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

The Bible tells real accounts

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 327 times Debate No: 54270
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Round 1: Opening statements
Round 2: Facts/Argument
Round 3: Facts/Argument
Round 4: Closing statements

I look forward to my opponents argument. Good luck

I believe that the Bible tells true stories


I accept your challenge.

I do not think that the Bible's stories are real, and I will support this with facts in the next round.

Please tell me in detail what your opinions are.
Debate Round No. 1


My opnion is that the Holy Bible tells real accounts of Noah's ark, The ressurection of Jesus Christ, and so on. The Bible was written by God and no one else. The Bible has been around since Jesus Christ ressurected. These stories can only be true.


Ok. Please note that I am in no way trying to offend you or your religion, but this is my argument.

So you mean to tell me that every story in the Bible is true, including the ones that most Christians themselves say are simply telling you how to act, such as the Parable of the Lost Son or the Lost Sheep? Parables are not supposed to be real accounts, so that's on part of the Bible that is false. Most Christians I know don't believe that Noah's Ark ever happened, and that it is simply a story telling you to be nice to others so that good things happen to you, instead of being sinful and being drowned. I think the Bible is just a big book of morals, and that it is just telling you to be a nice person.

Even as an Atheist, I think that the Bible is a good book to teach you life lessons from, but there are few people that take every story litereally.

Debate Round No. 2


Well, not everything is true, but most of it seems scientifically possible. Noah's ark seems like something that would happen back in the day. There are real roman accounts of the ressurection of Jesus Christ, and not just from the Bible.


No offence, but you really shouldn't use the words "scientifically possible".
There is absolutely no way that a scientist would take you seriously if you walked in and said "Two of every animal was carried on a big boat to escape a flood that was brought upon us by a man in the sky!"

Also, it is not scientifically possible, as well... let's be logical here.

If there were only two of each animal, wouldn't all the animals be horribly mutated due to inbreeding? To have babies we need variation, and if there isn't any variation, the offspring could end up disabled.

Plus, there were predators and prey on that ship. All the predators would have eaten the small animals. Also, there are over 6,000,000 different types of bug, and most animals are scattered all over the planet, so how could Noah have gathered all these animals in such a short time? There were no planes, and a boat journey would take a long time to go right across the earth. Plus, back then America hadn't even been discovered, so how could he have gotten all the animals unique to America?

Also, "Roman accounts"? Yes, there are accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but how do you know these were accurate? Some random guy could have come along and made it all up. Same thing with the Bible, except a group of people instead of one person.

So as you can see, your argument is flawed. Are there any other examples you would like to bring forward?
Debate Round No. 3


1. Noah did not have every animal on his ship
2. These accounts are from the time of the Resurrection, so yes, they are proven.
3. Like I said, not everything is true in the Bible.

In closing, I say this. Though not everything is true in the bible, I think we can trust it.


1. It does say pretty clearly that Noah took two of EVERY animal on the ark in the bible.
2.What do you mean by proven? Where is your evidence? I said on my last post that there was no possible way that you can be sure that the accounts were true, so simply saying that because they were from the time of the resurrection proves nothing.
3. Yes, you made it pretty clear last time that you thought that not everything in the bible was true, but I didn't say anything to do with that since after you clarified that. You said that Noah 's ark was "scientifically possible" and I explained how it wasn't. So it has nothing to do with how you said that not everything in the bible was true.

In closing, you can't trust the bible as a reliable source of history, as there is no proof that it is accurate.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by mrchu39 2 years ago
You're being way too black and white. Some accounts were most likely true, like I don't believe that God exists, but I do believe that Jesus Christ did, and that he preached goodwill. The whole son of God and rising from the dead thing, that I don't really believe. But some events were probably true.
No votes have been placed for this debate.