The Instigator
emospongebob527
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CRSdave
Con (against)
Winning
46 Points

The Holy Bible Contradicts Itself.

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 7 votes the winner is...
CRSdave
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/19/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,503 times Debate No: 26391
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (21)
Votes (7)

 

emospongebob527

Pro

Rules:

1. No semantics
2. No trolling
3. No profanity
4. No vulgarity


Structure:

1. Acceptance/Definitions
2. Opening Statement
3. Rebuttals
4. Rebuttals to Rebuttals
5. Closing Arguments/Conclusion

Definitions-

The Holy Bible- canonical collection of sacred texts in Judaism or Christianity.

contradicts- to assert the contrary of.

contradiction- phrase that asserts or implies both the truth and falsity of something.

If anyone violates the rules, they will lose the debate.


CRSdave

Con

I accept. I asume by "no semantics" you mean no arguing as to the definition of words. Correct? (New to the site; see this rule quite a bit.)
Debate Round No. 1
emospongebob527

Pro

I would like to thank CRSdave for accepting this intellectual endeavor. Shall we begin?
And yes that is what I mean by: "No Semantics"

Should we kill?

Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."
vs.

Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."
I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and mule. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."
Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up."

Should we tell lies?

Exodus 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness."
Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord."
vs.

I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee."
II Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."
Also, compare Joshua 2:4-6 with James 2:25.

Should we steal?

Exodus 20:15 "Thou shalt not steal."
Leviticus 19:13 "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor, neither rob him."
vs.

Exodus 3:22 "And ye shall spoil the Egyptians."
Exodus 12:35-36 "And they spoiled [plundered, NRSV] the Egyptians."
Luke 19:29-34 "[Jesus] sent two of his disciples, Saying, Go ye into the village . . . ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. . . . And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt? And they said, The Lord hath need of him."
I was taught as a child that when you take something without asking for it, that is stealing.

Shall we keep the sabbath?

Exodus 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy."
Exodus 31:15 "Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
Numbers 15:32,36 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. . . . And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
vs.

Isaiah 1:13 "The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity."
John 5:16 "And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day."
Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days."
Shall we make graven images?

Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven . . . earth . . . water."
Leviticus 26:1 "Ye shall make ye no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone."
Deuteronomy 27:15 "Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image."
vs.

Exodus 25:18 "And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them."
I Kings 7:15,16,23,25 "For he [Solomon] cast two pillars of brass . . . and two chapiters of molten brass . . . And he made a molten sea . . . it stood upon twelve oxen . . . [and so on]"
Are we saved through works?

Ephesians 2:8,9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith . . . not of works."
Romans 3:20,28 "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight."
Galatians 2:16 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ."
vs.

James 2:24 "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
Matthew 19:16-21 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he [Jesus] said unto him . . . keep the commandments. . . . The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven."
The common defense here is that "we are saved by faith and works." But Paul said "not of works."

Should good works be seen?

Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works."
I Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that . . . they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation."
vs.

Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them . . . that thine alms may be in secret."
Matthew 23:3,5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works. . . . all their works they do for to be seen of men."
Should we own slaves?

Leviticus 25:45-46 "Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, . . . and they shall be your possession . . . they shall be your bondmen forever."
Genesis 9:25 "And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren."
Exodus 21:2,7 "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. . . . And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the manservants do."
Joel 3:8 "And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it."
Luke 12:47,48 [Jesus speaking] "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes."
Colossians 3:22 "Servants, obey in all things your masters."
vs.

Isaiah 58:6 "Undo the heavy burdens . . . let the oppressed go free, . . . break every yoke."
Matthew 23:10 "Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ."
Pro-slavery bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here.

Does God change his mind?

Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not."
Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent."
Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent."
James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
vs.

Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."
Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him."
Jonah 3:10 ". . . and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
See also II Kings 20:1-7, Numbers 16:20-35, Numbers 16:44-50

As you can see the Bible contains many contradictions which plunges it deeper into the endless pool of questioning:

Is the Bible a reliable source for explanation of our moral obligations?

No.

http://ffrf.org...
CRSdave

Con

Thank You, emospongebob527.

My opponent has composed a list of verses found on the website www.ffrf.org.

When I refer to something as "outrageous, incredulous, outlandish, absurd, insane, unintelligent, buffoonish, or make reference in that nature, I am not speaking ill of my opponent. Rather, I am simply being frank in regard to this website and the man who wrote it. He has egregiously mislead you in your understanding of God's Holy Word.

Before I begin to refute specific instances this website has compiled, I feel the need the explain the Biblical interpretation process. When reading the Bible, one must take into account that although all scripture is God-breathed, and communicates a perfect message, it was written by many different authors, throughout several thousand years of time, and most importantly, in different contexts. The Bible gives us many prescriptive and descriptive instructions for what we ought to do in many different circumstances.

In realization of the above, one can understand that in order to accurately interpret the Bible, the usage of Observation, Interpretation, and Application is vital. What this means is that one must first observe what the scripture says, than he must interpret, or translate contexts. Only then is the correct application to our life found.

Most of these allegedly contradictory verses appear to be so simply because they have been ripped out of context.

A Caricature of "Context-ripping."

Lets say, for the sake of the analogy, that two men are debating the Quran. One is a muslim, and one is looking for flaws in the Muslim's book. (I have no affiliation with Muslims, nor do I believe what they say, this is a pure example. Neither do I have any idea what the Quran actually says.)

The flaw-seeker has found two lines in the Quran. One reads: "Listen to the Quran." Another, somewhere else in the book, says "Do not listen to the Quran when it is preached from the mouths of liars." The flaw-seeker says: "AH! Look: It says 'Listen to the Quran', and it also says 'Do not listen to the Quran.' What a contradiction!

Absurd, right?

We all know what the Muslim will say: "You idiot! read the rest of the line."

Obviously, this is a caricature, and the actual instances of this are far less obvious. However, they still contain this flaw.

Now Allow Me to Show Demonstrate to Interpret Scripture, the right way.

I doubt the character limit will allow me to examine every one of these verses, but if my opponent has a particular verse he wishes me to explain which I did not, I would be more than happy to do so in the future rounds, the comment section, or through private message.

Argument 1: Should we kill?

"Thou shalt not kill." It is true that the Bible makes the distinction between killing and murdering. There most certainly is a difference. While killing is the lawful taking of life, murdering is the unlawful taking of life. The Bible also makes the distinction between capital punishment and unjust murder.

The word for "kill" in hebrew, ratsach actually has several English translations. One being kill, another being murder, another being murderer, and many more. It is up to the translators to chose the right word. In our modern English context, the correct translation is "thou shalt not murder." Such is translated in the ESV version of the Bible, a newer translation.

Indeed, the first two verses refer to unjust killing, or murdering. The second set of verses refers to capital punishment. God does have the right to inflict judgement and punishment when people have sinned.

Argument 2: Should we Lie?

Once again, the first set of verses are commandments.

As to the second set: While God never lies, he has allowed Satan to deceive us. Those who are deceived have no one to blame but themselves.

Much of the alleged contradiction has to do with God allowing us to experience consequences after repeatedly and unrepentantly sinning. This is perfectly just. When we do not repent, we are "given" to lies and evil desires. This is our fault.

God allows allows Satan to deceive us, but those who follow God are not deceived.

As to the situation in Joshua, Concerning Rahab, we see countless times throughout the Bible situations in which people attempt to fulfill God's will in the wrong way. Luckily for us, God knows how to work through our mistakes. If he didn't we'd be in a seriously worse mess right now. Read the story of Jacob tricking his father into giving him his older brother, Esau's, birthright. This was not how God intended it, but God worked through Jacob's mistake and accomplished his plan another way.

Should we Steal?

Again, the first set are commandments.

The second set is a perfect example of the utter lack of contextual analysis. In actuality, the Israelites asked for silver, gold, and clothing from the Egyptians. The Egyptians gave it to them. That is certainly not stealing. The Egyptian example is so close to my blatant explanatory caricature that it is downright desperate and buffoonish. In this case, the beginning of the verse is neglected, and the end is quoted.

The actual verse: "The people of Israel had also done as Moses told them, for they had asked the egyptians for silver and gold jewelry and for clothing. And the Lord had given the people favor in sight of the Egyptians, so that they let them have what they asked. Thus they plundered the Egyptians."

Exodus 12: 35-36

Whoever wrote ffrf.org ripped that right out of the context of its own verse! How absurd and desperate!

As to the donkey situation- Everything belongs to God. I belong to God, you belong to God, all you voters belong to God. Our lives belong to God the air that we breathe belongs to God! He made it all! It was gratuitous of Jesus to offer an unneeded explanation. The Donkey was the Lord's. Everything you and I have has been given to us by God. Everything, even our own lives, are privileges, not rights.

Should we keep the Sabbath?

Again, Contextual analysis. This time in the Old vs New testaments. The commandments given to the Jews before Christ were specific to them. In Romans and Galatians, Paul clears some of the differences up. Things change with the coming of Christ. No longer is it forbidden to eat certain things, etc. The Old and New testaments are almost like two sides of the same coin, of the same story. Jesus makes everything new.

"The old testament is like a shadow of the New. And there are differences between shadows and reality. But such differences are not considered contradictions."

bcbrs.com

Should good works be seen?

This is an issue of motivation. We cannot "parade around" arrogantly, and full of conceit. When good works "fill our lives" so that they are "seen by others", we are spreading the gospel through our actions. The emphasis here is not on vain arrogance, but on glorifying God and spreading the Gospel! That is quite a big difference, my friend!

Does God Change his mind?

God's essence is unchangeable. All of his character and attributes will never change. Much of God's judgment is conditional. It is contingent upon our actions. We see countless times in the Bible where one has repented of their sin due to impending judgement, and thereafter God shows mercy and does inflict the often fatal judgment.

(Joseph and the Ninevites is a perfect example of this.)

As to the discussion with Abraham, God had allowed Abraham to intercede. Just as he allows Moses to intercede for the Israelites, and in the same way Jesus is interceding for you and I as we speak. This upholds one of God's unchangeable attributes, to listen to the prayers of the godly.

The Bible never contradicts itself. Those who claim it does and provide examples have ripped those examples out of their context and portrayed them as something they are not.


Again, this blasted character limit forces me to be concise. If my opponent feels I have been too vague or wishes me to explain other verses in further detail, I am more than happy to do so.

In Conclusion, does the Bible contradict itself? Absolutely not.

bcbrs.com

Debate Round No. 2
emospongebob527

Pro

I like to eat poopy diapers and lick crusty butholes.
CRSdave

Con

That's pretty much a concession. I have dismantled my opponent's premise and I have proved the the Bible to be thoroughly well written.

In response he has been immature and vulgar.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
emospongebob527

Pro

Bye.


I lost.
CRSdave

Con

Well than lets just go through the rounds so we can get to the voting period.
Debate Round No. 4
emospongebob527

Pro

God is gay
CRSdave

Con

He most certainly is not.

BTW,,,Read the above and Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 5
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
believing in god is a waste?
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
believing in god is a waste?
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
Essentially, it's a waste anyway.
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
Ah..So you believe in the existence of a God, but you're not going for any particular one.
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
I'm secular leaning deist.
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
eh...?? I thought Atheists were those who did not believe in the existence of God. And are you saying you believe in a God but don't worship God? Because that does not really fit into the impartial definition of secualar.
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
Failure in errya's logic.

You could believe in a god but not worship that God.
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
Lets look at this logic for a moment.

1. By the fact that you have tried to prove that the Bible contraticts itself, I can safely assume you don't believe Christianity.
2. Because you are not allied to any particualar religion, you must feel the same way about all religions.
3. You don't believe in any religions.
4.You don't believe in any God.
5. You're an athiest.
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
the state of being separate from religion, or not being exclusively allied to any particular religion.
Posted by errya 4 years ago
errya
Could you define secular?
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Gratuitously offensive forfeit.
Vote Placed by TrasguTravieso 4 years ago
TrasguTravieso
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited and showed repugnant conduct.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Derp.
Vote Placed by Volk23 4 years ago
Volk23
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Nice job making atheists look like assholes, PRO.
Vote Placed by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro breaks his own rules
Vote Placed by truthseeker613 4 years ago
truthseeker613
emospongebob527CRSdaveTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited. Conduct went to con, in round 2 for obviously taking things very out of context and distortion. And the rest of the debate was immature, irrelevant, & disgusting. G&S - I didn't see a difference. Arguments obviously go to con. Sources should perhaps go to con, but I'm not %100 sure, as con didn't really (need to) bring sources. He just needed to show that pro's "sources" were pathetic, which he did. To stay on the safe side I left it tied. Con will surely win anyway.