The Instigator
Ehmet
Pro (for)
The Contender
kikiki
Con (against)

There is a Correct Interpretation of the Bible

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Ehmet has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/25/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 412 times Debate No: 98437
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Ehmet

Pro

There is a common objection to the Bible, and that is that the Bible is all up for interpretation- basically one saying this is saying that everybody's interpretation is different and thus you can make the Bible say what you want it to. This is false and must be addressed in order to truly understand the Bible.
kikiki

Con

Just like with all religions, there is no correct interpretation for Christianity. Look at Qur'an for example. The moderate Muslims who give to the poor, free slaves, help orphans, be kind to women, tolerate other people, care for other people, help them etc., aren't wrong as those things are in the Qur'an. But ISIS isn't wrong either. There are verses in which the Qur'an calls for conquests and battle and there are plenty of them. The moderates believe that the violent verses are only justified in self-defence, whilst ISIS doesn't think that. Moderates believe that the kind verses are a way to salvation whilst ISIS disagrees. Even Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram, Al-Nusra and Hezbollah have different interpretations of the Qur'an and I can't really say that any of them are wrong.

The Bible, just like the Qur'an, is also filled with both kind and violent verses. In many of his verses Jesus called for turning the other cheek, but there are also verses where he justifies and condones violence (Luke 19:27, Matthew 15:4-7 just to name a few).

Many Christians call on the Ten Commandments which are in the Old Testament which is filled with hate, violence and revenge (the OT is hardcore), but will pick only certain parts of it because they believe Jesus came to redo those laws. Fair enough. Although, some believe he died so they don't have to experience Earthly punishment for their sins, although the sins are still there. Fair enough. And SOME believe he didn't come to abolish anything, but to enforce the Old Testament and if you read the Bible, none of them are truly wrong.

Jesus does say about enforcing the OT and does say that non-believers and rebelious children should be killed so that goes in favour of the hard-line OT followers. But he did also stop people from stoning an adulteress and said: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." so the argument for abolishing the OT stands as well. But he does threaten people that he will torture them forever if they sin so there is ground for "Sin still exists" argument.

Also, the most important, can non-believers enter heaven? Well Gallatians 2:16, Romans 3:28 say no, but Matthew 19:17, Luke 10:26-28 and James 2:24 say yes, if he keeps the commandments. So it's all a No true Scotsman fallacy.
Debate Round No. 1
Ehmet

Pro

You made some excellent points about the Qur'an, however we are talking about the Bible so let's get back on topic. The interpretation of a religion is not the same as the interpretation of a text. If you want an interpretation of a religion, you very well could get any answer, as religion is what you believe or feel is right- an opinion. However, what I am saying is that the text of the Bible itself has a correct interpretation, which is the meanings of the 66 different texts or "books"/scrolls and codices of the Bible inscribed by about 40 different men over the course of about 1600 years. For example, reading your last argument I could interpret it different ways as many do with the Bible, but in the end you meant what you meant. Similarly, the Bible writers meant what they meant, and any thinking that is different of what they meant is a misunderstanding whether intentional or not.
kikiki

Con

The Bible could be interpreted as anything. From a literary piece filled with exaggerations and old Arab folklore to an actual history book. So, the authors may have had a certain point they wanted to make, but that's irrelevant. It's like with other works of arts and literature. The author may have had a certain meaning he wanted to convey, but everybody can interpret his or her work differnetly.

There are, ofcourse, some who publically announce the meaning of their work, but that's not the case with religious texts. Also, the Bible did not have one single author, but multiple authors, most notably Mark, Matthew and Luke.

http://listverse.com...

"Many people contributed to the writing of the Bible. In fact, the Bible is a diverse collection of writings from about 40 main contributors"30 in the Old Testament and 10 in the New Testament." - Biblica.

http://www.haaretz.com...

That means that it was written by at least 40 different people ALL with different beliefs, testimony and interpretation of morality. Now imagine that. A book written over spans of dozens of years and sometimes HUNDREDS cannot have one single right interpretation. There may be right interpretations, but there is certainly not only a single one.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Lonely-Bird 1 year ago
Lonely-Bird
Um, followerofchrist1955?

Your comment means what?
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 1 year ago
FollowerofChrist1955
You should attend this debate:
Atheism- A lost reality! A hopeless, helpless cause!
Posted by Lonely-Bird 1 year ago
Lonely-Bird
Ummm, missmedic? To answer your question: yes.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
So is it allegorically or metaphorically or literally or all of them?
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
The bible is an interpretation of "anything"....There is/was no heaven or hell in the bible...
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Were this not your first debate, I'd likely accept. As is welcome to the site. http://goo.gl...
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.