The Instigator
pr.Daniel_Jordan
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
jkgraves735
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Heptadic Signature Proves Extreme Intelligence Behind The Authorship of 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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 329 times Debate No: 88062
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

pr.Daniel_Jordan

Pro

Many of you have heard that there is no evidence God is behind the Bible, that it's a book written by sheep herders with fancy imagination, despite it's historical accuracy and length of time spanning thousands of years.

But today I am here to show you that yes, it has been possible to prove that God is behind the Bible for quite a few decades now, and you will discover this undeniable evidence today. In order to show you what this is about, I will assign you a challenge. The challenge is to write a fictional genealogy -- but here is the catch, it has to fulfill all of the following criteria:

1. The number of words must be divisible by 7 evenly.
2. The number of letters must also be divisible by 7.
3. The number of vowels and the number of consonants must be divisible by 7.
4. The number of words that begin with a vowel must be divisible by 7.
5. The number of words that begin with a consonant must be divisible by 7.
6. The number of words that occur more than once must be divisible by 7.
7. The number of words that occur in more than one form must be divisible by 7.
8. The number of words that occur in only one form shall be divisible by 7.
9. The number of nouns shall be divisible by 7.
10. Only 7 words shall not be nouns.
11. The number of names in the genealogy shall be divisible by 7.
12. Only 7 other kinds of nouns are permitted.
13. The number of male names shall be divisible by 7.
14. The number of generations shall be 21, also divisible by 7.

Seems impossible to write in flexible English and computers of the 21st century? This is only 14 restrictions, there are a total of 75 restrictions in the book of Mark, written without any computers, in a language much less flexible than English, two thousand years ago! So there you go.
jkgraves735

Con

Since this is a 5 Round debate with few rules, I'd like to spend this round clarifying a few things.

To my opponent:

Which Greek manuscript text are you using? Majority Text? A particular codex?

Where did you get this information?

Where is a geneology or "generations" in Mark?

What do you mean "Only 7 words shall not be nouns?"

Once I have this basic information, we can begin the debate.
Debate Round No. 1
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Pro

(1) Which Greek manuscript text are you using? Majority Text? A particular codex?
(1A) The original, penned by the Holy Ghost, later known as Textus Receptus.

(2) Where did you get this information?
(2A) Studies of Ivan Panin, although it's open for anyone with library access to research himself.

(3) Where is a geneology or "generations" in Mark?
(3A) The genealogy in Matthew contains about 30 constrictions, when I mentioned the book of Mark, I never said it has genealogies, what I said was that it has 75 constrictions -- comparing it to Matthew which only has 30 -- it's irrelevant whether it's a genealogy or not, it's simply that a text with so many constrictions is impossible to write by mere human beings. In fact, people usually give up after 2.

(4) What do you mean "Only 7 words shall not be nouns?"
(4A) Seven words in the text shall not be nouns, others shall.

(5) Once I have this basic information, we can begin the debate.
(5A) There you go. Apologize for not including, I assumed that since this information is so well known and available on the internet for those who bother to search it up, it would not be an issue.

Hope we can begin.
jkgraves735

Con

You specified the Gospel of Mark as your special Gospel, so I was confused

Regardless, I will argue against this based on three things:

1. Changes in the Greek Text

2. Subjective Division

3. Purposeful of Design

1) Changes in the Greek Text

There have been hundreds of significant changes in the Greek text of a passage.

Here's one case study for the Gospel of Mark:

Mark 16:9-20

Eusebius said:

"One who athetises that pericope would say that it [i.e., a verse from the ending of Mark] is not found in all copies of the gospel according to Mark: accurate copies end their text of the Marcan account with the words of the young man whom the women saw, and who said to them: “'Do not be afraid; it is Jesus the Nazarene that you are looking for, etc. …' ”, after which it adds: “And when they heard this, they ran away, and said nothing to anyone, because they were frightened." That is where the text does end, in almost all copies of the gospel according to Mark. What occasionally follows in some copies, not all, would be extraneous, most particularly if it contained something contradictory to the evidence of the other evangelists." (1)

Theodore of Mopsuestia shows no knowledge of the addition, despite his early fifth century life:

" All the evangelists narrated to us His resurrection from the dead... The blessed Luke, however, who is also the writer of a Gospel, added that He ascended into heaven so that we should know where He is after His resurrection" (2)

Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, our oldest complete records of Mark, do not have this passage

This is not just in Mark 16, but all over the New Testament, we have many, many changes in the Greek text. That would mess up a numerological count, wouldn't you think?

2) Subjective Counting

Ivan adds other problems to the mix: he picks and chooses what he wants to divide. For instance, he chooses Genesis 1:1 as a case study. Why? Verses were not added to the Bible until the middle ages, and the logical flow of the Hebrew does not cut the idea at that point.

For another instance, Ivan said to notice that letters in Greek are used a certain number of times... but he does it at random. Alpha - Beta, Gamma - Delta, Epsilon - Zeta, ...skip Eta... Theta to... Rho? Sigma to... Chi? This is a random counting. No rhyme. No reason. He feels free to skip letters or group them in ways that happen to come up at numbers he wants. That is dishonest to say the least. (3)

3) Purposeful Design

Some parts of the Bible were perfectly designed to have divisions of 7 in them. The Matthew Genealogy is a good place to start. Matthew's genealogy has 14 x 14 x 14 x14, reaching 42 generations. However, Matthew omits several generations, compared to Chronicles, for that to occur. Purposeful (and wrong) design


Sources:

1) Eusebius, Gospel Problems and Solutions to Marinus

2) Theodore, Commentary on Nicene Creed

3) http://www.telusplanet.net...
Debate Round No. 2
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Pro

pr.Daniel_Jordan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Pro

pr.Daniel_Jordan forfeited this round.
jkgraves735

Con

That's disappointing...
Debate Round No. 4
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Pro

pr.Daniel_Jordan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by matt8800 11 months ago
matt8800
If I was to write something that fit those criteria, would it automatically be true?

Seven has long been a superstitious number and if someone set out with that purpose, it wouldn't be hard at all. Just restructure a few sentences to fit each criteria one by one.
No votes have been placed for this debate.