Atheism is more probable than Christianity

Thank you for your swift reply. I am going to defend my opening arguments first; and if time and space remain, I will defend my rebuttals. I. Why the Bible is Not God’s Word A. Biblical Contradictions A-1. Who was the high priest when David ate the bread? My opponent’s solution is thus: After a careful reading of the account of David and his men eating the showbread (sic) in 1 Samuel 21 - 22, we simply find that there were multiple priests. In fact there were at least 86 priests in the days of "Abiathar the high priest" (1 Sam. 22:18)! Once Saul learned that Ahimelech helped David, he commanded Doeg to kill Ahimelech and his entire family (1 Sam. 22:18-19), leaving alive only one of his sons, Abiathar the priest (1 Sam. 22:19, 23:9), who managed to escape. My opponent is correct in asserting that there were at least 86 priests in the days of “Abiathar the high priest.” However, notice Jesus states that he was the high priest—not just an ordinary priest. Also, this solution is rather awkward. It would be like saying that Neil Armstrong landed on the moon in the days of President Ronald Regan. Although Ronald Regan was alive at that time, the reading would be highly awkward. Also, I point out that it was lawful for David to eat the bread—which my opponent did not refute. I am going to expand on that in this round. David did not eat any "lehem panim" -- rather, the priest just gave David "kodesh." However, what IF it was lechem hapanim? Well, it would STILL have been ok for David to eat because Pikuach Nefesh (saving a life) is the number one priority according to the law (Leviticus 19:16) -- in other words, if a man has to eat pork to stay alive, then he would be REQUIRED to eat non-kosher food. The reason Ahimelech gave David the kodesh because David was in fear of his life and needed food. Also, the Greek text does not support the idea that Abiathar was an ordinary priest. Moreover, there could only be one “HIGH” Priest at one time (Lev. chapter 16).[1] A-2. How long did Jesus’ ministry last? This is not ad hominem, but that is one of the lamest "contradictions" I have ever heard. My opponent gave the answer already. Pro said, "By Chapter 11, we come to the last week of Jesus' life. Because the action moves so quickly and we are told that many of his events happened "eutheōs." Notice it was the last week of Jesus' life! His ministry has already been going on for 3 years! THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION. My opponent misses the point entirely. The time where the events began happening “eutheōs” in the Gospel of Mark was in the very first chapter with Jesus’ Baptism! Obviously, my opponent missed the point entirely! B. Historical Mistakes Pro is arguing that Moses couldn't have written about Dan since it hadn't been founded by Dan yet in Gen 14. There is an easy answer. Since Deuteronomy 34:1 has the word "Dan" in it again, and this time it's apparent that the writer has to outlive Moses (Moses dies in Deut 34), the MOST REASONABLE EXPLANATION IS THAT God told JOSHUA to put the word in to fit the account in Genesis 14. After all, Joshua is also given a copy of the Mosaic writings in Joshua 1:8, and MOSES IS TOLD TO REPEAT TO JOSHUA THE WRITINGS OF THIS BOOK(Exodus 17:14). Further, Joshua has the authority which God gave to Moses (Deut 34:9). Sorry, but it appears that Moses wrote the book of Genesis – not multiple authors. I’ll concede; however, that if the Torah was written long after Moses,[2] then it is entirely possible for him to write about the City of Dan. However, doing so contradicts Jewish and Christian tradition which has Moses as the author of Genesis-Deuteronomy. Jesus Himself held to the view that the Law (in this case, including Genesis) were given by Moses.[3] II. Why God Does Not Exist A. Divine Hiddeness My opponent is correct in asserting that Missionaries began in Acts. However, my opponent misses my point. Why would God wait so long to begin reaching people to believe in Him? Wouldn’t it be so much easier for Him to reveal Himself to the entire world? Indeed, as Ibn Warraq notes (Warraq): “It is a peculiar habit of God’s that when he wishes to reveal himself to mankind, he will communicate only with a single person. The rest of mankind must learn the truth from that person and thus purchase their knowledge of the divine at the cost of subordination to another human being, who is eventually replaced by a human institution, so that the divine remains under other people’s control” Because of the lack of evidence and the demographics of Theism making atheism more probable, Thomas Paine said in the Age of Reason (Paine): “When I am told that the Koran was written in heaven and brought to Mahomet by an angel, the account comes too near the same kind of hearsay evidence and second-hand authority as the former. I did not see the angel myself and, therefore, I have the right not to believe it.” The same line of reason deals with Christianity as well as Islam. As Paul Tobin notes (Tobin): “[T]he absence of evidence is a strong case for atheism” Moreover, my opponent's arguments fails because there are multiple unreached people in the world. The Mission to Unreached People noted these statistics (Shuffield, Carlisle and Cunningham): “Almost 2 billion people (27.9% of the world) are still essentially cut off from access to the Gospel. Many of these peoples live in major urban centers. Some are more remote and rural. All continue to be largely “ignored” by the Great Commission Christian world.” My opponent’s rebuttals have all failed. I am out of room. However, I can defend one of my rebuttals: namely, the fact that my opponent makes a false analogy between evolution and atheism. My opponent, instead of responding to the fact that evolution does not equate to atheism and that atheism does not (and never has) depended upon evolution, he instead shouts the same answer. Hint: You don’t defend “A” by shouting “A”! (We will debate evolution next). Conclusion My opponent has failed to meet his burden of proof. I have clearly shown that the Bible is in error in several places and that his argument for God’s existence does not hold any water. I hereby urge a vote for pro. [1] There were, however, numerous times throughout Old Testament where individuals wore an ephod (only to be worn by the high priest) when they were not authorized to do so. One example would be Judges 17:5. What then about the two high priest at Jesus’ birth? Apparently, the Greek Twistament got that wrong also! Ciphas was the son-in-law of Ananus. Ananus was the high priest from 6 CE to 15 CE. He was removed from his position by Gratus. Gratus appointed Caiphas as High Priest – AFTER Ananus! (http://en.wikipedia.org...) [2] This is the proposition that I hold to be most likely[3] See Mark 10:3; Luke 24:27; and John 1:17. Bibliography Paine, Thomas. The Age of Reason . Secaucus, 1974. Print. Shuffield, Wayne, et al. Mission to Unreachced People. 13 February 2012. 15 August 2012. <http://www.mup.org...;. Tobin, Paul. God and Theology - A Case for Atheism. n.d. Website. 15 August 2012. <http://rejectionofpascalswager.net...;. Warraq, Ibn. Why I am Not a Muslim. Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2006. Print.