Christianity is the truth

First, my opponent did not attack the framework that I setup for this debate. Thus, I can assume that he agrees with it, and it shall be used for the rest of the debate and serve as judging criteria at the end of the debate.Second, to address my opponent's question: "As the Con said, one of the beliefs was that God exists, so why wouldn't those points be irrevalant to the topic?"There are two reasons that the Pro's 'arguments' do not stand:1) They do not prove that a god exists. Statements from certain individuals about how tough a ship's hull is and made up stories about eggs not breaking in a car crash do little to demonstrate the existence of a supernatural being existing.2) Even if the Pro's arguments DID prove that a god existed, it still doesn't fit with the topic because it doesn't prove that the Christian god exists. There are thousands of made-up gods in the world: Zeus, Ra, or Vishnu to name a few. What good would the Pro's argument do if it proved that one of those existed instead of the Christian god?Third, I will address the new argument that my opponent introduced. The Pro claimed that Jesus died for our sins. To justify this claim, the Pro said that both the Bible and other historical sources tell the story of the Ressurection. Given that the Pro did not cite what historical sources he was actually talking about, the only thing he has left to rely on is the Bible.In this argument that I'm introducing, I will attempt to prove that the Bible isn't a reliable source for information, and thus, cannot be used as evidence to justify claims that my opponent has made. I will do so using the following two contentions: 1) The Bible is inconsistent2) The Bible is inaccurateContention 1:Anyone who is familiar with the Bible knows that there are contradictions all over the place. There are, in fact, more than 400 contradictions in the Bible[1], and that's just being generous. Here are the ones that I found most interesting.1. Does God lie?[2]Hebrews 6:18 - "It was impossible for God to lie."Jeremiah 20:7 - "O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived."2. Does God love everyone?[3]John 3:16 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."Psalm 5:5 - "The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity."3. Does God want anyone to go to Hell?[4]1 Timothy 2:3-4 - "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved."Proverbs 16:4 - "The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."There, of course, more contradictions than those three, I encourage the Pro to look at the first link I will provide in my citations. These contradictions in the Bible demonstrate that there are, indeed, some discrepancies that must be false (God can't love everyone and hate some people at the same time). Thus, given the incredible amount of contradictions in the Bible, it cannot be used as evidence to justify any claim of the supernatural. But this is only the first contention...Contention 2:The Bible has been proven to be inaccurate about a number of claims that it makes. For this contention, I will address the absurd claims that the Bible makes, using evidence and logic.1. The age of the earth.The scripture that the Pro would defend as being true tells us that the earth is somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years old.[5] Modern day science, however, tends to disagree by about 4.55 billion years, with a margin of error of 1%. The difference between the scriptural accounts and modern day science is that modern day science provides evidence and scientific explanations to back up their claims. Using radiometric dating, scientists have found rocks on the Earth that surpass 3 billion years of age.[6] I won't go into too much detail, citation #6 has all of the information you will need. This information is properly cited as well, I encourage you to check it out.2. Noah's ArkEveryone is familiar with the story of Noah's ark. God was disappointed with the humans currently living on the Earth, so he instructed one family to construct an ark which included 2 (or more) of every animal, and enough food for said animals to last a little more than a year (how long the flood lasted[7]). I also think it's worth mentioning that before the flood began, God, using his powers of omniscience, already knew that the family that he chose to build the ark would disappoint him in the same way as the humans that he drowned, rendering the entire endeavour futile, yet decided to carry on with his plans anyways. Regardless, it only takes common sense to understand why this story could never have actually happened as it was told, but for the sake of the debate, I will do my best to debunk it. All of the evidence for this section can be found in citation #8.For starters, it is utterly impossible to build an ark 450 feet long solely out of wood. As TalkOrigins says, "Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped."Secondly, there was no feasible way for Noah to obtain all of the animals required to make the journey. Some animals, such as penguins or koalas, live on entirely different continents, meaning that there was simply no way that they could have been included on the ark.Thirdly, all of the animals on the ark would have required enough fresh food to live for a year. How exactly was Noah able to keep a year's supply of food for every animal fresh for an entire year? Let's not forget that all of this food had to have a place on the ark as well, how could all of it fit?There are more arguments against the flood, but I don't feel like I need to address them.To conclude, I would like to reiterate the framework for the debate and demonstrate that Pro has so far failed to meet this framework in not just one, but all four areas.Pro must prove the following to win this debate:1) The Christian God exists, and he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.Pro has not even attempted to prove this yet, the status quo stands.2) This God created the universe and everything in itPro has not even attempted to prove this yet, the status quo stands.3) This God has sent his son, Jesus Christ, to Earth in order to absolve humanity of original sinPro has attempted to prove this using the Bible and other uncited material. Given my newest argument, the Bible cannot be used as evidence for this claim, thus the status quo stands.4) Jesus has died for the sins of humanity, and was resurrected three days later to live againPro has attempted to prove half of this, but the status quo stands for the same reason as #3.With that being said, I urge a negative vote.Citations:1. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... 2. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... 3. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... 4. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... 5. http://www.albatrus.org... 6. http://www.talkorigins.org... 7. http://wiki.answers.com...8. http://www.talkorigins.org...