No believer in any religion that includes an afterlife can provide me with a sound argument

Introduction:Thank you, V5RED, for allowing me to debate you in this topic.I will attempt to use sound arguments to justify the belief in the Christian religion.The Existence of God- A Priori ArgumentsMind Over MatterThis universe consists of matter and energy. In the theistic understanding of the universe, mind is the originator of matter, as opposed to an atheistic and evolutionary stance- matter causes mind.Before arguing for a mind to the universe, allow me to enter a third principle to the universe- information. To prove that information is separate from matter and energy, allow me to present an analogy: If I write a certain collection of letters, like, “elhlo,” then the reader should not be able to make an understanding of those letters. However, if I rearrange the letters to “hello,” the reader should then understand the collection of letters as a word that conveys the meaning of a form of greeting someone. As you can see, matter was the medium used to convey the information. I would form the word “hello” on a computer, on a chalkboard, or on pen and paper. The material used would be different each time, that is, the medium to convey the information would be distinct, but the information would still be the same.When dealing with information, there are two proponents needed. First, a sender, to form the information. Secondly, the receiver must be able to obtain and understand the information. To clarify “understanding the information”, imagine a Chinese person reading the word “hello.” If that person has no understanding of the English language, then they will not be able to understand the word “hello.” So, the sender must have an intention when delivering the information- that the message will be received and be understood. Information, not matter and energy, is the underlying principle of the universe. From genetics, to language, to the physical laws of the universe, information is the critical component.P1: Information is the underlying principle of reality.P2: Information requires a sender.C: There is a sender that caused all of the information (order) in reality.The Prime MoverAs everyone would agree, there necessarily exists the first cause of everything. What my opponent and I will disagree about is whether that first cause is God, or quantum fluctuations, or what have you.Everything that exists (besides the prime mover) is dependent on another part of existence. For example, the organism that is a cat is dependent on cells and structures, which are in turn dependent on molecules, which in turn are dependent on atoms, which are dependent on quarks, and so on. Cat^cells^molecules^atoms^quarksThe prime mover is not dependent on any part of reality. The prime mover exists through itself, not something that causes itself. As you can see from the text image, the prime mover would also be the simplest form/most fundamental of existence. As it is the most fundamental form of existence, it exists without boundaries.To understand the significance of boundaries, refer again to the text image. The cat is higher up on the form of complexity. A cat cannot be both a cat and dog at the same time. It is limited to being a cat. However, cells are not limited to cats, and can be formed to exist in other animals. However, cells are limited to exist in that form. Atoms are not limited to animals- they form all parts of the universe. As we travel farther down the simplicity of existence, the less boundaries exist, and the more forms can be created from these states of existence. Recall the famous double split experiment, where a single photon behaved both like a particle and a wave. This is possible because boundaries decrease as we travel down the chain of existence.So, the prime mover must be free from all boundaries. It is necessarily limitless. Also, because it is at the lowest point in the chain of existence, it can interact with all of reality. Not only does this prime mover interact with all of reality, all of reality is continuously depending on it. The prime mover that intends to create order (information) in the universe, while also continuously upholding all of creation, can only be understood as the eternal mind that underlies all of reality. This is otherwise known as God.(Because of space, an anticipated argument against God using the evidential problem of evil is expected, and will be dealt with in a subsequent round.)The Rationality of Christianity- A Posteriori ArgumentsThe Historicity of Christ.There are 12 historical facts that most secular (non-christian) critical scholars agree to. They are (1):-Jesus died by crucifixion.-He was buried.-His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.-The tomb was empty (the most contested).-The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus.-The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.-The resurrection was the central message.-They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.-The Church was born and grew.-James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).-Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).There are three possible scenarios: The early disciples all had hallucinations of Christ at different times and places and were convinced that it was real; The early disciples hid Christ's body from the tomb, spread the lie that he was resurrected, and were tortured and killed to protect that lie; or Christ was resurrected by God and this is what the apostle's saw and preached.The apostles directly denied that what they saw were hallucinations. (2) This either leaves the apostles lying and then dying for that lie, or the resurrection actually happened. I argue that Christ was really resurrected by God, because it is not reasonable to believe that they lied. If anyone objects to this (like my opponent), then they must give a motive for why the apostles would be tortured and killed for the lie- what was their benefit? Also, examples must be given for people who died protecting something they knew to be a lie (not examples of people dying for what they believe to be true, but what they definitely knew was false). If these two problems are not refuted, one must conclude that Christ was resurrected by God.The Historicity of GenesisThis is the most controversial and misunderstood aspect of Christianity. The document of Genesis claims that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. It claims that Adam was the first man who ever lived, that he was created fully formed by God, that he lived almost 1,000 years, and that this happened around 6,000 years ago. It also claims that there was a flood that covered the entire earth around 4,400 years ago, and that the entirety of the human population was wiped out, save Noah and his family- 8 people- causing a genetic bottleneck. What makes these claims controversial is that they are laughable in the academic climate of the modern day. Science is said to have proved these events demonstrably false. What makes these claims misunderstood, is that those who argue in favor of these beliefs are generally scientifically illiterate, and base their beliefs solely on an ancient text. It is those people that paint the picture for the type of person who holds these beliefs. It is sad that this is the case, and it nearly destroys the possibility of a rational discussion regarding the nature of origins. And in me bringing this up, I destroy my own credibility- I must commit academic suicide. I hope that my opponent can put aside his pre-conceived notions about the nature of this debate, and face the arguments on their own merits, without appealing to straw-man and bandwagon fallacies. It is worth noting that the critics of evolution go beyond mere religious people. (3)Also, some of the current creation scientists were once evolutionary scientists who were persuaded by the evidence for creation before they converted to Christianity. (4)Now, as the arguments that cover this topic are wide-ranging, and I am becoming very limited on space, I will bring to light just one argument that both destroys evolutionary theory and proves recent creation. (I am more than happy to cover more topics in this area in subsequent rounds, if need be.)Dr. John Sanford is a geneticist who created the gene gun (5). He has written a book entitled: Genetic Entropy (6). As the primary argument for evolution is that we are slowly evolving and improving, this book demonstrates that there is no scientific evidence to corroborate that, rather, we are de-volving. Not only does this attack the evolutionary dogma of the current day, but it emphasizes a very scary and devastating point- all species are heading towards extinction! Now, I would love for my opponent and any interested to read the book, but I recognize that it is asking people to spend money and invest a decent amount of time, so I will also reference a lecture on this topic, summarizing his thesis and main points: (see reference 7)To briefly summarize:The genome is subject to decay. With every new generation, new mutations are added. Species can only contain so many mutations before they reach the threshold and become extinct. Natural selection isn't good enough to weed out all of the mutations. Even "beneficial" mutations are subject to decay. Therefore, evolution is impossible, and perfect creation with decay fits the model.(out of space, more detail later)(1) http://www3.telus.net......(2) Luke Chapter 24 (3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com...(4) http://www.amazon.com...(5) https://en.wikipedia.org...(6) http://www.amazon.com...(7)