The Instigator
kwagga_la
Pro (for)
The Contender
CosmoJarvis
Con (against)

The Bible is reliable

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
kwagga_la has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/8/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 600 times Debate No: 102893
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

kwagga_la

Pro

The Bible is reliable in that it accurately recorded events as it happened. To show that the Bible is unreliable it will be up to Con to show that the Bible contradicts itself. Please use only one or two examples at most per round.

Examples must preferably prove that God made an error or contradicted Himself. Humans are able to err. History books contain lots of examples where people lied or made a mistake but that do not make the history unreliable.

If more than two arguments are mentioned I will choose which ones I want to answer without any obligation to address the rest.

I hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible in the same way we interpret things literally during normal communication today. In other words, parables, figure of speech, examples, sarcasm etc. has an essential literal interpretation. For this debate, please use the King James Version Bible as reference as support for your arguments.
CosmoJarvis

Con

I am happy to be debating this topic with you, kwagga_la. I anticipate a constructive, interesting debate.

For my argument, I will be taking out notable parts of the Bible and apply criticism regarding the legitimacy and accuracy of the stories, and citing my sources.

Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
kwagga_la

Pro

Thank you for accepting the debate. The Bible consist of 66 Books that contains information related to history, religious doctrine, practical wisdom and so on. Each narrative has its own merits and should be interpreted within the context it is written. I think it is often not putting things in context that creates problems. An example is the inscription on the cross. Three different versions are given of what was written that do not essentially contradict each other but omit information. It is also said that the inscription was written in three different languages. The different accounts may be explained that the writers were quoting what was said singiling out the account based on a particular language. Due to translation the accounts may differ in the language it was written. Taking that into account there is no conclusive proof of a contradiction and it is plausible the accounts are reliable although different in detail. Awaiting your arguments. Thanks again.
CosmoJarvis

Con

Outline:
I. Introduction
II. Contradictions in the Bible
III. Scientific Fallacies
IV. Sources

I. Introduction

The Bible is a collection of Christian scriptures consisting of sixty-six books from the Old and New Testaments. Some works from the Bible originate as far back as thousands of years[1]. According to Biblica, the International Bible Society, the Bible was written
from about forty main contributors - thirty in the Old Testament and ten in the New Testament [2].

I will be arguing that the Bible is unreliable because of the contradictions in the book and blatant scientific fallacies.

II. Contradictions in the Bible

The Bible possesses many verses which refute each other or provide a different take on a story. In this section, I will be listing a few contradictions.


1 Chronicles 11:11 states "And this [is] the number of the mighty men whom David had; Jashobeam, an Hachmonite, the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain [by him] at one time." However, 2 Samuel 23:8 says "These [be] the names of the mighty men whom David had: The Tachmonite that sat in the seat, chief among the captains; the same [was] Adino the Eznite: [he lift up his spear] against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time." 1 Chronicles 11:11 states that, with a spear, David slew three hundred men. However, 2 Samuel 23:8 states that David slew eight hundred [3].

Matthew 27:28 says that "and they stripped him ,and put on [Jesus] a scarlet robe," while Mark 15:17 states that "they clothed him with purple," and John 19:2 states that "the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put [it] on his head, and they put on him a purple robe."Matthew 27:28 contradicts these two other verses by depicting Jesus's robe as scarlet, while the other passages say that it was purple [4].

Isaiah 27:4 says "Fury [is] not in me: who would set the briers [and] thorns against me in battle? I would go through them, I would burn them together," describing God as a being incapable of being furious. However, multiple passages such as Micah 5:15 "I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen, such as they have not heard," and Nahum 1:2 "God [is] jealous, and the LORD revengeth; the LORD revengeth, and [is] furious; the LORD will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth [wrath] for his enemies," which demonstrate that God is furious of humanity [5].

Genesis 1:11-12 and 26-27 state that trees were created before man. However, Genesis 2:4-9 states that man was created before trees.

Though some of these contradictions may be little details, they prove the fallibility of the Bible. They go against an idea that these scriptures were written by infallible prophets and God.

III. Scientific Fallacies

The format for this section will be divided into different paragraphs, each dealing with a different topic about the scientific fallacies of the Bible.

  1. The Bible makes subtle indications about how the Earth is flat and fixed in the center of the universe such as Chronicles 16:30, "He has fixed the earth firm, immovable." However, things such as day-night cycles are caused by the spherical Earth rotating on its axis so that the sun is and isn't visible on sides of the Earth. If the world was a flat disc, it'd flip in a direction perpendicular to its own plane. Theoretically, light and dark would occur instantaneously on either side of the Earth. Additionally, the center of Earth's gravity is its core. When we do something like jump up, gravity will force us down towards the direction of its core.
  2. The Bible also exhibits "magical" themes such as alchemy when, in Genesis, clay waschangedtoman. This process may be described as alchemy, the spontaneous conversion of a material to another, such as lead to gold. Alchemy is impossible because it is theoretically impossible to remove or add protons to change the identity of the atom, aside from radioactive decay.
  3. The Bible also suggests that the world is approximately 6,000-7,000 years old according to Answers in Genesis.org [6]. However, through radiometric dating, geologists have found the Earth to be surpassing three billion years of age [7].
  4. Additionally, Bill Nye (the science guy) argued against the young-Earth beliefs in his first debate between him and Kem Ham about the validity of the Bible and Christian beliefs, saying "My scientific colleagues go to places like Greenland, the Arctic, they go to Antarctica and they drill into the ice with hollow drill bits; it's not that extraordinary, and many have probably done it yourselves, like with hole saws to put locks in doors, for example. And we pull out long cylinders of ice, long ice rods. And these are made of snow and ice. It's called snow ice. Snow ice forms over the winter,andsnow flakesfall,andare crushed down by subsequent layers. They're crushed together,andare entrapping little bubbles. The bubbles must needs be [from] ancient atmospheres; there's nobody running around with a hypodermic needle squirting ancient atmosphere into the bubbles. And we find certain of the cylinders to have 680,000 layers. 680,000 snow winter/summer cycles. How could it be that just 4000 years ago, all of this ice formed? We can just run some numbers. Let's see we have 680,000 layers of snow ice, and 4000 years since the great flood, that means we need 170 winter/summer cycles every year. For the last 4000 years. Wouldn't someone have noticed that? Wouldn't someone have noticethere'sbeen winter/summer, winter/summer for 170 times in one year?" [8].
  5. The tale of Noah's Ark states that Noah and his family single-handedly built a large ark capable of housing two of every creature on Earth to survive a flood lasting around 150 days. Noah and his family would also have to tend to the animals, feeding them and addressing their other needs. It's estimated that the ark would have to be "around 510 feet long and 51 feet tall," [9]. Would it even be possible for one family to create such an enormous ship in their lifetime, even if Noah surpassed 900 years of age? Additionally, to retrieve every animal on Earth, Noah would have to travel across the world to take and preserve two of each animal, including the penguins in the Arctic, the emus in Australia, the wild boars in Europe, the Canadian Geese in North America, and the llamas in South America. How possible would that be?

IV. Sources

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] https://www.biblica.com...
[3] http://bibviz.com...
[4] http://bibviz.com...
[5] http://bibviz.com...
[6] https://answersingenesis.org...
[7] http://www.extremescience.com...
[8] http://www.youngearth.org...
[9] https://answersingenesis.org...
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by DNehlsen 1 year ago
DNehlsen
Since this debate was never finished or followed up, I would be willing to step in as Pro in a new debate on the topic.
Posted by kwagga_la 1 year ago
kwagga_la
Yes sure :-)
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
Want to make another debate where we could continue upon this topic?
Posted by kwagga_la 1 year ago
kwagga_la
Sorry, Debate.org was down the weekend and up until now it gave a HTTP 404 error.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
I initially said that I would refrain from debating the existence of God.
Posted by kwagga_la 1 year ago
kwagga_la
The debate is not about the existence of God. Whether the Bible was written by aliens or not is immaterial. The reliability itself is the object of the debate.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
For the debate, I will be disputing parts of the Bible that deem the content within the Bible unreliable. Though I am an atheist, I will refrain from any arguments specifically regarding the existence of the Christian God.
Posted by LuciferWept 1 year ago
LuciferWept
It seems like you're trying to debate on your terms, presupposing the existence of God and not even contemplating the possibility that the Bible was composed by men.
Posted by kwagga_la 1 year ago
kwagga_la
The reason I worded it that way is because people often claim something is a mistake but the mistake or error do not really impact the trustworthiness of the Bible. The errors required must be of such a nature to discredit the Bible. For example: The Bible records a lie told to Eve. She made a mistake by believing it. Even though the narrative contains a lie and resulting error it does not discredit the Bible because there is no reason to believe it was not reported accurately. An error or intentional error would be someone else stating the opposite of what was recorded in there.
Posted by Cobalt 1 year ago
Cobalt
You've defined an error as making a mistake, but you also require Con to prove that the mistake was intentional? Whether the Bible was inspired by God or entirely a creation of man; why would either party intentionally make a mistake in its composition?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.