The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The Bible is not a credible source of evidence

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/2/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 431 times Debate No: 64397
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Con must show me how the Bible is a viable peice of evidence, and show how the Bible should be the main peice of religious tex.

Bible: the Christian scriptures, consisting of the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments.
Credible: able to be believed; convincing.

First round is acceptance


Their are thousands of complete manuscripts of the bible, and many archaeological findings of cities mentioned in the bible.

The bible has been copied almost perfectly over the years, no other book has been this accurately copied.
Debate Round No. 1


"When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons"-Mark 16:9

Once a human being is dead, he is dead. There is no coming back if there is a total chemical death. The only time when people can come back from dead is 4 minutes prior to the heart stopping. If doctors can figure out a way to revive the heart in 4 minutes, the person can very much be alive. If jesus was dead for 3 days, there is no way he can come back to life.

"So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."-Genesis 1:27. (Adam and Eve)

We know that these characters are not real and mythical because we do not have any evidence for them. 2 people are not enough to bring a population of 7 billion. There is not enough genetic diversity. Adam and Eve disproves evolution, and since evolution is a fact, we know Adam and Eve are mythical.

"Then the lord formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."-Genesis 2:7

Again, god cannot be quantified so we know this statement is false. There is lack of evidence. There is no biological way that plain dirt, can turn into a fully functioning man in one breath. "Dirt" does not contain the proper elements to create a human cell, let alone a fully functioning body.

"And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive"-Genesis 6:19-6:20

It is said that Noah brought 2 of each species that living thing of flesh. That is completely mythical because a 450 food long wooden boat cannot possibly carry 2 blue whales and 2 of every other "living thing of flesh". Its is a physical impossibility. Furthermore, the titanic was 882 feet and made out of parts of metal and it sank. A wooden boat carrying 2 blue whales alone would sink, let alone 2 of each species

"By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work.”-Genesis 2:2

Again, since there is no evidence of god and he cannot be quantified, he does not exist, We know the Earth, moon, and sun cannot be created in 7 days. It is impossible. And since day and light was created BEFORE sun and moon, it is impossible. Plus it took him a longer time to create the Earth than the Sun.

I will give my sources and do rebuttals for next round,


debater12332 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


My opponent has forfeited this round, and I look forward to a late argument in the comments.


debater12332 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ChandanB 2 years ago
interesting. looking forward to this
Posted by wampe 2 years ago
As pro, would you not be required to show that bible is not a credible source of evidence?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture