Resolved: The Christian god most likely doesn't exist.

My opponent ask's who is the God of the Bible? Can we really define the Biblical God? The is no way to anyone can make a statement which will totally define all that God is. If we could make such a statement then we have confined God and He would no longer be God. We must leave it at God is undefinable. Lets just bear in mind that we are human and we have limitations. Though we can give God some characteristics from within the Bible. God is spirit, He is living wisdom and active power. He is eternal, unchangeable, in His being, is wisdom, holiness, justice, perfectness, and pure love. My opponent proposed alot of claims against God here and lets look at them. Contention1: Problem of Evil My opponent: P1: If an all-powerful and perfectly good god exists, then evil does not. P2:There is evil in the world we live in. C: Therefore, an all-powerful and perfectly good god does not exist. Myself: Freewill P1: There are possible worlds that even an all-powerful and perfectly good God can not actualize. P2: A world with morally free creatures producing only moral good is such a world. C: Such a world that contains creatures who are completely free is more valuable than a world containing no free creatures at all. God has create free creatures because we live in such a world, but He can't determine with force or cause the creations to do what is right. If He does so then the creatures would not be free; nor did they choose to either do good or evil. Ultimately God can not prevent these creatures from having freewill therefore God must allow evil and exist. . http://en.wikipedia.org... Contention 2: Suspected Biblical Contadictions Myopponent: P1: If the god of the Bible is to exist, then the Bible can't contain errors. P2: The Bible contains errors. C: Therefore, the god of the bible can't exist. Myself: P1: If the God of the Bible is to exist, then the Bible does not contain errors. P2: The Bible does not contain errors. P3: Therefore, the God of the Bible exist. E1: Matthew 19:26 states:"But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. " while Judges 1:19 says: "And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. " The explanation for this comes from Joshua 17:14-18: The people of Joseph replied, "The hill country is not enough for us, and all the Canaanites who live in the plain have iron chariots, both those in Beth Shan and its settlements and those in the Valley of Jezreel. " But Joshua said to the house of Joseph - to Ephraim and Manasseh - "You are numerous and very powerful. You will have not only one allotment but the forested hill country as well. Clear it, and its farthest limits will be yours; though the Canaanites have iron chariots and though they are strong, you can drive them out. " It appears the plain country was not part of the original inheritance given to Israel, thus it may not have been God's intention to give it to the tribe of Joseph. E2: 2 Samuel 6:23 says:"Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death" While later on in this very same book at 2 Samuel 21:8 it says: "But the king took…the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul" Before being returned to David (2 Samuel 3:14), Michal gave birth to five sons to Adriel, the son of Brazillai (2 Samuel 21:8). However, on account of her conduct, it appears that the Lord shut up her womb, and she bore no children to David. The writer's comment in 2 Samuel 6:23 would seem specific to her barren nature before David, as the same writer shortly thereafter mentions the five sons bore to Adriel. E3: James 1:13 says: ". .for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. " while Genesis 22:1 says: "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham…" The Greek word "peirazo" and its Hebrew equivalent, "nasah" carry the meaning of "to try, prove",1 as well as to "tempt". The R. S. V. translators preserve the distinction between "test" and "tempt", thereby removing the confusion: "After these things God tested Abraham . . . " Contention 3: Science proves Bible wrong! Noah's Flood has not been proven to never have happened. The earth's layered rocks yield many evidences that natural processes once acted with much greater intensity than at the present time. Fossils generally testify of rapid, catastrophic burial. Several types of stratification require a catastrophic mechanism of sedimentation. Simplicity would suggest that the various evidences of Catastrophism be explained by a single flood catastrophe. Thus, the Stratigraphic record with its contained fossils instead of showing the evolutionary development of life and the gradual deposition of sediments over millions of years, actually bears testimony of the Flood. We have many of ways to explain the layers of fossils which exist on this planet. Alot of the conclusions are reached and supported by non-creationist. What I want to make clear is that fossils must have been laid diwn quickly and not over millions of years. The rapid event such as Mount Helen can be used to show how rapidly large and depp layers can be laid in canyons cut by water. What this suggest is that much of the sedimentary rock layers found are vast and covering thousands of miles, and indeed was laid during a flood. Thus, the assumption, which is nothing but a straw-man about creationism is incorrect. Conclusion: ("I will add more scientific evidence against the Bible and its god later on in the debate") These should suffice period! This is your challenge and you should have came all the way from the start. With five rounds and 8,000 charactors i doubt it will explain every conseviable contradiction of God. What does my opponent think we have all the space in the world to cover everything? My opponent had plenty of room to state his full case I think it would be bad conduct to pile on more later when it could have been brought to light before hand. Though if it contains to the arguement at hand it is valid. I will await my opponent's response. Thank You. . http://www.wrestedscriptures.com... . http://www.lookinguntojesus.net... . http://www.rationalchristianity.net... . http://www.bible.com...