God does NOT exist

My opponent's argument can be viewed in the comment section. I am responding to it now. I posted most of what he wrote. His comment will be on the first page of the comment section. My opponent states, "Firstly, you may talk about a perfect world, but it may not exist. Any entity or object in nature has flaws. There exists nothing in this world that is perfect. Nobody is perfect. So by logic, God is not perfect as you claim Him to be." That is an interesting argument, but it is a slippery slope fallacy. Basically, you are assuming that something perfect has to always create perfect things. I am stating that there are so many perfectly intertwined systems for reality to exist that it is logical to assume God exists. My opponent states, "The number of people that were killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings was 150,000-256,000. Maybe more. (http://en.m.wikipedia.org......) The h1N1 flu killed over 18,000 by UN statistics,..... Lets say God helped 1000 people. What did the rest of the thouands of women, children and men do to deserve this. If God can save 1000 people, why not be a good samaritan and save a couple 1000 others." If God exists, we deduct Heaven and Hell exists, correct? Now, we can deduct a few things from the Bible. I would like to refer to Romans 8:29-30: "29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."(1). So God already knows what everyone is going to do, etc. What if, the reason God allows these people to die, is so that they enter Heaven? It is understood from Romans that God knows that if they live longer, they could potentially worship idols, etc. So wouldn't it be better if they died sooner than later? Now, that is just one contention. We have free will. If we did not, then we'd be raped to love God so to speak (forced love is rape). So what I ask is, if he didn't allow us to do what we wanted, then wouldn't we have no free will (dropping the bombs)? So you're now probably saying, "So if he's so loving, why let them die?" What is the problem with dying if Heaven exists? If anything, I can't wait to go to Heaven. I won't kill myself, because that isn't allowed (we can get into that if you are curious). Moreover, Christians are warned that in the end times you will be persecuted, ridiculed, murdered, etc. for God because people will hate you. God never said it would be easy to enter Heaven. If anything, the Bible consistently states the opposite. My opponent states, "And Luke 22:36 reads: 36 [Jesus] said to [the disciples], "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag; and the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one." (New Revised Standard Version, NRSV) From the new testament above, clearly God is advocating violence. Since you asked me to quote. The old testament is full of it too. Im sure you are aware of it. " I'd like to quote from the same chapter. First, Luke 22:37, "37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end." (2). Secondly, Luke 22:48-51, "48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? 49 When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? 50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. 51 And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him."(3). So you claim the Bible is advocating violence, yet Jesus himself healed the enemy. Do you think instead of advocating violence, that there is another reason for them to buy the swords? As for the Old Testament, that is different but I can explain it. It'll take a while though. Now, this is the end of my argument for now. My opponent didn't address my other refutals, etc. but it's most likely because of his lack of time, etc. So I would ask the voters to not deduct point from my opponent due to him ignoring my refutals from last round. If he does it next round as well, that is different. Resources: (1) http://www.biblegateway.com... (2) http://www.biblegateway.com... (3) http://www.biblegateway.com...