God exists.

Thank you for beginning the arguments.Response to #1:Pro saiys that "The Bible is Proof for God being very real many people have picked up the bible and read the bible." He further says that for me to come to believe I must "confess the wonderful name of Jesus Christ and believe God had sent Jesus Christ to die on the Cross for all of our sins and repent and ask God to forgive you for all your sins and repent by saying Lord Jesus Christ I repent for lying stealing or bearing false witness."I will note first that I sincerely took my opponent's advice, and when reading his arguments said aloud, "Lord Jesus Christ I repent for lying, stealing, or bearing false witness." Nothing seems to have happened, unless I am doing it wrong. And this is my point: I am not attempting to debate how one comes to believe, or why people have not come to believe or fallen into apostasy, I am asking and attempting to find out why I should believe. My opponent claims that the Bible is evidence. I will note that in the first round, I made it quite clear that "...statements such as 'It's true because the Bible says so' will not be permitted unless convincing and rational arguments are put forth to give reason why the Bible should be trusted on the issues." My opponent seems to have forgetten to provide such evidence, but gone on assumption. I will respond to the assumption, however, by pointing out how I view the Bible. The Bible is a wonderful piece of literature, with numerous types of genres, written by hundreds of authors over many, many centuries. It has much in common with its predecessors, with some stories taken ver batum from earlier texts. For example, the Greek god Dionysus was allegedly born of a virgin, became a very young teacher, was baptized in a river by a man who was later beheaded, performed miracles, practiced exorcism, was crucified, died, and was resurrected three days later. I propose Pro provide reason to believe that the Bible is an inherent word. Arguments for this must not be because it was inspired or transcribed by god, for this inappropriately assumes the premise in dispute. Reponse to #2:As I noted, I have "called out" to Jesus Christ. I was a Christian for 16 years, believed every word of it, prayed consistently and have attended Catholic school since I was 5 years old. My opponent claims his vision (which, of course, none of us have any access to for verification purposes) is evidence for god. In an attempt not only to neutralize this but to show how unuseful it is as a form of argumentation, I will posit that I also had a vision, but this one was of someone telling me that god does not exist. You will note that this "vision" of mine is no more provable or relevant to the question at hand than my opponents. In short, my opponent must make an effort to validate a posteriori articles of faith. This is not to say that sources of experience are useless, but they may not, and should not be taken on face value. I urge my opponent to show us why his visions are reliable, and why we should believe he had them in the first place. If he does this (and I can think of no possible way he could), vote accordingly. Response to #3:My opponent here has made a declarative statement with no evidence; let the record state.Response to #4:As mentioned in response to #2, you must give reason to accept your feelings as a sign of some external, definitive truth of a deity. Many people feel that they are god (The Three Christs of Ypsilanti: http://en.wikipedia.org...). Ockham's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_razor) tells us that we must rid ourselves of parts of explantory theories that are unneccessary. The fact of the matter is, we have better explanations for the things my opponent calls into question, such as evolution, physiology, psycholoy, chemistry, anthropology, human emotional intelligence, etc.Response to #5:I'm confused on this point, as there are many more than 3,000 people who have talked about god. In response to the trivial question my opponent poses, I will note that detectives are always talking about and thinking about crime, much like the relationship between the idea of god and atheists.