The Instigator
ScottyDouglas
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
bluesteel
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

The Bible is right.

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...
bluesteel
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,575 times Debate No: 24043
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (19)
Votes (5)

 

ScottyDouglas

Pro

The I believe the Bible is right!

The definition of right in this debate is:

Right: in accordance with what is good, proper, or just: in conformity with fact, reason, truth, or some standard or principle; correct in judgment, opinion, or action; fitting or appropriate; most convenient.

Resolution: The Bible is right!

Rounds:
1. Approval
2. Arguement
3. Rebuttal
4. Rebuttal
5. Conclusion

Rules:
1. Debate must be respectful.
2. Debate must stay on topic.
3. Intelligent and witty comebacks(sarcasm)is tolerated.
4. Super natural, Metaphysics, suspected fantasy is not allowed. Because it is non-provable from either side. Only teaching and practices allowed.
5. All resources must be provided.
6. Con/Against must provide proof the Bible is not right.
bluesteel

Con

Thanks for the debate!

Definitions:

The Bible: "the collection of sacred writings of the Christian religion, comprising the Old and New Testaments" (Random House Dictionary).

I agree to my opponent's definition of "right." I will mostly be arguing that the Bible does not always advocate things that are "in accordance with what is good and proper," such as stoning disobedient children, and that the Bible is not "in conformity with fact."

As long as I can prove that there is one immoral advocacy or one single incorrect fact in the Bible, I win.

I now open the floor to pro, although since he has to disprove every objection I bring up, it might have made more sense to let me start arguing in Round 1.

I look forward to the debate.
Debate Round No. 1
ScottyDouglas

Pro

I would like to thank Bluesteel for this debate he is a very worthy opponent and I hope we provide a great discussion.

My opponent was right we he said that, he should of been able to make his arguement in RD 1. Since this is the case I hope my opponent would like to take this further into a 2nd debate if need be. I hope he would accept.

I think i may have rushed my debate and not fully explained my arguement and premises properly. I apologize for this and hope no problems are caused. I stand by the reasoning and statements I made and with that gives the first proof of the Bible being right. The Bible itself sayed to do what you say and say what you mean, be honest, and be direct about your faith and belief. http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com...

Zechariah 8:16"These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace"
Ephesians 4:25"Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another."

Premises: According to these premises my opponent may procede with his future arguement. I will add here that if my opponent supplies arguements that are only explained by supernatural cause then I must be able to supply the supernatural reason for that cause. The Bible contains a large number of prophecies of future events which have been remarkably fulfilled. The only reasonable explanation is that God used his forknowledge to make the prophecies and inspired the authors of the Bible to record them. By these premises my opponent and I are justified in whatever is brought forth. I add: The Bible contains no contradictions. Also that the Bible has remarkable numerical designs in it. The Bible contains a perfect morality, Virtue, and no ethical defects. We may infer that the Bible is not a purely manmade work, but divinely inspired. Other premises will be appealed to in the formulation of the arguement and rebuttals. Purpose here is to give the arguement direction. I'll simply focus on my arguement from here.

Example for supernatural cause: When God called his people out of slavery in Egypt and back to the land of their forefathers, he directed them to kill all Canaanite clans who were living in the land. The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child. So then what is YHWH doing in commanding Israel to exterminate the Canaanite people? The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli. God stayed his judgement of the Canaanite for 400 years because thier wickedness had not reached its peak. He even allows his own chosen people to langish in slavery for centuries before determing that the Canaaite people are ripe. God has moral and supernatural reasons for His judgement upon the Canaanites. God also knew that if the Canaaite children were allowed to live they would have spelled the undoing of Israel. This reasoning from God here is because of two specific reasons:1) The canaanites were defiling themselves and thier neighbers. They were rapists, murders, and thiefs. and because of this they would tarnish the Israelites. 2) There were many giant clans within them. These giants talked about were abominable. They were offspring of Anak, of them Nephilim and Gibborim. These kinds were intended upon the earth and must have been wiped out.

Arguement: This arguement will assert that man's nature is mortal. From that mortal nature comes natural sin. Though with that sin come a deep rooting of right and wrong. In that root we have a sense of right and wrong, we know what we ought and ought not to do. We feel justification when we do right and feel condemned when we do what we think is wrong. Since we follow moral law, it can be assumed there is a Lawgiver. The reason this should be assumed is because we govern ourselves, we govern ourselves because we have moral obligations to. With man's natural nature scrtaching at him he could not require law or have obligation to it of not for a lawgiver. Men are fallible and by that our arguement against the Bible is fallible too. I believe Jesus was a divine man-in fact God- and also with that the Bible is a divine book. Christianity is not a blind faith, it is the only religion that can actually prove itself, and the main source is from the Bible. There are many things proven from archaeology dealing with entire nations inside the Bible. Typically when God declared judgement on a nation it was because of justifiable reason. On some occasions God would also tell the citizens how He would reward them if they acted righteous and when they did God did reward them. All these prophecies support that it could not have been predicted by chance therefore it was divine inspiration from God. Both the Old and New Testament are strongly supported by maniscript evidence. The famous Dead Sea scrolls are one example. So our arguement is why does some things that is displayed in the Bible look wrong and is right and vice versa. Through the Bible and the holy ghost we are convicted, encouraged, and guided to the path of righteousness. myopponent must show were and how the Bible is wrong whatsoever.

Purpose: So I will defend the Bible against mishandling! We should not let a unbeliever raising questions lead us to thinking more about the text than it implies. Most Christians seem lost when they open thier Bibles. I wonder why? The Bible is a collection of historically contingent documents that may be turned to for inspiration and instruction for the reader and believer. The scriptures must ve read in sole dependance from the Holy Spirit. The Bible is a collection that is not perfect or error-free, or beyond discussion. But I think the Bible is beyond criticism from a moral standpoint from a fallible man. Nor is it a solitary story or motif. There several stories within it, and several different viewpoints. So we will try to take a look at those viewpoints and see this from the critical side and literal side. I thank my opponent for doing this debate and am overcome with intisapation for his rebuttal and with that I turn the floor back to him again.
Ephesians 1:13-14"In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory."

http://www.biblesearch.com...
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com...
http://carm.org...
http://www.infidels.org... http://intellectualcurrency.wordpress.com...
http://www.reasonablefaith.org...
http://www.bibletoday.com...
bluesteel

Con

Thanks for the quick response Scotty.

Scotty has decided to defend the Conservative Christian viewpoint, that the Bible is inspired by God, inerrant and infallible.

Let's start with this claim that scotty makes:

== 1) "THE BIBLE CONTAINS NO CONTRADICTIONS." ==

A. The conflicting genealogies of Jesus

It was important that the gospel authors proved that Jesus was a descendant of Abraham, in order to prove that he was the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament. For this reason, Matthew and Luke both offered genealogies of Jesus' heritage.

In Matthew's Genealogy (Matthew 1:1-17), there are 54 generations in between Abraham and Jesus. In Luke's Genealogy (Luke 3:23-37), there are 39 generations between Abraham and Jesus. [1] Mary Fairchild writes, "Throughout the ages, scholars have pondered and argued over the reasons for the conflicting genealogies of Matthew and Luke, particularly since Jewish scribes were known for their precise and detailed record keeping." [1] The only possible explanation for the conflicting genealogies is that they were made up, independently.

B. Is Jesus equal to or lesser than God?

JOHN 10:30 "I and my Father are one."

JOHN 14:28 "If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." [2]

The second quote contradicts the idea of the Trinity, where Jesus "is" God.

C. Which came first, beast or man?

Genesis 1:25-6 says that God created the beasts THEN man. Genesis 2:18-19 says God created Adam THEN the beasts. [2] The first and second books of Genesis completely contradict on the Creation story.

D. Human or Ghostly conception?

Acts 2:30 says that Jesus was a normal human descendent of David and would be placed on the throne in the kingdom of heaven because of a promise God made to David.

Matthew 1:18 says the Holy Ghost placed Jesus in Mary's womb. [2]

E. Punish the son for the sins of the father?

Isaiah 14:21 "Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers"

Deuteronomy 24:16 "neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin." [2]

F. Jesus' last words

We all know, last words are important. Too bad the Bible gives three different quotes from Jesus.

Matthew 27:46,50 "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

Luke 23:46 "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit"

John 19:30 "It is finished" [2]

G. Can God Be Seen?

God CAN be seen:
"And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (EXO 33:23)
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (EXO 33:11)
"For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (GEN 32:30)

God CANNOT be seen:
"No man hath seen God at any time." (JOH 1:18)
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (EXO 33:20)
"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1TIM 6:16) [2]

H. How did Judas die?

Matthew 27:5 – he hanged himself

Acts 1:18 – Judas spontaneously burst asunder and his bowels "gushed out" [2]

I. Did Michal, Saul's daughter, have kids

2 Samuel 6:23 – she had no kids

2 Samuel 21:8 – she had 5 kids [2]

== 2) THINGS IN THE BIBLE THAT ARE FACTUALLY INCORRECT ==

LEV 11:6 – hares chew cud (not true)

PSA 58:8 – the sun can cause snails to melt (not true)

GEN 3:14 – snakes only eat dirt (not true) [2]

Matthew (13:31–32), Mark (4:30–32), and Luke (13:18–19) – the mustard seed is the smallest seed in the world (we now know the orchid seed is among the smallest of seeds, by huge orders of magnitude) [3]

According to the Genealogy in Genesis, the Earth is approximately 6000 years old (however, it's actually 4.5 billion years olds) [4]

== 3) SCOTTY SAYS THE BIBLE MAKES ACCURATE PREDICTIONS ABOUT FUTURE EVENTS ==

It's easy to finagle vague predictions and claim they fit historical events, but some predictions were clearly wrong.

Isaiah 33:20 – Jerusalem will enjoy perpetual peace – no building will ever be destroyed (in actuality, the Temple Mount was destroyed, twice, except for one wall – the Wailing Wall; this also fails to predict the Crusades)

Isaiah 52:1 – the uncircumcised will never again enter Jerusalem (yeah, right) [5]

== 4) SCOTTY TALKS ABOUT THE EXODUS FROM EGYPT AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAANITES ==

According to the LA Times, "The truth is that virtually every modern archeologist who has investigated the story of the Exodus, with very few exceptions, agrees that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all … After a century of excavations trying to prove the ancient accounts true, archeologists say there is no conclusive evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt, were ever enslaved, ever wandered in the Sinai wilderness for 40 years or ever conquered the land of Canaan under Joshua's leadership. To the contrary, the prevailing view is that most of Joshua's fabled military campaigns never occurred--archeologists have uncovered ash layers and other signs of destruction at the relevant time at only one of the many battlegrounds mentioned in the Bible. Today, the prevailing theory is that Israel probably emerged peacefully out of Canaan--modern-day Lebanon, southern Syria, Jordan and the West Bank of Israel . . . 'Scholars have known these things for a long time, but we've broken the news very gently,' said William Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona and one of America's preeminent archeologists … the modern archeological consensus over the Exodus is just beginning to reach the public." [6]

This shows that the Exodus is a lie and the Canaanites were never destroyed. This directly contradicts what my opponent has said and refutes his main proof of the truthfulness of the Bible.

== 5) IMMORAL TEACHINGS IN THE BIBLE ==

A. Genocide

The Old Testament has God condoning the genocide of 13 different tribes and 12 cities. [7] He condoned the killing of all the men, women, AND children. Genocide is not consistent with current international moral standards. Many of these people did not even fight back. [7]

In Numbers 31:1-18, Moses is angry that his soldiers did NOT kill the women and children. He instructs his men to murder all the male children and all the non-virgin women. [7]

In 1 Chronicles 21:1-14, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David counted them, and God believed censuses were the work of the Devil. [9]

B. Rape

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 says rape is okay, as long as you pay the woman's father 50 shekels in exchange for the woman's purity. [7]

Deuteronomy 21:11-14 instructed the Israelites that they should rape their female prisoners of war. [7]

In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot, the most moral man in the city, instructs the people of the city to rape his daughters. God allows him to live because he led such an upstanding life. He later has sex with both daughters and impregnates them.

C. Slavery

Exodus says slavery is okay. It says you can beat your slaves, as long as you don't kill them. [8]

Leviticus 19:20-22 says you can rape your female slaves. Unless they are engaged to be married. If you rape an engaged slave, you have to sacrifice a ram in the temple and then God will forgive you. [8]

1 Timothy 6:1-3 in the New Testament tells slaves to obey their masters.

D. Anti-Semitism

1 Thessalonians 2:15 says all Jews are evil. [9]

E. Stone disobedient children

This instruction is in Deuteronomy 21:18-21

F. Men are worth more than women

Leviticus 27:1-7 provides actual monetary value comparisons

G. Homosexuality

Leviticus 20:13 says homosexuals should be put to death

[1] http://tinyurl.com...
[2] http://tinyurl.com...
[3] http://tinyurl.com...
[4] http://tinyurl.com...
[5] http://tinyurl.com...
[6] http://tinyurl.com...
[7] http://tinyurl.com...
[8] http://tinyurl.com...
[9] http://tinyurl.com...
Debate Round No. 2
ScottyDouglas

Pro

First off I would like to thank my opponent on this topic. This is great discussion and a way for all to learn.
First lets start with some understanding:

"What about apparent contradictions in the Bible? The Bible does in fact have answers to these contradictions. In fact, the answers are filled with some of the richest truth. Discovery of the facts are for who is humble and open to truth. Yet proud or hard-hearted people who have closed their mind to the truth, no answer will be enough. To skeptics, no answer would suffice. That is why Jesus refused to answer the hard core critics of his day."

My opponent came locked and loaded last round but unfortinately for him, his bullets were mere blanks. It is obvious that my opponent has done no study into his claims because they not well founded and have been explain many times before now. I probably can not get to all the issues my opponent brought forth last round so I will answer as many as I can here. With no delay lets get right to it.

Rebuttal:
I will label all the contridictions as my opponent has and in his order as well.

A. The conflicting genealogies of Jesus?

There is no conflict or any error. This has been a point of discussion amoung scholars for many years. Most scholars assume Luke is recording Mary's geneology and Matthew is recording Joseph's. Matthew is following Joseph(Jesus legal father), through David's son Solomon. While Luke is following the line of Mary(Jesus's blood mother), through David's son Nathan. Through both lines Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore the eligiable Messiah.

B. Is Jesus equal to or lesser than God?

Jesus is God. You must learn that Jesus is the son of God but through God the Father, Jesus is heir, our creator, and our personnel God. Jesus is the literal Word-Talk of God who displays truth and the will of the Father. Jesus is the form and action of the Word and Law of the Father. Lets read some passages:

KJV-R (Webster) Colossians 1:15-16 "Who is the image of the invisable God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created.
KJV-R (Webster) 1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one."

C. Which came first, beast or man?

My opponent mistakes both chapter 1 and 2 are intended to give chronological account of creation. In chapter 1 Moses does give a chronology of creation. But in chapter 2 he focuses on God's greatest creation, man. In chapter 2 he does not mention things in chronological order, but rather with a view of God's relationship with man. There is no contridiction.

D. Human or Ghostly conception?

Jesus was concepted by the Ghost. But was also born by flesh through his mother Mary. Jesus had no human father.

E. Punish the son for the sins of the father?

I think we see today that the acts of a parent as hugh effects on the child. This occurs in many places in the Bible. However, while children often shared the earthly punishment of thier parents, they would not be punished for thier parent's sin in the afterlife. The Bible makes it clear the real guilt belongs to the person who sinned. God declared that some sins merited the death penalty, humans were not to apply the penalty to anyone other than guilty parties.

F. Jesus' last words.

Of course there will three different interpretations here, there are three different authors. By this Jesus said what all three wrote. Though what they wrote is either what they heard or what they chose to write about. Either way this is not a contradiction.

G. Can God Be Seen?

"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God" (Mt. 5:8).
Here we see that no human can see God unless pure. Also no man can see God's essence in the spirit, that aspect of God is invisable. Certain occasions Jesus assumed a temporal form, which men did see. What is the meaning of,'see?' The fool sees only raw matter when he looks at nature. The spiritual see far beyond that. And thses biblical texts do not conflict to the issue of seeing God.

H. How did Judas die?

Judas hung himself. where you misunderstand is that Judas hung himself in a field that was paid for by the silver paid to him for betraying Jesus. The reason's Judas burst open was. because he had hung a long time and decayed. When he was cut doen and fell to the groung he burst open.

I. LEV 11:6 – hares chew cud

This was written about 1500bc in acient Hebrew. It would actually dishonest to claim that a 3500 year old writting is contradictory because it does not match todays scientific terms which is only hundreds of years old. Further, Hebrews defined 'cud-chewing' as that process where half digested food was re-chewed by an animal.

J. PSA 58:8 – the sun can cause snails to melt

This is a very remarkable and not intelligible passage. The author had the idea that the slimey track made by a snail as it crawled was subtracted from the substance of its body, and that the further it crept the smaller it became until it was wasted away. Exsplanations of this passage have been tired out. There is no doubt that the view of the author is the correct one.

K. GEN 3:14 – snakes only eat dirt

Do snakes consume dirt? Yes! Its common knowledge. Snakes have a organ which helps the snake to smell, in addition to functions by the nose. The entire process is through sampling bits of dirt and dust on the snake. You try eating a snake without getting dirt in your mouth. Snakes, lick, and eat, dirt.

L. the mustard seed is the smallest seed in the world

Jesus was not talkling about all seeds on earth but only in local fields. The context of the passage is refering to a local audience.

M. According to the Genealogy in Genesis, the Earth is approximately 6000 years old (however, it's actually 4.5 billion years olds)

I do not believe the world is little over 6 thousand years. Gen1:2, the earth was formless and void. This gives hint to the earth being old and was destroyed and God remade it.

N. Isaiah 33:20 – Jerusalem will enjoy perpetual peace – no building will ever be destroyed.

This is refering to the 1,000 year reign of Christ in the new Jerusalem. also technically The ten lost tribes are apart of Israel and Jerusalem and they still reign.England-America.

O: Isaiah 52:1 – the uncircumcised will never again enter Jerusalem

This again refering to the New Jerusalem. But anyway prove there has been?

P: Exodus is a lie and the Canaanites were never destroyed.

You article means nothing. It is assumption. You can not say never happened when you no proof to verify or reject. Many reasons why there is no evidence.

Q: Genocide:

Our morality does not determine all morality. We can not force our laws and regulations on another nation can we? God is moral excellence.The reaons for this was thier acts, acts which today we would imprison and execute them, would we not? The women and children was killed also because they could not carry the remenant of these people any more. *Plus they were defiled from Fallen Angels, which was not suppose to be upon the earth.

R: Rape/Slavery

Prove they were raped at all! The distinction the text draws is that there is no way of knowing. A futher reading shows that God set laws for protection for these captives and also says they will never be captives to any other people again. This was apracitce that no other acient people allowed. They would have been killed by another nation.

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net... http://www.rationalchristianity.net... http://www.gotquestions.org... http://www.biblestudytools.com... http://www.thywordistrue.com... http://www.probe.org...
bluesteel

Con

Thanks for the response Scotty.

I'll go through my points in the same order.

1) Contradictions

A. Conflicting Genealogies

My opponent is wrong to suggest that Luke was recording Jesus' genealogy through Mary. The Genealogy in Luke 3:23-38 states, "[Jesus] was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat …" Luke, like Matthew, was tracing Jesus' genealogy through his father, Joseph. It's right there in the passage.

B. Is Jesus Equal to God

I understand that most of the New Testament says that Jesus and God are one and the same. However, my opponent didn't answer the contradiction in John 14:28, where Jesus said, "my father is greater than I." This says they are not equal.

C. Which came first, beast or man?

My opponent claims Genesis, book 2, does NOT mention the Creation in chronological order. However, Genesis 2:18-19 states, "The Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.'" Only THEN did God create the beasts and ask Adam what he wanted to name them.

This contradiction still stands. If the beasts already existed, Adam would not have been "alone."

D. Human conception?

My opponent never answers the contradiction in Acts 2:30. Both Luke and Matthew's genealogies trace Jesus' genealogy to David through Joseph. But if Jesus is not actually born of Joseph's bloodline, then he is not actually a descendent of David, as discussed in Acts 2:30, meaning he was not the Messiah.

E. Punish the son for the sins of the father?

Parts of the Bible (and my opponent) say that the son should NOT be punished for the sins of the father. However, in Joshua 7:20-25, God sanctions the killing of Achan's entire family for his sins. And in Isaiah 14:21, God INSTRUCTS the Israelites to murder sons for the sins of their fathers.

My opponent claimed the Bible has NO contradictions. This is a blaring contradiction.

F. Jesus' Last Words

My opponent claims that these are similar interpretations of the same words. However, there's a big difference between asking God what he has FORSAKEN you (Matthew's account) and committing your body unto him (Luke's account).

Scotty claims that all three authors were at the Crucifixion and "heard" different things. However, none of the gospel authors claims to have known or seen Jesus, except for Paul, but it has been proven that his claims about meeting Jesus are false. The gospels were written generations after a historical Jesus might have existed.

G. Can God Be Seen

My opponent doesn't really answer my argument and doesn't answer the specific passages I cited. Exodus 33:11 says that Moses saw God "face to face, as a man speak[s] to his friend." This says Moses saw God as if God was a normal corporeal human. In Genesis 32:30, Jacob says he has "seen God's face." However, John 1:18 and 1 Timothy 6:16 say that God cannot be seen and has not been seen by anyone. All my opponent does is repeat the views cited in John and Timothy, but this contradicts the Old Testament.

I. Michal's children

Dropped

2) Incorrect Facts

A. Hares don't chew cud

This still hasn't been refuted. My opponent claims Hebrew has a different context, but then proves that in this context, the passage does mean "cud."

B. Snails melt

My opponent's explanation is also wrong. The secretions of the snail's "trail" do not "use up" the snail's body. It is a mucus secretion.

C. Snakes only eat dirt

"Eat", according to Random House Dictionary, means "to take into the mouth and swallow for nourishment." Using dirt particles to "smell" is not "for nourishment." Snakes don't even take in dirt particles; they sample chemicals in the air. [1] Lastly, in Genesis 3:14, God condemns the snake to eat nothing but dirt. This is obviously untrue.

D. Mustard Seed

My opponent claims Jesus was only referring to "local seeds." Mark 4:30-32 says, "It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth." [2]

E. Earth is 6000 years old

My opponent claims the Earth was formless and void and thus existed long before the Creation story. However, based on Genesis, there are approximately 6000 years worth of generations between Adam and modern times. This means man cannot be more than 6000 years old, based on Genesis. However, the oldest human fossils are 195,000 years old. [3]

3) False predictions

A. Israel will enjoy perpetual peace/no buildings will be destroyed

My opponent claims that Isaiah is referring to the 1000 year reign of Jesus that will occur when he returns. However, Isaiah is in the Old Testament, so it is obviously not referring to Jesus. It is a promise that God is making to the Jewish people that will apply once they take back Israel from the other tribes. Obviously, buildings have been destroyed in Jerusalem, including the ancient Jewish temple (twice).

B. Uncircumcised

My opponent once again confused the Old and New Testament and then demands that I prove an uncircumcised person has been to Jerusalem. My friend Rob, for one. And Pope Benedict XVI.

4) Exodus is a lie

Archaeologists agree, based on archeological evidence, that the Jews were never in Egypt and that the battles described in Exodus never occurred. My opponent doesn't bother responding to this.

5) Immoral Teachings

A. Genocide

The women were defiled by angels and thus needed to be killed? What?? Basically my opponent is arguing that it is moral to murder innocent women and children.

B. Rape

Prove who was raped? Lot's daughters? The Bible isn't clear on whether they were raped, but Lot does INVITE the townspeople to rape his daughters, and God still deems Lot worthy of saving.

This also doesn't answer any of the other passages in Deuteronomy. C – G are also dropped.

6) The Jesus Myth is just a repeat of pagan Sun God religions

The Jesus myth is just an amalgamation of stories taken from the pagan gods: Tammuz, Osiris, Attis, Dionysus and the sun god Mithras.

Horus performed miracles, was known as the "lamb of God," and after being betrayed, was crucified, lay dead for 3 days, then was resurrected. If you watch Religulous, it also explains that Horus walked on water and raised "Asar" from the dead ("Asar" translates to "Lazarus").

Dionysus was born of a virgin on Dec 25, was a traveling teacher who turned water into wine, he was referred to as the "King of Kings" (God's only son), and upon his death, he was resurrected.

Mithra was born of a virgin on Dec 25, had 12 disciples and performed miracles and upon his death, was buried for 3 days and then resurrected. The sacred day of worship for Mithra was "Sunday."

Why did the 3 Kings visit Jesus upon his birth? The three stars of Orion's belt were known in ancient times as the "3 kings" and they oversee the rising of the Sun on December 25.

Bethlehem translated to "House of Bread," another name for the constellation Virgo (The Virgin), from whence the Sun rises (is born) on Dec 25th.

The 3 day death is the Winter Solstice of the Sun and the resurrection in the Spring Equinox (or Easter).

These all prove that the historical Jesus is not a real person. He was made up to attract pagan's to Christianity. Even if he is a historical figure, it is unlikely he was actually born on December 25th of a virgin, and it is unlikely he was resurrected after 3 days.

[1] http://tinyurl.com...
[2] http://tinyurl.com...
[3] http://tinyurl.com...
Debate Round No. 3
ScottyDouglas

Pro

I'll go through your points in the same order.

A. Conflicting Genealogies

He was adopted by Joseph who was by blood the heir to the throne. Jesus had it both ways. Mary and Joesph were related if you did not know. The reason Mary was not mentioned was because she is a woman and typically are not mentioned in genelogies only males.

B. Is Jesus Equal to God

To man they are equal for there is only one God to man and that is Jesus. Jesus is equal to God the Father to us. But He is God's only begotten son and therefore God the Father is greater. No contradition.

C. Which came first, beast or man?

19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Here it is not providing that beast were formed in chapter 2. But it simply says God formed them from the ground(past tense or present tense)No contradiction.

D. Human conception?

He was concieved by the Holy Ghost. Also Jesus is descended to David through both Joesph(not blood but adoption) and Mary. Mary and Joesph were related, both are from the tribe of Judah.

E. Punish the son for the sins of the father?

"Parts of the Bible (and my opponent) say that the son should NOT be punished for the sins of the father."

I never said no such thing. I said the guilty should be punished, and rightly so these people were guilty both from father and son. All the generations did as the fathers and God knew that. read:

KJV-R (Webster) Joshua 7:20 And Achan answered Joshua, and said, Indeed I have sinned against the LORD God of Israel, and thus and thus have I done:
KJV-R (Webster) Isaiah 14:20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.
21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

No contradition.

F. Jesus' Last Words

"Scotty claims that all three authors were at the Crucifixion and "heard" different things."

Again I never said no such thing. I said this is what they heard I did not say were. As so they have differnet interpretations from different sources. This also does not prove Jesus didnt say all the things they mention in these verses. No Contradition.

G. Can God Be Seen

I did answer it, you did not understand, Ill make it plain. You can see Jesus. You can't see the Holy Ghost and God the Father. Moses saw Jesus. And Jesus said you can not see God the Father or Holy Ghost in the NT. No contradition.

I. Michal's children

Dropped=Not dropped

Michal's sister, Merab, married Adriel the Meholathite (1 Samuel 18:19), and it was Adriel's children that, according to 2 Samuel 21:8, belonged to Michal and were "brought up" by Michal. We know that Michal had no children, but we will probably always be uncertain of what role (if any) Michal played in the rearing of the children of Adriel.

A. Hares don't chew cud

"This still hasn't been refuted. My opponent claims Hebrew has a different context, but then proves that in this context, the passage does mean "cud."

No that means we call cud differnet than they did. Nothing more. No contradition.

B. Snails melt

My opponent's explanation is also wrong. The Hebrew word here is temec, and this is the only place where it appears in the Bible. The main meaning here is liquefaction, with a root in a word referring to dissolution. All agree that slugs and snails leave a trail behind as they move -- this is not something that is hard to observe or unknown.

C. Snakes only eat dirt

"[1] Lastly, in Genesis 3:14, God condemns the snake to eat nothing but dirt. This is obviously untrue."
KJV-R (Webster) Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Where does it say that only dirt? It says he will intake dust all his life but does not say only. No contradition.

D. Mustard Seed

KJV-R (Webster) Matthew 13:32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge on its branches.

It is merely saying the least seed the farmer had. Not the earth.No contradition.

E. Earth is 6000 years old

However, the oldest human fossils are 195,000 years old.

That is opinion. But lets say it is true. Well God rebuilt the earth as I said he did. There was inhabintants before that. No contradition.

A. Israel will enjoy perpetual peace/no buildings will be destroyed

My opponent claims that Isaiah is referring to the 1000 year reign of Jesus that will occur when he returns. However, Isaiah is in the Old Testament, so it is obviously not referring to Jesus.

Why isnt it? Isaiah was refering to the New Jersusalem. Jesus is God, he was OT and NT. No contradition.

B. Uncircumcised

KJV-R (Webster) Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

This is talking about New Jerusalem. It is refering to when Jerusalem will be free and a joy for the Lord. You know that is not the case today or in past.

4) Exodus is a lie

"based on archeological evidence"
Again opinion not fact!No contradition.

A. Genocide

"The women were defiled by angels and thus needed to be killed? What?? Basically my opponent is arguing that it is moral to murder innocent women and children."

Who is innocent? They committed abominable acts with angels and themselves. Thier children were offspring of giants who was ordered by God to not be on earth doing such. The woman are guilty. The children were hybrids and would contaminant human genes.No contradition.

B. Rape

"Prove who was raped? Lot's daughters? The Bible isn't clear on whether they were raped, but Lot does INVITE the townspeople to rape his daughters, and God still deems Lot worthy of saving."
You said it yourself. Look why Lot did this because Angels would of been raped, i doubt it, they were there to destroy the city. Lot knew they were from God and was protecting them even with his daughters.

"This also doesn't answer any of the other passages in Deuteronomy. C – G are also dropped." Not it aint i missed it.
KJV-R (Webster) Deuteronomy 21:13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

Sounds like wrong doing huh?No contradition.

6) The Jesus Myth is just a repeat of pagan Sun God religions

You wont listen to the Bible but you will listen to this crap. Ok, fallen angels were threw out of heaven with satan. Satan was God greatest angel and learned tons from God, like the Holy Word of God. In this he knew of man. In heaven is the trinity, so no wonder it was on the earth both before and after Jesus. Nonsense. No contrditions.

T: Stone Children

In its context several issues emerge. The youth is out of control and is a danger to society. That is evident from the words that describe this behavior. There is no evidence that anywhere in scripture that this had ever been carried out.
"You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid." Deuteronomy 21:18-21

V: Homosexuality

Homosexuality has no virtue or purpose. It is against nature. It is a abomination.
bluesteel

Con

Thanks scotty.

1) Contradictions

A. Conflicting Genealogies

The only evidence that Joseph and Mary were related is from assuming Luke's genealogy is the genealogy of Mary (even though it SAYS it is tracing Jesus' genealogy through Joseph). The only reason people assume Luke is tracing Mary's genealogy is because the genealogy conflicts with Matthew. There is no other evidence Luke is tracing Mary's genealogy besides the fact that the two genealogies conflict.

My opponent claims that women are not mentioned in genealogies. This is untrue; Matthew's genealogy includes four women - Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and "the wife of Uriah" (i.e., Bathsheba).

My opponent claims that Jesus was Messiah because he could inherit from his father's bloodline. This is untrue. Deuteronomy makes clear that only blood-related children could inherit. For example, Deuteronomy 23:2 says, "No bastard shall enter the assembly of the LORD." This contradicts Acts 2:30, which says the Messiah must be blood-related to David (which I argued under point D).

My opponent argues again that Jesus was descended through Mary. This assumes he was blood related to Mary. Is my opponent suggesting that Jesus had half God's genes and half Mary's genes? Was Jesus only half god and half human? If so, the Trinity makes no sense. If instead Jesus "is God," then Mary was really only his surrogate mother.

B. Is Jesus Equal to God

My opponent just repeats that Christians believe in the Trinity. That doesn't mean the Trinity makes sense. How can you be both equal to and lesser than God, at the same time?

C. Which came first, beast or man?

My opponent doesn't want you to know that right BEFORE the passage in 2 Genesis that he is citing, it says that Adam was "alone" so God decided to make him "helpers." Then the passage my opponent cites says that these helpers were the beasts. You cannot take the passage out of context.

If Adam was "alone," then we know the beasts had not been created yet. It is clear that 1 Genesis and 2 Genesis were written by different authors. This contradiction still stands.

D. I extended this under A.

E. Punish the son for the sins of the father?

If the father is guilty and the son is not, the son should not be punished for the sins of the father.

My opponent merely cites back the passages I already cited, with no analysis. Both passages punish sons for things their fathers did.

F. Jesus' last words

I remind my opponent of his assertion that "the Bible contains no contradictions." He argues the Bible is infallible. If it were infallible, 3 different accounts of Jesus' last words should all contain the SAME words. It's as simple as that.

There's no way Jesus said 3 different things as his "last words." He either asked God why he had forsaken him OR he prepared to meet his Father. Not both.

G. Can God be seen?

Scotty says Moses saw Jesus? What?? Moses lived long before Jesus' time, assuming you believe there was a historical Jesus and historical Moses.

I'm kind of shocked that my opponent claimed in the comments section that I don't know the Bible very well when he consistently confuses the Old and New Testament.

The OLD Testament has instances of God being physically seen by Jacob and Moses. The NEW Testament says God has never been seen by anyone.

2) Things that are wrong

A. Hares chew cud?

My opponent said in the last round that in ancient Hebrew, cud is partially digested food. Hares don't regurgitate partially digested food. That's just factually incorrect.

And if the Bible is infallible, why don't Christians keep kosher?

B. Snails melt

Again, the trail does not represent the snail's body "liquefying." It is a separate mucus secretion – the same type of stuff that comes out of your nose when you're sick.

C. Snakes eat dirt

The passage in Genesis, by "dust thou shalt eat every day of thy life," means that the snake is condemned to eat dirt. My opponent never answers my analysis that snakes 1) don't "eat" dirt since it's not for nutrition and 2) don't even use dirt particles to "smell." That's not even true – it's just something Christian websites like to say.

D. Mustard Seed

I cited MARK, which said that the mustard seed is the smallest seed on earth. My opponent cites MATTHEW back at me. That is not a response.

In addition, the passage he cites in Matthew says "the least of ALL seeds."

But Mark clearly answers my opponent's previous argument that it was referring to only local seeds.

E. Earth is 6000 years old

The oldest human fossil's age is not "opinion," it is scientific fact, based on radioactive isotope dating techniques.

Genesis clearly states that Adam is the first man. My opponent cannot possibly argue successfully that the Bible says there was another race of men before Adam who God killed. This is never mentioned in the Bible.

3) False predictions

A. Israel will enjoy perpetual peace

Saying that Isaiah is referring to Jesus is wrong because Jesus wasn't born yet. The books of the Old Testament were written between 538-332 BC. That's just factually inaccurate.

In addition, if you read Isaiah, the context is that God is promising the Israelites perpetual peace once they kill the other tribes living in Israel. This prediction was obviously wrong.

B. Uncircumcised

As my opponent points out, the passage says, "henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised." According to Collins English dictionary, "henceforth" means "from now on." Clearly, this prediction was false.

Regardless, this prediction cannot possibly be consistent with Christianity.

C. Psalm 132:11-12

This passage tells David, "[your] children shall also sit upon THY THRONE for evermore." This clearly did not come to pass.

4) Exodus is a lie

My opponent confuses scientific facts with opinion. Gravity is not an opinion, although it is only a theory. However, it's my opponent's job to prove my evidence wrong. He has failed to do so.

5) Immorality

A. Genocide

Where does the Bible say that all the 13 tribes that were massacred were composed of women who mated with angels and had giants as children? Regardless, this sounds like a work of fiction. How did the Israelites successfully slay giants. Giants would have p0wned them.

B. Rape

My opponent cites the passage in Deuteronomy that says that if you rape a woman, you have to marry her. Does that sound like something modern women would be okay with? If a man rapes you, he can also force you to marry him. And then he is not guilty of a crime. Does that sound moral?

This also doesn't answer the passage that says you can rape your female slaves.

E. Stone disobedient children

Deuteronomy says, "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us"… Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death."

Then comes the passage my opponent cites, which says that disobedient children are the "evil among you" that must be "purged."

It doesn't matter whether Deuteronomy gives accounts of such stonings; this is a moral instruction to followers of the Old Testament. It is written in instruction format.

G. Homosexuality

So homosexuals in the United States should be put to death? Seriously? This violates their right to life and liberty and is against Lockian and Kantian ethics.

My opponent STILL drops C, D, and F – the Bible sanctions slavery, Thessalonians says all Jews are evil, and Leviticus says men are worth more than women (it even quantifies how much more).

6) Jesus never existed; he is just an amalgamation of different Sun gods

My opponent's answer to this made absolutely no sense. He just talks about Christian beliefs regarding Satan.
Debate Round No. 4
ScottyDouglas

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent again and hope he would like to send me a offer to continue this debate further.
I would like to go over more of my opponents aligations against the Bible. I feel I should because this contains to proving my case.

Geneologies: refer here- http://www.ecclesia.org... No contridiction just misunderstanding.

My opponent asks the question,"Is my opponent suggesting that Jesus had half God's genes and half Mary's genes? Was Jesus only half god and half human?"

My opponent is under his own assumptions here. Jesus is God, the God of the OT and the NT. Jesus made this world and mankind not God the Father. Most think that God the Father is the OT God but they are mistaken. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation and He created us for his pleasure.

I again Quote my opponent, "If Adam was "alone," then we know the beasts had not been created yet."

No it doesn't. Genesis 1 and 2 was not written by different authors!lol. Moses wrote both. Also my opponent wants to look over that God was seeking a helpmate for Adam and Adam named the beast and none was found suited for Adam and God created Eve.

My opponent says, "My opponent merely cites back the passages I already cited, with no analysis. Both passages punish sons for things their fathers did."

Should I have to put full chapters from the Bible? I put verses that clearly states that the sons committed the same sins as the father. The father cursed his sons and the sons in return for being cursed committed the same acts as the father.

Again my opponent says, "There's no way Jesus said 3 different things as his "last words."

I ask you if three people read a book or watch a show will all three discribe it the same? Would they pick certain words or images that stuck for them? I think so. Jesus could have said all these things and the writers are telling what they have heard from the stories. Nothing more.

And again,"I'm kind of shocked that my opponent claimed in the comments section that I don't know the Bible very well when he consistently confuses the Old and New Testament."

Jesus is the OT God and the foretold Messiah, BOTH. Jesus told the OT prophets about his coming to earth and He did in the NT. Moses saw Jesus-God in the OT. In the NT Jesus told the apostles that no person can see God the Father and God the Holy Ghost.

He says,"And if the Bible is infallible, why don't Christians keep kosher?"

Because sir we are not under the OT Jewish customs or Law. We must always follow the ten commandments. But the Laws set for Jews in the OT is no longer under effect since the Messiah has come and filfilled the Law. We are under Grace now.

He says,"The passage in Genesis, by "dust thou shalt eat every day of thy life," means that the snake is condemned to eat dirt."

I supplied the passage anyone can read it. I says the snake shall eat dust all the days of his life not that is all he shall eat. Snakes do consume dirt.

My opponent said," in the last round that in ancient Hebrew, cud is partially digested food. Hares don't regurgitate partially digested food. That's just factually incorrect."

Answer: rabbit is an animal that does ‘maketh' the previously digested material to ‘come up' out of the body (though in a different way than a ruminant does—thereafter does chew ‘predigested material'! http://creation.com...

My opponent says,"Again, the trail does not represent the snail's body "liquefying." It is a separate mucus secretion – the same type of stuff that comes out of your nose when you're sick."

Snails do seem to melt and by the eye they do. This what it is refering here and snails do leave mucus as it crawls. My opponent is suggesting that the Bible must be hip on science today and the lingo they use.

My opponent,"I cited MARK, which said that the mustard seed is the smallest seed on earth."

You and I cited it back but you do understand the passage nor read the passages before it. It clearly is talking people in that region and the farmer who was also in that region and that the farmer had many seeds but the mustard seed was the smallest the farmer had.

My opponent,"The oldest human fossil's age is not "opinion," it is scientific fact, based on radioactive isotope dating techniques."

That is if those techniques work and that is speculation, You think they do, That does not mean they do at all. Plus I got much reason to believe that other inhabinants were on here from the Bible, If granted another debate I will show.

My opponent had the nerve to say, "Saying that Isaiah is referring to Jesus is wrong because Jesus wasn't born yet."
This here show a complete lack of Biblical knowledge and understanding on your part. Jesus is God, He always been around, even way before the creation of earth.

The he says,"In addition, if you read Isaiah, the context is that God is promising the Israelites perpetual peace once they kill the other tribes living in Israel."

My opponent is right it has not happened yet, It will in the New Jersualem, Which I will be there. My opponent then clearly misses this same point in his contradition of the uncircumsised.

He goes on and says,"This passage tells David, "[your] children shall also sit upon THY THRONE for evermore." This clearly did not come to pass."

Again He is right, it will in the New Jersualem.

I thank my opponent for his assertions here, "My opponent confuses scientific facts with opinion. Gravity is not an opinion, although it is only a theory."

Gravity is not fact neither is Archeaology.

He asks,"Where does the Bible say that all the 13 tribes that were massacred were composed of women who mated with angels and had giants as children?"

The use of the word "nephilim" in this verse describes a crossbreed of God's sons and the daughters of man. The text states that Anak was a Rephaite (Deuteronomy 2:11) and a son of Arba (Joshua 15:13). Etymologically, Anak means [long] neck http://en.wikipedia.org...

My opponent again says,"Does that sound like something modern women would be okay with? If a man rapes you, he can also force you to marry him. And then he is not guilty of a crime. Does that sound moral?"

Ill answer, They never raped them, for one, two they were being allowed to live amoungst the Jews. There were accepted not forced.

He continues,"It doesn't matter whether Deuteronomy gives accounts of such stonings; this is a moral instruction to followers of the Old Testament. It is written in instruction format."

It should be instruction. These children never listened to parents, did as they pleased, and stole, killed, and rebeled against thier parents. God was telling them purge such evil, Yes. I guess my opponent thinks that children as these should be allowed to as they please. They did not have prisons back then and foster homes.

He says,"My opponent's answer to this made absolutely no sense. He just talks about Christian beliefs regarding Satan"

Satan was in heaven and taught by God. He learned the Word of God in heaven he was taught it. In heaven three is God the father, Son, and Holy Ghost already always has been. These demons now that and knew Jesus would come. They set up false Messiahs everywhere.

He says,"So homosexuals in the United States should be put to death?"

No. We do not follow under that law anymore. We are not to purge the sin from our nation but our personnel lives. So no one today deserves that.

He ends,"My opponent STILL drops C, D, and F – the Bible sanctions slavery, Thessalonians says all Jews are evil, and Leviticus says men are worth more than women"

If God sees someone as evil, they are. The Bible never sanctions slavery and I dare you to show it instead you provide nothing. Man is ahead the household and throne, above the women and certain ways.

Thank You Bluesteel, Though I take my faith serious I mean no offense and enjoyed it.

VOTE PRO~!
bluesteel

Con

Thanks for the debate Scotty.

== Burden of proof ==

My opponent has consistently agreed that if I can prove that a single passage, anywhere in the Bible, is either a) immoral, b) factually incorrect, or c) contradictory to another passage, then I win.

In addition, the Bible claims to be the word of God, and thus infallible. In the Old Testament, Jeremiah 1:9 says, "Then the LORD stretched out His hand and touched my mouth, and the LORD said to me, ‘Behold, I have put My words in your mouth.'" The New Testament says the same thing; in 1 Thessalonians 2:13, Paul says, "When you received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God." So there should not be a single mistake or contradiction in the Bible if it is the word of God.

Since God is omniscient ("all knowing"), it shouldn't matter if science wasn't advanced enough at the time for people to know, for example, that snails don't leave part of their body behind in their mucus trail.

== Voting Issues ==

Conduct – see my opponent's arrogant comments in the Comments section

Grammar – in Round 4, my opponent uses multiple (incorrect) double negations and in Round 5, he is missing a number of semi-colons.

Sources – I directly footnoted each of my claims, whereas my opponent did not (see his first Round).

Convincing Argument – see below

== Things in the Bible that are wrong or contradictory ==

1) The Genealogies of Luke and Matthew

My opponent, in this round, merely refers you to a new source. His new source explains that Luke and Matthew's genealogies differ because Matthew was writing for a Jewish audience and Luke was writing for a non-Jewish one. This DOES explain why the genealogies differ – because each author had different concerns while fabricating the genealogy.

Ultimately, Luke and Matthew's genealogies both trace Jesus' lineage through Joseph, but mention entirely different people and have vastly different numbers of generations between Abraham and Jesus. This is a blaring contradiction.

2) Is Jesus descended from David?

In Acts 2:30, God promised David that one of his descendents will be the Messiah. However, Deuteronomy 23:2 makes clear that only blood-related, legitimate children could be considered true descendants. If Jesus is not of Joseph's bloodline, he is illegitimate. The genealogies trace Jesus' bloodline through Joseph. Thus, Jesus is not a true descendant of David. He is not even related to Mary, according to my opponent. He is 100% God. No genes from Mary were used in his creation.

3) Is Jesus Equal to or lesser than God?

My opponent claims, "Jesus made this world and mankind not God the Father." This DIRECTLY contradicts John 14:28, where Jesus said, "I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." This ALSO contradicts the First and Second Commandments, which state that you cannot elevate another god above Yahweh. My opponent is saying Jesus is greater than God himself. This is a glaring contradiction, and my opponent is probably going to Hell for saying it.

4) Which was created first, beasts or man?

My opponent claims Moses wrote both books of Genesis. However, most scholars agree that these books were written by multiple different authors in the 5th and 6th century, B.C., which is long after Moses' time. [1] Having multiple authors explains why the creation story in 1 Genesis differs in chronology from the creation story in 2 Genesis. In 1 Genesis, God creates the beasts, then Adam, then Eve. In 2 Genesis, God creates Adam, then the beasts, then Eve. In 2 Genesis, Adam was "alone" until God created the beasts. This is a clear contradiction.

5) Should we punish the son for the sins of the father?

Deuteronomy 24:16 has a direct instruction NOT to kill sons for the sins of their fathers because it's immoral; Deuteronomy says each man is responsible only for his own sins. However, Isaiah 14:21 instructs the Israelites to prepare for slaughter sons for "the iniquity of their fathers." The 2nd Commandment, in Genesis 20:1-17, says God will punish the children, down to the 3rd and 4th generation, of idolaters. This is a clear contradiction, in addition to being unethical. Most people would agree with Deuteronomy; one should only be punished for one's own crimes.

6) Why don't Christians keep kosher?

Leviticus 11:8-10 says you cannot eat pigs or shellfish. Jesus never specifically said it was suddenly okay to do so. Regardless, if Jesus is the same Lord as in Leviticus and he's omniscient, it makes no sense for him to take two different advocacy positions in regards to pork and shrimp.

My opponent merely cites Paul's weak justification: that Jesus, by existing, created a new "covenant," thereby exempting Christians from keeping kosher or being circumcised.

7) Can God be seen?

My opponent really stretches the Trinity to the breaking point when he argues that Jacob and Moses actually saw Jesus. Not only was Moses alive centuries before Jesus' time, but also my opponent's argument would mean Jesus isn't God because the passages say that Moses and Jacob saw "God."

8) Snakes don't eat dirt

They don't. Eat means "consume for nourishment." They don't even put dirt on their tongues – their tongues sample chemical tracers in the AIR. If you ever see a snake's tongue flicking in and out, it's NOT licking the ground; it's sampling the AIR.

9) Snails don't melt

My opponent's argument is essentially that it's not God's fault for not understanding modern science. But God is supposed to be omniscient. The passage says that snails melt; it doesn't say they APPEAR to melt. This is just factually incorrect.

Snails don't even appear to melt, in the sense that their body does not get smaller as they crawl.

10) The mustard seed is the smallest on Earth

Mark literally says "smallest of all seeds on Earth." My opponent agrees there are smaller seeds on Earth, like the orchid seed. Game over.

11) Adam is 6000 years old

Genesis clearly states this, based on the number of generations it lists. Yet the oldest human fossils are 195,000 years old. My opponent fails to show why dating techniques that use radioactive isotopes are wrong. He also fails to show how Adam could be the first man, according to Genesis, but there could also be humans from before Adam's time.

12) The New Jerusalem

My opponent claims that the passages about perpetual peace and the uncircumcised refer to a future New Jerusalem. Scotty even says, "I will be there." This contradicts, however. If all "good" Christians will be there, then some uncircumcised people will be there.

13) The Book of Exodus is a lie

I provided evidence from William Dever, who the LA Times describes as "one of America's preeminent archaeologists," to show that the consensus among archeologists is that the Jews were never in Egypt and that the battles in the Old Testament never happened. The cities that were listed in the OT as burned should have left traces of ash. However, there are no traces of ash at these sites. My opponent never refutes this, except by saying that all of science is merely opinion.

14) Genocide is not okay

My opponent says it is okay because the people had "long necks." I disagree. He says the children that were killed were "unpure." Nearly every genocide movement, such as the Holocaust, used similar rhetoric.

15) Rape is not okay

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 says you can rape a woman, but you have to marry her afterwards. Leviticus 19:20-22 says you can rape your female slaves. My opponent never answers these passages.

16) Slavery is not okay

Exodus says that it is. You can beat your slaves. Just don't kill them. 1 Timothy 6:1-3 in the New Testament tells slaves to obey their masters.

17) Jews are not evil

1 Thessalonians 2:15 says all Jews are evil.

18) Don't stone your children to death

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says to do so. My opponent claims these children "killed" people, but the passage never says that. It just says that they were disobedient and some of them drank alcohol. This description fits most modern teenagers.

19) Men and women are of equal value

Leviticus 27:1-7 says men are worth far more than women.

20) Don't put homosexuals to death

Leviticus 20:13 says to do so. My opponent even agrees that this is morally wrong.

For these 20 reasons, Vote Con.

[1] Davies, G.I (1998). "Introduction to the Pentateuch", p.37
Debate Round No. 5
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 4 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
RFD:

Pro's 1st round while interesting wasn't really expanded on during later rounds which focused more on Con bringing up contradictions in the bible and Pro refuting them.

Con pointed out that Jesus said that his father is greater than him yet the new testament says that god and Jesus are the same. Pro failed to adequately refute this point.

Pro's refutation for whether god can be seen was also not well-argued as he claims that fools only see raw matter whereas the spiritual see beyond that. By "see," it is generally understood that the speaker is referring to seeing with the human eye.

As for factual inaccuracies, it was a clear Con win as he was able to show that many of the claims made by the bible were untrue such as snakes eating dirt, snails melting, and the Earth being 6000 years old. I get Pro's argument that god isn't up to the standards of modern science but as Con points out, god by the general definition is supposed to be all powerful and know everything.

Moving onto morality, Con showed passages from the bible that tolerated rape, slavery and genocide among other things. Pro's response was that genocide was justified because of abominable acts with angels etc.

To evaluate, I considered whether Con could bring up enough points to refute Pro's resolution which stated that the Bible is "good, proper or just," and "in confirmity with fact, reason, truth."

To be fair to Pro, he did have a massive uphill battle as all evidence seemed to favor Con but it was a good debate.

Overall, I felt that the evidence presented by Con was convincing enough to show that the bible did not meet the above requirements giving Con the win.
Posted by thett3 4 years ago
thett3
Scotty, since you believe that it's ok to punish sons for the sins of their fathers let me ask you a question.

My great grandfather was gunned down by the mafia in 1933. Those men were never caught, so escaped punishment. If I theoretically tracked down their descendants would it be acceptable for me to gun them down as well? An eye for and eye after all.
Posted by thett3 4 years ago
thett3
Pro has a mountain to climb in proving that the bible is innerant, given that the claim is almost universally rejected by contemporary scholars. Cons BOP is just to prove on falsehood/contradiction/immorality in the Bible and it was met on a variety of issues. Arguably all 20, but I'll list here the issues that Pro lost big on:

1. Jesus

A. Genealogy- Pro gives conflicting responses to this, first that one of the bloodlines is Mary's, then arguing in his next round that women were excluded from genealogy...what? Either way, Pro offers no plausible explanation for this until Rd 5 where it's too late.

B. Last words

It is a blatant Contradiction to have 3 different sets of last words. Pros response that the three people could've heard three different things still plays in Cons favor--if the Bible was truly w/o error only the true last words would be recorded.

2. Morals

A. Punishing children

Pro argues that the children deserve to suffer earthly punishments with their parents, but not ones in the after life. What? Nevertheless, the Bible also says NOT to punish children for the sins of their fathers so it's a non-starter.

B. Genocide

Pro gives no warrant on how the caannites were, by birth, irredeemable. The genocide was not justified.

C. Homosexuals

Pros only response to this is that we dont follow Leviticus anymore, but if the Bible was truly w/o error there would be no reason to reject Leviticus in the first place.

D. Slavery

It's a historical fact that slave owners justified it with the Bible, and while I believe this is easily explained away, Pro literally drops it, unless asking blue to prove that rapes happened 3000 years ago counts as a response.

3. Science

A. Pro loses on Genesis. He dismisses carbon dating as "opinion" as if a scientific process can be disproven as simply as that.

B. (Biggest factor) PRO DROPS THAT EXODUS DIDNT HAPPEN

Pro drops that card that exodus didn't happen, leading an entire book o
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
I hope Bluesteel chooses to debate again. If He does I hope that He takes the ones He feels that are still unexplained and any mordd and start it off in RD 1 of the next one. Basically we start where we left off to make it productive.Thanks.
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
I hope Bluesteel chooses to debate again. If He does I hope that He takes the ones He feels that are still unexplained and any mordd and start it off in RD 1 of the next one. Basically we start where we left off to make it productive.Thanks.
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
Ive been debating this for years. Im not use to online debating but its ok. The only real contradition on the bible that can be considered is the Moon as a great light. Thats it. With all the science we have it can not make one claim against the Bible except the moon being a light. And I got answers for to but Bluesteel did not ask.
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
Im really hoping that Bluesteel will realize that Jesus is really God. And He would accpet that and become saved through the blood of the lamb.
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
Sorry no limks or references, I had no room, Ill post next round or here, if need be!
Posted by photopro21 4 years ago
photopro21
conduct points for bluesteel for sure! who else agrees?
Posted by ScottyDouglas 4 years ago
ScottyDouglas
Which are whom are you refering with that passage. I cant tell, me or you?
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 4 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
ScottyDouglasbluesteelTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Comments
Vote Placed by royalpaladin 4 years ago
royalpaladin
ScottyDouglasbluesteelTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering Pink for the horrendous RFD/votebombing
Vote Placed by thett3 4 years ago
thett3
ScottyDouglasbluesteelTied
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: Comments
Vote Placed by Pink1234 4 years ago
Pink1234
ScottyDouglasbluesteelTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: More convinced by pro.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
ScottyDouglasbluesteelTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: The fact that Pro dropped a number of points and Con's burden was to provide a single example of biblical inaccuracy or immorality, he wins right there. Even so, there are at least a dozen of Con's numerous contentions that stand. Snails do not melt; Pro concedes this. Snakes do not eat dirt, even if they appear to do so. Archaeological studies cast doubt on the age of the Earth ad the Egypt exodus; Pro simply dismisses these "opinion." So on and so forth. Pro also had worse grammar throughout.