God who is the Lord Jesus Christ is is very real and I will prove Jesus Christ is God

Well, that was um...all very interesting.Pro defines god as a spirit. In all honesty, this definition isn't very helpful. What is a spirit? What does it do? What is its role in my life? What are its plans? I understood Pro's definition, but it didn't lead me any closer to understanding his conception of god.Pro mentions eye-witness accounts, but are these accounts really eye-witness? What first-hand accounts exist about Jesus Christ? Have we found any writings that say, 'Dear diary, today Jesus came to my village'? Of course that's a joke, but we haven't found any actual first-hand accounts. The youngest accounts come three decades after Jesus was alleged to have existed.(Note: I'm not arguing for the Jesus myth. Just that the evidence has been overstated.)I think Pro is severely overestimating the conclusions that one can make from a dream. His argument is more or less, 'I saw Jesus in a dream, therefore he exists'. This is simply a non-sequitur. Something does not exist because you have dreamed about it. Pro gives us no reason to think that his dream is anything more than a dream.Consider the following:'I once had a dream where I was traveling to Rivendell with Frodo, Aragorn, Pippin, and Merry. On our way there, we were attacked by five ringwraiths, and Frodo was injured. Aragorn went out and found some leaves to try and treat the wound a little. After I woke up, I decided to re-read The Fellowship of the Ring. As it turns out, my dream was exactly like the events in the book. This led me to believe that Middle-Earth actually exists, and J.R.R. Tokien is a prophet communicating the holy word.'This is clearly absurd. Yet, this is exactly the type of logic that Pro expects us to accept. If his dream can lead us to believe in god, why can't my dream lead us to believe in LOTRism?Pro gives us a video of an alleged miracle. This video is very poor in quality, so I was unable to clearly understand what the person's claim was. Furthermore, the description was just a giant run-on, and it did not have a single period. Pro will have to excuse me if I'm a little bit confused.I'll put forth the following question: why hasn't god healed anybody in a way that could not have happened anyways? Consider the case of ESPN reporter Hannah Storm, who suffered massive third-degree burns from a grilling accident. Her appearance is much different from what it used to be, kindly worded. If god truly performed miracles, why not make it to where Hannah Storm can wake up one morning and look exactly like she did before the accident? The evidence of such an event would be undeniable, considering Mrs. Storm's high public profile. We would have a documented miracle that is completely undeniable and irrefutable. Yet, god decides that it's better for us to rely on anecdotal evidence that cannot be independently verified! Your omniscient god can easily perform an undeniable and irrefutable miracle, and he instead relies on something else? What absurdity!Perhaps Pro feels that Jesus Christ has spoken to him. Indeed, neuroscience shows that the parts of the brain that control speech are activated when one prays. However, this is true for prayer to any god. Either the people praying are under a delusion, or all of those gods exist as well. Which seems more likely?In conclusion, Pro has not provided a logical case for belief.Vale.