Santa Claus is Real

You will not decimate God, you merely will decimate yourself. You are digging your own grave. You have rebutted my Rebuttal with rebuts that I have already rebutted. (I <3 tongue twisters) "Count yourself lucky..." I've a feeling this is a lie. Btw (by the way) the work on this Debate.org saves, so even if you don't have internet connection, it will still save your work. You have used my words wrongly, "I even ended with the line, "It is time to accept the cruel reality, and not live in the idyllic reality that you believed in, and continuously deceive yourself. That reality will be shattered, broken by me." - a quote by yourself." I have accepted the cruel reality, it is not you that hasn't. 1. God will not do anything you ask. And no one wants to destroy the 7 Wonders of the World, except you. You don't rebut my statement with a question. You've got the Bible all wrong, as usual. He is not under much obligation to reply to our wishes. 2. God indeed doesn't need prayers. Prayers is just something we Christians do, to acknowledge God, to attain his blessing, to communicate to him, and gain wisdom. God did not request Prayers. 3. You are replying my statements with regards to Christianity. God does not need to answer prayers 100% of the time, but he is always listening. "Surely the arm of the Lord is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear. But your iniquities have separated you from your God. Your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear."3" He ignores us, because we are sinful, or we doubt him, or we do not believe in him. Sin has separated us from him. He is pure and hates Sin, which is why sometimes God does not answer our Prayers. Link: http://www.everystudent.com... 4. God has already proved his existence. Also, God has no need to prove his existence. He does not need to prevent Atheists from burning in hell. I have already answered this rebuttal. Please, open your eyes. "God however, has use for Angels and Humans. He balances everything. He makes the Dark, he creates the Light. He kills, and resurrects. He makes the rich, he creates the poor." God is the ultimate arbiter and adjudicator. He does not need to prevent sinful people from burning in hell and getting thrown into Gehenna. 5. God's thinking is not flawed. God created an idyllic, perfect, flawless world for us. But nooo. We humans had to go and Sin, and allow evil in this world. There are 2 types of Evil: Natural Evil: Disasters, Catastrophe, Tornado, Earthquakes, etc. Moral Evil: You can guess. This destroyed God's creation, and he couldn't do anything about it. Because he took a gamble, and allowed us to have free will. We abused it, and now he cannot do anything to help us. We allowed starvation. God is not to blame. God is not to blame for any Sin, we *are Sinful*. 7. God always has a plan, and a great one. There are many points to prove that, just like Jesus's act of dying on the cross. From the prediction in the Bible that predicted Jesus's coming 2500 years beforehand, it clearly shows that The Plan of Salvation was already planned. 8. God is pure, and he can do anything in this world, except for anything that is contrary to his nature. (Sinning) We are Sinful, we do not deserve his omniscience. God has abandoned us multiple amounts of times in the Bible, and we made him so angry that at times, *"the lord did not even spare his own house in his anger"*. God has literally destroyed every single one of the altars or covenants or temples that Israel once had, (In the Bible) and has allowed its enemies to pillage, slaughter his own people, the people that he had chosen. He has allowed mass genocide, and has killed numerous amounts of people, to the extent that it is possibly beyond the calculations of Mathematics. God has killed more than billions. The Bible also states that God killed all the people on the Earth once (except for Moses). Sin does not apply to God, as whatever God does, he cannot Sin. The Bible states so. The word and definition of "Sin" does not even apply to an omnipotent being like him. Santa, however, is not omnipotent nor omniscient, (except in the context of your argument, which I rebutted already) and thus, he *CAN* Sin. 9. I would say, indeed, for a fact that I would believe in Santa, in the context that everyone in the world worshipped Santa except for about 2% of the population. However, nobody in the world worships Santa except for you. This is Reality. Btw, I would get thrown into Gehenna, into the River of Fire for worshipping an Idol. I would get punished, severely, for worshipping Santa. Your main argument is stupid. I shall now destroy your main argument. There is not sufficient evidence to state the Existence of Santa. Scientifically, Santa does not exist. You stated scientifically about how Santa and his reindeer worked, (and I applaud you for that bullcrap) but the science part was based on the claim that you visited Area 51, which is not believable, and not backed up by any evidence. God is proven scientifically, from a single tiny strand of DNA to the measurement of plants and music, and most of all, nature. Logically and Scientifically, God is real. There is an ultimate Designer of this Universe, it is just which one. And theoretically, logically, God exists. There is no evidence of Santa. Most of your rebuttals are on the premise that you assume that Santa is real, while you do not have any evidence to state that fact. Which is why most of your rebuttals are originally not meant to be rebutted, but as kindhearted as I am, I did rebut. This Debate has been stupid, especially as my opponent himself is stupid. He thinks that making up all these lies and claims, that are based on no evidence will help him win this Debate. By proof, I mean legitimate proof. Most of your "evidence" is fake, false, and a lie. (claims) "The Babble states that... 10 commandments..." Bullcrap, Santa does not have 10 commandments and a Babble. Get actual evidence. This is one of the rebuttals which I have posted last round. You still have not rebutted it. Just saying, "I lost my work" is not an actual excuse. I win, tejretics is back. He isn't stupid like you, and will most likely vote for the better Debater. I believe in God, because he has concrete, scientific evidence, while Santa does not. *NOTE THAT "****" MEANS PRO HAS NOT REBUTTED, AND "*" MEANS THAT I HAVE REBUTTED THE STATEMENT!* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rebuttals: -Wikipedia, and almost all links related to Santa states that Santa is false, fake, and a lie. This surely proves something. This is what everyone means by Concrete Proof. Almost no links state that Santa is real, and most of them are obviously scams. You can try them for yourself, my dear readers. **** (Not rebutted) -None of the non-believers of Santa has received coal for Christmas ever in their lives.***** (Not rebutted, I win. You can't retract your statement. You have made a serious blunder." -God is real, proven scientifically, historically, logically, is a widely held belief, and in my case, a fact. God has almost literally been proven, the part where it is proven Scientifically is based on a *strong foundation*, while yours doesn't even have a foundation.* (I have already rebutted your weak rebut. You can rebut this statement now) -Destroy the 7 Wonders of The World, right here, right now. I haven't seen it yet. You can also claim credit for destroying the 7 Wonders of The World.* (Rebutted your rebut) -Santa does not need Children's wish lists, he is omniscient, and already knows what everybody yearns for or wants.* (Rebutted your rebut) -Most of your links are unfalsifiable. Get better concrete, hard, evidence. "I have solid evidence behind the existence of Santa". Don't make me laugh.**** (Not rebutted) -He answers "at least 90% of the time". What is with that "at least" and "90%"? Santa is, according to your statements and claims, omnipotent. He can answer 100% of the time.* (Rebutted your rebut) - If Santa was indeed omniscient and omnipotent, he would not need anybody to catch him on a mere technological device (that is, a camera). Neither will he need a child to catch him putting presents below the Christmas Tree. It is hardly evidence and illogical. Santa would wanting to be on tape is pure crap.* (Rebutted your rebut) -You yourself admit that Santa's thinking is flawed. Isn't this strange? Starvation. Hunger. Tragedy. Overpopulation. Santa does not solve these problems, instead he gives out presents to kids. (Rebutted your rebut) -"Santa is helpful to everyone and uses his immense power very wisely." You usually say a sentence like this when you have a limited/finite amount of power. But remember, Santa is "omnipotent". So he does not have to use his immense power very wisely. Santa does not have a great plan. The more I read, the more you blasphemy.**** (Not rebutted) -There is no such definition of "Babble". In your context, you state that this "Babble" is a book. Allow me to show you: Babble: talk rapidly and continuously in a foolish, excited, or incomprehensible way. Somehow, it admittedly suits you.**** (Not rebutted) -You have no evidence, concrete or not, to support your claims. Do you not understand? -There is a serious flaw in this. Santa has no use for any servants, yet he has elves to make toys when he could materialise them out of thin air.* (Rebutted your rebut) -Elves have higher technology than Humans, but the toys are still the same.* (Rebutted your rebut) Dear Readers, note that there are more statements that Pro has not rebutted. Pro, search through my Debate for them. Should you not give an actual rebut, you lose this Debate. Admit it, I win this Debate. Did you see mah *AWESOME* Poem? Nah, nvm, I'm clearly the better Debater.