The Instigator
tahir.imanov
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Sitara
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Eight Reasons Why Trinity is Invalid.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/13/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,491 times Debate No: 37686
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

tahir.imanov

Pro

Format of Debate:
First Round is Introductions.
Second Round is rebuttles, and at the end of rebuttle arguments opponents will ask Questions to each other, which are answered in Third Round.
The Last (Forth) Round is Conlusions.


1. What is Trinity?


Trinity is the Christian Godhead as one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The word "Trinity" comes from the Latin noun "trinitas" meaning "three are one". The doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three divine persons or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature". A nature is what one is, while a person is who one is.

2. Why Trinity is Invalid?

(a) There is no evidence or fact to support it. But there are evidences and facts which opposes it.
(b) Bible never spokes about Trinity. All "facts" from Bible are assertions not facts.
(c) It does not make sense.

3. Ten Reasons

Reason 1 : It is absent in Old Testament.
The words "Elohim" and "Adonai" (translated as God or Lord) is plural, but in semitic languages plural is not always plural, plural nouns are used for single person for respect to that person, It is called majestic plural. In this case, Elohim and Adonai means "One God".
Also the words "We", "Us" and "Our" (God refers to himself) also majestic plural (Royal We). Pope also uses "we", when he refers to himself, Queen Elisabeth II also.
Very core of Old Testament is based on Oneness of God. Deutronomy, Chapter 6, Verse 4 - Hear, O Isreal: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One. In Hebrew it is - "Sh'ma Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Ehad". The word "Ehad" means one, absolute one - one in person, one in essence, one in nature.

Reason 2 : Jesus is not God or THE Son of God.
I talked about this issue here :
http://www.debate.org...
But I will share main points, all points are taken from Bible :
1. God is The Creater and God is The Beginning-less and The End-less. Jesus was born so he has beginning and he died (according to Christianity), so he has end.
2. God is The Dependable, He does not depends on others and needs nothing to depend on. Jesus ate and drank, so he needed food and water to live.
3. God is The All-Seeing, The All-Hearing and The All-Knowing. Jesus did not know and does not know the Hour (the time of last day).

4. God is not subjected to anything of His creation. Jesus lived on Earth, so he was subjected to gravity, time, to all laws of Universe.
5. God cannot be seen. The people who saw Jesus, saw Jesus.
6. God cannot die or cannot be killed. Jesus killed so he died. And also If Jesus is God and If He was crucified then God submitted a suicide.
7. In The New Testament Jesus never (explicitly) says that He is The God or He is The Son (of God).
8. Jesus prays to God, can God pray upon God? What is the point?

Reason 3 : The word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible.
I do not need to speak about it, because it is obvious fact. You can check all versions of Bible, yourself.

Reason 4 : "The Doctrine of Trinity" is not found in the Bible.
The word Trinity is not in the Bible, but is doctrine of Trinity in the Bible? Short Answer is, No. John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" is mistranslated, in greek scripts, there is no word "with", it is "towards", which is idiom, means "pertaining to", the correct translation is "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word meant God, and the Word was God". Then it makes sense.

Reason 5 : Origin of "Doctrine of Trinity".
The doctrine of the Trinity was first officially formulated by the Council of Nicea, in 325 A.D..

"....the discussions concerning the three persons in the Godhead, among those who approved the decisions of the council of Nice.
There is so little clearness and discrimination in these discussions, that they seem to rend the one God into three Gods.
Moreover, those idle fictions, which a regard for the prevailing opinions of the day had induced most theologians to embrace, even before the time of Constantine, were now in various ways confirmed, extended and embellished.
Hence it is that we see on every side evident traces of excessive veneration for saints in heaven, of belief in a fire to purify souls on leaving the body, of partiality for priestly celibacy, the worship of images and relics, and for many other opinions which, in process of time, almost banished the true religion, or at least very much obscured and corrupted it.
Genuine piety was gradually supplanted by a long train of superstitious observances, which were derived partly from a preposterous disposition to adopt profane rites.
To the temples, to water consecrated with certain forms, and to likenesses of holy men, the same efficacy was ascribed and the same privileges assigned, as had been attributed to the pagan temples, statues and lustrations before the advent of Christ."
Mosheim (Century 4, Part 2, Chapter 3, Section 1)

Reason 6 : Holy Spirit
Bible nevers speaks of Holy Spirit as God or part of God. And there is no evidence to support godness of Holy Spirit. And Holy Spirit never claimed to be God.

Reason 7 : Trinity is evolved doctrine.
"In the beginning" (I mean when Jesus was around) The God was One God. And first believers belivied in One God, they did not believe Jesus was God with Father God. With Paul the divinity of Jesus was established, means Jesus became (Son of) God. Later on from 3rd-4th century the divinity of Holy Spirit was established. The doctrine was ratified at the Council of Constantinople, 381 AD.

Reason 8 : If Trinity is true, Why God never spoke about it (before)?
In old Testament God always says, I am one, there is no with me, there is no equal to me. Why he is "hiding" his "true" essence from people?! And also in New Testament, Jesus also never spoke of Trinity, why is he "hiding" the "true" essence of God. Is there "Godly" conspiracy here?!

Sources:
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...
http://www.answering-islam.org...
http://www.letusreason.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://christianity.about.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.antipas.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.jewfaq.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...;

Sitara

Con

I am not the best religion scholar, but I will take a swing at it. Let's address the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4) first. Deuateronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one!" This means that there is one God. Next: John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made." This means that in the beginning, Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God. The two were one. It is confusing, but it is in the Bible. Acts 5:3 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." Since Peter said that Anaias lied to the Holy Spirit, and that He lied to God, that means that the Holy Spirit is God. 1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." This one means that there is one God that exists in three persons. Pretty straight forward. John 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." It is important to know that cultural context of that I AM statement. That is the name that God said to Moses in Exodus, so Jesus was claiming to be God. John 10:30 I and My Father are one." This one implies the divinity of Jesus in two ways: He said that He and the Father are one, meaning that He is God, or part of God or however that works out, and He used the possessive "My" in reference to the Father. Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence." The term firstborn is a status of a importance, not a birth order. In ancient Hebrew times, the first born son was given the highest honor. The rest explains itsself, in my humble opinion. John 14:6 "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." Although not explicit in this verse, Jesus was claiming to be God, because only God can be the way, the truth, and the life. John 8:19 Then they said to Him, "Where is Your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also." This could be used in favor of Trinitarian monotheism. John 8:36 "Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed." Only God can set people free, and Jesus does that, so He has to be God.
Debate Round No. 1
tahir.imanov

Pro

Notes: NT = New Testament; OT = Old Testament; Scripts= Manuscripts.

My opponent shared verses from Bible, most of them we are familiar with. What
she did not do :
1. Prove Bible is the the word of God.
2. Show us, these verses from original greek scripts (the verses from NT)
3. Also, I would like to know this verses are accurately translated.

Deu 1:1 - God is one. OK, let's assume there is God and God is One. I already explained what the word "Ehad" means. It means one in essence, one in person, one in nature. Ask the jews, they know hebrew better than others.

Before going to other verses I would like to talk about NT scripts. There are 2 papyri manuscripts from 2nd cen., 5 papyri, 1 uncial manuscripts from 2nd-3rd cen., and 28 papyri and 2 uncial manuscripts from 3rd cen, In later centuries number of manuscripts grows up. That means Jesus "died" in 1st cen., there are no manuscripts. 2nd-3rd cen., thare are total 7 papyri and 1 uncial manuscripts, how can you write a total book of NT, with them. The later manuscripts cannot be taken seriously, because there are no evidence for chain of transmission. There are no evidence who wrote that manuscripts, when and where they wrote it. For example, Gospel of John is not Gospel of John, it is Gospel ACCORDING TO John. There are no names no signatures at the end of manuscripts, to indicate who wrote them. And nobody knows who John is. Who say that he knows who John is, just speculates. We know who Alexander the Great is, because there are some historical documents about him. But there are no historical document about John.

John 1:1 - I already talked about it in first round.
1 John 5:7 - three in one. This verse is not in "original" Greek manuscripts, so was removed from New Bibles. But, I do not know the reason, King James Version still has it. Actually it was also removed from KJ version, but later was re-added.
John 8:58 - "Ego eimi" is translated as I am. Ego means "I, me". Eimi means "am, have been, it is, I, was". Only here eimi was translated as "I am". And also, the hebrew "I am, what I am" is different from greek "I am". Their translations to English may be similar, but in context of the languages it was said, meanings are different. And Jesus spoke Aramaic. Watch to the Gospel According to Mel Gibson.
And also I can say, "Before Adam was, I am". And I can prove it. If I prove this statement, would you worship me as God?!
John 10:30 - All your statements are from John. You know, you cannot use Mark to support your point. I and My Father are One. Read the John 10. John 10:34 - Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’ (referring to Psalm 82:6). In that context all jews are god. Are you discriminating Jews, this is racism. God wants His children to worship him, and Jesus wants the children of God to worship God, so in this context Jesus and God are one, no divinity here.
Col 1:15 - He is the image of invisible God, according OT, all humans are made in the image of God. No mystery here.

There is no point to continue, other verses also easily can be answered.
Jesus spoke aramaic, but gospel manuscripts are in greek, everybody knows that when text is translated, the meaning of text is slightly changes. The manuscripts you have is the copy of the copy of th copy of the copy of the copy. And they cannot be taken seriously. Because you do not have original, aramaic gospel, which Jesus was holding in His hands.

Here is my questions for third round:
1. Is God Perfect?
2. Is the Word of God Perfect?
3. Can the Word of God have internal and external contradictions?
4. If No, How would you expalin contradictions in OT, and NT?
5. If you say it is Insprition from God, but work of man, then it is not Word of God.
6. Do you have any evidence that Jesus spoke greek?
7. Do you have any evidence apostels of Jesus wrote gospels?
8. Does Jesus or God confirms divinity of Holy Spirit (show facts)?

Thanks for reading
Sitara

Con

Pro says: "John 8:58 - "Ego eimi" is translated as I am. Ego means "I, me". Eimi means "am, have been, it is, I, was". Only here eimi was translated as "I am". And also, the hebrew "I am, what I am" is different from greek "I am". Their translations to English may be similar, but in context of the languages it was said, meanings are different. And Jesus spoke Aramaic. Watch to the Gospel According to Mel Gibson." I say: I do not concur. The Jews understood that to be a claim of divinity, and that is why they tried to stone Him. Proof for thee: John 8:48 Then the Jews answered and said to Him, "Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?" 49 Jesus answered, "I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50 And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 51 Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death." 52 Then the Jews said to Him, "Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, "If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death." 53 Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?" 54 Jesus answered, "If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your[m] God. 55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, "I do not know Him," I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." 57 Then the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" 58 Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." 59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple,[n] going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
Pro says: John 10:30 - All your statements are from John. You know, you cannot use Mark to support your point. I and My Father are One. Read the John 10. John 10:34 - Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, "I have said you are "gods"" (referring to Psalm 82:6). In that context all jews are god. Are you discriminating Jews, this is racism. God wants His children to worship him, and Jesus wants the children of God to worship God, so in this context Jesus and God are one, no divinity here. I say: you got me there.
Pro says: Col 1:15 - He is the image of invisible God, according OT, all humans are made in the image of God. No mystery here. I say: If that was the case, the Bible would say we instead of He. "The Bible does not mean now what it did not mean then." -Rick Bretlinger
I also say: Address the rest of this section of Scripture: 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
Debate Round No. 2
tahir.imanov

Pro

All my opponent had done just quoted Bible. No proofs, no facts or evedences to support her position. Ordiniray Christian mind. She did not ask questions, may be she knows I have answers to all her questions.

If you want to prove your point, bring some evidence. I hope in this round, she will answer my questions, here they are :


1. Is God Perfect?
2. Is the Word of God Perfect?
3. Can the Word of God have internal and external contradictions?
4. If No, How would you expalin contradictions in OT, and NT?
5. If you say it is Insprition from God, but work of man, then it is not Word of God.
6. Do you have any evidence that Jesus spoke greek?
7. Do you have any evidence apostels of Jesus wrote gospels?
8. Does Jesus or God confirms divinity of Holy Spirit (show facts)?

Thank you for reading.
Sitara

Con

My opponant needs to make up his mind. Either the Bible is a credible source or it is not. It is not logical to use the Bible to support your argument, then oppose me for doing the same. Anwhoo: Pro says: All my opponent had done just quoted Bible. No proofs, no facts or evedences to support her position. Ordiniray Christian mind. She did not ask questions, may be she knows I have answers to all her questions.
I say: That is an ad homenim argument absurdem. Attacking your opponant's character to win the debate. That is a logical fallacy and it has no place in this debate. If you can use the Bible as a source, so can I. You did not ask me to do anything else.
Pro says: If you want to prove your point, bring some evidence. I hope in this round, she will answer my questions, here they are : 1. Is God Perfect? I say: completely irrelevent. The subject of this debate is the validity of trinitarian monotheism according to the Bible, not whether the Bible is a credible source, and nothing more and nothing less. Pro says: 2. Is the Word of God Perfect? I say: stick to the subject. I am here to debate trinitarian monotheism. You cannot keep changing the subject. Pro says: 3. Can the Word of God have internal and external contradictions? No, but translations can. I do not believe that translations are the word of God, but just a translation. Next. Pro says: 4. If No, How would you expalin contradictions in OT, and NT? I say: errors in the transmittion and translation are the problem here.
Pro says: 5. If you say it is Insprition from God, but work of man, then it is not Word of God.
I did not say this. Pro says: 6. Do you have any evidence that Jesus spoke greek?
Many Jews of His time spoke Greek, so it would make sense to say yes. Pro says: 7. Do you have any evidence apostels of Jesus wrote gospels? I say: not currently.
Pro says: 8. Does Jesus or God confirms divinity of Holy Spirit (show facts)?
What kind of facts?
Pro says: Thank you for reading.
You bet, I hope neither one of us is offended, and I am grateful for this debate. I am about to lose power, so you might not hear from me for e few hours. Debatcha then. :)
Debate Round No. 3
tahir.imanov

Pro

1. Quoting Bible is not same with using Bible to support argument. I do not only use Bible, I also analyze Bible. I say Bible does not support Trinity, so to prove my point, I can only use Bible. I say Jesus did not claim any type of divinity, so to prove my point, I can only use Bible and common sense. To prove something in the Bible is not true (faith related issues) I can only use Bible. If Bible contradicts itself, for example, on issue of salvation, then at least one of the points of Bible about salvation is wrong, then Bible cannot be direct revelation and holding Bible as a prove for Bible is wrong and it is fallacy.

2. Please, I do not need you to teach me Informal fallacies, I already studied them, ALL. And there are no fallacies in my arguments.

3. Perfection of God is relevant, because triniterian God cannot be perfect, because if Jesus some how, is the part of God, then He shares all attributes of God with God, so if Jesus is imperfect, then God is imperfect. The shortest verse in Bible is, "Jesus swept", means Jesus cried, crying god, you have to love that. Jesus did not know time of last day, then he is not All-Knowing, then God is not also. Jesus was tempted. All-Powerfull God was tempted by his creation, who would worship to this God (except republicans, of course; no offense, I just don't like republicans)?

4. Translations can have contradictions. Do you have originals? This is a ritoric question, of course you don't have originals. If you say we have original greek manuscripts, none of two manuscripts are same, means this manuscripts contradicts each other.

5. About Jesus speaking greek, it is an assumption, not fact. You do not have evidence to support your assumption. And as Bible says, Jesus was sent to House of Israel, and not all jews spoke greek.

I made points, and brought evidence to support my points. Trinity is not found in the Bible, (both as word and concept) the verses which mostly quoted to support trinity, if you read in the context, then you will come to know, that they have nothing to do with trinity.

Thank you for reading,
..... and we are part of great imagination.
Sitara

Con

"1. Quoting Bible is not same with using Bible to support argument. I do not only use Bible, I also analyze Bible. I say Bible does not support Trinity, so to prove my point, I can only use Bible. I say Jesus did not claim any type of divinity, so to prove my point, I can only use Bible and common sense. To prove something in the Bible is not true (faith related issues) I can only use Bible. If Bible contradicts itself, for example, on issue of salvation, then at least one of the points of Bible about salvation is wrong, then Bible cannot be direct revelation and holding Bible as a prove for Bible is wrong and it is fallacy."
You used the Bible as a source and you know it. This debate is about the validity of trinitarian monotheism according to the Bible. You used the Bible for your position, so I can too.
"2. Please, I do not need you to teach me Informal fallacies, I already studied them, ALL. And there are no fallacies in my arguments."
So you cannot handle criticism. Got it. It is also arrogant to assume that you are the only one with knowledge. Stick to the subject at hand.
"3. Perfection of God is relevant, because triniterian God cannot be perfect, because if Jesus some how, is the part of God, then He shares all attributes of God with God, so if Jesus is imperfect, then God is imperfect. The shortest verse in Bible is, "Jesus swept", means Jesus cried, crying god, you have to love that. Jesus did not know time of last day, then he is not All-Knowing, then God is not also. Jesus was tempted. All-Powerfull God was tempted by his creation, who would worship to this God (except republicans, of course; no offense, I just don't like republicans)?"
The relevant subject is the validity of trinitarian monotheism. If you keep changing the subject, I will be forced to make my own debate where people stick to the rules.
"I made points, and brought evidence to support my points. Trinity is not found in the Bible, (both as word and concept) the verses which mostly quoted to support trinity, if you read in the context, then you will come to know, that they have nothing to do with trinity."
You cannot logically say that the Bible is not a credible source and then use it as a source. Make up your mind.
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
Thursday is good for me.
Posted by Rabid.Penguin 3 years ago
Rabid.Penguin
That will also give us both time to prepare our opening statements and arguments.
Posted by Rabid.Penguin 3 years ago
Rabid.Penguin
That's why I was saying maybe we should start after Christmas. I won't be able to post anything on Tuesday or Wednesday as I'll be busy with Christmas and family stuff. I can start the debate Thursday if you think you can start then. Does that work?
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
Start debate now and choose 72 hours for posting argument (I think it is the max amount of time.) So it would be easy for both of us. I dont think I will online around Christmas. I will be studying for exams in January.
Posted by Rabid.Penguin 3 years ago
Rabid.Penguin
If you would like to challenge I will. I think that would be fun. But I will only debate this if I too will be allowed to use the Bible as my source and we can start the debate after Christmas, as I will be pretty busy this week. The Bible will be our main source on the Trinity for a few reasons. One, you used it as a primary source for attempting the show the trinity was false, and two, if I first have to prove God exists, then I have to prove it's the God of the Bible, then I have to prove the Bible is God's word, then I have to prove the Bible is reliable, we'll never get to the main topic. There are not enough words allowed :p Can we agree on these points before starting a debate? Do you have anything to add?
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
If you are so sure on your statements, challenge me (click on my user name, then click challenge).
In any topic.
Posted by Rabid.Penguin 3 years ago
Rabid.Penguin
Let's look at your reasons again, shall we?

Reason 1: It is absent in Old Testament.
Reason 2: Jesus is not God or THE Son of God
"But I will share main points, all points are taken from Bible"
Reason 3: The word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible.
Reason 4 : "The Doctrine of Trinity" is not found in the Bible.
Reason 6 : Holy Spirit
"Bible nevers speaks of Holy Spirit as God or part of God."
Reason 8 : If Trinity is true, Why God never spoke about it (before)?
"In old Testament God always says..."

Each one of those reasons uses the Bible as it's source.
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
Dude, I did not use Bible in reason N.2,5,6,7,8.
In 1. I used O.T. to show the verse contradicts Trinity.
In 3. I sais there is no such a word as Trinity in Bible. Prove I am wrong.
And in 4. I said the doctrine itself is not found in bible and I just used 1 verse.
So How did I use Bible as my main source.
My main source is RATIONALITY and LOGIC, which are absent in some people, and they do not understand the main point, and talk non-sense.
And Sitara can use Bible, but before she uses it to support her claim, she needs to prove that what Bible says is accurate and true.
You cannot say "What Bible says is true, because Bible is true, because it is revelation (or inspration from God), because it says so." It would be non-sense, irrational and illogical.
I did not use Bible to support my claim. I just said Bible does not talk about Trinity, and what I said is true. Only thing you have to do is put your brain back into your head, and read Bible.
Posted by Rabid.Penguin 3 years ago
Rabid.Penguin
6 of your 8 reasons attempted to use the Bible to disprove the Trinity. When Sitara attempted to use the Bible to show that it did indeed support the trinity and that you were wrong you shouted "the Bible cannot be trusted." That seems a bit odd don't you think? So you can use the Bible as your main source, but Sitara cannot?
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
@Rabid.Penguin if you read the title of debate (I assume you can read) it says 8 reasons why trinity is invalid, not whether bible supports it or does not support it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.