The Instigator
leandro.sanchez
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RobbyByron
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Evolution and the bigbang theory are compatibel with the Bible.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
RobbyByron
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/5/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 881 times Debate No: 37385
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

leandro.sanchez

Pro

Rules:
first round is acceptenz only.But my opponent can make his case in his first round if he accepts to make no further arguments in his last round.
grammar errors are allowed but voters should vote the person with the best graamar probely my opponent because english is not my first language.
RobbyByron

Con

I wish you the best of luck.
Debate Round No. 1
leandro.sanchez

Pro

The creation of the universe.
The begging of the universe biblical stand of view:<>god said and light was.
The big bang theory: At this time, the Universe was in an extremely hot and dense state and began expanding rapidly. After the initial expansion, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into various subatomic particles, including protons,neutrons, and electrons. Though simple atomic nuclei formed within the first three minutes after the Big Bang, thousands of years passed before the first electrically neutral atoms formed. The majority of atoms that were produced by the Big Bang are hydrogen, along with helium and traces of lithium. Giant clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity to form stars and galaxies, and the heavier elements were synthesized either within stars or during supernovae.
The expansion of the universe is represented as an explosion were it was darkenes now there was light.
Energie can not be created we only can use the energy that is alredy there proving that we depended of something eternal. God is energy that"s why we aren"t allowed by the bible to paint him or make an image of him. because god is not material he is energy.

God created the animals and plants.
Evolution does not dispute that animals have not been created by god. Evolution is the theory of how animals evolved from simpler live forms to the complicaded beings we see today.
Evolution never claims to be an explanation of how animals and plants were created it just claims to be an explication of how animals evolved from earlier live forms to the complicated beings we see today.
In the bible it is written god created the animals but it isn"t written what animals they were it isn"t written that it was the Animals we seed today it could be the earlier life forms.
The creation of the humans.
God created us but what are we are we our bodies our brains ?no we are a soul and the bible says that wen a body is born god gives it a soul. We are not bodies of flesh and blood we are souls in a body god created us not our bodies .bodies are born but god gives us our souls .
As I have alredy explained god isn"t a being that has mass he isn"t something you can touch.The bible says we are maid in his image that means we are not bodies our souls are maid in his image .If we go to heaven our souls go not our bodies our bodies stay here on earth.We are like god our souls can"t be touched our made an image of just like god. Adam and eve were Adults they had the capacity of thinking early on they had not to wait to grow up proving theier had no bodies,and they had no sons in paradies because they weren"t had no material form where they could have given birth but when they are expulsed from heaven they can suffer and age a soul does not suffer or age. Proving that Adam and eve have been given a body by god to punish us to let us suffer hunger fear (would you be afraid if you had no bodie?no because nothing coud harm you).

Conclusion:God created the universe by beginning the big bang and created the early forms of live he gave us our soul .God is energie and without energie we could not do anything and live woud not have originated god created us all by giving us energie that made us.
RobbyByron

Con

I thank Pro for this oppurtunity to debate, and for the comprehensive explanation of the big bang theory he has given us.
However, my contention lies with his rather abridged version of the biblical account of creation, "god said and light was." In full, Genesis 1:1-3 states:

"In the beginning God created the sky and the earth. The earth was empty and had no form. Darkness covered the ocean, and God's Spirit was moving over the water. Then God said "let there be light" and there was light."

Note that according to the biblical account, water existed before God created light. This already creates a contradiction between the big bang theory and the bible: matter (In the surprisingly complex form of H2O molecules) existing before the moment of the big bang.

Another logical impass arises in Genesis 1:4-5-

"God saw that the light was good, so he divided the light from the darkness. God named the light 'day' and the darkness 'night'. Evening passed, and morning came. This was the first day."

We can assume from the inclusion of the words 'day' 'night' and 'morning' that this refers to Earth. But how is this possible, when, as Pro claims "God said and light was" describes the big bang? If that was the case, surely the light eminating would be continous, as the universe was constantly expanding?

"God is energy that"s why we aren"t allowed by the bible to paint him or make an image of him. because god is not material he is energy."

I have never come across this being forbidden in the Bible. Would Pro be able to provide a verse reference of this point in the bible? And if this is a case, why is it that Pope Julius II permitted Michaelangelo to paint this picture, of God giving life to Adam, on the roof of the Sistine chapel?


"God created the animals and plants."
Once again, there is a continuity error between the scientific and biblical accounts (this time of evolution). According to Genesis 1:11-12,

"Then god said, "Let the earth produce plants- some to make grain for seeds and others to make fruits with seeds in them. Every seed will produce more of its own kind of plant" And it happened. The earth produced plants with grain for seeds, and trees that made fruits with seeds in them. Each seed grew its own kind of plant. God saw that all this was good"

This is the first mention of any biological organisms in the Bible, suggesting that plants were the first organisms to develop. Yet the accepted scientific view is that the first living things were single-celled prokaryotic organisms, such as bacteria.

However, there is an even more obvious disparity between the big bang theory and the bible, when we examine Genesis 1:16 -

"So God made the two large lights. He made the brighter light to rule the day and the smaller light to rule the night. He also made the stars"

Here we reach an impossibility, as according to the Bible, life began before the Sun was formed. This creates a further contradiction between the big bang theory and the Bible, because we have established that Nuclear Fusion reactions started to happen in the sun's core 4.6 billion years ago, whilst the first life forms only developed 3.8 billion years ago- From this, we can establish that the Bible and big bang theory are incompatible by a margin of at least 800 million years.

In response to Pro's points about the creation of humans, I must first say that in the Bible humans were created as a seperate, special species, not along with the other animals
The first animals were created in Genesis 1:20 -

"Then God said, "Let the water be filled with living things, and let the birds fly in the air above the earth"

Whereas humans are created last of all in Genesis 1;26

"Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image and likeness. And let them rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the tame animals, over all the earth, and over all the small crawling animals on the earth"

This is in direct contrast to the theory of evolution, which states that human beings are just another species, which evolved from apelike ancestors.

Whilst Pro states-

"Adam and eve were Adults they had the capacity of thinking early on they had not to wait to grow up proving theier had no bodies"

Genesis 3:7 states-

"Then, it was as if their eyes were opened. They realised they were naked, so they sewed fig leaves together and made something to cover themselves."

So the Bible clearly states that Adam and Eve had physical bodies, if they could cover themselves with fig leaves.

"Proving that Adam and eve have been given a body by god to punish us"

I have just proved that according to the Bible, Adam and Eve had a physical body whilst they were in the garden of Eden, and crucially before Genesis 3;16 and 17, when God curses Eve and then Adam.

Conclusion:
There are huge contradictions between the Bible and the theories of evolution and the big bang, and humanity had always had physical bodies, even according to the Bible

Sources:
The Bible (New Century Version)
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
http://www.universetoday.com...
http://humanorigins.si.edu...



Debate Round No. 2
leandro.sanchez

Pro

My opponent does not understand that the language used in the bible was written to be understand by simple desert folk. The language in the bible was original in Hebrew.I will use a comment in our debate to explain why the bible being in Hebrew is an explication to this.
You know the genesis account is not meant to be a blow by blow accurate picture of the process of creation and the development of the universe after the big bang, the biggest problem is that the Hebrew language itself is entirely unable to express such notions with a vocabulary of only about 4,000 words which all that was needed to describe the pastoral economy and a small body of civil and religious laws. When Genesis 1 says that "God Created the heavens and the earth" this is the language that best describes "In the beginning God created the universe". There simply is no word for "Universe" in Hebrew.
So I think this can be an explication to your problem that in the bible there is written that water existed before light and your problem with light in the bible.
You must also consider that a science book would not have any effect on society as god intended to do.
Can you imagine what would happen if god had given Jesus physical formulas ?
People would have ignored him and the bible would not have had any affect on early life and society as god had intended.
I think we can agree that the simplistic language of the bible is logical due to the knowledge that the people had in those time.
Now your second point the painting of god in the Vatican.
Here we have the second of the ten commandmet:
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
What does that mean you shall not paint heaven(heaven above ),you shall not paint hell(or that is in the earth beneath) . the one thing I don"t understand the water under the earth?
Well it does not matter what the Vatican does it is god"s ten commandments how are the word of god not the Vatican or the pope.
Other problem my opponent has is the order that life is listed to have appear in the bible plants bevore animals.because the first living beings were single-celled prokaryotic organisms, such as bacteria.
MY explanantion to this problem the bible was written by people how were inspired by god but they still were people and god new what they could understand in a time where the microscope was not even invented saying that the first live were bacteria little things we can"t even see would be ridiculous no one would accept the bible. So god listed in the bible the animals man new at this time but god never said that plants were the fist living beings that would be a lie he only stated that plants were formed bevore animals what is true.
The last problems that my opponent has is that mean are created apart from the other animals what is in fact supporting evolution because mean only came after the first animals mean are very late in the evolution so animals were created bevore humans.
This is like to say my mom was created bevore me that does not mean you are not her offspring .human spirits were created in gods image their bodies just were the result of evolution after many animals were born bevore them.
Also my opponent states that mean always had a physical bodie what is wrong .adam and eve only noticed they had bodies after they sined proving that they had a body after the first sinn as punishment.
Conclusion:when it comes to use science against the bible many people do not understand that the bible is written for simple town folk to learn them morality not to learn them science but the bible never lies they only put it in a way so that the early people could understand it.
RobbyByron

Con

I understand my opponent's point that the Bible was not meant to be a book primarily explaining the scientific truths of our world, but the fact remains that it has many factual innacuracies. For example, as I mentioned earlier, the problem of plants being created by god before the sun came into existence.
I noticed that my opponent used an argument written in the comments about the Hebrew language (I have no problem with this, by the way), in

"You know the genesis account is not meant to be a blow by blow accurate picture of the process of creation and the development of the universe after the big bang, the biggest problem is that the Hebrew language itself is entirely unable to express such notions with a vocabulary of only about 4,000 words which all that was needed to describe the pastoral economy and a small body of civil and religious laws. When Genesis 1 says that "God Created the heavens and the earth" this is the language that best describes "In the beginning God created the universe". There simply is no word for "Universe" in Hebrew."

Can he provide a source for this knowledge of the language? In addition, regardless of the semantic constraints on Hebrew, the fact is that the bible contains an incorrect piece of information in its narrative of creation, in stating that water existed before light did.

Not only several of the events described in the old testament in a conflicting order with the scientific model given by the big bang theory, but the timescale given by the Bible is vastly innacurate too, as shown here in Exodus 20:11

"The reason is that in six days the Lord made everything- the sky , the earth, the sea and everything in them. On the seventh day he rested. So the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

The Bible states that the world was created in six days, in stark contrast to the billions of years over which the Big Bang Theory shows the Solar system and the Earth were formed. Now many would argue that here 'days' refers to a length of time, and not 24 hours. However, firstly if one consults the septuagint, the ancient greek translation of the old testament (the earliest Biblical language of which I have sufficient knowledge to comment on properly), they find it uses the word "O69;μ^1;ραις"- "O69;μ^1;ρα" means 'day' or 'daylight' rather than any connotation of a long period of time (the Greeks had another word for 'age' "αιων". Secondly, I have already shown that it is scientifically impossible for the 'third day' (creation of plants) to have come before the fourth (creation of the sun and moon)

"The last problems that my opponent has is that mean are created apart from the other animals what is in fact supporting evolution because mean only came after the first animals mean are very late in the evolution so animals were created bevore humans."

My contention is not with the ordering of events here, but the way in which humans were set out especially apart from other animals, as in genesis 1:28-

"God blessed them (humans) and said, "Have many children and grow in number. Fill the earth and be its master. Rule over the fish in the sea and over the birds in the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth"

This, again conflicts with the theory of evolution, as according to the latter, we are merely another species of animal, who evolved on one particular branch of the 'tree' of evolution.

"Also my opponent states that mean always had a physical bodie what is wrong .adam and eve only noticed they had bodies after they sined proving that they had a body after the first sinn as punishment."

To be honest, I do not think that one can draw from Genesis 3:7 whether Adam and Eve had physical bodies before eating the fruit- I think it's a matter of interpretation. On the other hand, the fact that Eve was able to eat a piece of fruit from a tree suggests that she had a physical body.

Conclusion

Regardless of the purpose of the Bible, it contains several large inconstistencies, both in order of events, and duration of time, with the Big Bang Theory and Evolution, and is therefore in several places simply untrue.

Sources:
The Bible (New century version)
Oxford Classical Greek Dictionary
http://www.ellopos.net...;
Debate Round No. 3
leandro.sanchez

Pro

Again my opponent does not understand the genesis of the bible is not inconsistent everything in it is true i
The bible says first came the plants and than came the animals and this is true plants came bevore animals but the bible omited the littel bacterias this also applies to all the concerns of my opponent i would like if he pointed out in what points this did not apply.
RobbyByron

Con

On the contrary, I have previously demonstrated that there are many things written in the Bible which are simply untrue. I shall now list several I have previously mentioned for my opponent's convenience.

1. Water existed before light (Genesis 1:1-3)

2. Day and night existed (Genesis 1:5) before the sun and moon were created (Genesis 1:16)

3. Plants existed (Genesis 1;11) before the sun and moon were created (Genesis 1:16)

4. The creation of the universe happened in 6 days (Exodus 20;11)

In addition, according to the theory of evolution, death has existed since life has. Every biological organism will eventually die. Yet according to Romans 5:12

"Sin came into the world because of what one man did, and with sin came death. This is why everyone must die- because everyone sinned."

In the original greek translation, the word "θανατοσ" 'death', which has an entirely physical, not spiritual connotation.

However, the most obvious point of inconsistency between the biblical and scientific accounts of the origins of the universe is in pure length of time: according to the Bible, it is 6,000 years old; according to the big bang theory, 13.7 billion.

Sources:
The Bible (new century version)
Oxford Classical Greek dictionary
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk...;
Debate Round No. 4
leandro.sanchez

Pro

leandro.sanchez forfeited this round.
RobbyByron

Con

Arguments extended.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Critical_Knowledge 3 years ago
Critical_Knowledge
Interesting debate, gentlemen. I believe the crux of it is how literal the words of the Bible are taken. For example when God said, "light was" on the cold dark Earth, it could simply mean that the Sun was already there or that it became day on a certain half of the globe. I do, however support the idea that religion and science can coexist without rendering the other incorrect or worthless.
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
I thank my jerryboy for this wonderfull argument that i will add to my respose
Posted by Jerryboy 3 years ago
Jerryboy
You know the genesis account is not meant to be a blow by blow accurate picture of the process of creation and the development of the universe after the big bang, the biggest problem is that the Hebrew language itself is entirely unable to express such notions with a vocabulary of only about 4,000 words which all that was needed to describe the pastoral economy and a small body of civil and religious laws. When Genesis 1 says that "God Created the heavens and the earth" this is the language that best describes "In the beginning God created the universe". There simply is no word for "Universe" in Hebrew. Second the debate about Old Earth and Young Earth must be informed by the several uses that the Hebrew word for "day" (I think it"s "mot") It can be variably rendered a year an age, or an epoch. When the deepest bore in Antarctic ice reveals over 600,000 annular rings it"s pretty hard to sustain a young earth paradigm, unless God is just fooling us. This I do not buy. Whether old or young neither is a serious impediment to faith.
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
I thank my opponent for his argument i was wainting to read it.
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
okay good that we goth that right.
Posted by RobbyByron 3 years ago
RobbyByron
yes
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
so the first round is for acceptence only and you will write an argument in your last round right?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
leandro.sanchezRobbyByronTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: Forfeited round. SOURCES: con easily takes the lead on this (they could have been numbered too, but oh well). Otherwise a great argument all around.