The Instigator
kohai
Con (against)
Winning
45 Points
The Contender
Calvincambridge
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The God of the Bible Exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/6/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,017 times Debate No: 18192
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (7)

 

kohai

Con

First round is for opening arguments. The BOP is shared.

FULL RESOLUTION: It is probable that the Biblical God exists.

==================
OPENING ARGUMENTS
==================

Argument from Biblical Defects (ABD)

(P1) If the God of evangelical Christianity were to exist, then the Bible would be God's only written revelation.

(P2) Thus, if that deity were to exist, then he would probably see to it that the Bible is perfectly clear and authoritative, and lack the appearance of merely human authorship.

(P3) Some facts about the Bible are the following:

  1. It contradicts itself or is very unclear in many places.
  2. It contains factual errors, including unfulfilled prophecies.
  3. It contains ethical defects (such as God committing or ordering atrocities).
  4. It contains interpolations (later insertions to the text).
  5. Different copies of the same biblical manuscripts say conflicting things.
  6. The biblical canon involves disputes and is apparently arbitrary.
  7. There is no objective procedure for settling any of the various disputes, especially since the original manuscripts of the Bible have been lost and there has been no declaration from God that would help resolve any of the disputes.

(C1) Therefore [from C], the Bible is not perfectly clear and authoritative, and has the appearance of merely human authorship.

(C2) Hence [from B & D], probably the God of evangelical Christianity does not exist [1]

Discussion

Premise 1 is unproblemetic since God would want to preserve his word. It is logical to assume that there may be other false revelations, but only one true revelation.

Premise 2 is also unproblemetic. If God were to exist, he would want his word to be clear and authoritative. Therefore, there cannot be any mistakes found within the revelation.

Premise 3 is where the real discussion begins. This is an important issue that I will be discussing in this debate.

It contradicts itself or is very unclear in certain points.


One of these major points in which the Bible is unclear or contradictory is in the matter of Savlation. Take a look at the following:


By Hearing the Gospel & Belief in God: John 5:24: "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life."

By Baptism: John 3:5: "Jesus answered, 'I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.'"

By Grace & Faith, not Works: Ephesians 2:8,9: "For by grace are ye saved through faith ... not of works."

By Faith & Works: James 2:17: "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone."

By Keeping the Law: Matthew 19:17: "... if thou wilt enter unto life, keep the commandments."

By Belief in Christ: John 3:16: "... whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

By Belief and Baptism: Mark 16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

By Words: Matthew 12:37: "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

By Calling on the Lord: Acts 2:21: "whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Not Works but by Grace & Baptism: Titus 3:5: "Not by works ... but according to his mercy ... by the washing of regeneration." (Note: some denominations will say the washing refers to Christ's blood and sacrifice.)

According to Proverbs 16:4: God made the "wicked" for "the day of evil" (i.e. judgment & damnation). Of course, this makes no sense in light of passages that confirm or suggest that Jesus died for a small number of the elect; or that suggest all will be saved: John 1:29, 4:42, 1 Corinthians 15:29, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 4:14.

Salvation Available to the Chosen Few: Matthew 7:14, 22:14, Luke 12:32, 13:24, John 6:37,65,15:16,19, Romans 8:29, 9:11-23, Ephesians 1:4.

Salvation Available to Those Who Desire it: Matthew 7:7-8, 11:28, John 3:16, 5:40, 7:37, Acts 2:21, Revelation 3:20.

In fact, Christians cannot agree on how to be saved!


Southern Baptist
: Baptism (by immersion) seen as a public testimony to the commitment to Christ (infant or preconversion baptisms not practiced); some require baptism, some do not. Belief in God, eternal covenant between the Father and the Son about the redemption of the elect, repentance of sin. Communion is seen as symbolic.


Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod:
Grace alone through faith, belief in Christ's sacrifice; baptism is "generally" required. Lutherans believe that Christ's body and blood are present "during" communion (i.e., consubstantiation).


There is also confusion about the role of women. Can women preach or can they not? There are churches that disagree. We can conclude that the Bible is very unclear and/or contradictory.


Another issue the Bible can't seem to get straight is how Judas died.


"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (MAT 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (ACT 1:18)

Which one was it? Did he die by falling head long or did he die by hanging himself?

Even more important is the order of creation [2]:

Here is the order in the first (Genesis 1), the Priestly tradition:

Day 1: Sky, Earth, light
Day 2: Water, both in ocean basins and above the sky(!)
Day 3: Plants
Day 4: Sun, Moon, stars (as calendrical and navigational aids)
Day 5: Sea monsters (whales), fish, birds, land animals, creepy-crawlies (reptiles, insects, etc.)
Day 6: Humans (apparently both sexes at the same time)
Day 7: Nothing (the Gods took the first day off anyone ever did)

Note that there are "days," "evenings," and "mornings" before the Sun was created. Here, the Deity is referred to as "Elohim," which is a plural, thus the literal translation, "the Gods." In this tale, the Gods seem satisfied with what they have done, saying after each step that "it was good."

The second one (Genesis 2), the Yahwist tradition, goes:

Earth and heavens (misty)
Adam, the first man (on a desolate Earth)
Plants
Animals
Eve, the first woman (from Adam's rib)

It contains factual errors, including unfulfilled prophecies.

failed prophecy: Tyre

Ezekiel 26:7-14 (KJV)
For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people. He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee. And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers. By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach. With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground. And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water. And I will cause the noise of thy songs to cease; and the sound of thy harps shall be no more heard. And I will make thee like the top of a rock: thou shalt be a place to spread nets upon; thou shalt be built no more: for I the LORD have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.

God states in this text that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre. Hwoever, these events never happened. After 13 years, nebuchadnezzar withdrew his army. Tyre survived for another 240 until Alexander the Great destroyed it [3] and the city was rebuilt.

References
[1]http://www.infidels.org...
[2] http://www.infidels.org...
[3] http://phoenicia.org...

Calvincambridge

Pro

I accept your debate
Debate Round No. 1
kohai

Con

Round 1 was for opening arguments. My opponent has yet to provide evidence the Biblical God exists, while I have proved that he does not.

(This is going to he funny).
Calvincambridge

Pro

I am offended by your comment at the bottom Kohai but your whole argument is irrevelent even if the Bible was inacurate it would not make God/YHWH/Allah not exist.If the Bible was inacurate like the Old testament and the New testament the God of Islam who is also the God of Judaism and Christianity would still exist it would simply leave room for the Muslim belief the Tanakh and Bible have been corrupted and the Quran is correct therefore scripture being true or not does not make God exist in round 2 I will explain possible mistranslation.
Debate Round No. 2
kohai

Con

Please extend my arguments and vote PRO. My opponent has not refuted anything I said nor has my opponent given any evidence for God. The Burden of Proof is shared.
Calvincambridge

Pro

My opponent has failed to argue after his opening arguments. Point 2 mistranslation the Hebrew,aramaic,Greek and Arabic of the abrahamic religions are the only key to what the Bible says for example it appers you cite the King James translation of the Bible bu there are translation errors in the KJV for example

http://www.biblestudy.org...;
http://www.behindthebadge.net...
http://www.behindthebadge.net...;

Here is the orginial languauge text of the verses you cited

John 5:24 Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὁ τὸν λόγον μου ἀκούων καὶ πιστεύων τῷ πέμψαντί με ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ εἰς κρίσιν οὐκ ἔρχεται ἀλλὰ μεταβέβηκεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν

(All Orginial language quotes are from the following links)

www.Biblos.com

John 3:5 ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ


Ephiesans 2:8-9 8ἧς ἐπερίσσευσεν εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ καὶ φρονήσει, 9γνωρίσας ἡμῖν τὸ μυστήριον τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὴν εὐδοκίαν αὐτοῦ ἣν προέθετο ἐν αὐτῷ

James 2:17
17οὕτως καὶ ἡ πίστις, ἐὰν μὴ ἔχῃ ἔργα, νεκρά ἐστιν καθ' ἑαυτήν.


Matthew 19:17 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· τί με ἐρωτᾷς περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ; εἷς ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαθός· εἰ δὲ θέλεις εἰς τὴν ζωὴν εἰσελθεῖν, τήρει / τήρησον τὰς ἐντολάς.


John 3:16 16Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ' ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.


Mark 16:16 ὁ πιστεύσας καὶ βαπτισθεὶς σωθήσεται, ὁ δὲ ἀπιστήσας κατακριθήσεται.

Matthew 12:37 37ἐκ γὰρ τῶν λόγων σου δικαιωθήσῃ, καὶ ἐκ τῶν λόγων σου καταδικασθήσῃ.


Acts 2:21 21καὶ ἔσται πᾶς ὃς ἐὰν / ἂν ἐπικαλέσηται τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου σωθήσεται.


5οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ
ἃ ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς
ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ αὐτοῦ ἔλεος
ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας
καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως πνεύματος ἁγίου,

all Greek quotes are taken fromm www.Biblos.com
Westcott / Hort, UBS4 Variants


As for the Hebrew proverbs does not need to be quoted because according to christian idealogy that all changed when Jesus came.

Now for Hebrew

The denomations philophsy is not revelant because they could be wrong.

Ezekiel 26:7-14 in Hebrew

taken from www.Biblos.com Hebrew OT WLC (contsanants and vowels)


כִּי כֹה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה הִנְנִי מֵבִיא אֶל־צֹר נְבוּכַדְרֶאצַּר מֶלֶךְ־בָּבֶל מִצָּפֹון מֶלֶךְ מְלָכִים בְּסוּס וּבְרֶכֶב וּבְפָרָשִׁים וְקָהָל וְעַם־רָב׃ 8 בְּנֹותַיִךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה בַּחֶרֶב יַהֲרֹג וְנָתַן עָלַיִךְ דָּיֵק וְשָׁפַךְ עָלַיִךְ סֹלְלָה וְהֵקִים עָלַיִךְ צִנָּה׃ 9 וּמְחִי קָבָלֹּו יִתֵּן בְּחֹמֹותָיִךְ וּמִגְדְּלֹתַיִךְ יִתֹּץ בְּחַרְבֹותָיו׃ 10 מִשִּׁפְעַת סוּסָיו יְכַסֵּךְ אֲבָקָם מִקֹּול פָּרַשׁ וְגַלְגַּל וָרֶכֶב תִּרְעַשְׁנָה חֹומֹותַיִךְ בְּבֹאֹו בִּשְׁעָרַיִךְ כִּמְבֹואֵי עִיר מְבֻקָּעָה׃ 11 בְּפַרְסֹות סוּסָיו יִרְמֹס אֶת־כָּל־חוּצֹותָיִךְ עַמֵּךְ בַּחֶרֶב יַהֲרֹג וּמַצְּבֹות עֻזֵּךְ לָאָרֶץ תֵּרֵד׃ 12 וְשָׁלְלוּ חֵילֵךְ וּבָזְזוּ רְכֻלָּתֵךְ וְהָרְסוּ חֹומֹותַיִךְ וּבָתֵּי חֶמְדָּתֵךְ יִתֹּצוּ וַאֲבָנַיִךְ וְעֵצַיִךְ וַעֲפָרֵךְ בְּתֹוךְ מַיִם יָשִׂימוּ׃ 13 וְהִשְׁבַּתִּי הֲמֹון שִׁירָיִךְ וְקֹול כִּנֹּורַיִךְ לֹא יִשָּׁמַע עֹוד׃ 14 וּנְתַתִּיךְ לִצְחִיחַ סֶלַע מִשְׁטַח חֲרָמִים תִּהְיֶה לֹא תִבָּנֶה עֹוד כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה דִּבַּרְתִּי נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה׃ ס


point:3 the Bible does not contradict itself and scripture is accurate

http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com...


point 4: extra biblical sources

http://www.everystudent.com...
http://www.spiritual-experiences.com...;


Christanity is the largest religion in the world, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world they both worship the same God therefore there must be some truth to God and so many people die for him everyday I thank you for a good debate and if I trolled any I apolgize. Vote pro and more importantly and most importantly vote for Jesus as your lord and saviour.
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
Con's opening was very clear and convincing. Pro never even addressed the point, except possibly in his links, which we can't be expected to follow.
Posted by Calvincambridge 5 years ago
Calvincambridge
excuse me an idiot
Posted by Winged 5 years ago
Winged
As much as I disagree with kohai on this issue, I find that the abbhorently simplistic, stupid, and errent arguements submitted by Calvincambridge are beyond reconsiliation. We don't need idiots like that, strutting around misrepresenting the true advocates of the pro.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Would have been an interesting debate with a ...less worthy... opponent than the great Calvincambridge.
Posted by Davididit 5 years ago
Davididit
Meh, I saw the debate but I think I didn't take it because of the rounds. 3 rounds isn't sufficient to deal with this issue, considering you throw a lot of scriptures around, and I would have to do so much exegetical correction :P Perhaps we can debate abortion soon. I see you're pro.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Eh true. I was hopign someone like ReformedArsenal or davidit would have accepted it.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
I see...at least you'll get an easy win.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
After calvin accepted
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
Before or after this debate was instigated?
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
I blocked Calvin.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't introduce an argument (if most people believe something, it must be true) until the final round, when Con didn't have the chance to address it. Con opened with an argument (biblical errors cast doubt on the biblical god's existence) which was never effectively refuted.
Vote Placed by Rockylightning 5 years ago
Rockylightning
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Horrible contender.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Insert RFD here
Vote Placed by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: While it is shocking to see Calvincambridge actually post an argument, it is irrelevant as he waited till the final round to do so. With round 3 irrelevant his case is essentially a forfeit.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Calvincambridge is just too smart for me. His arguments and language were of such a high level, they completely went over my head. However, being human, I voted for the arguments that I could understand. I voted SG to Con because I can see that his SG is correct. Pro's SG while infinitely superior could not be verified as I don't speak his language. I would have given conduct to
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Calvin posted arguments in the last round, thus giving a point for conduct to Con. Spelling and grammar are obvious...Pro never made a valid argument, merely offered the original forms of Con's quotes (and did not challenge his arguments about the flaws in the Bible), and made irrelevant points (If the debate is about the god of the bible, then the issue of its validity counts).
Vote Placed by Sketchy 5 years ago
Sketchy
kohaiCalvincambridgeTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Calvin's only argument came at the very end when Con couldn't respond, so conduct goes to Con. Spelling and grammar is self-explanatory. Pro's only argument was mostly in Greek, and his other arguments were simply links. The links leads to one site that assumes you are Christian, another is a broken link, and the last one simply lists common religious answers to simple questions. Pro's final ad populum fallacy was the last nail in the coffin. Obvious troll is obvious.