The Bible is Outdated
Debate Rounds (5)
Round 1 is for agreement of rules and opening statement. Statement should be short much like a Thesis Statement.
Round 2-4 are for rebuttals and evidence.
Round 5 is for Closing Statements, no new arguments or evidence.
Failure to follow this format results in automatic forfeit.
Professionalism is imperative and no personal attacks. You must stay on topic as this is to be a serious debate.
The Bible is the 66 books that are generally accepted as the Canon.
Outdated: Not relevant for today as a whole.
If you need any other definitions please message me so we can agree to them before proceeding.Burden of Proof is SharedI look forward to your acceptance. Serious Debaters Only!
The bible is an outdated document that should not be used in a person's life today.
Diirez forfeited this round.
davidtaylorjr forfeited this round.
Diirez forfeited this round.
Example, take the 10 Commandments.
One is you shall not murder. Is that outdated? Nobody would argue that, in fact, they would say it is very much reasonable to take that as continued truth today.
You shall not lie. Do we believe lying is wrong? Yes.
You shall not commit adultery. Do we believe Adultery is wrong? Yes, we do.
The notion that the Bible is outdated is unfounded. There are arguments of portions of the Bible being outdated, and most of those, if not all, are referencing some of the law which was covered by the Death of Christ and no longer applicable. That doesn't mean they are outdated, it means they have been taken care of.
The man is the head of the woman:
"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God," Corinthians 11:3
Wives must submit to the man.
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto The Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:22-25
A woman is not allowed to speak in church:
"Let your woman keep silece in the churches.: for it is not permitted unto them to speakl but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent." Timothy 2:12
Is genocide revelant to today's society?
"This is what The Lord Almighty says...'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." 1 Samuel 15:3
The murder of people who call themselves witches?
"Do not allow a sorceress to live." Exodus 22:18
The Killing of infants?
"Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us/ He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." Psalm 137
"Slaves submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel." 1 Peter 2:18
You cannot take an ancient book, written 2,000-5,000 years ago, written in a completely culurally different time and say it isn't outdated. Just look at Leviticus chapter 20 which says that you sjalll be punnished with death if you worship other gods, curse your parents, commit adultery, if you have sex with your step mom, if you have sex with someone of the same sex, if you blaspheme the name of The Lord. Go and read the chapter. IF someone commits adultery, do we kill them? What about homosexuals? Or everyone who isn't Christian?
Other verses were taken completely out of context and any logical person can see that.
My opponent has not argued how the Bible as a whole is irrelevant. I would say that Thou Shalt not Kill is still quite relevant today. Do unto others, is still relevant and quoted often today by all members of society.
I yield to my opponent as he has not given any good arguments for the Bible being outdated.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by calculatedr1sk 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||2|
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was a rough one. Neither side was very convincing, both sides forfeited at least one round, and neither used good sources. At least Diirez used Biblical references to support his case, so I can give him credit for sources. However, since he forfeited first, I decided to penalize Pro for conduct.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.