The Judeo-Christian God exists.

Thanks, Con1. Rebuttal"Adam and Eve's descendants had at least 1,000 years to make one written record of a god that is similar to the Judeo-Christian god... the first appeared only after plenty of other beliefs had come to be."Again, I see no reason why this should be necessary. Oral tradition would have done the job, and it needn't be similar to either Judaism or Christianity (as my opponent seemed to agree with). And that's if Adam and Eve were, in fact, literal people, which the Christian is by no means restricted to believing. "If God chooses to inflict natural disaster and disease on the innocent, it is immoral on his account. It is evil."Why think that God is "inflicting" natural disasters and diseases on people? Do you have any justification to support this assertion? It's entirely possible that an evil force, Satan for example, is responsible for natural disasters and diseases. I see no reason to assert that God is responsible. "Satisfied?" Not quite. My opponent has failed to show that there is a logical contradiction between the existence of a "good" God and the existence of evil. In fact, when I asked if my opponent thought such a contradiction existed he responded "not necessarily". So, we can reasonably conclude that no logical contradiction between God and evil exists. As such, the problem of evil fails. "it seems like every religion's prayers are being answered"Everyone can recognize that there are thousands of conceptions of God. In fact, I would go as far as to say that there are not two identical conceptions of God, so that each individual who has ever lived has had a conception of God that differs in at least one aspect from another. We can just as easily recognize, however, that we aren't each praying to a unique God. Members of several different religions pray to their conception of God, but we must keep in mind that it is the same God (if He exists) who receives each of those prayers. "Whether or not someone prays is not entirely dependent on his free choice of prayer; where a man is born can also affect it."I agree; one's environmental circumstances certainly impact the probability that one will pray (or refrain from prayer). This is irrelevant to what was being discussed with regard to prayer, however.2. Arguments in Favor of GodRecall that in the beginning of the debate, I presented two arguments in favor of the Judeo-Christian God. These arguments included (1) God is the best explanation for the origin of the universe and (2) God is the best explanation for objective moral values and duties. I'll respond to my opponent's most recent objections to these arguments:In response to the first argument I presented, my opponent argues that the universe had no beginning because there was no "before the big bang". My opponent completely ignored the evidence I presented for a beginning of the universe (namely the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem). This theorem says that the quantum vacuum state of the early universe must have had an absolute beginning. It is not fair to simply ignore this widely accepted theorem in favor of a subjective personal opinion (without evidence) on a beginingless universe, as my opponent has opted to take. My opponent also takes issue with my saying that infinity does not exist in reality. Here again, he gives no evidence to support his objection. Here are just a few academic sources showing that a universe with an infinite past is not possible:https://www.math.toronto.edu...http://www.princeton.edu...http://people.clas.ufl.edu...Thus, it seems that my opponent has failed to knock down the first argument that was presented. Now, let us turn to the second argument.My opponent originally argued that objective morality comes from evolution. I showed the absurdity of this proposition in my last argument, and it seems from my opponent's lack of response that he has decided to drop this argument. My opponent moves on to argue that the Bible "is an unreliable source for morality". Again, this is pure speculation on my opponent's behalf. Nonetheless, even if he is correct, it does not follow that therefore objective morality does not exist. I responded to one of my opponent's objections in the last round by arguing that using his line of reasoning, self-sacrifice is immoral (see my last argument). My opponent responded to this by saying that self-sacrifice is moral due to the fact that someone else's life is being preserved. This contradicts what he argued in the last round, however, when he stated that morality must increase fitness. Clearly, self-sacrifice that results in death does not increase fitness. It is not reasonable to suggest that because another organism's fitness is increased, morality is maintained. That is not how evolution works. An organism that sacrificed it's life (and the passing on of its genes) in order that another organism (with a different set of genes) might live to reproduce would be an evolutionary disasters. To quote Charles Darwin from On the Origin of Species, this type of behavior would "annihilate" the theory of evolution.3. The Story of HorusMy opponent continues to assert that Jesus is some sort of myth modeled after a character named Horus. This radical theory is overwhelmingly rejected in academia; the comparisons between Jesus and Horus are have simply been invented by atheists and have no standing whatsoever in academic circles. To counter the book that my opponent offered as a source (which is by no means an academic source, as I requested), here are two books which demonstrate the historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth:The Evidence for Jesus by James D.G. DunnThe Historical Evidence for Jesus by G.A. Wells4. Conclusions As there was a shared burden of proof in this debate, my opponent and I have both been responsible for providing arguments and evidence in support of our respective positions. My opponent has failed to provide any sound arguments in favor of his position. I have shown the error in each of the arguments he has attempted to bring forward, including the problem of evil, the argument that prayer doesn't work, and the argument that Jesus was a myth based on the character of Horus. None of these objections were successful. My opponent failed to justify his assertion that there is a contradiction between the existence of God and the existence of evil, the assertion that prayer doesn't work, and the assertion that Jesus did not exist. On the other hand, I have provided two sound arguments in favor of my position in this debate:1) God is the best explanation for the origin of the universe.2) God is the best explanation for objective moral values and duties.My opponent was unable to knock down either of these arguments. His attempts to show that the universe is eternal and that morality comes about through evolutionary means have been utterly flawed. As such, we are left with two sound arguments in favor of God, and zero sound arguments against God.I have fulfilled my share of the burden of proof in this debate by providing reasons to think it is likely that God exists. My opponent, on the other hand, has failed to carry his share of the burden of proof. 5. Sources http://now.tufts.edu...On the Origin of Species by Charles DarwinThe Evidence for Jesus by James D.G. DunnThe Historical Evidence for Jesus by G.A. Wells