There is no evidence supporting the existence of the biblical god.

As my opponent has supplied no definitions, I will provide them: Evidence: (. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...) ev·i·dence n. 1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment. 2. Something indicative; an outward sign: 3. Law The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law. Types of evidence (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) Anecdotal evidence Intuition Personal experience Scientific evidence Testimonial My role as Con will not be to prove that God exists. My role as Con will not even be to prove that the evidence in favor of God isn't vastly outnumbered by the evidence against his existence. My role as Con will simply be to prove that there is at least one (however small it may be) piece of evidence that does support the existence of god. My opponent's statement that there is 'NO EVIDENCE,' is an extremely bold generalization that will be easily disproven. Let me state again: I am not proving the existence of God. I am not even proving the likelihood of his existence. I simply have to prove that there is at least one piece of supporting evidence for a biblical god's existence. Also, my opponent states "Belief relies on blind faith alone. " This is a bold assertion that I reject and present rebuttal for bellow. So, I am going to list evidence supporting the existence of the biblical god (not proving) and this will prove my opponent's extremely bold assertions false: Evidence and Arguments for The Existence Of God: Cosmological Argument: (. http://www.faithfacts.org...) 1. Finite and contingent beings have a cause. 2. A casual loop is unsound. 3. A casual chain cannot be of infinite length. 4. Therefore, a First Cause, must exist. This argument provides scientific as well as a priori evidence that the universe's existence requires an explanation and that the First Cause (instigating factor of creation) can be a possible description of biblical god. Kalam Cosmological Argument (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) 1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of existence. 2. The universe has a beginning of existence. 3. The universe has a cause of existence Further explanation: "Why couldn't natural forces have produced the universe? Because there was no nature and there were no natural forces ontologically prior to the Big Bang. Nature itself was created at the Big Bang. That means the cause of the universe must be something beyond nature—something we would call supernatural. It also means that the supernatural cause of the universe must at least be: spaceless because it created space timeless because it created time immaterial because it created matter powerful because it created it out of nothing intelligent because the creation event and the universe was precisely designed personal because it made a choice to convert a state of nothing into something (impersonal forces don't make choices) Those are the same attributes of the God of the Bible. " (. http://www.faithfacts.org...) 'Scientific Evidence' for the existence of God: Recent scientific studies suggest that that which is proven to be created and finite, must have an infinite creator. (. http://www.leaderu.com...) Ontological Evidence: (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) ". .. but the arguments typically start with the definition of God and conclude with his necessary existence, using mostly or only a priori reasoning and little reference to empirical observation. " There are a few versions of the ontological argument but here's what one looks like: Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived. The idea of God exists in the mind. A being which exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind. If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality. We cannot be imagining something that is greater than God. Therefore, God exists. Evidence from Morality: (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) Generally, the normative argument purporting moral evidence is this: Some aspect of Morality (e. g. , its objective force) is observed. (Moral realism) Existence of God provides a better explanation of this feature than various alternatives. Therefore, to the extent that (1) is accepted, belief in God is preferable to these alternatives. Personal Testimony: Eye-witness statements of hundreds and thousands supporting miraculous observations or encounters with a biblical god are also forms of evidence. The bible is perhaps one of the biggest forms of testimonial evidence, but there are others who claim faith healing by god, others who claim they heard god's voice and others who provide personal testimony that god reached out and touched them. (. http://www.cbn.com...) Other evidence: The evidence stemming from scientifically recognized laws of Thermodynamics or the Law of Conservation of mass also exist. (. http://toptenproofs.com...) Conclusion: My opponent makes a very bold statement saying that there is no evidence supporting the existence of a biblical god. Notice, I do not have to prove god's existence. Nor do I even have to offer the conclusions of the arguments being the most likely explanation for god's existence. I simply have to prove, as per the debate's intent, that there is indeed evidence for god's existence. And I have done so. My opponent is refuted.