The existance of God

First: my apologies for forfeiting the last round. I simply wasn’t near a computer to post it. Given this is the last round; I won’t make any new arguments. REBUTTALS (I’ll try to make my opponents argument easier to read…) “The definition of faith is: making an assumption that something is or is not, without sufficient evidence. “ I’ll accept that definition for the sake of this debate. “By saying that God could exist anywhere outside of your small circle indicates you not knowing if god exists. “ Well clearly. I’ve already argued that it impossible to prove nonexistence… “Further, since you say it would be outside of the large circle, it will never be possible for you to empirically know if god does or doesn't exist. “ Indeed. Again, I have already argued that not being able to prove nonexistence is not a good reason to have doubt in something’s nonexistence; like flying reindeer… I will say it: I – DON’T –KNOW. However, given the evidence I find the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient being that cares about our insignificant lives extremely unlikely. “Therefore, you must exercise the definition of faith for your atheist position. “ “If you say anything could be outside of your circle, this only further supports my position. “ “You've said nothing that makes an atheists belief (faith) in no god different from a religionists belief(faith) in god. “ NO! I’ve said this repeatedly. I base my position on the evidence. The evidence as I interpret it is that God is not needed in the equation of our existence. We have other theories about how the Universe came to be (Multiverse theory; Big Bang Theory), how Earth came to exist (a rocky body left over after the formation of the Sun), how life started on Earth (abiogenesis) and how life came to exist in the many forms it is in now (Evolution). God creating the Heavens and the Earth in the beginning is obsolete. “Your worldview dictates you examining real world data inside the small circle, and from that, inferring there is no god. A religionist does the same but infers there is a god. “ Indeed. I feel the evidence against a God is much stronger and nothing you’ve said has made me think otherwise. “Either you change your position to "we can't know" (agnostic) or start saying you know god doesn't exist. “ I find the existence of God so unlikely that the fact he MIGHT exist is irrelevant; like flying reindeer. “As far as Christianity goes. One event defines the entire religion. Did Christ rise from the dead? Either all those people lied and it spread through a very skeptical pagan empire at an extremely rapid rate. Or, it happened. ” We know people lie or are mistaken about religious revelation. (Joseph Smith; L. Ron Hubbard) We know Constantine wanted to unite “the very sceptical pagans” and made Christianity the new religion of the empire, founding the Catholic Church. We know people can’t rise from the dead. “Since our senses are quite fallible, much of the world we take in will be interpreted according to our wordview. ” Do you think it’s possible the people two thousand years ago were mistaken about any of the key elements of the Jesus story which support his divinity? SECOND ROUND: “I can't criticize you or say your irrational. ” FIRST ROUND: “Therefore, it's completely irrational for an atheist to say religion and faith are silly and make no sense. ” Ok… now you’re backtracking. “But, you can’t criticize or tell me i'm irrational. If you did, this would come from a purely emotional place. “ I certainly can criticise you, since you have not made a non-fallacious argument. CONCLUSION My opponent made his circle analogy in the forums and has persisted with it. It is basically the only argument he has made and I’ve already pointed out that it’s fallacious. I’ve explained my position and it has only been vaguely addressed.