We cannot know reality without the Christian God

Thanks for accepting the challenge!First I will rebut Pro's arguments. Remember that being successful in debunking Pro's arguments is enough because Pro has the burden of proof. However I will give some further arguments against the necessity of a god to be able to know.Rebuttals "The Christian God, is a contingent part of our psyche, our culture, our heritage, economy, our day to day lives and much much more. That aspect of the Christian God, regardless of his personal representation. SO we cannot Exist without him, that is confirmed fact. He is here, we are here - the end."I really love this part:" we cannot Exist without him, that is confirmed fact"It isn't a fact that we can't exist without god. That's just a belief, one that I can respect, but a belief at the end. Presenting beliefs and subjective statements like facts isn't just a fallacy but also morally incorrect." we can no longer live without Harry Potter and the PowerPuff Girls, for better or worse." I don't think this provides anything to the debate, but is still an statement without any argument. Just an empty statement.The last paragraph is just a demonstration of arrogance. This doesn't serve to prove Pro's stance in any way and should be noticed in the conduct point.I showed that the whole argument of Pro was invalid and argument less, anyway I will give more argumentation.My arguments There are plenty of different arguments which prove we can know reality without any god. Here are some...EmpiricismThe philosophical stance that knowledge comes only from the senses. Basically, I can know reality, not because god but because I feel reality. I can know reality by using my senses and only that. I know that the first thing you could think about this is "sometimes my senses fail me, sometimes I see things in a way but then I realise that they weren't like that".This is an intelligent thought. It's true that our sense fail us sometimes. However, senses mistake with what is "far and less sensible" (Descartes). In contrast, they don't make mistakes with what is "close and more sensible" (again Descartes).The perceptions I receive from this reality are pretty strong, close and sensible to make me sure that I know reality.Summarizing, We cannot doubt of our senses. They might mistake when I think someone far away is A but actually is B, but they can't mistake in the short range. Is indubitable that I'm with my laptop, writing this speech, right know.Solipsism The philosophical stance that only one's mind exists. If the only thing that exists is my mind, God doesn't exists. And I can know myself(duh). Ergo, I can know reality without God.The good old "Cogito.Ergo,sum.". The Descartes' argument is quite famous but, but I will expose It anyway.If I doubt about my existence I'm thinking.If I think I exist (because to do something you must exist).Therefore, I exist.This is the only knowable thing, the only statement of which I cannot doubt. ConstructivismConstructivism proposes that knowledge is a sort of collection of human made constructions. This means that knowledge is created by the human interpretation of sensory experience. Thus, no need of God, because knowledge is human made. I have more arguments favouring my position but I will leave them for next rounds.ConclusionsPro's arguments were successfully refuted and new arguments against the resolution were proposed.The resolution is negated.