If God is Real He's Unfair and Unjust

A.The Killings of God 1. The only interpretation I can get is that my opponent believed there was witches. If that's not what my opponent is saying, then I'm sorry. 2. My opponent says that it was to, basically, show the power of a prophet and to punish the parents. Killing an animal than eating that animal, so that the killing has two purposes and making it more efficient, would have been just as affective with more benefits. About punishing the parents, this is unfair to the children. Why not just punish the parents and take in the children and teach them "God's way." 3. There are two things I'd like to address. The first being that my opponents says, "This command seems to be directed to the Medes and Persians," but it never says so in context. Because of this I'd like to say that this is undecided due to lack of evidence of both sides. The other thing I'd like to address is, "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me." (Exodus 20:5) This is god admitting to being jealous, which against one of the seven deadly sins but that's not relevant. So I see this as God punishing people because of his jealousy, which doesn't seem very "just" of God.Note: My opponenet claims that only the Old Testament is valid, which is a comman claim. I don't see why we should disclude the New Testament because both Testaments were written by or with the influence of God. Maybe his point is that the Old Testament and New Testament have nothing to do with each other, but again I'd like to say that both were written with the influence of God so I think they both should be thought of as a intertwined to each other. B.God Endorsed Slavery "Endorse - Declare one's public approval or support of". Is God not approving slavery? Is he saying that it's okay to own a slave? Yes. I've given a Bible verse already showing that God approves it. That's all I have to say to end this topic.C.God is Not Just, Nor Does He Have A Heart 1. God says he's almighty himself. (almighty - Having absolute power; all-powerful) 2. I believe I know what you're saying now, if I do, I'm perfectly fine with that Hell. I was basing my argument off the fundamental thought of Hell. (this statement is going off what you say in "D.What's the point of Hell") 4. My opponent says,"My opponent keeps inserting how she feels and what she views as if everything evolves around her opinion", but I never stated anything even remotely close, I'm saying I can't conceive why a God would be so, in my opinion, cruel. My opponent also says, "My opponent also wants God to allow His creations to do their own will without punishment.," even though I satated, "I made this section to argue about the reasoning of Hell eventhough it helps nobody. I would understand Hell if God sent us back to mortality, to try again, or into Heaven after a certain amount of time." In this quote I'm saying that would seem much more useful if we gave people a chance after Hell to put what they've learned into affect or giving them a timed punishment, not that no punishment should be issued. (This statement is directed to the fundamental thought of Hell and I'm okay with no response to this subsection.)D.What's the point of Hell As I said in C-2, I'm perfectly fine with you definition of Hell.Note: Thank you for debating, I hope I had you feeling and/or thinking about something I said during this debate.