.info... http://www.is-there-a-god.info... https://en.wikipedia.org... Links for ancient historians backing up the existence of Jesus: http://www.everystudent.com... http://www.gotquestions.org... This statement my opponent made bothered me "Also, the Bible cannot be used for proof of Jesus because that's essentially the same as using the Bible to prove Christianity." This shows a misunderstanding of what the Bible is. The Koran was written by one man. The Bible was written by over forty people and many in the New Testament knew Jesus personally. Some were friends of Jesus and some were relatives. These writings from the people who knew Jesus were eventually complied into one source for the benefit of the church. But you can't just throw out eyewitness testimonies just because you already assume Christianity to be false. 5. I assume you believe that Hitler was a real person and you weren't alive for his existence. The point is that Josephus should not be discredited because he was not an eyewitness. I mean, your standards for proving Christianity are becoming impossible. You won't except eye witness testimonies (complied into the Bible) for some bizarre reason and now you will not accept a secular historian because he lived a few years later. How am I supposed to prove anything to you if you don't accept what any person of the time period says? 6. My opponent says "Being eaten by animals, stolen by humans or disappearing by other means is a much more logical explanation than resurrection." I have already covered the stolen by humans alternative. As for the eaten by animals alternative...the tomb he was buried in was sealed by a rock and the body went missing three days later. Not only that but he was buried in a casket sealed shut and buried in the earth. No animal could have had access to the body. 7. My opponent says "The rest of the third paragraph of Part 2 of my opponent's argument is using the Bible as proof and can be disregarded." This is just not true...you cannot disregard eye witness testimonies merely because you assume that Christianity is false. 8. My claims about evil were for the common deist who made those types of claims. TheRussians' profile said deist so I thought I would include that in my opening argument. But he/she is clearly not a deist. So let us indeed see what we have so far: My opponent disregards the idea of Universal morality because other cultures have done immoral things. I think I have addressed this issue well. The sources I have added do show that the majority of scholars believe in the existence of Jesus. He divinity is proven by eye witnesses of the time period and by the evidence of the Resurrection which I have begun to supply. My opponent rejects the Bible for no reason other than he assumes that the writers were wrong. I want to remind my opponent that the Bible is composed of many independent sources which we have and that he has given no reason to reject them other than him assuming that Christianity is false. By the way, the Koran was written by a man that originally thought the book to be inspired by demons and it was one of his many wives that told him that it was God and not demons. There are plenty of reasons to reject the Koran but lets stay on topic. Answers to my opponents questions: Do I believe the theory of evolution to be true? Absolutely not. See link on my debate about it for details: http://www.debate.org... Do I believe that all of the laws of nature were changed by/for Jesus for just several decades during Jesus' supposed life? No...I believe that because Jesus is God and created the laws of nature he can do anything he wants with nature. And then returned to normal after his resurrection? They never changed...I believe God was just showing people what he could do. He wasn't changing any of the laws he created. By asking this, I'm essentially asking whether or not my opponent truly believes that incredible events such as Noah's flood, the plagues, Jesus' miracles etc. were the results of "magic" from above? I don't believe it was magic. I believe that these things were a result of the power of God. But yes, I believe the flood happened, the plagues, and Jesus' miracles happened. I thank my opponent for their respectful nature and I admire the boldness they possess. I will eagerly await for his/her next response.