The Instigator
PapaNolan
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Valar_Dohaeris
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points

The Bible Is True

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 5 votes the winner is...
Valar_Dohaeris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 807 times Debate No: 68027
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (5)

 

PapaNolan

Con

The Christian Bible is the topic here.True-real or genuine.(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)First Round) AcceptanceSecond Round) OpinionsThird Round) Closing StatementPro has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Bible is true, and Con has to prove that the Bible ismost likely fake.
Debate Round No. 1
PapaNolan

Con

How Come Praying Cannot Work?

In the Bible it says that God will give you whatever you want if you pray.

Matthew 7:7



      Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!


I prayed that I would explode in the next five seconds, but I did not explode. What happened?

I thought that God was perfect

Psalm 18:30

God's
way is perfect. All the Lord's promises prove true. He is a shield for all who look to him for protection. This God—his way is perfect; the word of the Lord proves true; he is a shield for all those who take refuge in him.

If God is perfect than why did he not resolve my prayer? The bible does not exist on that principle alone, but I will provide more examples.

Physical Evidence

There is a large lack of physical evidence that the Bible existed. The only thing they have are large leaders like King David, but they were large figures so it would be fair to suppose that anyone average person back then would know about them.

John 2:13-25

When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?” Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” But the temple he had spoken of was his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scriptureand the words that Jesus had spoken. Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name. But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person.

This event is when Jesus cleared the temple courts. That was a very crucial event in Biblical history, so you think a follower or Jesus would mark off the spot, but they did not. We do not even know where the exact location of the temple.

Normal Inconsistencies

Genesis 1:3-5 King James Version (KJV)

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Genesis 1:14-19 King James Version (KJV)

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


On the first day God had created light, then separated light and darkness. On the fourth day God had created the Sun, which separates night and day. This part of Bible, which is the most important part by far makes no sense due to the logical lapses.

Genesis 4:9 King James Version (KJV)

9 And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?


Proverbs 15:3 King James Version (KJV)

3 The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.

God was asking Cain where Abel was, but God is everywhere.

Genesis 7:7 King James Version (KJV)

7 And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood.

Genesis 7:13 King James Version (KJV)

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

Why did they enter the ark again. That is physically not possible, and does not make sense from a story stand point.


Overall, I have shown why the Bible clearly is not true.

Onto Pro!

Valar_Dohaeris

Pro

Per Pros rules and definitions

The bible is true

He defines true as "real"

so we are debating

The bible is real.




Here is a pic of a bible






As we can see, the bible is real


real - existing or occurring as fact; actual rather than imaginary, ideal, orfictitious:
http://dictionary.reference.com...


resolution affirmed

Debate Round No. 2
PapaNolan

Con

I did not say that this was a troll debate. I was expecting my opponent to take this debate seriously. I can tell you that Pro had known what I meant by saying "The Bible Is True." I hope that the audience takes this debate seriously.

Vote Con!

Valar_Dohaeris

Pro

The only thing we can do is judge by my adversaries definition

he defined true as real, and I showed that the bible is in fact real.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Rethal, the debate isn't about whether the bible is true or not. It's about whether the bible is real.
Posted by rethaluious 1 year ago
rethaluious
I do not understand why people voted for pro, but con has made a more reasonable argument. Though con has made his point, I disagree with him being the bible isn't true. He asked God to make him explode in 5 seconds, but he didn't grant his wish. To this, I say, God grant wishes to people who are good, loyal and faithful, and he doesn't do things just because a person told him to do so.
I won't vote for a tie, for I disagree with the both of you.
This is just my opinion. Make love not war.
~Peace
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 1 year ago
Valar_Dohaeris
when i got to accept it notes this

You cannot accept this challenge because you do not match the Instigator's age, rank or number of debates completed criteria.
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 1 year ago
Valar_Dohaeris
can you send it to me, It wont let me accept
Posted by PapaNolan 1 year ago
PapaNolan
I will not fall into your trap again.
Posted by PapaNolan 1 year ago
PapaNolan
This debate has my rules, and I changed the criteria
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 1 year ago
Valar_Dohaeris
Let's also make this a speed debate 5 min responses. Ill argue with one paragraph each round
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 1 year ago
Valar_Dohaeris
Change your age criteria
Posted by PapaNolan 1 year ago
PapaNolan
@Valar_Dohaeris Sure
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 1 year ago
Valar_Dohaeris
Ill debate this
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Tweka 1 year ago
Tweka
PapaNolanValar_DohaerisTied
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: Con starts insulting Pro in the last round. He, himself set the definition wrongly in the first round. Conduct to Pro. Con misuses the definition of the word 'True'. And, Pro has fulfilled the BoP which show that the bible is real.
Vote Placed by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
PapaNolanValar_DohaerisTied
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: Con needs to learn how to define things clearly to get the debate he wants. I warned him about this in the comments but he failed to heed my advice.
Vote Placed by imabench 1 year ago
imabench
PapaNolanValar_DohaerisTied
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: The first definition in the link that con provided clearly states 'agreeing with the facts : not false', which is clearly what he was referring to. While I applaud Pro for a fantastic attempt at trolling, con's sourcing and definition of real wasnt that much of a loophole to troll an entire debate on it. Argument points to the con, sources for any of the Bible quotes he made would have been nice to, but he didnt, so all other categories remain tied
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
PapaNolanValar_DohaerisTied
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: Pro's physical evidence showed the Bible is real/true.
Vote Placed by YYW 1 year ago
YYW
PapaNolanValar_DohaerisTied
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: This is hawkward. CON defined true as real, and the bible in fact is real. PRP wins.