The Instigator
Abstinian
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
WorldSkeptic
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The Bible is God's Word

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 410 times Debate No: 83690
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Abstinian

Pro

The first round is acceptance

Also by God's Word I mean the King James Version of the Bible.
WorldSkeptic

Con

I accept the debate, Pro has the burden of proof, as he is making a positive claim.
Debate Round No. 1
Abstinian

Pro

The Book of Books written several thousand years ago. Loved and cherished by many, yet hated and despised by others. But this Book is more than just a book. This Book has changed lives, contains more prophecies than any other religious book, and has been ahead of scientists throughout history. Even when theories contradicted it and people thought that it was old fashioned and needed to me removed or reformed, we found later that it wasn't the Bible that needed to change but the theories. No other book in history can compare to this one. There is only one way this book would be able to do all this and that is for this book to be God's inspired word.

But in order for it to be God's inspired word it must also be infallible. Since God is perfect, His Word must also be perfect, otherwise it was just written by men and everything Christians live for is for nothing. But don't many people today say there are many contradictions in the Bible. Also that this proves it is just a fairytale and shouldn't be trusted. Is this true, or is it not. I say there are none and to prove my point I will be presenting 2 popular "contradictions", and I will show why they are wrong.

The first so called contradiction appears in Genesis 1,2. In Genesis 1 it says that man was created with the land animals after the fish and birds (Gen. 1:20-27) . But in Genesis 2 it seems to suggest that the beasts and the birds were created after man (Gen. 2:19). People many times use this as a clear contradiction and so prove that the Bible was only written by man. But Answers in Genesis provides a good explanation for this. The Hebrew word translated to mean formed in Gen. 2:19 is yatsar. But this word could also be translated to mean had formed, which makes this passage, not another creation story, but a more detailed account of day 6.

The second is what actually happened to Judas? In Mathew 27:5 (And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself) it says that Judas hung himself. But in Acts 18:1 (Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.) it appears to give a different story of how Judas died. This is another popular "error" that people use to prove the Bible wrong, but if you study it more you learn that once again it isn't the Bible that is wrong. An error only occurs when you view this from a perspective that these are two separate descriptions of how he died. Instead this is an order of what happened to him. Matthew writes about how Judas died, by hanging himself. Luke (the author of Acts) writes what happened to Judas after he died, there isn't any mention that this is how he was killed. All you need to do is look at it from a different perspective and there is no error.

But even if there were many errors in the Bible, considering its background, wouldn't you expect hardly anything to agree in it. Because the Bible was written by over 40 authors from various areas of life. It has been written by shepherds, farmers, tent-makers, physicians, fishermen, priests, philosophers, and kings. Try getting 5 people today to agree on only a few matters of opinion. Yet if this wasn't enough, the entire Bible was written book by book over a 1,500 year time period. And some of the authors never read or heard any of the others' writings. We should expect many huge contradictions in the Bible, but for the most part people only find small contradictions which many times just need a knowledge of the language or culture to understand it. The only way the Bible could be so intact is if it was God's Word.

For my second point I would like to observe how the Bible has always been ahead of the "facts" of that time. One example is Leviticus 15:13 (And when he that hath an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean.) This is telling those that are sick or have a disease to bathe in running water after they have been healed. Yet it was more than 2 thousand years later when it was discovered that washing your hands in a basin or still water does not remove all germs. Only running water will get rid of most harmful germs. But how were the Jews supposed to have known about that? And keep in mind this was during a time when cleanliness was not well observed. It was only a couple centuries ago when people found out about harmful germs. Now if this was the only example then the Jews might have just got lucky when creating random laws, but this isn't the only one.

Leviticus 17:14 (For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off) talks about not being allowed to eat the blood with the meat because it is the life. However this was practically the last thing people thought at that time (that was the reason for the process of bloodletting). So why would they make this law? Today we know that blood is what gives you life. It's what brings your body the oxygen and nutrients it needs. It's what fights off sickness and infections. Without blood we would die. Yet the Israelites had no way of knowing about this. They didn't have the technology or the knowledge about the human body that we have. Only an all knowing being could have known about this.

Still another example is Jeremiah 33:22 (As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.). This verse says that the stars cannot be counted. Once again this contradicts the thinking of this time. This verse was written around 2,600 years ago, probably around 600 B.C. But in 150 B.C. Hipparchus, said that there were less than 3,000 stars. Ptolemy in 150 A.D. said he that had counted exactly 1,056 stars. It wasn't even until around the 1600's, when Galileo observed the heavens with a telescope, that people found out it is impossible to count all the stars. These 3 times people had thought the Bible was in error, but it turned out they were wrong. If these examples aren't enough then you can look up Job 26:7, Genesis 3:19, Isaiah 40:22, and my favorite Job 37:7.

If you're still skeptical about these verses and just think that the Israelites were just making up random things, then think about it logically. Not many things have changed during history, people want their country to be the best and to be on top. And one of the ways is to be up to date on the theories and technology of other countries. But if you came up with an idea that was the opposite of what people thought at that time (and stayed like that for centuries), also having no proof or facts to prove it, do you think you would keep it. You wouldn't even have tried to come up with anything close to it. The Isreaelites weren't much different. Like other countries they wanted a king and other things. So why did they keep these verses? They were obviously thought of as absurd. The only answer is because an intelligent designer inspired them to write them.

In conclusion, it is simply impossible for the Bible to not be God's Word. It has been the most persecuted book in all history, yet we still have it with us today. So many attempts have been made to get rid of it but all have failed. How is it that a book that was written thousands of years ago can have such an impact on people today. People have died for their love of it, and people have killed others because of their hatred of it. Even though countries have outlawed it, it always is able to grow inside that country. Wherever it's persecuted the most is where it thrives the most. This must be God's Word.

https://answersingenesis.org...

https://answersingenesis.org...
WorldSkeptic

Con

Thank you Pro for your arguments, I commence.

Whether the Bible contradicts itself or not doesn’t prove it's God’s word. There are books that write about subjects and don’t contradict, but if the authors said their book was divine, the fact that the book doesn’t contradict itself is no proof of this.

Pro gives an extremely bad argument:

“(After saying God's word must be perfect and mentioning contradictions) that this proves it is just a fairytale and shouldn't be trusted. Is this true, or is it not. I say there are none and to prove my point I will be presenting 2 popular "contradictions", and I will show why they are wrong.” This is clearly the position he adopts (that there are no contradictions and the bible is perfect), and I will answer this claim, but he then says: “But even if there were many errors in the Bible, considering its background, wouldn't you expect hardly anything to agree in it. “ He goes on to give excuses about the Bible and how it could not be perfect. Pro contradicts himself in this argument, but I will answer nonetheless.

I know several contradictions that go like this:

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. (2)

Another one goes:

"In “Matthew 28:1 states two women (Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary) came to the tomb; Mark 16:1 states it was three women (Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome);Luke 24:10 agrees it was three women but gives a different list of three than Mark (Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James); John 20:1 states it was only Mary Magdalene.” (4)

Suppose we take his first stance that the Bible is infallible and has no contradictions. If I show then that the Bible has contradictions and is not perfect, the only position Pro could possibly hold is that it is not perfect or intact, which goes against his logic and argument when he says: ”in order for it to be God's inspired word it must also be infallible. Since God is perfect, His Word must also be perfect, otherwise it was just written by men and everything Christians live for is for nothing.” I think that gets rid of the argument.


He also says: “The Hebrew word translated to mean formed in Gen. 2:19 is yatsar. But this word could also be translated to mean had formed, which makes this passage, not another creation story, but a more detailed account of day 6.” Is Pro going to use the Hebrew bible or the King James Version as he specified in the beginning? Using one is not the same as using the other, and if Pro is going to argue from the King James Version he obviously cannot use other versions with different words.


“In conclusion, it is simply impossible for the Bible to not be God's Word. It has been the most persecuted book in all history, yet we still have it with us today. So many attempts have been made to get rid of it but all have failed. How is it that a book that was written thousands of years ago can have such an impact on people today. People have died for their love of it, and people have killed others because of their hatred of it.”


Well, this is basically a criterion that allows for Hinduism and Islam to be God’s word also. Pro uses the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy. Let's take Islam. Islam is 1400 years old, is still existing today, and has impact on more than 1.5 billion Muslims around the world. If you want to add the “it’s been persecuted throughout history”, CHRISTIANITY persecuted Muslims during the Crusades and they didn’t succeed in destroying it. Well, if the Qur’an survived Christianity, then it must be superior to the bible’s word, and therefore it is the true God’s word! You see how this is useless reasoning. Hindu texts are THOUSANDS of years older than the New Testament(1), but this doesn’t mean it is God’s true word. Killing for it? Does that give credibility? I give then two words: Allahu Akbar. (Muslim suicide bombers)

As for what he says about the Bible being “ahead of it’s time”, Con makes a lot of mistakes. I’ll say firstly that my position is that the Bible says SOME correct things. Firstly, blood does give you life. Without it you would die...However, your stomach is also life, without it you would die. Without a BRAIN you would die INSTANTLY, you don’t even have time to bleed out. So saying that the Israelites mentioned blood being life and thus they are divinely guided is an error, because they only mentioned one aspect and you already fill in all the other spaces (vital organs).

I further argue that even if the Bible has some true facts, it doesn’t make it all a truth. An example: let’s say that a PhD astronomy author wrote a book about astronomy and 150 other different subjects, those 150 all having fake facts. He darn well could have had multiple correct facts about astronomy, that doesn’t mean he is right about the rest besides proved astronomy. If the author claimed that he was perfect, we could have no reasonable excuse to give him the benefit of that position.

The Bible got SOME things right. So what? That doesn’t mean it’s God’s word. The Bible also says the Earth is 6,000 years old, which was debunked with radiometric dating. We know we weren’t created and we are the product of evolution. We know that we cannot fit all the animals in the world into a space of 150 meters long by 25 wide.(Genesis 6:15) We know that all the animals on the ark that got to a height higher than Mount Everest’s would have died because of a lack of oxygen. (Genesis 7:20) We know grass can’t grow before the sun is created. (Genesis 1: 11) We know there are no giants (Genesis 6:4). We know that dragons don’t exist (Revelations 12: 3). We know human beings can’t live more than 900 years (Adam, Eve, Methuselah, Noah in Genesis 5) . And we know the Earth isn’t flat (Matthew 4: 8Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.” You can’t see all the kingdoms in the world from any height because it’s round AND there is no mountain higher than Mount Everest, from which you cannot even see U31; of the Earth.) (3)

It is clear that the Bible holds numerous erroneous facts, which further convinces me that the Bible is not the word of God. Pro says: “But in order for it to be God's inspired word it must also be infallible. Since God is perfect, His Word must also be perfect, otherwise it was just written by men and everything Christians live for is for nothing.” I have shown the Bible not to be infallible, therefore it’s not God’s word, according to Pro’s logic (which is still erroneous). I negate the resolution.

Of course, Pro also has to prove that God exists in order for his claim to be complete, and the fact that the Bible says it’s the word of God does not prove this is true. He has not said this, but it is a common false claim. As the reader knows, the Qur’an also says this, the Vedas also say this, and numerous other religious texts do so too. I am sure that the Bible is not perfect, but let's imagine the Bible were to be perfectly written, and had modern medicine and science written on it, you could still get to a number of conclusions. Was it aliens that wrote it? Does this prove superpowers? Did the authors have the ability to read the future? Or maybe something else? How can we rule out that we aren't being joked with even if the author was a superior being? You see how even if the book was perfect you would still not have a reasonable excuse to say the Bible is God’s word because there are still many questions open to be answered.

I finish my first rebuttal.

Source:
  1. http://www.ancient.eu...

  2. http://infidels.org...

  3. https://www.biblegateway.com...

Debate Round No. 2
Abstinian

Pro

Abstinian forfeited this round.
WorldSkeptic

Con

Extend, if Pro is not going to answer anymore would he please just write extend so that the debate be over soon please.
Debate Round No. 3
Abstinian

Pro

Firstly I would like to ask con have you ever read the Bible? If so, how much of it?

Whether the Bible contradicts itself or not doesn"t prove it's God"s word. There are books that write about subjects and don"t contradict, but if the authors said their book was divine, the fact that the book doesn"t contradict itself is no proof of this. Checking if a document contains contradictions is one out of three important tests to see if that document is accurate or reliable. So checking for contradictions is extremely important to prove the Bible right. Also you completely missed out on the main point of my argument. I never said that just because the Bible claimed to be inspired proved that it was right. It's the fact that it has been written by over 40 different authors, over a 1,500 year period. That is what makes it amazing that there are no contradictions in it.

Pro contradicts himself in this argument. I never said there were contradictions in the Bible. I was stating that the Bible has the most amazing past than other book. That logically, the Bible shouldn't even be together considering how it was written. I never have, and never will, assert that there are contradictions in the Bible.

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary,...
LUKE 3:23...the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. This is contradiction can be cleared up very easily. Here are two links that give a logical answer for this. https://erikbrewer.wordpress.com... https://answersingenesis.org...

The answer to who went to the tomb is summed up in this link https://answersingenesis.org...

Is Pro going to use the Hebrew bible or the King James Version as he specified in the beginning? I never specified that I would only use the King James Version. I said that I would be trying to prove that the King James Version is the Word of God. I am allowed to use whatever version of the Bible as long as it helps me prove the King James Version is true.

Well, this is basically a criterion that allows for Hinduism and Islam to be God"s word also. Pro uses the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy. The Qur"an has never been majorly persecuted like the Bible has. It was not because of the Qur"an that the Crusades started. But it was because of the Bible that the Catholic Church, the Roman Empire, Stalin, and many others persecuted Christians. If you don't believe me that the Bible is hated, go on a busy street corner and preach about how if you don't accept Islam you will be killed. Then the next day go to the same street corner and preach how Jesus died for you so you don't have to go to Hell. What do you think would happen?

CHRISTIANITY persecuted Muslims during the Crusades and they didn"t succeed in destroying it. Well, if the Qur"an survived Christianity, then it must be superior to the bible"s word, and therefore it is the true God"s word! Christianity never persecuted the Muslims. The people who ordered and led the crusades were not Christians. What the world commonly misunderstands is that not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is a Christian. Matthew 17:16 (Ye shall know them by their fruits...) the people who wanted to rid the world of Muslims were not following the Bible, therefore their works show that they are not a Christian.

Killing for it? Does that give credibility? Actually it does but in a different sense than the one Con is portraying. How can the Bible be loved by millions, and at the same time persecuted by many (to the point of killing others, who are spreading it, in an attempt to stifle it). Even the Qur"an cannot relate to this. It is loved by many, but no one has killed someone else because they hated it so much.

I further argue that even if the Bible has some true facts, it doesn"t make it all a truth. Here Con gives an illustration that seems to prove his point. But the problem with it is, the Israelites weren't experts on these things. They never knew that the body has the same constituent elements as that of dirt (Gen.3:19), that germs can be cleaned by running water (Lev. 15:13), that blood gives you life (Lev. 17:14), that the earth isn't being held up by anything (Job 26:7), that fingerprints can be used to find criminals (Job 37:7), that the earth is round (Isai 40:22), or that the stars can't be counted (Jer. 33:22). The Israelites never knew about these things, nobody did for several thousand years!

The Bible also says the Earth is 6,000 years old, which was debunked with radiometric dating. Radiometric Dating is not an accurate way of finding out the age of things. http://creation.com...

We know we weren"t created and we are the product of evolution. This comment is just the same as me saying, we know evolution is false and we were created by God.

We know that we cannot fit all the animals in the world into a space of 150 meters long by 25 wide. Not all the animals in the world went on the ark. Only 2 of each kind (except clean animals). A kind can be described as a species, like the cat kind and the beetle kind. Basically only 2 representatives for each species went on the ark. And they would have been very young. There would have been way more than enough room on the ark.

We know that all the animals on the ark that got to a height higher than Mount Everest"s would have died because of a lack of oxygen. The flood didn't need to get higher than mount Everest because there was no mount Everest. The mountains could have been created after the flood.

We know grass can"t grow before the sun is created. Grass and other plants can survive for a day without sun. Plus don't you think if someone is able to speak things into existence, they can make things grow and survive one day without the sun.

We know there are no giants. So what we observe today, is what has always been happening. Well I guess you have to get rid of evolution. Because we don't see animals evolving (not adapting) today.

We know that dragons don"t exist. Dinosaurs were called dragons in the Bible.

We know human beings can"t live more than 900 years. There is no such thing as something being supernatural. Don't you think that NOTHING exploding and forming the world we know today is supernatural?

And we know the Earth isn"t flat. This verse does not imply that the earth is flat. Since Jesus is the Son of God, He can do anything, including see all the kingdoms of the world from one spot. Satan, being once an angel himself, may have been able to do this too. The Bible does not imply the earth is flat. In fact Isaiah 40:22 says the earth is round or spherical, according to the Hebrew.

And lastly, I do not have to prove God is real to be able to prove the Bible is true. That is an entirely different debate topic, and this topic is that the Bible is God's Word.

Before I just stated some of the facts about the Bible, but now I will do a more in depth study. As I said before, the Bible has been more viciously attacked, ridiculed, and blasphemed than any other book. But it is still the world's best selling book year after year. Daniel Radosh from The New Yorker said "The familiar observation that the Bible is the best-selling book of all time obscures a more startling fact: the Bible is the best-selling book of the year, every year. Calculating how many Bibles are sold in the United States is a virtually impossible task, but a conservative estimate is that in 2005 Americans purchased some twenty-five million Bibles"twice as many as the most recent Harry Potter book. The amount spent annually on Bibles has been put at more than half a billion dollars". Once again how can a single book do all this and not be divinely inspired? No other book in the entire history of the world can be compared to this one.
WorldSkeptic

Con

“I am allowed to use whatever version of the Bible as long as it helps me prove the King James Version is true.” No, Pro cannot. Language and wording change dramatically from version to version. One version has a certain word (like yatsar) that means before, while another version (this one) says "after" in other words. What Pro asks of us is to ignore the language from the KJV and replace it with ancient Hebrew. This is not valid if he argues that the KJV ONLY is the word of God (as he said).

When Pro tries to refute my contradictions, he uses a page that argues using a NEW KJV, a modified form of the agreed KJV. The page says: “Notice that Matthew does not say that only two women were there. Mark does not say only three women were there. They simply focus on the women they name.” Convenient, the author uses a No True Scotsman fallacy, saying this isn’t REALLY what Matt. meant, even though Matt. clearly says so (amount of women). Ex: “The FBI says bin Laden blew up the Twin Towers” “Cat Stevens was there!” “Why don’t they mention him?” “They just focus on the people it names”.

As for the other contradiction:1. The website uses Greek, which is not allowed for this debate. 2.The page says Matt’s account is Joseph’s because Jechonias couldn’t have children and Jesus couldn’t have been his physical descendant. However, Jechonias does have children: Matt. 1:12” Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;”

The second website says that Luke’s account is Mary’s:“in Matthew’s list, some women were included..So, if this were a genealogy of Mary, then she would be listed.” “Matthew’s genealogy is Joseph’s.” Matthew DOES list Mary (1:16), and Luke doesn’t. How do you know Heli is Mary’s father, when Heli is only named once without Mary? Luke:3:23:”Now Jesus Himself..thirty years of age, being..the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,”. The first page says that women did not appear in lists of genealogy because they took their husband’s name, but this can’t be true, as Pro’s second page admits: “in Matthew’s list, some women were included, such as Tamar, Ruth,..”. The obvious question is: why did THEY appear?


“..not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is a Christian..people who wanted to rid the world of Muslims were not following the Bible, therefore their works show that they are not a Christian.” A bad criterion. Let’s say Pro’s grandfather (no offense intended) said the Bible didn’t mention using phones, and Pro using it shows he is not a real Christian. According to Pro’s logic, this is totally valid. Crusaders wore a cross, spread the Christian faith, and were sanctioned by the Church of Rome, which makes them Christians.

“The Qur"an has never been majorly persecuted like the Bible has..How can the Bible be loved by millions, and at the same time persecuted..(to the point of killing others..)..the Qur’an cannot relate.. It is loved by many, but no one has killed someone else because they hated it..” Pro ignored what I said about the Argument from Emotion and uses an Appeal to Popularity too, arguing against my example. Lots of people killed others when Salman Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses” was released. Others loved it. This doesn’t mean Rushdie is more right than others. As for the rest, the war on ISIS is a clear example of violence against Islam. They are fundamentalist Muslims who are killed because of their actions (sanctioned in Islam).

“Job 37:7 “He sealeth up the hand of every man; that all men may know his work.” Criminal fingerprinting involves DNA and advanced computer processing, none of which are mentioned, like the blood example I gave. Man coming from dirt is not plausible, as we evolved, which I will explain shortly.
“Radiometric Dating is not an accurate way of finding out the age..”
The website’s info. on radiometric dating is inaccurate; the decay rate of an atom is a mathematical constant(4) and atoms are trapped in zircons, which don’t allow other minerals to get inside.(5) We know then: 1.That the decay rate is the same 2.The atoms weren’t contaminated.

“This comment is just the same as me saying, we know evolution is false..” Genetics can show we are related to all animals, some more than others. It traces us back millions of years to a common ancestor. Fossils are also evidence, as they show the transition from one species to another by using unique characteristics of animals to relate them. Now useless body parts (a whale has hand-like bones in it’s fins and has a hip-bone.) and micro evolution are observable proof.(2)

“..The flood didn't need to get higher than mount Everest because there was no mount Everest. The mountains could have been created after the flood.” The Himalayas are millions of years old (3), while the Flood was supposed to happen some 5,000 years ago. There is no evidence of such event happening.

“Grass..can survive for a day without sun..don't you think if someone is able to speak things into existence, they can make things grow and survive one day without the sun.” He could, except you haven’t proven that a person capable of this exists, and you forget grass evolved, as I mentioned. This is why it is necessary that you prove God is real.

“..there are no giants. So what we observe today, is what has always been happening. Well I guess you have to get rid of evolution. Because we don't see animals evolving..today.” The argument is a Red Herring. Pro gives a useless argument, as giants aren’t necessary for evolution to occur. Evolution takes millions of years to happen, which is why you don’t see humans evolving right now. Yet you may look at our ancestry and see how they are slightly different or incredibly different. (1)


“Dinosaurs were called dragons..” Pro provides no proof. Plus, there were no 7 headed dinosaurs. (Same verse)


“..human beings can’t live more than 900 years. There is no such thing as something being supernatural. Don't you think that NOTHING exploding and forming the world we know today is supernatural?” This is a Red Herring and he is “Avoiding the Issue”, as he does not answer the question and goes into what the definition of supernatural is and what I assume to be Big Bang talk, which wasn’t mentioned.

“..the Earth isn’t flat. This verse does not imply that..Since Jesus is the Son of God, He can do anything, including see all the kingdoms of the world from one spot..The Bible does not imply the earth is flat. In fact Isaiah 40:22 says the earth is round or spherical..” Indeed, this is called a contradiction. Pro uses the Blind Authority fallacy to prove his point. He breaks common sense (one can’t see all the surface of a round object standing on top of a high point) and instead argues that Jesus saw all kingdoms with super-vision, so to say, because he is supposedly the son of God. This is another reason why Pro needs to prove that Jesus had said supernatural powers and he existed, else we cannot assert that he could do what Pro says he did.

“And lastly, I do not have to prove God is real to be able to prove the Bible is true. That is an entirely different debate topic..” To prove that the KJV is God’s word you do, because you point to the (false) statement that the Bible has no faults, yet this would not prove it was made by a God. A link between both is necessary. I explain why you need to prove his existence in the grass example. You also try to justify your claims by saying Jesus had divine powers, and you expect me to accept that without proof, which is ridiculous.

Finally, he uses the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy and the Appeal to popularity by saying the Bible is the most printed book. This does not mean it is divine. If a badly written book sells more than an accurate book, this does not mean the former has more truth in it.

Pro commits 7 fallacies: Appeal to Accomplishment, Appeal to popularity, Argument from Emotion, Red Herring, Blind Authority fallacy, No True Scotsman, and Avoiding the Issue fallacy. For space issues, I’ll paste the sources on the comments section.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by WorldSkeptic 11 months ago
WorldSkeptic
Forgiveness for the extremely abridged post, I hope I did a good job at representing the whole debate accurately. Here are the promised sources:

(1)http://humanorigins.si.edu...
(2)https://www.youtube.com...
(3) https://en.wikipedia.org... (Geology section)
http://www.todayifoundout.com...
(4) http://www.uwgb.edu...
(5)http://www.amnh.org...
Posted by WorldSkeptic 11 months ago
WorldSkeptic
Go right ahead then.
Posted by Abstinian 11 months ago
Abstinian
I apologize, I didn't mean to forfit the round. I ran out of time before I was able to finish writing my part.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
When you say "God's word" do you mean Jesus and his dad?
Posted by BIBLETHUMPER 1 year ago
BIBLETHUMPER
Go Pro!!!
Posted by TheKryken 1 year ago
TheKryken
Why KJV?
No votes have been placed for this debate.