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

The God of the Bible is the one and only Living God

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/20/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,218 times Debate No: 18407
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (28)
Votes (2)





hank you, loftus_flower for agreeing to debate this with me. Is the Biblical God the only Living God? I assert that the answer is a big fat NO.

Scope of the Deabte

To find out wheither or not the Biblical God is the God that we should worship and the Bible is His divine revelation.

Technical Rules

First round is acceptance only.
You will be alloted 8,000 characters.
You will have 3 days to argue.
Voting period lasts for 3 months.
Videos for complementary purposes only.
There will be 5 rounds.

If for any reason you need more time, you may tell the opponent to wait to post his arguments.

Good luck!


I accept! (:
Debate Round No. 1


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]


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)
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.



addressing P2, the bible is the word of GOD, and has many scientific proofs that no one could have known even then. For example, Isaiah 40:22 reveals the truth that the earth is round, a fact that we didn't know until the 15th century. "[It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

- 1769 Oxford King James Bible 'Authorized Version

also, another proof is that Job 26:7 reveals that the earth is held in place by invisible forces, something we didn't know until 1650. "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, [and] hangeth the earth upon nothing."

- 1769 Oxford King James Bible 'Authorized Version

and, yet ANOTHER proof would be that psalms 8:8 proves that the Oceans have natural paths in them, a truth we didn't know until 1854. "The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas."

- 1769 Oxford King James Bible 'Authorized Version

I could go on. So, I think that I have proved that the bible isn't just a normal book, but is in fact a book that holds supernatural truths.

also, as far as salvation goes, there is only one way to find it. "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all �€��€� (1 Timothy 2:5)
all of the other ways listed are just ways to express this. As far as works go, once you are saved, you should feel the NEED to help people. James 2:17 means that if you just "talk the talk" so to say, then nothing good can really come out of it. You must show you love god by confessing your sin, show the world by baptism, and show your true love to god by helping others.

as far as the the different denominations go, that would be a straw man, because those denominations were formed by man, not the bible.

as far as if women can preach or not, it is true that he bible says that they should not. But, what you didn't mention is that Mathew say this: 'Jesus came to the disciples. He said, 'God has given to me all authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore go and make disciples in all the nations. Baptise them with the authority of the Father [God] and of the Son [Jesus] and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to obey all the things that I have commanded you. I am with you always, even to the end of the age.'

-Matthew 28:18-20
this means ALL people.
as far as the prophecies go, I think that we should be able to agree that the prophecies are something that can be argued, because they are filled with figurative speech, and they can be easily misunderstood.

in conclusion, I believe that I have adequately shown the bible has supernatural aspects to it.

Debate Round No. 2


Thank you for your quick response. I appreciate your opening arguments. Let's take a look at my opponent's scientific "facts."

==Rebuttal to Pro's opening arguments==

Isaiah 40:22 reveals the truth that the earth is round, a fact that we didn't know until the 15th century. "[It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

Sounds impressive until one realises that this actually gives notion to a flatearth! Matt Slick of CARM admits this, "This may or may not be construed to support the spherical shape of the earth. The horizon is a circle and a circle is flat." [1]

In Rejection of Pascal's Wager, Paul Tobin points out the fact that the word circle does NOT mean a sphere! [2] It is a fact that both a circle and a sphere are both "round", but the shapes are not interchangeable. Notice the word tent in that passage to describe the sky. It is a fact that you put a tent on a flat surface. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A TENT THAT is A SPHERICAL OBJECT ENVELOPING ANOTHER SPHERICAL OBJECT!

In fact, just to point out the Hebrew word is khug. This is a circle not a sphere. [3] Here are other uses of khug.

Job 26:10
He has described a circle (Hebrew khug) upon the face of the waters ...

Proverbs 8:27
When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle (Hebrew khug) on the face of the deep

Moreoever, it should be pointed out that there is a word that does mean sphere. That word is dur.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, it gives the cosmology of the Earth:

"The Hebrews regarded the earth as a plain or a hill figured like a hemisphere, swimming on water. Over this is arched the solid vault of heaven. To this vault are fastened the lights, the stars. So slight is this elevation that birds may rise to it and fly along its expanse."[4]
My opponent then cites the verse: Job 26:7 which reveals that the earth is held in place by invisible forces, something we didn't know until 1650. "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, [and] hangeth the earth upon nothing."

As always, there are a few issues with this:

Issue 1: The Earth is not upon "nothing"

In fact, the earth is "supported" by the gravity from the sun.

Issue 2: Who is speaking?

In efforts to better understand the passage, we first need to understand who is speaking. The person speaking is Job. Obviously Job is a mortal man and can make mistakes. Let us now look at other passages that contradict that.

1 Chron. 16:30 "...the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved." Psa. 93:1 "...the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved." Psa. 96:10 "...the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved:" Psa. 104:5 "[Who] laid the foundations of the earth, [that] it should not be removed for ever." Job. 26:11 "The pillars of heaven tremble..." 2 Sam. 22:8 "...the foundations of heaven moved..."

Let's see what God thought of Job's scientificly sound knowledge.

Job 38:1-4
Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind: "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?...Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?"

So Yahweh declares Job to be "without knowledge" and affirms a foundation of the earth!

My opponent does not stop there, he then cites yet another (fallacious) verse to "prove" the scientific soundness of the Bible!

Psalm 8:8, "The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas."

Paul Tobin once again makes a good notice when it comes to this verse:

In fact, the word "path" according to Strong's is best translated as a well trodden road. The meaning can be found within the Old Testament:

Judges 5:6 KJV
In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath, in the days of Jael, the highways [Hebrew orach] were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways.

Isaiah 41:3 RSV
He pursues them and passes on safely, by paths [Hebrew orach] his feet have not trod.

There are some version that translates orach as "caravans" and Isaiah 41:3 as "the way." The point is clear. The word in its literal sense is a "well trodden road." So much for scientific accuracy!

My opponent wants to use a literal translation of this, so a literal translation would be, "The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passes through the well trodden road of the sea.

There is no miracle here.

==Defense of My Arguments==

My opponent calls my different denomination argument a "straw-man." However, this is clearly not. Let us consult the Bible. Matthew 17 says, "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."

Here Jesus is praying that all of the Christians would be one. Thank you Jesus for proving that nothing fails like prayer. In any case, it is a fact that not one moment and point in the Church's history were the followers of Jesus united as Jesus wants them to be.

My failed prophecies prove a point. My opponent thinks it can be a figurative; however I would like to know how that can be figurative given the historical context of the scripture.

Resolution Negated.


[1] Slick, Matt J. "Scientific Accuracies of the Bible." CARM - Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. Web. 21 Sept. 2011. <;.

[2] Tobin, Paul. Rejection of Pascal's Wager

[3] Strong. Strong's Concordance Dictionary of the Bible.

[4] Kohler, Kaufmann. "Cosmology." The Jewish Encyclopedia. The Kopelman Foundation. Web. 21 Sept. 2011. <;.


lotus_flower forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Extend my arguments.


I honestly cannot refute this. I believe that you may have won.
Debate Round No. 4


Thank you. Vote con!


yes, vote con.
Debate Round No. 5
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
My worldview is challenged every day. You just seem to be more hostile about it...
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
This is a debating website. Being assertive is necessary and expected.

If someone challenged the very thing you build your worldview on, would you just sit back and let them? If they insulted someone you loved deeply, would you not push back?
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
Actually, I have never spoken with WLC, just watching him and reading the dribble on his web site. You are being excessively assertive, and it is just uncalled for.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago

You seem to not recognize the difference between how one interacts in a debate context, and the rest of the world. You only have interacted with me in the context of a debating website... the very nature of this site is to be adversarial and to assert you are right.

You really have no concept of who I am or what I am like outside of that context, yet you have made an entire judgement on my character based on the very small, limited, contextual interaction you have had with me. My suspicion about WLC is that you have interacted with him in similar contexts.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
Yup. ReformedArsenal can be a big d*ck at times...not as much as Izbo though.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
I don't think that you hate us, but the condescending attitude of people who are Christians- You, William Lane Craig, and just about every other one that I have had the "privilege" to meet- is very frustrating. Why you would EVER want to treat people that way is beyond me.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
*have = hate
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
I don't have you or Kohai. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to pussyfoot around the fact that you're wrong.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
You remind me of a bible professor I had. He always ran around calling people who spoke out against him or his beliefs cowards and fools, but I believe HE, in fact, was a coward. He wrote books and studied religion, but just looking at the way he viewed other people, I knew that I didn't want to take part in his religion. The fact that he was so hateful really told me that I didn't want to feel those emotions, and I notice it more and more in a lot of Christian intellectuals.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
This was a resolution my opponent wrote and agreed to
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dappleshade 5 years ago
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: Con had better arguments, didn't forfeit.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF. Let me be clear, Kohai's argument is garbage that he found on google. But a FF is a FF, also... Pro accepted this debate with little or no actual Biblical knowledge... which is lame.