Christianity is false
Debate Rounds (3)
First round is acceptance only.
I accept this debate and look forward to its discussion.
So, let's take a look at a few biblical contradictions. Remember, Christians believe that the bible is the true word of God.
1. God good to all, or just a few?
PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.
JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.
2. War or peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
3. Who is the father of Joseph?
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.
These are just a few. If you would like to see more, you can visit this website http://infidels.org...
Now, let's take a look at scientifically incorrect verses
1. Anatomy of insects
Leviticus 11:20-23 (NIV):
All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest.
2. The smallest seed
13:31 Another parable put he [ Jesus ] forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.
Note: This is another old saw which argues that Jesus was wrong because there are smaller seeds in existence, like the orchid.
3. The value of pie
"He made the sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it." "It was a handbreadth in thickness... It held two thousand baths" - 1 Kings 7: 23,26(NIV) abbrev.
Note: The mathematical number `0; is the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference. The value of `0; truncated at 10 digits is 3.141592653. The bible itself gives us a different value of `0; in 1 Kings 7:23:
Again, these are just a few. To see more, visit http://rationalwiki.org...
If the Bible was the word of God, would it not have any contradictions? Would it not have any mistakes?
I'm glad to have been given this debate. First there are a few assumptions and misconceptions my opponent has that need to be cleared up.
First of all: "Remember, Christians believe that the bible is the true word of God."
There are two assumptions that need to be cleared up. First, "Christians" do not believe anything as a group. There are thousands of major groups, denominations, and sects. Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, Episcopal, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Independent Fundamental Baptist, Methodist, United Methodist, Non-Denominational, Arminian, Calvinist, Cessationist, Pentecostal, Liberal, Progressive, Fundamentalist, Evangelical, and many more. Each of these disagrees on practically anything. To say "Christians believe that the Bible is the word of God" is like saying "America supports gun control." There is too much diversity to make such a broad statement.
Secondly, There is an assumption of inerrancy of Scripture in my opponent's definition of the "Word of God." Inerrancy is the belief that there is not a single error in Scripture in any way, something that I vehemently disagree with. (See my Debate "Biblical Inerrancy and Infallibility is a Failed Theology) I do believe the Bible is God's Word, but not in the sense that God whispered in the ears of the writers to say what He wanted. That's foolish and childish.
To me and many progressive Christians, the Bible shows the evolution of how people viewed God through history. There is polytheism, slavery, misogyny, genocide, and worse. Is that God? No, that's a primitive people's misunderstanding of God, although we see His love shine through in some pages. The Bible is a human book about a divine story.
My opponent is not arguing against Christianity, but against Biblical Inerrancy.
The definition of Christianity is: "the religion derived from Jesus Christ, based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies" (Webster Dictionary)
In that, I will be arguing from here on that Jesus was the Son of God who died to save the sins of the world and rose three days later.
I am not arguing:
1. A specific understanding of Jesus' divinity
2. Biblical Inerrancy (Idolatry)
4. For any one denomination
1 Corinthians 15:17-19 lays out this idea of the resurrection being the most important theology:
" And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."
Therefore, all that is needed is theism, deity of Christ, and the resurrection for Christianity to indeed be true, until my opponent counters that, Christianity still stands.
There were numerous scholars recording "history" around the mediteranean at the time Jesus supposedly lived and not one of them even mentions this "great" guy that runs around converting the masses and performing miracles.
Don't you think that a guy doing those things might just be newsworthy??
Add that to the fact that christianity didn't emerge till 200+ yrs later and it kinda blows a hole in the whole works!!
Apart from that, there is no historical proof outside the Bible regarding the life of Jesus. It is possible that he existed, but from my point of view, it is most likely that the people whoever wrote the bible stories about him had simply mistaken him to be the son of God.
I'm simply going to take quotations from my opponent and debunk them one by one.
"There were numerous scholars recording "history" around the mediteranean at the time Jesus supposedly lived and not one of them even mentions this "great" guy that runs around converting the masses and performing miracles Don't you think that a guy doing those things might just be newsworthy??" (sic)
One part is right, there were numerous men writing history around that time, but apparently my opponent did not bother looking up the time period that they were active. There were several active decades before Christ, and decades after him, but no substantial histories that we know of were published before 70 AD on since around 30 AD. Jesus was active around 30-40 AD, we are not precisely sure when.
However, there are several major historians that mention Jesus
Tacitus the Historian, Annals Book 5:44 (AD 116)
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..."
Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18:3 (73-74 AD, before the Gospels of Luke and John were even written)
"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."
Those are two closer ones, although the Gospels are also earlier (and later) accounts depicting Jesus' life, as well as the Epistles. To dismiss the Gospels entirely for "bias" is foolish and shows a lack of understanding for higher scholarship
Not only that, Jesus' time was filled with apocalyptic prophets, each claiming similar things to Jesus. Unless you were there to see it, you'd doubt any of them were divine, and none of contemporary newsworthiness.
"Add that to the fact that christianity didn't emerge till 200+ yrs later and it kinda blows a hole in the whole works!!"
Sorry, no. The Christian church was thriving by 60 AD, 25-30 years after Jesus. Before 230 AD, the suggested date by my opponent for the beginning of Christianity, we have 4 Gospels, dozens of churches, the persecution of Nero, the Epistles, the writings of Clement and Origen, Council at Jerusalem, Council of Rome, and many other important pieces of church history. This statement is 100% false.
"Apart from that, there is no historical proof outside the Bible regarding the life of Jesus. It is possible that he existed, but from my point of view, it is most likely that the people whoever wrote the bible stories about him had simply mistaken him to be the son of God."
Basically a summary of my opponent's arguments, along with his own opinion based on facts we have already seen are wrong.
Having the burden of proof, my opponent's job was to show that Christianity is false by showing Jesus was the son of God, was not crucified, or was not resurrected. He failed at all three.
Sources listed with their respective quotations
~All the Best~
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Bob13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: The burden of proof was on Pro, but he did not fulfill it. As Con explained in round 2, in order to prove that Christianity is false, Pro must prove that Jesus did not die for our sins and then resurrect. Pro then explained how it is unlikely that Jesus was the son of God, but since he had the BoP, it was insufficient. His job was to prove Christianity to be false, not likely to be false. In addition, Pro's sources were anti-religion sites and therefore biased in the context of this particular debate, while Con's were historical texts from the time period of Jesus, probably the most reliable sources on the topic.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.