The existence of the christian god.

First off, I wanted to point out your lack of evidence, but i understand that you had a limited timespan, i got done with mine quite late. The first point i would like to make is that, since i was running out of letters, i want expand on my last argument.The Law of thermodynamics"This commenly used argument by christians states that nothing can from from nothing, it must come from something. So however the universe started it, what started that? The answer, we don't know, but if you try to say god, then i ask you, where did god come from." Taken from my original argument, i wish to expand upon this, since i did not have a lot of room to finish it. This law, states that nothing can come from nothing, everything has something that caused it. So, when an atheist, or other forms of an atheist, state that they believe the Big Bang created the universe, there christian counterpart would say then what started the big bang. They would then state that the Big Bang must ahve had some sort of ignition, E.G. god. They would also say that God is the beggining of everything, and that before he created the universe, there was only him. Well, this law is a two way street. If you would state that everything must have a beginning, then so must god. So, a common christian argumnent debunked.Now onto my rebuttal.You said, and i quote "First of all, you say that the Bible was written by uneduated men in the Middle East. That is not true, because the book of Luke was written by Luke, who in fact, was a doctor. Doctors are educated, aren't they? Also, the Bible is legible. It has not even changed through the years. True, grammatical editing to fit the times was in order, but no matter how many versions of the Bible you go to, the whole story is the same." First off, your argument of Luke is flawed. Luke was a doctor, true. But would you say that a doctor back then would be educated, sure maybe more so than the average camel herder(just kidding), but still not very smart, and if the bible is the word of the lord, dont you think it would at least be up to today's grammatical standards, if not better. I agree with you when you say that crimes must be punished. But, is disobedience worthy of death. If your son, whether or not you have one, disobeyed you, would you inflict any of the deadly plagues upon him. As for Jericho, maybe the city was wicked. But was every person in that town wicked. Were the mothers of infants wicked, were the infants wicked, or the small children, or the men who worl all day to support them. Did they deserve to die because a good percent of the population was wicked. Should we carpet bomb Baghdad just to kill all Al Quaeda. And should the occupy wall street, or even further back, the african americans whom walked to washington, be killed for civil disobedience. By the logic of the bible, yes they should.As for your rebuttal of the contradictions, i found it hard to read. A good part of what you say makes no sense. i give you the actual bible verses, and you say they are false? You may give verses supporting that vegetation came before the earth, but that does not change the fact it still says in one verse man came before the trees. For my closing statement, i will say that, while your arguent was compelling, and you did not have much time, you still did not cover my first point entirely, you at least could have done that.I would also ask that before your rebbuttal, you adress the rest of my points, so as to get you entire opinion.