The Instigator
Cooldudebro
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JasperFrancisShickadance
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The Bible stories, The Tower Of Babel and Noah's Ark are false.

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 1 vote the winner is...
JasperFrancisShickadance
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/5/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,834 times Debate No: 62687
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Cooldudebro

Pro

This is a spinoff debate from the one we are currently doing. I'm sorry, I can't deal with the stupidity, and I don't want you tricking people into thinking your points are correct. Let's go.

Bop is shared.

First round is for acceptance.
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

I can't wait.
Debate Round No. 1
Cooldudebro

Pro

Hello! Thank you for accepting this debate. I feel like this is going to be one of many religious debates we have. On to business....


Tower Of Babel:

The overall story of the Tower of Babel is a faulty one. It is said the people tried to build a tower that would reach into heaven. God didn't want this, so he used the tower to change their languages, so they couldn't build to tower to the heavens. Some people believe that God also changed the people's races. (1)

Believers Point Of View:

This is true because the Bible says it's true.


Skeptic's Point Of View

Probably one of the most destructive parts of the story is that history doesn't coincide with it (2). A quote from the article:


"
At this point we shall review some of the documented historical events from the ancient era within this time frame and see if they are consistent with the date of the Tower of Babel.

Babylonian culture flourishes in Mesopotamia. Cultivation methods for rice documented in Indochina First cultivation of maize recorded by the Aztecs in Mexico The plough is invented in China The Egyptians and Sumerians extract silver from ore The Egyptians develop the first iron tools Training of horses for transportation is invented in Ukraine Hindu scriptures are complete and practiced in India The invention of alcoholic beverages in western Iran Fishing nets and hooks invented by the Australian Aborigines

The sample list of events were recorded by different cultures with distinct languages and writing systems, therefore the Tower of Babel narrative in the bible does not fit with the documented historical record. In other words it can be proved easily that at and before the time of the Tower of Babel, assuming it truly happened, there was not one single common language spoken by all humans as claimed in Genesis."

Some flaws in the story are:

Man can't reach God by going higher in the sky. If this story was true, God would have to be oblivious to the fact that it is impossible to reach him.

How does race come into the picture without the Tower of Babel?

How come historical evidence goes completely against the Tower of Babel?

Noah's Ark:



The Cross-breeding Fallacy:


Many people think you can cross-breed two breeds of dogs and get every single breed through cross breeding. However, I would like to show this isn't true. Lets just say I cross bred a husky with a collie. I wouldn't get all the types of dogs through cross-breeding. I would only get the mix of the collie and husky. If dogs did cross breed to get every breed we know today, then how did they do it so fast? In the link used commonly by creationist, it states that the flood happened 4,359 years ago.

"
Calculated BC date for creation: 4004
Calculated AM date for the Flood: - 1656
Calculated BC date for the Flood: 2348
Current Year (minus one2): + 2011
Number of years since beginning of Flood: 4359
"




My challenge for you is to find me a link that states what two breeds cross bred into all the breeds of dogs and if it would take less than or just exactly 4,359 years. Good luck! I would also like to see, in your logic, how eight people can interbreed into billions of people.




Morality:


God is supposed to be all good according to the bible. However, I will suggest that he is not all good. If you are still confused about this point, let me explain. If I prove God isn't 100% good, then the bible, and all of the quotes you are using is an invalid source.

First, God supposedly caused the flood, so that means he murdered thousands upon thousands of humans.

Second, murder is a sin,

Third, god committed murder, thus committed a sin.

Last, this would make god in-perfect, which wouldn't make him all good.

My challenge for you, is to refute this.


Case 3: Logical refutation for the bible story

1. The story says people that follow god will be sustained. However, why doesn't he sustain priests and nuns? What links shows that the first humans were in better health than we are right now with modern medicine.


Good luck Con!










1. http://creationtoday.org...
2. http://www.ghanaweb.com...
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

Hi, and you're welcome for accepting this debate. :) Now let's get serious!

The past debates you and I have done together were set aside for evolution against creationism. Let me remind everyone else that we are both Christians, and I will give my reasons for belief (RFB!) in a loving, kind way and you will give yours. This will be on the topic of Christianity and different world views, but of course I will try to stay on topic and it will mostly be a debate about what we argue is false and what actually happened in the Bible. My arguments will bounce off of the rebuttals I think.

R1. "The overall story of the Tower of Babel is a faulty one. It is said the people tried to build a tower that would reach into heaven. God didn't want this, so he used the tower to change their languages, so they couldn't build to tower to the heavens. Some people believe that God also changed the people's races."
For each story you call faulty in God's Word I will challenge you to give alternative reasons for why the story was even in the Bible. To me, the Bible is His Story (a history textbook) that holds the secrets and morals of God himself, and we should respect it with reverence. However if we do not know which way to interpret the contents of history, we will have a hard time knowing what to believe. Firstly, I don't believe that the ToB has anything to do with races. Why? Because the Bible doesn't say so. See, I believe races came from Adam and Eve in a form of evolution, but I don't believe in the type of evolution that you believe in CDB. But here's proof that the ToB was real:
#1 History
The Bible explains the genealogy from creation until about a thousand years later. Noah and the families of Noah's generations were the ones who divided the earth after the Flood, and according to the Bible, at that time all of humankind spoke a single language. The populations spread eastward and a plain was discovered in Shinar (Babylon). The land became populated and the dwellers talked of building a great city with a temple tower reaching the skies (heavens). Because of their pride they said that if they built it, it would stop people from populating around the world and it would "weld them together."
#2 Details
They burned hard brick and made huge piles of it, then using bitumen to use as mortar. Isn't that interesting?
#3 The Lord's Presence
God looked at the city and the magnificent tower, and He said, "Behold, the people is one,
#4 The rest of the Bible supports the Genesis account thus the ToB
Acts 17:26 says "From one man he created all the nations of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth." You may ask 'where did Cain get his wife?' And I might answer that he used her sister, but your counter rebuttal would be saying we'd all be insane by now (lol) [1]. Mutations increase over time due to studies you would probably agree with [2]. You might use Leviticus 18:6 for your side because it says "No-one is to approach close relatives to have sexual relations." But if we trace back to the time of Leviticus, it was a very long time--2500 years--after the creation of mankind, therefore mutations would've ben plentiful and (what we call) incest marriage actually would be wrong! Point is that in the time of the first humans it was ok to have...sex...with close relatives...
#5 Adam and Eve's skin color
You've probably heard of couples who have had children with different melanins (skin colors) [3], so you should understand that it was very possible for skin colors to differ among generations after creation. Same type of deal with eye shapes. In fact, Charles Darwin thought that dark skinned people were not as evolved as light skinned people thus "blacks" were closer to the animals!! Imagine how that led to the slavery, and the overall racism that happens now. [6]
#6 If evolution is disproved I can prove ToB
Doesn't make much sense at first, but really ties in to this precisely because of the races and languages issue we are arguing. First, a status from an evolutionist says (paraphrase) "human ancestors lived 5000 years ago, but there is one woman whom all humans currently living have related DNA thus we are all related to each other..." [5] This seems to prove that all men came from one man (Acts 17:26). The evolutionist used simple mathematics to figure that out, but don't get this mixed up with mitochondrial eve. Mitochondrial Eve is an observable proof that science points towards the Bible, which clearly says that all men/nations descended from one woman!
#7 Ziggurat
The ToB is an example of a ziggurat. The story of the Tower of Babel at first sounds imponderable to many ears, but not to the informed. In fact this story fits our best knowledge of earth"s earliest civilizations like a well-tailored glove. No longer is it possible for scholars to smugly dismiss these stories as mythological simply because of their unusual nature.
the ancients built most of their cities around sacred towers with uncanny similarities to what we find in the Biblical Tower of Babel narrative; these sacred towers are referred to as ziggurats. These massive structures first appear during the Uruk period (3500-3100 BC) in Mesopotamia (literally "the land between two rivers," also referred to as the "Cradle of Civilization," or commonly "land of the Bible"). It is in this land, explicitly, where the earliest events in Genesis take place. From Babylonia to Assyria, most Mesopotamian cities had a centralized tower. See #2 for reasons that ToB was most likely a ziggurat. [7]

R2. You say that a "Believer's" view is that the Tower of Babel is true...because the Bible says it's true; that a "skeptic" thinks it's a contradiction, etc. I beg to differ, aren't skeptics believers in God still?? And if you read the above you will see why I don't believe that ToB is real because I read it on pages (though 'God's Word' holds significant pages), I believe it because of the given facts.

R3. "Man can't reach God by going higher in the sky. If this story was true, God would have to be oblivious to the fact that it is impossible to reach him."
I don't get what you said lastly. But I will rebut the first part. Many times in the Bible it says the word 'high(er).' First class people are even now considered "higher" than working class. Psalms says "Lead me to the Rock that is Higher than..." and Ephesians talks of the spiritual realms as being up high in the sky. The Heavens themselves can be defined as the place God "lives," or outer space/sky. So, because of their pride and arrogance and in order to be closer to God or MORE LIKE God, the people built a tower that would presumably reach to the heavens.

You say: "How come historical evidence goes completely against the Tower of Babel?" If you tell me about it I will then attempt the rebuttal.

R4. "My challenge for you is to find me a link that states what two breeds cross bred into all the breeds of dogs and if it would take less than or just exactly 4,359 years. Good luck! I would also like to see, in your logic, how eight people can interbreed into billions of people." Are we talking about skin colors in that last part? If so, I explained above. For your first sentence: http://sciencenetlinks.com... It's not bias, it doesn't exactly prove my point, but it shows you what interbreeding does. I don't see what you're trying to prove though.

One thing: God created morality dude!!!

SOURCES
[1] http://gameofthrones.wikia.com...
[2] the video at top
[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
[4] http://www.rtgmin.org...
[5] http://science.howstuffworks.com...
[6] http://thetruthwins.com...
[7] http://kata-aletheia.blogspot.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Cooldudebro

Pro

Rebuttal 1:

The bible stories itself are faulty. They were put in there because, when the Bible was made, it was their best way of explaining it. I then turn the question around on you, and ask why we should take this story literary?

Rebuttal 2:

You talk about how the Bible explains history, however, you completely ignore the evidence I brought up that says that history is wrong (See Tower of Babel argument round 2)! Anyone can make up a fake history!

Rebuttal 3:

How could they build something that doesn't exist?

Rebuttal 4:

I don't know how this can be an argument...

Rebuttal 5:

The Bible supports it. So what? The Bible is false, and you neglect to even touch my arguments against it!

Rebuttal 6:

I find some flaws I would like to exploit.

1. What are the skin tones of the parents?

2. Adam and Eve would need to have at least two white, black, Asian, Indian, native American, ETC.

Rebuttal 7:

I find multiple problems with this.

1. He is not an expert in science, genealogy, ETC.

2. The study was in 1987.

3. Even if the study were true, it would not line up with the Biblical timeline. She is 200,000 years old. This actually supports evolution.

Science has changed a lot since the 80's. We all can agree on that. With the article not being written by an expert, and the study being so old, we can't trust it. It also does nothing but go against the Bible, because it says she lived 200,000 years ago. The Bible says the Earth is thousands of years old.

Rebuttal 8:

I find great academic shame brought forth by Con this argument. Not only is this preposterous, it is plain stupid. First off, there were many ziggernauts. Second off, this shouldn't even be used as evidence, as it's all just conjecture. Third off, your link doesn't work.

Rebuttal 9:

You couldn't find a rebuttal to this, so you threw some things and hope they'd stick, and make the voters forget my arguments.

You totally ignore the un-questionable historical evidence against the Tower of Babel I brought forth.

I find this disappointing.

Rebuttal 10:

Again, God would have to be oblivious to the fact that no one is higher than God.

I did give you historical evidence. If you forgot about it, or were too lazy to read my arguments, I will quote from my arguments.

"At this point we shall review some of the documented historical events from the ancient era within this time frame and see if they are consistent with the date of the Tower of Babel.

Babylonian culture flourishes in Mesopotamia. Cultivation methods for rice documented in Indochina First cultivation of maize recorded by the Aztecs in Mexico The plough is invented in China The Egyptians and Sumerians extract silver from ore The Egyptians develop the first iron tools Training of horses for transportation is invented in Ukraine Hindu scriptures are complete and practiced in India The invention of alcoholic beverages in western Iran Fishing nets and hooks invented by the Australian Aborigines

The sample list of events were recorded by different cultures with distinct languages and writing systems, therefore the Tower of Babel narrative in the bible does not fit with the documented historical record. In other words it can be proved easily that at and before the time of the Tower of Babel, assuming it truly happened, there was not one single common language spoken by all humans as claimed in Genesis." (1)


Rebuttal 11:

I agree, this isn't bias. However, this has nothing to do with the question I asked. You gave a answers to questions about dogs. You didn't find any two breeds that could cross breed to all the dog breeds. I also want to ask you this, and I will bold this so you don't skip past it, HOW CAN EIGHT PEOPLE MULTIPLY TO BILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN 4,359 YEARS?

Rebuttal 12:

Man created morality.

Summation:

My opponent is spewing propaganda hoping that you forget about my arguments and think they prove her's when they have close to nothing to do with the topic at hand. She drops cases hoping you also forget about them. She is trying to trick you. Don't fall for it.






1. http://www.ghanaweb.com...
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

Thank you!

You ask why we should take this story literally. (Actually you said this: "why we should take this story literaRy," but anyways.)
The Bible is a book of History. It tells the past (stories of the past i.e. creation itself), it tells the present (does Pro not agree that the Bible is God's Word/letter to us?), and it tells the future (there are about 1,817 prophecies made in the Bible, a little less than 2/3 have already been fulfilled). This gives so much uniqueness to the authenticity and originality of God's Word. Here are just a few example of prophesies fulfilled, and if you can debunk them I'd be surprised. Note and assume the probability of all these, because most are like 1 in 10 to the fifth power! [1]

1. Some time before 500 B.C. the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26). He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 B.C., 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee. (Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about 26 A.D. Also note that from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in 70 A.D. came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.

2. In approximately 700 B.C. the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as the birthplace of Israel's Messiah (Micah 5:2). The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of the most widely known and widely celebrated facts in history.

3. Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.

4. Mighty Babylon, 196 miles square, was enclosed not only by a moat, but also by a double wall 330 feet high, each part 90 feet thick. It was said by unanimous popular opinion to be indestructible, yet two Bible prophets declared its doom. These prophets further claimed that the ruins would be avoided by travelers, that the city would never again be inhabited, and that its stones would not even be moved for use as building material (Isaiah 13:17-22 and Jeremiah 51:26, 43). Their description is, in fact, the well-documented history of the famous citadel.

R1. "You talk about how the Bible explains history, however, you completely ignore the evidence I brought up that says that history is wrong (See Tower of Babel argument round 2)! Anyone can make up a fake history!"
I know you believe that God created matter. Do you not also believe that the history of the world and its people is all HIS STORY? If you do, then why are we debating this, since the Bible is the only way to figure if it is all really God's Word/His story? If you don't, then what's your reasoning for believing in the Christian God in the first place? The Bible is not fake history. It holds secrets (of the past, present, and future) that we can't get from any other place/book/mouth/artifact, and it is the only way we can positively communicate with Christ Jesus. My challenge to you, Pro, is why believe in the Christian God if you can't rely on what the Bible says is history.

R2. "How could they build something that doesn't exist?" If you are talking about ziggurats, then I'll make my previous argument a bit clearer: the ToB could've been in an early form of a ziggurat, due to the details the Bible gives about it.

R3. "The Bible supports it. So what? The Bible is false, and you neglect to even touch my arguments against it!" Give me arguments against it that hasn't already been refuted, then we'll talk. I still can't see why you don't believe the Bible but can still believe in God.

"What are the skin tones of the parents?" You need to further explain what you exactly mean, but I'm going to assume you are talking about Adam and Eve. It has been proven they were around the tannish tone. http://www.christiananswers.net... [2], [3]

"Adam and Eve would need to have at least two white, black, Asian, Indian, native American, ETC." ? You gave no sources of validity and it is a bit irrelevant. In fact I already disproved that claim because of my arguments that explained why genes can form completely different races from the opposite. And I have to say I laughed when I saw 'native American.' :)

"Science has changed a lot since the 80's. We all can agree on that. With the article not being written by an expert, and the study being so old, we can't trust it. It also does nothing but go against the Bible, because it says she lived 200,000 years ago. The Bible says the Earth is thousands of years old." If you want the readers to vote Pro, you should say which source I had which was wrong. Just my suggestion but you should also say what part of the source was wrong and why. Nothing has been refuted therefore my proof remains steady. Please attempt to rebut these evidences for a Young Earth:
#1 Very little sediment on sea floor. [4]
#2 Bent rock layers. [5]
#3 Soft tissues in fossils (already explained in Round 2)
#4 Faint sun paradox. [6]
#5 Rapidly decaying Magnetic Field. [7]
#6 Helium in Radioactive Rocks. [8]
#7 Carbon-14 in fossils, coal, and diamonds. [9]
#8 Short lived comets. Comets can't live for billions of years.
#9 Very little salt in the sea. [10]
#10 DNA in ancient bacteria. [11]

Can you prove that 8 people can't multiply to billions of people in nearly 5,000 years?

You say "Man created morality." But I say that God created man THEREFORE He is the source of all morality, too.

R4. "She drops cases hoping you also forget about them. She is trying to trick you. Don't fall for it." How is my argument propaganda?? Tell me what I did not refute!

R5. We do not expect the Israelites to have a ready term for ziggurats because ziggurats were not a part of the Israelite culture. To call the ziggurat a tower is not inaccurate, and as a matter of fact, the term they used is derived from the Hebrew term gdl (to be large), which is somewhat parallel to the etymological root of the Akkadian word, ziqqurat (zaqaru, to be high). Despite the fact then that the Hebrew term is used primarily in military senses or as watch towers, the context here and the known background of the narrative prevent us from being limited to that semantic range.

[1] http://www.reasons.org...
[2] http://www.christiananswers.net...
[3] http://rightpunditry.wordpress.com...
[4] http://pubs.usgs.gov...
[5] http://creationrevolution.com...
[6] http://creation.com...
[7] http://www.talkorigins.org...
[8] http://www.britannica.com...
[9] http://www.icr.org...
[10] http://www.asa3.org...
[11] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 3
Cooldudebro

Pro

I'm so glad I caught this debate. I have been sick lately but I'm back from my three day vacation.

Rebuttal 1:

Your whole Bible argument is worthless. I don't even know why you posted it.

Rebuttal 2:

Fake history? You give no reason why this source isn't credible and then, because you can't think of any other ways to refute it, claim it's fake history. Nice try. You then preach about how we should believe the Bible over historic proof. Please, JFS.

Rebuttal 3:

With no proof to back that up, I can't believe it. I said the ToB isn't true.

Rebuttal 4:

I did, yet in your closed mind, you neglect to acknowledge it.

It was a simple question. What were the skin tones of the parents?

Rebuttal 5:

It's simple logic. If Adam and Eve would be the father and mother of the human race, they would have to bear at least one male and female child of all races.

Let the records show that all of the claims come from bias sources, and don't even apply to the debate EX: christiananswers.

This would take a lot of complex math, and variables depending on child rate, mother's death at birth, dead babies, babies killed from diseases, ETC. Con neglects to even try to prove it is even remotely possible, and to keep herself from answering, she puts it off on me. Clever tactic.

This link: http://science.howstuffworks.com...

Even according to the Bible, man has free will. Now, here is where my logic comes in. We govern ourselves. To someone, abortion may be moral to save the mother's life, to others, no. Morality is determined by man and its society.

Rebuttal 6:

Bias sources, arguments that don't apply to the debate, all of these are used by you to derail the reader and tricking them into thinking your arguments are relevant. I will give you a list of arguments not refuted or refuted poorly.

Rebuttal 7:

I'm wondering how this is a rebuttal.

Dropped arguments and rebuttals:

How can two dogs cross breed into all the dogs in the world?

Poorly refuted arguments:

Time span of reproduction.

Adam and Eve would need to have a male and female of every race.

Please see through Con's biased sources and crooked arguments and focus on those with reliable sources and concern the debate. Thank you.
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

Thank you! Yes, I think it's great that you stayed in this debate too, as it has been very interesting. Now, onward.

I will try to stay to the pattern of the final round. Rebuttals first.

Well, the first argument part you wrote last round was hardly a rebuttal, so I must mention it. If it was not our last round of the debate, I would ask you to clarify it, but alas. Here it is: "Your whole Bible argument is worthless. I don't even know why you posted it." Why? Your statement is not valid in any way unless you give me a reason to think it is. You gave no back up proof (example of my worthless argument, etc.). Isn't this supposed to be ABOUT the Bible's authenticity? I gave a rightful argument and you didn't even try to refute it.

You say rather sassily: "Fake history? You give no reason why this source isn't credible and then, because you can't think of any other ways to refute it, claim it's fake history. Nice try. You then preach about how we should believe the Bible over historic proof. Please, JFS." Funny, you gave no example of me doing that, either. I merely said that the Bible IS historical and gave proof that there is historical evidence for it (see my part for Round 2).

You, again: "It was a simple question. What were the skin tones of the parents?" You did not clarify. Yet I gave an answer. Yet you did not tell me if the answer was relevant. So I will not say it again, since I don't barely know what you are talking about in the question.

"If Adam and Eve would be the father and mother of the human race, they would have to bear at least one male and female child of all races." No, and I already explained why not. But I will do it again. It has been proven that a race can form out of two opposite, different races/genes.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.jarnot.com...

Much of what Pro aid was utterly irrelevant to this debate. I.e.: "Even according to the Bible, man has free will. Now, here is where my logic comes in. We govern ourselves. To someone, abortion may be moral to save the mother's life, to others, no. Morality is determined by man and its society."

This is what you said: "Bias sources, arguments that don't apply to the debate, all of these are used by you to derail the reader and tricking them into thinking your arguments are relevant." Well, if the voters decide that the arguments are completely irrelevant, so be it. That's their job, but it's yours and my job to JUST debate.

You say that I dropped this argument: "How can two dogs cross breed into all the dogs in the world?" But actually I had previously asked you if it's impossible for two dogs to cross breed into all these dogs. So...I wonder who's fault it really is. To answer you question I will give these two links. Please don't call them bias or irrelevant!
http://ask.metafilter.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://creation.com...
http://creation.com...

You say that this was poorly refuted. "Time span of reproduction." This is a vague statement. It seems like you also made a poor argument for it, if any. But here we go, since I have the opportunity to refute it now:

The Bible record is found in Gen. 4:16,17. After Cain had killed Abel, he departed from the land where he and Abel had lived. He moved to Nod, a land east of Eden. There he and his wife had a son whom he named Enoch. He also built a city which he also named Enoch. The fact that Cain, the son of Adam, built a city tells us much about the increase in population in the early history of mankind. If a city was built in the lifetime of a son of the very first man, it follows that population grew rapidly and was quickly civilized (in contrast to the views of evolutionists). God had commanded Adam and Eve to reproduce and fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). Men in that time, before the flood, lived to great ages (see chapter 5). Adam, for example, lived to be 930 years old before he died (5:5), and most of his descendants before the flood lived about 900 years. If there are no gaps in the genealogies, this means Adam would have been alive following the birth of Lamech, father of Noah, 8 generations later! Hence, although they eventually died, people lived many years before they died. This greatly multiplied the number of people living on earth because, at any one time, there were many generations still living. Further, men were capable of having many children, and large families were common. Noah was having children at age 500 (5:32). All men in chap. 5 are recorded as having "sons and daughters." In such long lifetimes with long periods of fertility, many children could be born. By the time Cain died, there could easily have been 120,000 people on the earth (certainly enough for there to be cities). By the time of Noah there could easily have been seven billion - more than on earth today! Do not think of Cain, Adam, and other such people as walking around on a bare, lonesome, uninhabited earth. From the above information it is clear that there would have been many women available for him to choose from eventually. With people living such long lives, it would have been no problem for a man to marry a woman 50 or even 100 years younger than him. This would be no different, by comparison, than a man today marrying a woman 5 or 10 years younger than himself.
http://www.gospelway.com...

Think of the span of reproduction like this. You believe God had a purpose and a plan for us even from the beginning, do you not? Then why would it be wrong for Cain to intermarry? Why would it be impossible for dogs to get this sophisticated and abundant in about 6,000 years?

God sent the Flood not out of complete wrath, but also out of his great love for us that we might begin properly and prospering. Genesis says (6:5), "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." From another perspective in considering why God sent the Flood, we must first realize that those living upon the Earth were completely and utterly wicked beyond the hope of changing. There were no innocent bystanders caught up in the Flood; everyone was guilty of the most deplorable sinfulness. The rebellion against God that we saw taking root in Cain and his descendants had now reached a fruition that God could not overlook.
http://answersfromthebook.org...

You do not say anything more about the Tower of Babel OR the Flood in Round 4, surprisingly! You are either avoiding it or you know that I refuted your arguments about it. Thank you for reading, everybody, and I'm sorry if it got a bit rough. I hope we all can see a little clearer now that we've discussed this.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
On the topic of races: http://www.debate.org...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
CooldudebroJasperFrancisShickadanceTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to con as pro used ad hominem tactics and called Jaspers arguments preposterous and stupid. Sources also go to con as she presented valid evidence to boast the claims of her position. although I would say that it's a tie since neither side were able to completely prove their position, seeing that both were going off topic. Con could have won had she worked on providing evidence rather than using Scripture as evidence for the Bible's reliability.