The Christian God is more likely to exist than Pagan Gods

Content: Rules Definitions Introduction Arguments for Zeus Arguments for the Christian God Rules. We both need rest, hence both of us are required (not optional) to forfeit one round. Definitions. o God: simply means supreme being o Exist: "To have actual being; be: The world exists, whether you like it or not." http://dictionary.reference.com... o Likely: "***seeming like truth***, fact, or certainty; reasonably to be believed or expected; believable: a likely story." http://dictionary.reference.com... Introduction. This debate is about whatever or not the Christian God is more likely to exist than Pagan Gods. I as Pro say that the Christian God is more likely to be real. Arguments for Zeus. I would ask my opponent to provide arguments for Zeus or any other Pagan God. Since I provided 2 arguments for the Christian God, I expect my opponent to do likewise. Note: I will also attack (refute) your chosen Pagan God. Arguments for the Christian God. A.The Resurrection To begin we have sincere eyewitnesses. Many of them preferred to go through torture and ultimately painful death rather than repudiate their testimony of the resurrected Jesus. Many historical records (The Book of Acts 4:1-17; Pliny's Letters to Trajan X, 96, etc) say that they could have ended their suffering by renouncing their faith. Instead they chose suffering. (Also the book of Annals,XV,44) Q. What did the followers of Christ had to gain (assuming they lied) by proclaiming the resurrection? Q. Did the followers of Christ knew whatever or not they saw Jesus resurrected ? I would also like to note the interesting conversion of certain skeptics. Paul and James. Paul was of his own admission a violent persecutor of the early Church. Paul after seeing the resurrected Christ converts and suffers for his new belief. That is he gets imprisoned, beaten and then executed. James the skeptical brother of Jesus was also suddenly changed. Like Paul, James willingly suffered for his new belief. (see The Book of Acts). Q. Assuming they both lied, what have they gained? Q. Did they want to be proven wrong? In short would they want to have some extra evidence which would disprove their experience? Q. How well would James know his brother? Now the tomb was found empty. It would have been impossible for faith in His resurrection to take root in Jerusalem while His body was still in the tomb where the Sanhedrin could exhume it, put it on public display, and thereby expose the hoax. Some crazy explanations have been made and I think this will be no exception. Women are the first witnesses. Now make no mistake in the first century their testimony was regarded as unimportant. This was embarrassing to the gospel writers. There are old rabbinical sayings that said, 'Let the words of Law be burned rather than delivered to women' and 'blessed is he whose children are male, but woe to him whose children are female.' Women's testimony was regarded as so worthless that they weren't even allowed to serve as legal witnesses in a Jewish court of Law. There's no need for questions at the moment and in fact the resurrection section is finished ! B. Jesus was foretold by the Old Testament Now Messianic prophecy is not clearly labelled. There are disputes over what is a messianic prophecy and what is not. What we do know is that there are certain contradictions, for example: Messiah both come upon clouds (Dan. 7:13) and come lowly upon a donkey (Zech. 9:9). Officially there are 3 resolutions: 1. There are two messiahs 2. There is one Messiah but the prophecies will be fulfilled at different times. 3. The prophecy is conditional. What is this all about? Well in case you try to tell me that Jesus is not the messiah as foretold, I have the background set up already. Now here are the prophecies: http://www.bibleprobe.com...... Thank you for your time and I hope you accept, V0Antras.