The Instigator
tala00131
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
donald.keller
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points

Is the bible the word of God?

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 3 votes the winner is...
donald.keller
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/23/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 978 times Debate No: 36962
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

tala00131

Con

I will give my opponent the head start, he may start whenever he feels like it.
donald.keller

Pro

Is the Bible the Word of God?

1 - Conservation of Text:

Many studies that compare the newer text of the Bible to the older text have often found that, while variations exist in the Bible, the overall text follows the oldest manuscripts we have.(1) The largest variations are found in the form of:

Manuscript #1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Manuscript #2: In the beginning, God created the earth and the heavens.

No true variations in meaning or purpose are apparent in the texts.

This applies to even comparisons to text over a 1000 years old. An example is the Codex Sinaiticus, which is 1,600 years old, and is almost completely identical to modern translations.(2)

[1] http://irr.org...
[2] http://codexsinaiticus.org...
[]

2 - Impossible Text

The Bible has several texts that should not exist. These impossible texts practice knowledge unknown to men at the time of their writing.

A large example is a reference to Springs in the Ocean...

""Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?"
Job 38:16(3)

The "springs of the Ocean" are referring to geothermal vents, which exist far to deep in the ocean for anyone around the writing of the oldest text of Job. The Bible making reference to geothermal vents is evidence of a higher intelligence of anyone at that time writing. No one could have written about them because no one could have explored and learned of such vents without a good submarine.

In fact, geothermal vents were a notable discovery made in 1960, after a few prior speculations were made about them(4)

[3] http://www.biblegateway.com...
[4] http://www.icr.org...
[]

- Contradictions in the Text

People love to bringing up contradictions in the text. The problem with them is that they are either misread interpretations, or aren't contradictions.

Most of these are found in a misunderstanding of the two types of biblical text...
Descriptive and Prescriptive.

Descriptive Text is writings based on personal viewpoint or representing the writer.

Prescriptive Text is writing that are based on God's viewpoint or written to represent what God wanted written.

An example of Descriptive Text follows:
1 By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept
when we remembered Zion.
2 There on the poplars
we hung our harps,
3 for there our captors asked us for songs,
our tormentors demanded songs of joy;
they said, "Sing us one of the songs of Zion!"
4 How can we sing the songs of the Lord
while in a foreign land?
5 If I forget you, Jerusalem,
may my right hand forget its skill.
6 May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth
if I do not remember you,
if I do not consider Jerusalem
my highest joy.
7 Remember, Lord, what the Edomites did
on the day Jerusalem fell.
"Tear it down," they cried,
"tear it down to its foundations!"
8 Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction,
happy is the one who repays you
according to what you have done to us.
9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants
and dashes them against the rocks.
Psalm 137:1-9(5)

This text supports anger, revenge and hatred... It does not represent God's viewpoint, but the viewpoint of the Jews. It represents their sadness and anger, as opposed to represent how God feels. Ruth is a book written completely in Descriptive Text.

An example of Prescriptive Text follows:
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.
32 Although they know God"s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Romans 1:28-32(6)

While, like all books of the Bible, this text is written by a man, it represents the viewpoint of God himself, and is his text.

Many people talk of contradiction in the text, but near always manage to bring up examples where one bit of text is Prescriptive and the other is Descriptive.

There are slight flaws in Descriptive Text, because those texts are human in writing, and flawed like humans are.
This is no recorded flaw or contradiction found in Prescriptive Text,which represents the viewpoint of God

Between the Old and New Testament, no contradiction can be found. Many people point out differences, but every difference found so far has only represented a misunderstanding of the Relationship between the two texts.

An example is in discussing the idea that in the Old Testament says you must stone people for being Gay, but than the New Testament says you can not because you are imperfect too. The misinterpretation is in the Contract we have with God. After Jesus died, his blood rewrote the Contract... In the Old Testament, all sin that was greater than normal must be punished by death, but Jesus new contract allowed everyone, even the Gentiles, to be forgiven.

A good way to show this is with Cake
Old Testament = Making the Cake from scratch. You need to mix everything yourself, and use this ingredient and that ingredient.
New Testament = Making a Cake with Cake Mix. Same cake, different instructions.

[5] http://www.biblegateway.com...
[6] http://www.biblegateway.com...

=======================================================================

I pass it on to Con.
Debate Round No. 1
tala00131

Con

What I have gotten from pro's argument; is that there are some things that are in the bible that are true. He claims that there are things written in there that shouldn't have been known at the time. This seems to be a poor argument, because, just because one verse is true, doesn't make all verses true. If I write a book, and in one passage, I say that the earth is round, that is true. In another passage I say that wizards exist, does the passage that says the earth is round add any credibility to the wizard passage? Another problem with pro's argument is, there are also things in the bible that are false. For example, there was never an original two people that populated the world.
donald.keller

Pro

- Rebuttals

What I have gotten from pro's argument; is that there are some things that are in the bible that are true. He claims that there are things written in there that shouldn't have been known at the time. This seems to be a poor argument, because, just because one verse is true, doesn't make all verses true.

Con makes a poor case here. He ignores the premise of my argument. I therefore challenge him to explain how the writer of the texts knew of the Springs of the Sea?

The book of Job is considered to be the oldest book in the Bible. Some believe that, from a biblical perspective, the book was written before the Great Flood.(1) Since it is his accusation that a book written so long ago could mention something human's hadn't even discovered until 60 years ago, it is his BOP to prove that the writer could have known of such a thing.

Until he can prove the absurd accusation that someone from before the writing of Genesis could Logically have known of geothermal vents, we must conclude that anyone knowing of such vents, 1000's of mile below the sea, would have been impossible, and therefore be evidence backing my stance in the Resolution.

[1] http://www.ancient-hebrew.org...
[]

Con did make one claim I'd like to point out.

is that there are some things that are in the bible that are true.

I'll shall explain several thing to Con...

- Hittites

Have you ever heard of the Hittites? A massive empire that rivaled Egypt for much of it's reign. The two were equal for the duriation of their existance. How large were the Hittites?



The Hittites are the Blue kingdom to the North.
They were thought to be a Biblical myth for thousands of years, often called the Children of Heth. Until the 20th Century, they were simply fiction. The Old Testament was literally the only text that ever documented them until their discovery.(2)

They weren't the only Myth one might find in the Bible proven true after time... There was also...

-Troy
-Hanging Gardens
-Herod, the Great
-Noah's Ark
-The Great Flood
-Ebla Tablets(3)

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://www.prevailmagazine.org...;

- Historical Accuracy

How historically accurate is the Bible?

The Bible is actually considered a template for most Historians. Using the Bible, they have been able to locate entire cities, kingdoms, and other ancient locations and accurate names and dates.
Using the texts of the Old Testament, they accurately reconstructed the blueprints to the Temple of Soloman, as seen below.


The texts have also accurately determined the early movements of mankind. The early texts accurately tell of the movements of men after the flood, or for scientists, after men left Africa.

It also accurately despicted the founding of multiple languages. Scientists now believe that languages came from around the Middle East, from one language. A few even believe the Tower of Babel was in fact involved. This is amazing accuracy for a religion that is only half as old as the oldest religion (that being Hundi.)

Few Historians are amazed anymore that as the years go by, Biblical Fiction stops being so fictional.

The Bible has amazed people by the excessive accuracy of places, names, and dates listed.(4)

[4] http://www.icr.org...
[]

- Continued Rebuttal:

Another problem with pro's argument is, there are also things in the bible that are false. For example, there was never an original two people that populated the world.

This is a blank argument...

Any falsehood located in the Bible is either a misrepresentation or misinterpretation of the Bible. The 2 most common flaws found in such accusations are listed below:

: Confusing Descriptive Text with Prescriptive text.
: Confusing Literal Text with Symbolic Text

These are often more than not the cause of any flaw or error people 'believe' they have located in the Bible.

Since Con hasn't provided any examples, I have nothing else left to arguet against.

Con has dropped to following Arguments:

-Conservation of Text

Con never argued with my actual examples and failed to account for my Claims and Arguments. Con only gave blank arguments. His Aguments are completely empty and unwarranted and hold no value in this Debate.
Debate Round No. 2
tala00131

Con

tala00131 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
Wait.... So calling it whatever they called it, that was translated into spring, is an explanation of a cause? Not so much... It's just naming something, and you don't need to know anything about something to put a name to it. Unless the bible says more about it that wasn't included in your argument?
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
I think he hit the nail on the head actually.

You are taking the passage and assuming because it has the word "deep" and "spring" in it, it is automatically a reference to geothermal vaults. Which people of that time would not have had knowledge too.

There is a process called Hermeneutics that people use to study the bible and which is the only way to study it if you are a christian. It teaches you read the passage in the context for which the author intended it to bed read.

EX: Pauls letters to the churches were his critiques and direct remarks to the churches in that time, not to be taken literally today.

Take this into consideration when reading this passage. What is "deep" to them. It would obviously bear a different meaning than what we think as deep.

There are 2 conclusions you can draw from this.

One : you are committing a Gap argument, taking a irrelevant verse and applying it within the context of how we perceive it. Essentially because we do not know what the verse was referring to, using it to support a claim that you want it to support. Often people do the same thing with God himself.

Two: Your are committing a fallacy yourself. You are immediately assuming this is a "prophecy" because you are applying the verse in the context in which you think it should be interpreted rather than what the author could have meant for it originally. We have no idea what that verse was referring to.

Another verse you could take of out context would be something like this

" Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11; 14).

The first verse saying this

"For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar"

Some people consider this a prophecy or something that people should not know. Do you know how illogical that sounds? People may not have known the specifics, but they could easily be aware that if you are lacking blood, you would die. Thus life is in b
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
Such stupidity.

Appeal to Common Sense Fallacy.

And you know what decision. Obviously not where the boiling is coming from, but what is causing it. You know that. Stop depending on stupidity to support your claim.
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
And exactly what decision are we analyzing here? That whatever was causing the boiling was underwater? Because that's simple common sense. Something's making the water boil, but nothing on the surface is doing it.... What other option is there? Not really a decision if there's only one option.
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
The issue isn't seeing... It's interpreting. No one from centuries ago would have know what the boiling was.

No one knew what a Geothermal Vent was until the 1950's+, if you actually paid attention to the argument. We didn't know about them for thousands of years and then decided to call it a discovery only 60 years back.

My fallacy applies quite nicely.
Historian's fallacy " occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
I love it when people throw around fallacies when they don't apply. They could see boiling water just as well as we can.
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
Mrsatan... You understand that *you* or a *geologist* would know of those being geothermal vents. People 4,000+ years ago wouldn't. Simple case of historian's fallacy
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
Assuming the "springs of the sea" is actually a reference to geothermal vents, there's no need for divine knowledge. With a low tide, the boil from freshwater springs can be easily seen on the waters surface.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
tala00131donald.kellerTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
tala00131donald.kellerTied
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: CONDUCT: Forfeit. ARGUMENT: I don't need to agree with pro, yet his argument was superior in every way. Con was steamrolled, his case about wizards added nothing, and he disagreed with evolution (insisted that there was no first two members of the species; leaving his arguments where?). Summed quite simply with this quote "Con never argued with my actual examples and failed to account for my Claims and Arguments. Con only gave blank arguments. His Aguments are completely empty and unwarranted and hold no value in this Debate."
Vote Placed by countzander 3 years ago
countzander
tala00131donald.kellerTied
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:34 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't know whether the Bible is the word of God, and neither side's arguments were sufficiently convincing. Pro's arguments were well thought out, but as Con pointed out, even if there are some precocious things in the Bible, that does not mean the entire book is true. It may be that only parts of the Bible are divinely inspired or that the ancients were ambiguous enough to allow open interpretation. The burden of proof actually rested upon Con since he made the assertion, but Con provided no argument to back up his assertion. The only conclusion is that the Bible may or may not be the word of God. Con forfeited the argument, so Pro receives points for conduct. Pro also used better sources.