The Instigator
yougotthehit666
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
MadCornishBiker
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points

In fact there is not one real contradiction in scripture.

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 8 votes the winner is...
yougotthehit666
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,013 times Debate No: 34240
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (66)
Votes (8)

 

yougotthehit666

Con

Pro's position is simply this: In fact there is not one real contradiction in scripture. I have been shown hundreds of so-called contradictions and it has always bee easy to show how they are not in fact such.

Con's position is that this is complete nonsense and sounds like an unsupported fabrication.

Rules:
(A) Pro uses first round to accept and supports his claim.
(B) This is a formal debate and sources are suspect until proven otherwise.
(C) Final round is for closing arguments only.
(D) Anything magic based is supported by evidence or it is invalid.
(E) All modifications to rules are determined and agreed upon before acceptance.
(F) Cambridge dictionary rules.
MadCornishBiker

Pro

My argument is simple. There are no real contradictions in scripture.

There are reporting differences.

There are errors of translation

Most of all there are incorrect understandings of the scriptures involved.

I have been shown hundreds of so called contradictions by those who have tried to prove that scripture contradicts itself, but so far none have truly been contradictions, even if, on the surface they may have seemed to be.

That si where getting a true understanding of scripture comes not it's own, and is in fact one of the main ways that you kow that you do have the correct understanding.
Debate Round No. 1
yougotthehit666

Con

[My argument is simple. There are no real contradictions in
scripture.]

First question. Really, do you have any sources? Example,
Jesus is or isn’t the son of god/man? There are 38000 Christian denominations
in the world according to a theistic Christian today count. 15000 of these denominations
exist in the U.S. If there are no contradictions, then why is nearly every
aspect of Christianity splintered and divided by its own interpretation?

http://www.christianitytoday.com...
and as highlighted in

http://www.abovetopsecret.com...

[There are reporting
differences.]

Second question: Really, with 8 popular and mainstream
bibles in tow, you admit there are differences? What about inerrancy? There are
many Christian depictions that claim the word of god is inerrant, if you haven’t
convince the remaining 37999 denominations of your superiorities in both
translations and interpretations, then why should anybody else accept your
limited version?

[There are errors of
translation]

Third question: Really? It occurs to me that errors in translation
or interpretations are indeed contradictions in the bible that you claim don’t
exist! How do you explain this?

[Most of all there
are incorrect understandings of the scriptures involved.]

Forth question: Really? Well as long as you have universally
accepted sources that speak for all 38000 (plus) Christian denominations you
should have no problem wining this debate. Are you speaking for all 38000, and
how are you doing this?

[I have been shown
hundreds of so called contradictions by those who have tried to prove that
scripture contradicts itself, but so far none have truly been contradictions,
even if, on the surface they may have seemed to be.]

Fifth question: Really, so all a Christian has to do is make
the interpretation at an individual personal level to be correct according to
this last statement of yours. So, this means your bother in Jesus Christ, your brethren
Adolf Hitler was correct in his interpretations? What about all the other Christian
tyrants, are all of them correct too, or is it just you?

[That si where
getting a true understanding of scripture comes not it's own, and is in fact
one of the main ways that you kow that you do have the correct understanding].

Six question: Really? Well then if you are referring to
magic that can make one understand when no-one-else can, then I cannot wait to
see the evidence you are going to present to support this claim….but I am now
wondering why you haven’t already stopped me dead in my tracks and posted this
ace in the hole you claim to have? Your surely not claiming your education is
greater them mine are you? How is my education now void? Did the magic of Adolf
Hitler’s understanding work too?

I have plenty of room to post all the contradictions found
in the bible, but I think I will wait for the responses to the questions and fallacies
in reasoning Pro has already presented and thus not allow him to skate of to
the side in a diversionary fashion. Buy the way, I am not accepting bets on whether
he will address them in case anybody asks.

I close with a list terms, even though most would just be
considered common sense. I cannot wait for the response….. : )

Apologetics: showing that you feel sorry about having caused
someone problems or unhappiness:

Apologetics (from Greek O36;πολογ^3;α, "speaking in
defense") is the discipline of defending a position (often religious)
through the systematic use of information. Early Christian writers (c. 120–220)
who defended their faith against critics and recommended their faith to
outsiders were called apologists.[1

noun [treated as
singular or plural] reasoned arguments or writings in justification of
something, typically a theory or religious doctrine: apologetics for the slave
trade are quite out of order

Origin: mid-18th century: from apologetic

In short, used for recruitment and defense of the faith.

http://oxforddictionaries.com...

http://dictionary.cambridge.org...

Faith: high degree of trust or confidence in something or
someone. Belief without evidence to support this belief. 2 A strong belief in
the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof:
bereaved people who have shown supreme faith. In short, an irrational thought
process that has given no reason to have been believed in in the first place.

http://oxforddictionaries.com...

MadCornishBiker

Pro

Don't confuse those who claim to be Christian with those who truly are. Jesus was very clear on that point and warned us about them on a number of occasions, warnings that were repeated by the Apostles after him.

To be true followers of Christ demands unity of thought and worship. (Philippians 2:1-5, 1 Corinthians 10:11) Therefore those who dissent from true Christian teaching and unity are in fact those who come under the classification that Jesus describes at Matthew 7:21-23 as workers of lawlessness, therefore they are false prophets not true Christians.

My source is the bible, the source of the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles (Old Testament) as well as the description of their explanations of biblical teachings and examples of how they lived and worked by them (New Testament).. Jesus taught solely from scripture, as did all his followers, and all taught that Jesus was the son of God, God's first and only sole creation who then worked alongside his Father in the creation of all else, millennia before his life force was transferred to the perfect human child that Mary gave birth to. Jesus never once claimed equality with his Father and always proclaimed his subservience to Him. Like all of Jesus true followers after wards he was of one mid with his Father, imitating Him in every way.

There is no other source with authority from God.

Do not make the same mistake of confusing God (capital "G") with the use of the word god (lower case "g"), the bible uses the word god to apply to Christ, Angels, humans, even Satan and yet God is only ever used to denote "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 1:3, Ephesians 1:3 et al). In fact god (lower case "g") is used in scripture to denote simply someone or some being in authority whether human or angelic, good or evil.

All bibles of any translation can be used t prove exactly the same truths, despite man's attempts to change them, because the mistranslation cause apparent contradictions

Reporting differences are not contradictions, a contradiction is a statement which makes the exact opposite declaration to another scripture reporting differences do not do that they simply present another reporters viewpoint or writing style.

The other classic example of that (apart from Solomon's Stables) is a comparison of John chapters 20 and 21 with Luke 24. The two accounts are very different but are they truly contradictory?

No. John reports the part he knew about from first hand experiences, but does not report on the whole of that period, whereas Luke reports what he discovered through his researches, and covers in many less words, the period right up to Jesus ascension t Heaven. It is impossible to know if the two accounts actually describe the same events or if they somehow dovetail together to fill in parts the other has not reported.

Yes there are 38,000 denominations which claim to be Christian, but can they actually justify that claim? As I have already explained, no they cannot, they are merely "nominal Christians" Christian in name only not in reality or teachings.

Jesus was very clear that very few would find the true path, and most would choose an "easier" path, hence his illustration of the comparison between the narrow gate and cramped road to the broad and spacious road. Matthew 7:13,14.

Incidentally he also despaired of even finding the faith in the earth in this time of the end, and he wasn't wrong to be so concerned either since the world today is filled with nominal Christians but, as he prophecies few who truly are such. either. (Luke 18:8)

yes errors raise apparent contradictions, but that is my point, don't forget that my assertion is that there are no REAL contradiction. two scripture that appear to contradict because they have been mistranslated are not real contradictions, only apparent one. As I have said before that is how you know you have the true meaning, because when you have the "contradiction" vanishes.

No, I speak only for true Christianity not the 38,000 or so fake, counterfeit versions that merely call themselves Christian, or as Jesus said, teach and preach in his name but prove false to his teachings (Matthew 7:21-23 again). The problem you, and all others have is working out which one is the true one. There can only be one, and it has to fit definite criteria carefully outlined in scripture. It is not easy to do, Satan has made sure of that, but God has not allowed him to do so to the extent that it is impossible. If truth means enough to you, you will eventually find it, because God and Christ will make sure you do.

I prefer the bible's definition of faith (Hebrews 11:1) where Paul defines what is meant by faith, in a scriptural context, before describing those who God views as men of faith. "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." Such was the faith held by these men of faith, from Enoch to the present day.

I think I have just about covered your points. If not feel free to remind me of any I have missed. Why not try to produce a few contradictions? I will be happy to show you why they are not in fact contradictions.
Debate Round No. 2
yougotthehit666

Con

Pro concedes to Cons’ challenge, resolution solved in round
two. Pro’s claim was “In fact there is not one real contradiction in scripture”
and this debate fulcrum now pivots against itself.

Con QUOTES Pro:

“yes errors raise apparent contradictions, but that is my
point, don't forget that my assertion is that there are no REAL contradiction.”

Sorry Pro, but errors in an inerrant word is the epitome of
contraction especially when they come from an all-knowing all-powerful inerrant
god.

Error in an inerrant word of god means, god couldn’t get his
word out correctly. The inerrancy of god is eroded? This is contradiction when
there is no room for error, god errors by letting man error OR god errors on
his own. Either way, this is contradiction of and in the bible.

Pro’s diatribe goes on how all but his denominational
beliefs are irrelevant as they pertain to Christianity. I QUOTE Pro:

“I speak only for
true Christianity not the 38,000 or so fake, counterfeit versions that merely
call themselves Christian, or as Jesus said, teach and preach in his name but
prove false to his teachings (Matthew 7:21-23 again).”

Pro offers a bible verse which does not support his claim,
which does not discredit the remaining 37999 Christian denominations. The point
is this, Pro see’s the contradiction in his fellow Christians, and Pro see’s
the contradiction in the bible. However, Pro refuses to see the contradiction
in his god, so he makes up apologies for the bible and tries fruitlessly to convince
his audience of his piousness and superiority. Pro uses the bible to give creed
his claims by using verses of the bible to credit the bible.

It works like this, Superman is real, because the Daily
Planet says so, if this were not true, then why is there such a thing as Kryptonite
like the Daily Planet says there is?

Apologetics are a religious creation intended to defend
beliefs that cannot defend themselves. Apologetics are also a religious
creation intended to defend scriptures found in the bible that cannot defend
themselves as well. ‘IF’ the bible needed no defense, “’IF’ the bible wasn’t
contradictory and needed no defense, no apologetics would be necessary in the
first place and therefore never have existed. But apologetics do exist, they
ARE needed and there is not one place in the bible they are not used.

Pro refuses to answer question like> “is Jesus man, god,
god and man, son of man, son of god, son of god and man because no matter what
his choice, it is in direct conflict with one passage or another. The bible effectively
claims all of the options above as true, but it fails to denounce anyone belief
about Jesus over the other. The only answer that doesn’t contradict itself is
this> “the bible doesn’t make clear who Jesus was.” Now this answer is in
conflict with Pros’ position as a Christian and as he interprets the bible.

Pro offers a
distraction and I QUOTE> two scripture that appear to contradict because
they have been mistranslated are not real contradictions, only apparent one. As
I have said before that is how you know you have the true meaning, because when
you have the "contradiction" vanishes.”

Sorry Pro, I count 1127 acts and or justifications for evil
violent acts and only 224 mentions of love and some of these remain dubious
giving no congress to the claim of a Peaceful, loving Jesus’s preaching’s that
distinguish you from any other Christian. In fact, I find more bible scriptures
that supports your brethren Adolf Hitler and his claims than I do yours making
him more likely to be the true depiction of Christianity.

Sorry Pro, I don’t mean to sound like I am putting you down,
but the bible contradicts your beliefs that ‘it is a good book meant for good people’ and
if you really understood the bible, its origins, its history and why it was
created you would know this.

I could now move on and post enough bible contradictions to
fill the next dozen debates, but I don’t really need to because Pro’s position
cannot overcome what he has just posted concerning his own personal bible
contradictions. Pro admits to errors in the inerrant bible as the word of god,
as sourced by god….and this is a CONTRADICTION and I only need one to win this
debate.

The advantage was always mine, you see I am an atheist as I
see no evidence of the one true god’s (<this spelling is correct by the way, it is written as shown in the Jewish bible
prior to its being editing into the O/T). Pro is a Christian who denies at
least 37999 versions of a Christian god which makes him more of an atheist than
I am.

Glossary:

Apologetics (from Greek O36;πολογ^3;α, "speaking in

defense") is the discipline of defending a position
(often religious)

through the systematic use of information. Early Christian
writers (c. 120–220)

who defended their faith against critics and recommended
their faith to

outsiders were called apologists.[1

noun [treated as

singular or plural] reasoned arguments or writings in
justification of

something, typically a theory or religious doctrine:
apologetics for the slave

trade are quite out of order

Origin: mid-18th century: from apologetic

In short, used for recruitment and defense of the faith.

http://oxforddictionaries.com......

http://dictionary.cambridge.org......

Faith: high degree of trust or confidence in something or

someone. Belief without evidence to support this belief. 2 A
strong belief in

the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction
rather than proof:

bereaved people who have shown supreme faith. In short, an
irrational thought

process that has given no reason to have been believed in in
the first place.

http://oxforddictionaries.com......

Summary in one paragraph:

Eight contradicting bibles, an O/T cut down from 24 books to
4 in order to hide contradictions, the contradictions of who and what Jesus is,
the contradictions of 38000 different interpretations found in 38000 Christian
denominations and Pros position unable to move on from where we are at now, and
of course, the error pro admits to.

MadCornishBiker

Pro

Who says that the word of God is inerrant verbatim? No-one with any sense because even scripture itself doesn't claim that.

Why? Because God has had to allow for misinterpretations to take place,

He has had to allow for deliberate alteration additions and omissions which He knew would happen.

That is why scripture says, at Psalm 119:160 "The substance of your word is truth,
And every righteous judicial decision of yours is to time indefinite."

Notice that it says "the substance" not "every single word".

Such mistakes and alterations do not negate God's word, they simply condemn those who instigated them, if they did so deliberately. God's word is still valid, as we will see.

Mankind has, at Satan's instigation, produced many an apparent contradiction into scripture in order to try to discredit it.

God however has allowed for this in a number of ways. One is to make His word so completely integrated that if anything is added or taken away it changes the meaning of parts of the whole so much that they don't fit into the entire context.

That context has been carefully protected in order that those determined enough to find truth will be able to do so. That enables those determined enough, who feel truth and life are valuable enough, and are therefore prepared to take the time out of their daily lives and make the effort to find it will be able to do so.

OK the work is not easy, and it cannot be achieved overnight. The journey to truth means frequently having to change your ideas as you discover mistakes along the way, but believe me it is worth the effort, especial since God and Christ both promised help to do so should we try hard enough.

In one sense you are right. The scripture con refers to is presumably the verses found at Matthew 7:13,14,21-23. They do not condemn any particular group pr organisation.

What, however they do is to alert us to the need to, as scripture elsewhere tells us many times in many places. ensure that what we are taught is right, and only listen to those who teach what complies with scripture, the whole of scripture not just individual verses. In fact God's word even praises those who do diligently check up what they are being taught in scripture to makes sure thy are being taught correctly, and praises them over and above those who simply accept the teachings they are given. (Acts 17:10,110).

That is because God only wants those who are prepared to make that effort. He doesn't want those who always want to take the easy way (hence Matthew 7:13,14). The rewards for faithful service in this Satan ruled world are too great to give to just anyone, though the majority of humankind, the vast majority, will be given a second chance to achieve it after the resurrection and before the final test.

God is impeccably fair, and only wants to weed out those too lazy, or too full of self interest, to learn in this time of the end when He has made, through His son, the information so completely available to all who wish to find it. By the time this system comes to an end there will be no excuse left for those who have refused, for whatever reason, to listen and at least test out what they are being shown. That time is not now far away, so time is getting ever shorter.

Unfortunately no word promulgated after the death of the Apostles is valid, because as Revelation assures us, such false workers are to be allowed freedom to operate until the time when it really counts, this time of the end, when all are being given the chance to learn. (Revelation 22:11). Many many times scripture warns us that the faith will be taken over by what some scriptures call the "man of lawlessness" and others simple Apostate or false teachers. This was already happening in the days of the Apostles and is the reason behind the letters that have been included in scripture. It took complete hold after.

If I were to come up with a list of teachings that condemn the vast majority of so called Christians it would take all day, but the most important false teachings that are leading people away from god and which were accepted by the thoroughly Apostate church after the death of John, the last of the Apostles are:

The Trinity. A teaching which dishonours both God and Christ and appears nowhere in scripture. This has been the cause of more scriptural alterations than any other doctrine. It is a teaching which is remarkably easy to disprove, but one which many cling to despite the evidence, historical and scriptural, against it. One of the simplest proofs against it is 1 Peter 1:3, a thought echoed by other Apostles in other places but shows that Christ himself has a God whom he worships. It is also the cause of more apparent contradictions than any other single doctrine despite it's not being officially adopted by the church until late 4th century.

The doctrine of the Immortal Soul. Again an easy one to disprove but one many cling to because it gives them instant, if false, comfort in believing that their relatives are relaxing in heaven.

Both of these are teachings which the Apostles fought against continually but gained a hold some time after their deaths. Both have no unambiguous scriptural backing, whereas their opposites do.

Being an Atheist is no advantage. I know, I have spent a period of a few years being just that, and the only reason you cannot see the obvious evidence all around you is because you choose not to. I eventually had to admit my srror as I could defend it no longer. The only advantage being an Atheist give you is that you can refuse to look at the evidence claiming it to be a waste do time, however as Paul points out, so strong is the evidence against them that they are "inexcusable".

I do not ask any to merely accept my word, I ask them to be like the highly praised Beroeans, and check out for themselves what I say, thoroughly. If they do so thoroughly, and honestly, bias free, enough they will not be able to deny it any more than I was.
Debate Round No. 3
yougotthehit666

Con

The biker has left the building! He has now gone to preaching instead of addressing any of the contradictions that he himself has brought up. He seems like a nice enough of a guy, but like a broken record his whole defense or claim there is no contradiction hinges only on “his personal opinion.”
Like Superman, his god has fans and they prove Superman exist because in the end they all need rescuing by Superman. Cliffhangers notwithstanding, his god has revealed himself to bilker and now Biker has to save Christianity from itself. It seems no-one knows the truth like the biker does.
You would think that if a Christian god put all his eggs in one basket (so to speak), there would be a mass migration drawn to that religious camp the biker represents. Biker see’s that this as not being the case, but he has scriptures to explain this away as well.
Bible contradictions exists, and excuses are just excuses and Biker’s apologies will never make the contradictions he listed disappear. To offer an apology for god’s word is a conflict in itself.
Biker asks where it says that every word is inerrant, to which my response is Christians say it all the time. Biker believes the bible is the word of god. But if gods’ word errors, then these errors hold god in check as well.


This is all moot however, you see Biker has already admitted to the point I set out to show him…..there are contradictions in the bible. Excuses don’t make them disappear and the explanations he offers for them are even offensive to Christians (the majority of Christians in fact).

Biker avoids the bible contradiction I posted for him like a disease.
The bible states Jesus is god, it states that he isn’t god, that he is god and man, that he is only man, and that he is only god, it also states that he is the son of man, son of god and so on. There are 38 thousand Christian denominations all battle with contradictions of the bible, all of which have different interpretations and Bikers whole point is this…” If they would only succumb to my interpretation which is the truth, it would all work out.”

Biker brings up the false apostle ‘Paul’ as evidence for there being ‘not one real contradiction in in the bible.’
Paul, the one who admits in the bible he never met Jesus. Pauls’ accounts are that he had a dream and wrote them down some 70 years later.
Paul knows nothing of the teachings of Jesus, Paul only claims to know about his death, Paul offers no after thoughts and writes for the purpose of confirmation for the bible to come. Pauls’ depiction is of a story that did NOT happen on earth, Paul’s depiction describes an off world encounter concerning the story of Jesus. To use other words, Paul was a fake!
http://www.antisupernatural.com...

Paul gives the bible three of its contradictions (more if you wish to read on).
Here are a few more points for starters regarding the false Apostle Paul.

#1 Paul gives 3 totally conflicting conversion accounts in the book of Acts.

#2 In the 3rd conversion account Paul quotes Dionysus from a pagan play!

#3 Paul also in his 3rd conversion accounts LIES about why he got arrested and caused even more of a disturbance and a riot because of his lie!

#4 Paul gives a fourth conflicting account of his conversion in Galatians.

#5 Paul lies about what Hab 2:4 really says as I pointed out in the above post. Remember, people could not just go purchase a "Bible" back then to check up on Paul. The Hebrew Scriptures were penned on dried animal skins, and it took the around $50-75,000 dollars of today's value to get even 1 Tanakh totally made (in Scrolls)

#6 Paul lies in Galatians about the events of Acts 15 and say "We were only to remember the poor", he leaves out the other 4 things which were listed as starting points for Jews and Gentiles to come together.

#7 Paul teaches against the FOREVER AND EVERLASTING command of circumcision. No stranger could even partake of Passover unless they were circumcised! Abraham's servants who were not even "Jews" were circumcised! This alone shows Paul to be a false prophet!

#8 Jesus teaches us to love our enemies. Paul turns his enemies over to SATAN FOR TORTURE!

#9 Jesus says not to call your brother a fool, but Paul calls the ENTIRE REGION of Galatia fools because they have went after another "Gospel" of Peter, James, and John, whom Paul said were only "Seemed to be pillars".

#10 Jesus says we are saved by keeping the commandments! Paul on says the exact opposite!

#11 Jesus says the Torah is eternal, and that as his followers we are to DO and teach the least of the Torah. Anyone who breaks and does not do the least is the LEAST in the kingdom of heaven! Paul teaches against this! Paul says the Torah was "nailed to the cross".

#12 Paul says the Torah was to condemn people. YHWH says the Torah was given so that we human being could CHOOSE LIFE!

#13 Paul says the Torah caused him to sin! What filth and utter blasphemy! Paul says the Torah made sin stonger in him and wrought all manner of sin in him! I am curious how many of you christians read "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife" and had that make you sin? Paul also calls Moses and YHWH a liar during this section!

#14 Paul lies about what Moses said in Galatians. Moses told us NOT TO SPIRITUALIZE THE TORAH and to never whine that the Torah was hard to keep! Moses said it was easy and right here that we may DO IT. Paul leaves out the "Do it" part and replaces with faith! Paul also spiritualizes the entire Torah!

#15 Paul tells people to remain slaves because Jesus is coming back!

#16 Paul tells people to remain single and stay in the state you were found! YHWH tells us to marry and have kids!

#17 Paul directly broke Torah, which commands us to let a slave who has escaped settle anywhere he wants in the land. Torah says this slave can never be returned to his master and that the slave is to be left alone! PAUL RETURNS ONISEMUS TO HIS MASTER! How did Paul's "Freedom" work out for that guy?

#18 Paul breaks Torah and says "IF you do not work you do not eat" Torah commands us to leave the corners of our field untouched so that the orphan, the poor, the widows, and the illegal aliens/strangers can eat!

#19 Paul says that a woman is saved via Child bearing.

#20 Paul lies and says no man is righteous and takes 6 verses from all over the Tanakh out of context (where King David is contrasting the righteous with the wicked!) to attack the Romans who accused Paul of being a liar which Paul admits in Romans 3:7

I COULD GO ON FOR HOURS ABOUT PAUL. HE IS A FALSE PROPHET! AND REMEMBER! EVEN IF I AM WRONG ON EVERY POINT ACCEPT 1, THEN EVEN BY THAT 1 PAUL IS STILL A FALSE PROPHET! I ONLY HAVE TO BE CORRECT ONE TIME!


http://www.godlikeproductions.com...

Contradictions in the bible are many!
Yes Biker, I know there are apologies for everything in the bible (including for Paul). The trouble is that you have spent more time making up excuses for the contradictions of the bible than applied to studying the bible. Maybe another helpful clue might be that you should spend less time studying ‘from it’, and more time studying about it. Be warned, if you study the bible in this manor, you will no longer be able to believe in it….best wishes and good hunting.
MadCornishBiker

Pro

Actually I was beginning to wonder if you had left the building.

And no my claim s based n the simple fact that removing all the so-called contradictions from scripture, not by removing the scripture but by finding way in which they do not form contradictions actually works. That is not an opinion, personal or otherwise, it si a demonstrable fact.

I have not introduced one single contradiction. If I have failed to make myself clear enough for you to understand that, that is my failing and mine alone, however I am sure that if you think carefully enough about it you will find understandings of my posts that do not provide contradictions. Are you sure you are not setting for what you think I am saying rather than making sure of what I am really saying?

There is no one surprise to any who know scripture that there are many different denominations, after all, Jesus himself warned us that would happen when He said what he does at Matthew 7:21-23, nor should it be surprising that the majority are in one or other of them because Jesus also warned us about that at Matthew 7:13.14. In fact he gave us a great many warnings in his famous Sermon on the mount.

Yes I would agree, it would be tempting to think that, but that would not take into account that God's truth has a very powerful enemy, one who is very capable of manipulating the minds of men, and frequently does, hence Paul said, at 1 Corinthians 4:3,4 "If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through."

God has always been are of this. Because of the rules of justice He can only interfere so far unless people turn to Him for help, as He begs them to do.

For the sake of Justice, Satan has to be given a fair chance to prove his case. Part of that fair chance includes Satan being allowed to corrupt scripture to a certain level, so that only those interested enough n truth can find their way to the truth, hence god is looking for such ones (John 4:23,24).

However most people are either completely disinterested, being too involved in their own little lives, or too determined to pick holes that are not really there.

No,I have admitted no such thing. I have admitted that there are APPARENT contradictions, but since they are only apparent due to misunderstandings they are not actually contradictions. Change your understanding of teh same scriptures and those false contradictions disappear.

Put more simply, a misunderstanding is just that, nothing more,nothing less, it is not a contradiction, because in truth those scriptures do not contradict.

It is simply the same for a mistranslation. It is not a contradiction. It may make things look like they contradict, but appearances are often deceptive.

In both cases they do not stand up to sufficiently close examination, just as the best forged "20 note doesn't stand up to detailed examination.

I have not avoided them. True I have not covered everything you have said, bit much of it is self evidently specious so I have left it to those reading to understand that.

You say Paul gives three contradicting accounts of conversions,and yet you cannot specify where those accounts are so I cannot check them, is that because you know they don't really contradict.

Yes many denominations say that scripture is inerrant,and in itself it is, however errors have been introduced into many translations, sometimes deliberately. Then again many denominations declare that the 6 creative days are literal 24 hours days which they plainly are not.

If you think you can point me to anything you believe to be a contradiction, then by all means do.

No,I am not referring to magic. There is nothing magical about the operation of Holy Spirit,or Satan's spirit,any more than there is to radio waves. Just because we don't understand it, any more than we can have any understanding of what the spirit realm is doesn't make it magical.

Satan can blind us to the truth with his spirit, God can open our eyes with His, but will not interfere unless we ask Him to. unlike Satan He allows us a choice. Of course just asking Him to help doesn't mean He will, That will depend on why you are asking. Motivation is all. He will always, however, help those who are willing to become a part of His "New World" when it is brought into being.

There are no fallacies in my reasoning, though t is not possible to say the same about yours. The reasoning that a mistranslation actually represent a contradiction is fallacious for a start, two things only contradict if their actual meanings are equal and opposite. A misunderstanding is not the actual meaning of anything.

I would be happy for you to post any contradiction you find, you don't even have to post the whole thing, just chapter and verse will do, I am more than happy to look them up. It would be even better if you were to name the translation or translations you are reading them from.

Some would class me as an apologetic. I do not see myself as such I see nothing to apologise for in the errors and misunderstandings of others. I am simply sticking up for truth against all else.

I prefer the bible's definition of faith as found at Hebrew 11:1. That definition demands at least a foundation of solid evidence,even if it is only a basic foundation. I have seen more than a basic level of solid evidence and so have you if you would only recognise it as such. It is all around us, in the design of god's creation. after all, you cannot have design without a designer. To say that you can is a major contradiction.

Again, an error is just that an error, it is not a contradiction, it could only be a contradiction if it were not an error. You do appear to be using a very different understanding of what a contradiction is. A fake "20 note may look like one. yu may even be able to pass it off as one, but it isn't one. In the same way an error that appears to be a contradiction is not a contradiction in reality.

con"tra"dic"tion [kon-truh-dik-shuhn]
noun
1. the act of contradicting; gainsaying or opposition.
2. assertion of the contrary or opposite; denial.
3. a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.
4. direct opposition between things compared; inconsistency.
5. a contradictory act, fact, etc.

(Courtesy of dictionary.reference.com)
Debate Round No. 4
yougotthehit666

Con

Bikers entire
argument relies on I don’t see it that way so it must not be true. The bible is
indeed in conflict with itself even if the bible claims otherwise. Biker may
believe his personal interpretation is not in conflict with the bible, but he
cannot demonstrate it. Biker knows he is in conflict with the reaming 37999
Christian denominations, but since he is right and they are wrong there is no
conflict??????

In fact there is not one real contradiction in scripture
“But yes, there are errors.”

Contradiction: Something illogical: something that has
aspects that are illogical, or inconsistent with each other.

Opposing element: a statement, or the making of a statement,
that opposes or disagrees with somebody or something

Example: Jesus is god vs. Jesus is man.

Error: Wrong belief: a belief or opinion that is contrary to
fact or to established doctrine. The state or fact of being a mistake, or of
being inappropriate or unacceptable. A mathematical variation between the true
value of a mathematical quantity and a calculated or measured value.

Example: JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.

JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and
come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go
unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

1+1= less than one? Or more than one?

Example: Who was at
the Empty Tomb? Is it:

MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn
toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see
the sepulchre.

MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and
Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might
come and anoint him.

JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene
early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away
from the sepulchre.

1+2= Who was narrating this story, who was really there?
This sounds more like a “yeah what he said” meant to convince those being told
a story than an eyewitness account.

Biker posts: Jesus himself warned us that would happen when
He said….

Sorry Biker, but Jesus never said a thing as all accounts of
Jesus is hearsay. The contradiction you were taught to claim Jesus had claimed
anything is dishonest as Jesus and the apostles never published and because the
authors of scripture are ALL non-contemporaries of Jesus and apostles, you
cannot honestly claim Jesus told us anything.

http://www.infidels.org...

Biker posts: Some would class me as an apologetic. I do not
see myself as such I see nothing to apologise for in the errors and
misunderstandings of others. I am simply sticking up for truth against all
else.

Sorry Biker, you don’t have the authority, the permission or
even the ability to do so. Apologies, errors and misunderstandings are
contradictions. If the bible had not one real contradiction like you claim then
apologies, errors and misunderstandings and contradictions would not be needed.

Biker posts: [It is all around us, in the design of god's
creation. after all, you cannot have design without a designer. To say that you
can is a major contradiction. AND Again, an error is just that an error, it is
not a contradiction, it could only be a contradiction if it were not an error.]

Sorry Biker, but to believe everything is by design and
claiming there had tyo be an iteligence to that design and then qualify with
the buety of it proves there is a design and therefore a designer is not only
ERROR, it is conflict to everything know by man.

Your argument is based in the argument of ignorance as you
have no valid support to believe there is a creator because there is no evidence
of a creator to begin with.

Examples provided by
http://www.infidels.org...

Argumentum ad ignorantiam (Argument from ignorance)

Argumentum ad ignorantiam means "argument from
ignorance." The fallacy occurs when it's argued that something must be
true, simply because it hasn't been proved false. Or, equivalently, when it is
argued that something must be false because it hasn't been proved true.

(Note that this isn't the same as assuming something is false
until it has been proved true. In law, for example, you're generally assumed
innocent until proven guilty.)

Here are a couple of examples:

"Of course the Bible is true. Nobody can prove
otherwise."

"Of course telepathy and other psychic phenomena do not
exist. Nobody has shown any proof that they are real."

In scientific investigation, if it is known that an event
would produce certain evidence of its having occurred, the absence of such
evidence can validly be used to infer that the event didn't occur. It does not
prove it with certainty, however.

For example:

"A flood as described in the Bible would require an
enormous volume of water to be present on the earth. The earth doesn't have a
tenth as much water, even if we count that which is frozen into ice at the
poles. Therefore no such flood occurred."

It is, of course, possible that some unknown process
occurred to remove the water. Good science would then demand a plausible
testable theory to explain how it vanished.

Of course, the history of science is full of logically valid
bad predictions. In 1893, the Royal Academy of Science were convinced by Sir
Robert Ball that communication with the planet Mars was a physical
impossibility, because it would require a flag as large as Ireland, which it
would be impossible to wave. [Fortean Times Number 82.]

See also Shifting the Burden of Proof.

Biker is not making an argument here, like when he insists
there are no contradictions in the bible. He makes his claims from ignorance
which is based in a conditional statement. Conditional statements ask the
reader to believe in one fallacy in order to establish another. If A is valid,
then A plus B must be true because if A then B. This is also known as begging
the question with only slight differences.

Petitio principii (Begging the question)

This fallacy occurs when the premises are at least as
questionable as the conclusion reached. Typically the premises of the argument
implicitly assume the result which the argument purports to prove, in a
disguised form. For example:

"The Bible is the word of God. The word of God cannot
be doubted, and the Bible states that the Bible is true. Therefore the Bible
must be true.

con"tra"dic"tion [kon-truh-dik-shuhn]

noun

1. the act
of contradicting; gainsaying or opposition.

(A) I am god, no I am not…..

2. assertion of the
contrary or opposite; denial.

(B) Who am I? Who do you say I am?

3. a statement or
proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically
incongruous.

(C) Son of god, son of man, I came to save, I came to
destroy.

4. direct opposition
between things compared; inconsistency.

(D) I came to be put to death, I caused myself to be put to
death….or suicide.

5. a contradictory
act, fact, etc.

(E) Jesus had no contemporaries that wrote about him.
Everything that was written was done so in a hearsay fashion even though
Christians will almost always claim that popular doctrine claims otherwise.

(Courtesy of
dictionary.reference.com and the yougothehit666)

Biker, I use to belong too many of the Christian
denominations you see as contradiction. I agree they are in contradiction to
themselves and to you. But I also understand that you have only convinced yorself
what makes up a contradiction. The bible storyline contradicts itself, doctrine
contradicts itself, the bible contradicts itself, the anonymous apostles
contradict themselves and most importantly and most likely the least popular
amongst Christians is that the bible contradicts common sense.

Bikers parting thought: “Because of the rules of justice He
can only interfere so far unless people turn to Him for help, as He begs them
to do.”

666 responds: Really, because a god that begs for anything
he didn’t already create is no god…..and this is the greatest bible
contradiction of all.

MadCornishBiker

Pro

I think part of your problem with this debate has always been not really understanding either the meaning of contradiction, or what the debate really is.

I have never stated that there were not apparent contradictions in scripture, simply that anything that appears to be a contradiction does so simply because it is misunderstood, misinterpreted or either a deliberate or unintentional error.

Nothing you have produced has contradicted that fact.

Neither have I said that all but one Denomination which claims to be Christian is a contradiction, though it is true that what they teach contradicts some aspect of scripture or other. To be false teachers rather than Christian (Matthew 7:21-23) they only need to be teaching one error, and to be unwiling to change it when sufficient scriptural evidence is produced.

So my summing up is really as simple as that. You have demonstrated that there are passages in some translations of scripture, or parts of scripture that appear to contradict others, however you have not been able to prove that they truly are contradictions when properly understood, therefore you have not proved that they are real contradictions.

I never truly belonged to any denomination in that I was never Confirmed. I was brought up in a CoE family and for a while attended a Baptist Sunday School, and yes the confusion and contradiction is what deterred me from looking closer than I did. I have also studied many denominations, but as soon as I found a dogmatically false view of scripture I looked no further.

However I have no problem in understanding what is a contradiction and what is not, and to be a contradiction it has to be real.

Many of the teachings are contradictory, I agree, but it is their understanding, or mistranslation of the relevant scripture which is contradictory, not the scripture itself.

As to your final comment, there is no contradiction there.

God created man with free will and all he needed to use that free will wisely, however Adam failed to do so.

All God begs for is for us to use our free will wisely, something He, however briefly, had but does not have at present and, for our sakes, wants again.
Debate Round No. 5
66 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MadCornishBiker 3 years ago
MadCornishBiker
He hasn't found the right one yet though.
Posted by younes 3 years ago
younes
ahmed deedat have seen 3 religions in his life & Yusuf Estes was Christian priest
so i can absorb what they said about Christianity and Islam
& the others thing will back to u & see u in another Debates
Posted by MadCornishBiker 3 years ago
MadCornishBiker
No, it won't, because there is nothing to understand Mohammed is a false prophet and there were none to come after Jesus, I have no desire to understand how they twisted scripture to mean that. It simply doesn't, anywhere. Simple as.

Apart from all else, if there had been another prophet to come after Jesus, as God's son he would have told us.
Posted by younes 3 years ago
younes
If you see the video clip that I sent to you u will understand
i can't make u understand i just give a way to make ur self understand
Posted by MadCornishBiker 3 years ago
MadCornishBiker
You hadn't given me the answer until now.

Song of Solomon 5:16 "His palate is sheer sweetness, and everything about him is altogether desirable.+ This is my dear one, and this is my boy companion, O daughters of Jerusalem."

That is actually talking abut Jesus prophetically, not any later prophet to apply that to Mohammed is to misuse it. Apart from which there was nothing sweet about Mohammed, he broke so many of God's laws and principles he would not be worthy of the name Prophet.
Posted by younes 3 years ago
younes
song of solomon 5 16
Posted by younes 3 years ago
younes
sry @MadCornishBiker i give u what u need & i give u the answer
& that all what i know now if u have another question i'm here
Posted by MadCornishBiker 3 years ago
MadCornishBiker
If you can't tell me what the answer is I have t assume that you don;t know it, which is hardly surprising since there isn't one.

I have every intention of following Christ's command to shun all false prophets and Islam is one, as was Mohammed.

If you know the answer, tell me the Chapter and verse, if not ...................
Posted by younes 3 years ago
younes
@ MadCornishBiker

in this video after 7 min u find the answer
in 7 min ahmed deedat will start talking about what u ask me in ur last comment
Posted by MadCornishBiker 3 years ago
MadCornishBiker
@younes.

Where in scripture do you find that, because I certainly don't know of such a promise.

I know Jesus warned that many false prophets would arise after him

I also know he promised a helper, which in fact turns out to be Holy Spirit.

I know of no other prophet promised, so chapter and verse please?

I have to admit I am not interested in any man's interpretation of scripture, so again, I simply wish to see it for myself so that I can decide, chapter and verse please.

I long ago gave up any hope of finding important truths in the Q'ran.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by JonMilne 3 years ago
JonMilne
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: This is spectacularly easy. Pro was guilty of periods of where he didn't even address the argument, including spending one round in particular just engaging in a sermon, so this gives conduct to Con. Con also explicitly used the Bible and managed to constantly counter Pro's claims about no real contradictions existing when, as a matter of fact, there very clearly IS. Pro also used No True Scotsman and a really tortured apologetic on why he believes no contradictions exist, in contrast to the really simple logic Con used. Sources and Argument therefore also go to Con for this reason.
Vote Placed by Skeptikitten 3 years ago
Skeptikitten
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Almost gave conduct to Pro for snarkiness on Con's part, but preaching by Pro made it even. Con cited a list of several contradictions in Scripture that Pro did not even deign to address. Pro's entire argument seemed to be a combination of the No True Scotsman fallacy and the claim that contradictions aren't really there because he says so. He fails to provide any non-fallacious evidence that apparent contradictions aren't really contradictions at all. Pro clearly had the BoP, but really just argued that contradictions were just a failure to understand or even "Satan" changing it on purpose, without backing up those statements. Con did outline in the resolution that anything "magic" based was to be supported by evidence- since by definition the accomplishing of a task by supernatural means is magic, many of Pro's arguments fall under those auspices.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 3 years ago
MassiveDump
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources to Pro for using the Bible, which, surprisingly was never used by Con even though he instigated a biblical debate. Pro meets his burden of proof because Con never presented an actual contradiction in scripture, which wins pro arguments. And Con was being a jerk with his sarcasm, so Conduct for pro as well. Another point added to help counter the votebomb, since the counter was only partially made without reason.
Vote Placed by Mrparkers 3 years ago
Mrparkers
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Reasons for voting decision: Con won although he didn't do a very good job proving his case. Pro failed to differentiate his version of Christianity from all of the other "wrong" versions of it, which is the main reason I give Con the vote. However, Con was sarcastic and berating for the vast majority of the debate, so I give conduct to Pro.
Vote Placed by Fanboy 3 years ago
Fanboy
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
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: I feel like this is all I can judge on because while I believed that MadCornish was right, that may have been because of preordained disposition. MadCornish used the Bible to show no contradictions existed within the Bible. youg tried to show that contradictions by showing that logically there should be contradictions. However, he never emphasized why this was important nor why we should believe because of the Bible external issues there should be internal issues as well.
Vote Placed by Chase200mph 3 years ago
Chase200mph
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: MadCornishBiker sited contradiction and failed to explain it away, his only resource is the bible and I talked with him to make sure of this before voting.
Vote Placed by Gaurdian_Rock 3 years ago
Gaurdian_Rock
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering VB
Vote Placed by yourgodlaysdeadatmyfeet 3 years ago
yourgodlaysdeadatmyfeet
yougotthehit666MadCornishBikerTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Reasons for voting decision: Sources to Pro for using the Bible, which, surprisingly was overcome without con having had to return to the bible because pro failed to defend the contradictions he himself provided. And Con was being a factual with his sarcasm seemed to be direct at the many bibles, so Conduct for con as well because the bible itself offers so many conduct contradictions. Pros spelling was off and his only valid source disproved what he was arguing against. Pro?s argument was cirrus of circular reasoning and only another Christian could find favor it (if he failed to have read most of it that is). The bible is not a source that can confirm itself let alone redefine semantics which is where Pro?s argument was hiding. But Pro is new to this and I took conduct from him as he was insulting to the greater part of Christendom.