There's as much evidence that Wotan and Lord Krishna exist as there is that Yahweh exists

My opponent has argued that the fact that 2.1 billion Christians believe something (that I am wrong to declare the Bible to be self-contradicting) is evidence that what they believe is true. This is a logical fallacy known as Argumentum ad numerum: asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition, the more likely it is to be correct. I have been requested to point out a contradiction in the Bible. Matthew traces the descendants of from David to Jesus via 28 generations. The following is taken from the King James version of the Bible, as requested by my opponent: Matthew 1 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations. In the Gospel of Luke, he traces the descendants from David to Jesus via 41 generations. The following is also taken from the KJV Bible: Luke 3 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David, I you studies these, you will see that there is hardly any overlap. My point is proved. I also described the Bible as being inconsistent, so I will justify this. Mary and Joseph have to be in Bethlehem to meet the Old Testament prophesy: (Micah 5: 2) 'But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.' In the Gospel of Luke, he gives a reason why Mary and Joseph travelled to Bethlehem: Luke 2 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. The census mentioned above is indeed confirmed by independent historical documents. However, the census occurred in 6 AD, which is too late. Furthermore, why would Joseph be required to return to Bethlehem because a remote ancestor (David) lived there 1000 years previously? This shows that the Gospel of Luke is inconsistent, because the excuse he gave for Mary and Joseph travelling to Bethlehem is incorrect and shows signs of being contrived. I apologise for my use of the word 'article,' this was inaccurate. I have also been requested to justify my claim that Yahweh is an evil, cruel and unrighteous god. My opponent does not agree with the comments I posted in the debate 'does the Christian god exist?' Readers may wish to decide the validity of these for themselves. I struggle to understand how he does not see rape and murder at 'gratuitous evil.' In any case, god claims that he does indeed create evil in Isiah 45:7 - 'I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.' I could quote many immoral passages from the Bible, but if my opponent cannot see my quotes on rape and murder as evil, then I can't really go much further. Readers should decide this for themselves. Is Yahweh hiding? My opponent has said that god has already spoked and his full 'Word' is in the Bible. He is asserting that the Bible is the word of god without providing any evidence. I suggest he does this for this assertion to have any credibility. My opponent has also suggested that god expects people to live by faith, not by sight. This is also based on the assumption that the Bible is accurate. Furthermore, how are people who have had no access to the Bible supposed to have faith in something they know not of? Are you saying that god would condemn them to hell? My statement "We should expect that a being capable of creating a universe and all of the infinite complexity of it, would be more enlightened than one of his creations," is accused of being an assertion, whereas it is infact an inference; I shall explain. You believe that god created the universe. The universe is very complicated; we have discovered many complexities in the universe, such as gravity and quantum theory. God must also have set all of the scientific constants to extreme degrees of accuracy. All of this suggests that god is intelligent. Since no human can even understand all of this, god is therefore more intelligent than humans. His moral views in the bible are, however, less enlightened than our own, suggesting god in not intelligent. Ergo, the biblical account of god's word leads to a contradiciton, that god is both intelligent and unintelligent. With respect to the resurrection, my opponent claims "we have demonstrable sincere eyewitness testimony." I ask him then to demonstrate this. He uses the Bible to confirm that Christians suffered rather than renounce their faith. Once again, I request evidence that the Bible is accurate. Moreover, the fact that Christians would rather suffer and die then renounce their faith is not evidence that their faith is correct, only that they think it is. I don't doubt their sincerity (assuming the biblical account is accurate). Other than the Bible (which has not been shown to be accurate, and I have shown to be inconsistent) there is absolutely no evidence of the resurrection. Also, the resurrection contradicts the laws of physics and biology. They have never before been contradicted and so this has little credibility. I have now run out of space, but I shall continue to answer my opponents questions in round 3.