God is real

Thanks for posting a case. Myself and the voters really appreciate it. In your first contention you stated that there is no scientific evidence for God. Well first of all I'd like to say that there is also no scientific evidence against God. No one really knows what scientific values would prove God real, so you're saying you want evidence, but you don't even know what kind of evidence you're looking for. Secondly, religion is about faith, not evidence. If God's existence was a fact instead of a reality, there would be no religion. It'd just be another scientific fact. Religion is supposed to lift people up, and it requires faith in order to do so. If it's indisputable, the purpose ceases. In your second contention you stated that the Bible is very violent. Ok, but the Bible is also allegorical. The passages that condone slavery and say that you should kill your neighbor for working on Sunday are not meant to be taken literally. Do you know any Christians who do those things? Because I don't. What about Bhuddists or Hindus? They are religions with violent stories and you don't see any violence from them. Why? Because they have the sense to not take every word of their holy books literally, just as Christians do. In your third contention you brought up what is commonly referred to as the problem of evil. This is a common fallacy embraced by modern atheism. I believe that God could stop the holocaust and 9/11 if he wanted to. Why didn't he? Because that would interfere with religious faith. If God stopped it, then everyone would know that he exists and the concept of faith would cease to exist, thus making religion pointless. In other words, evil has to exist in order for religion to prosper. It's a sad truth that atheists have yet to realize. Atheists commonly expect believers to say that religion is perfect and has no flaws. I'm perfectly okay with saying that my religion has flaws, but it's ultimately the right path for me. You attacked my first contention unsuccessfully yet again. You said that I think that there is no room for improvement in intelligence. Of course there is. That's what science is for, but you say that means we have to rule out God without any evidence that he doesn't exist. There is absolutely no reason to use science to rule out God, especially now whe there has been no evidence against God. And I would actually say that we can develop science to use it as a tool for understanding God, rather than mindlessly ruling him out. I still think you're missing the point of my second contention. We live in a strange and mysteriously orderly universe and since nature is inconsistent, how can everything exist? If God didn't fine tune the universe, what did? For my third contention, you said that the only reason why people believe death is bad is because it's different and no one really knows what's after. Death also hurts. There are many reasons why societies agree death is bad. My point is that there is a correlation between the moral views of just about every society. And what is the reason for that if there isn't a God helping us lean that way. To the voters, you should vote for me because I have brought up more science to back up my statements, I have more successfully refuted my opponent's arguments, and we have not seen a lot of BOP delivery on my opponent's side.