The Instigator
mynameisnowtamia
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Superboy777
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

The Bible Cannot Be Trusted

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/2/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,390 times Debate No: 13870
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

mynameisnowtamia

Pro

The Bible cannot be trusted and nor can the Torah, the Quaran, and other holy books for these reasons:
1 Before these holy texts were written, they were preserved orally then the teachings were written down. From the time God first told us these things and the books we have today must be tremendously different.
2 Archeology, anthropology, and other investigations that there are many parallels in religions such as the teachings of the Christians' Jesus and the Buddhists' Buddha.
3 Other than knowing God exists and the fact that we are souls that can go to heaven, the Bible, Quaran, and Torah are just stories of people and rules that the writers thought will make you a good person. This is common knowledge that you can learn yourself throughout life rather than read form a book.
Superboy777

Con

I first ask my opponent to define the resolution, but as they have not done this, I am forced to work with what they have. After reading my opponents argument, I offer my rebuttals. My opponent claims that the things that god told us were given orally and passed from generation to generation. While I am not sure where they got this piece of evidence it is in my understanding that the bible (Christian version) was written by numerous authors that saw a divine path from god.
http://www.allabouttruth.org...
These people did not hear about god's stories from other people but were instead inspired to write a part of the bible after they were divinely inspired.

As to my opponent's second point, from what I can gather is that there are many similarities between Jesus and Buddha. I do not find how this has any relevance to the debate. The topic that my opponent made is that the bible is not to be trusted and while I found the topic very biased, I will do my best to defend the bible's teachings. Just because religious works are similar does not mean that they are not to be trusted. Or is my opponent suggesting that either Jesus or Buddha is completely evil and anything like them would be something not to be trusted?

Finally, in regards to my opponents third and last point, they seem to be agreeing with the fact that there are some parts of the bible that can be trusted. "Other than knowing God exists and the fact that we are souls that can go to heaven,". While I am not saying I agree with that sentence, my opponent did make that statement. Anyways, my opponent then goes on to say that many things in the bible are common knowledge. Now I ask my opponent, is common knowledge not to be trusted? Is our common sense not to be trusted? All and all, I think my opponent accidentally strayed too far from the resolution and made the point that the bible is something that provides common knowledge that can be learned elsewhere. However, just because the knowledge that my opponent agrees will make one a good person and is common knowledge can be learned elsewhere, where does he/she get the impression that the bible cannot be trusted because of that? I believe that my opponent made a logical error, but it happens to all of us.

In conclusion, in support of the con side, my opponent agrees that much of the stuff in the bible is common sense although it may be learned elsewhere. Is common sense not to be trusted? In my opinion, common sense is what is so absolutely to be trusted that it has even been deemed COMMON sense.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
mynameisnowtamia

Pro

To my opponent, thank you for accepting my challenge.
My opponent is right in the fact that the Bible along with other holy texts had many authors. These authors were "inspired" by God or in other words wrote their opinions. Why did people believe them? The same reason the first Muslims believed Muhhamed when he claimed to see Gabriel in a cave. If you do not believe, you are threatened with the risk of eternity in hell after death. (http://www.religionfacts.com...), a very convincing aspect.
There are many verses of the bible that Christians now contradict with their beliefs:
Leviticus 18:22 You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act.
The reasons behind this belief are logical. For one, God is said to command humankind to "be fruitful and multiply" in Genesis but babies can only created by males and females in the human species. Therefore, homosexuality defeats the purpose of two sexes.
Many, however, have swayed away from that belief (http://www.religioustolerance.org...). If we, again, think about it logically...maybe homosexuals are here for a reason. All over the world we have problems with over-population (http://mwillett.org...) but if we continue to "go forth and multiply" our problem will become even more serious.
I must point this out if you have not noticed: I have not once referred to the Bible or other Holy Texts as evil and I do not believe they are. Many of their teachings, however, do not apply to today's world such as Genesis 3:16 where God supposedly makes women inferior to men.
The ten commandments are simply, as I said before, common sense and I find no fault in them but say that other than those commandments and having faith in God holy texts do not have much to offer.
Superboy777

Con

After reading my opponent's point I gather that she has changed her opinion on the bible. If one looks at round one, she says that the bible was preserved orally and eventually written down, so they cannot be trusted. In Round 2, she agrees with me that the bible was written by authors inspired by "God" and not passed down orally. To my opponent's second point from what I can gather is that homosexuality is condemned in the bible but never was there a statement stating that homosexuality will never happen. On the other hand, the bible even mentions homosexuality because it had considered it but decided against it. That is choice. however, I must ask my opponent how the bible cannot be trusted as a result of this? I must ask her to look at the resolution again as she is getting off topic. If the bible cannot be trusted meaning that it is false then should we "You must have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is an amazing act."? I am not sure of my opponent's beliefs but I for one am against that. My opponent is at the pro side but consistently agrees with me that at least parts of the bible are right and just common sense. If she wants to have a debate on the bible having little to offer that is fine but the resolution is the bible cannot be trusted and she is making irrelevant points that only contribute to mine. My opponent has the burden of proof as pro and has failed to offer a point in which I have not refuted.

The bible, as my opponent agrees is it is filled of common sense and my opponent can find no fault in them. I agree. So, I guess my opponent agrees that the bible can be trusted instead of what she previously believed.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
mynameisnowtamia

Pro

As my opponent has pointed out, I have been unclear in my debate. I apologize.
For one, let me say that my opinion towards the bible has not changed. The Bible makes delivers it's message through stories in which the meanings are already interpreted for us. The bible was created by many authors but that does not mean those authors were changers of the original words of the bible along the way of its many years of oral and written preservation.
The words of the Bible did not come from God but form those who claimed to be "inspired" by God therefore the way people were created along with other teachings of the bible may not only be incorrect but purely opinion. In writing their opinion, they may include points that may be common sense or maybe even good advice, but the bad outweighs the good. It is for these reasons that the bible cannot be trusted. I make what my opponent calls "irrelevant points" because I cannot address the bible without addressing the beliefs that people hold because of it.
For the record, I did not say homosexuality is wrong or not but that it is much more tolerated in the present that it has been in the past.
Superboy777

Con

My opponent has failed to provide any real examples where the bible cannot be trusted and is false. However, she has given quite a couple agreeing with the con side that the bible can be trusted. I as the con side have absolutely nothing to refute simply because my opponent merely says that the bad outweighs the good and does not provide any real examples. I however believe that the good outweighs the bad and if one reads most of the points that my opponent has stated, she has agreed with me on this quite a few times.

Here are my examples for correct parts of the bible.

The 10 commandments (my opponent agrees that this is right)
Common sense is included in examples (quote from opponent "The ten commandments are simply, as I said before, common sense and I find no fault in them but say that other than those commandments and having faith in God holy texts do not have much to offer.")

My opponent also makes the rather irrelevant statement that the bible has little to offer. However, the resolution that my opponent made is actually whether the bible is to be trusted or not. She does not give any examples other than the homosexuality one that I have refuted and is currently unanswered. My opponent agrees with me that the bible has many parts that are common sense "Other than knowing God exists and the fact that we are souls that can go to heaven, the Bible, Quaran, and Torah are just stories of people and rules that the writers thought will make you a good person. This is common knowledge that you can learn yourself throughout life rather than read form a book."

Also, she admits later that common sense is correct and to be trusted. The resolution is saying that the bible is not to be trusted and she admits that it can be trusted. She provides no examples that the bible cannot be trusted but instead has given me examples in which the bible can be trusted. I ask my opponent to stick with a point that is actually beneficial to her argument. Finally I ask her to give points so I have a chance to refute them.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
mynameisnowtamia

Pro

mynameisnowtamia forfeited this round.
Superboy777

Con

I am somewhat annoyed that my opponent has not finished this debate as she has only one argument left to post. I feel that there is nothing for me to say other than the fact that my opponent has completely failed to provide any solid evidence or even a point that the bible cannot be trusted. She has not refuted any of my points but has only denied them. Her points once refuted shifted to other points that only helped my side. Thus, I urge a con vote.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
Drop round in decent debate = auto loss.
Posted by Superboy777 6 years ago
Superboy777
not helpful

!!!
douchbag
Posted by Charr 6 years ago
Charr
>.> so, anyway, my point is, you can't disprove this :B

So, this in essence, is the bible. BS from several different delusional authors. The only reason the bible is accepted is that it was a cult religion that promised eternal afterlife >.>

NOT TRUSTWORTHY AT ALL.
Posted by Charr 6 years ago
Charr
OLOL the fact that there are multiple authors of the bible who hear divine voices does not add to the sincerity of the bible at all. In fact, here let me contribute my own two cents. I have a confession to make, I am a reincarnation of Jesus, and I can here words from god and walk on water and turn it into wine =w=.

Frank will grow old, alone, and poor, and will work in a mcdonalds. I know this because I am divine and I can hear from god :U
Posted by mynameisnowtamia 6 years ago
mynameisnowtamia
Depends on your view of extreme
Posted by Superboy777 6 years ago
Superboy777
please define resolution
Posted by Superboy777 6 years ago
Superboy777
kinda extreme
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
mynameisnowtamiaSuperboy777Tied
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