The Holy Spirit is real

I believe Pro believes her stuff but doesn't know how express them with dynamic clarity. As I continue to debunk her resolution I will also show her own debating confusion she caused.A. "The debate has been particularly a waste of time and I didn't appreciate my opponent's effort put into basically shunning the concept of a tri-God or Holy Spirit for 3 whole rounds."Pro never mandated that a Con should debate the topic with mutual agreement. So my position wasn't as supporter but as detractor. A1. " if I can prove the Trinity is real, I have more than proved my case." She couldn't even prove definitively what "tongues" is let alone prove 3 people as 1 person. It isn't my fault she doesn't know how to remain glued to her own proposition. B. Now let's look at what her proposition was about. Her debate title is "The Holy Spirit is real". Do we not first assume by this title the debate is about proving the holy spirit is real? Into it we find out she wants to prove the trinity is real. So she jumps from one thing (holy spirit) to three things (trinity). But never establishes a decisive piece of evidence that either is practical.C. "Acts 2 is irrelevant..." " I'm not going to bother venturing too far into my opponent's argument..." "I don't see your point for showing the Lonnie Mackley video..." "I don't see your point for showing the video by..."Pro's own statements show she can't distinguish fact from fiction. Let's look into this for utmost clarity.1. TO PRESERVE WORD LIMITS I won't quote her directly for this point, read her R1. She claims the holy spirit is a "he" aka a "person". Now this is why Acts 2 is RELEVANT:--there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind=According to her Bible, the HS sounds like wind, not a person--it filled all the house=Can a person fill an entire house or can something like wind?--as of fire, and one sat upon each of them=What is "as of fire"-a person or a thing? Do men aka "he(s)" sit on people's heads?--they were all filled with the Holy Spirit=How are multiple persons filled with a person? Or can they be filled with something invisible like wind?--And when this sound occurred=Twice her Bible calls the HS a "sound".--I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh=Can you "pour out" a person on every living person?--I will pour out My Spirit in those days=Hmmm? See Strong's definitions below.https://www.biblegateway.com..."Pour out"= Hebrew compound word ekcheó. Ek=out; cheó=poured. ekcheó is used 12 times in a literal sense. Each time it is used in a literal sense it was translated as "pour out" "poured out". See link and check out verses.https://www.blueletterbible.org...Why is Acts 2 relevant? Because it reveals the holy spirit not a he as Pro claimed but as an it, something sounding like wind. What is Acts relevant? Because it reveals multiple races with different languages speaking their own native tongue to other races while the other races understand them in their own language. German speaking German to Frenchman as the Frenchmen understands every German word in French. Why is Acts relevant? Because it reveals that "tongues" refer to human languages. Why is Acts relevant? Because it shows humans speaking in tongues understanding each other in real languages. My use of Acts by no means proves the holy spirit is real. My use proves: 1. Pro's defense of tongues being language of angels or a way to talk to God is fiction. There is not one reference in Acts 2 where the people are speaking to angels or God or said to be speaking the language of angels; 2. Pro can't interpret her religious story correctly, is it plausible she can prove something that sounds like wind is a person in a three tier relationship?C2. "I don't see your point for showing the Lonnie Mackley video..."A man rambling at random. He states I'm going to "speak in tongues" so he's said "I going to say something in tongues." But he never tells us WHAT HE SAID even though he specifically told us he was going to say something in tongues. What was it? But here's the billion dollar bullsh*t that Christians don't realize kills their credibility. As I showed "tongue" comes from the greek word "glossa" which means "language". Christians leave plural; Lonnie thus said "I'm going to speak in languages." But rambled off the same similar phonetic sounds. So are their several languages that phonetically sound exactly the same? Or did he bullsh*t us with his babble? Also, speaking involves literally the vocalization of established grammatical language words. Lonnie did not speak--as in with words, he rambled off sounds. Please understand that essential fact.C3 "I don't see your point for showing the video by ResotredCOG"Oh. Did not a Christian pastor thoroughly debunk WITH THE BIBLE speaking in tongues does not sound like gibberish but real human language? You didn't look at the video. He methodically broke down with your Bible what tongues is and isn't. Pro feels it's okay for her to use a Christian to support a biblical topic; but it isn't okay for anyone to use a Christian to discredit a biblical topic. So a devout Christian's beliefs are only valid to support biblical malarkey but a devout Christian's beliefs are invalid if they discredit biblical malarkey. And they have the nerve to call Atheists illogical.D. "The debate has been particularly a waste of time..."Actually it wasn't. It showed us:-- a Christian debater blindly expected us to blindly believe the holy spirit is real simply by stating it.-- a Pro laying down a loosely thought-out resolution, believing it was ironclad with factual maxims.-- a Con revealing that if one crucial belief in the Bible is shown blemished the whole house Christianity crumbles.E. " In conclusion I will say that the Holy Spirit hasn't been refuted and I had to spend half the time explaining and retelling my case so my argument could only go so far."You didn't prove the holy spirit real as claimed whereas I proved it cannot be proved real when Christians are divided upon is it a he or it; does it make you ramble out indistinguishable sounds or does it make you speak decipherable human words. You spent "half the time explaining and retelling" your case because you presented a factless, illogical argument based on your belief that proving the holy spirit as real was easy as saying look at those people there, they're happy, they have the holy spirit, the holy spirit is real, see I proved it. I have no doubt you are a sincere believer in your bible beliefs, but advertised for a debate on one, so I just gave you want I got to offer in opposition.