The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
NapoleonofNerds
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

bible is not infallible

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/29/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,733 times Debate No: 1144
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (13)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

the outrageousness speaks for itself.

---When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

--Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

---Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the law says. And if they desire to learn anything, let thorn ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church."
I Cor 14:34.35

----"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion." Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB

-----Exodus 22:16, where we read "If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall give the marriage present for her, and make her his wife." But when we look at the verse immediately following, we get a whole different picture. In verse 17 we read, "If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equivalent to the marriage present for virgins."

--Kill Your Neighbors
(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

---2 Kings 2:23-24
"Elisha Is Jeered
23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths."
Now, granted,they made fun of him. But c'mon. Plus, why doesn't this tstuff happen nowadays?

even if these are not the way things are done anymore, it still does not answer why it ever was, and by "God"'s command.
NapoleonofNerds

Con

So, I think the key to me winning this round is to prove that there's some way in which the Bible can be said to be infallible, not necessarily in the profoundly flawed way presented by the affirmative. Therefore, I will not be arguing that the bible is literally true in every historical or scientific detail, or that the civil code of an ancient civilization ought to be followed in the modern age, the way my opponent hopes I will. I will be arguing as per traditional Christian doctrine that the Bible contains the truths necessary for a moral life, and that these truths are discernible and immutable.

I. The opening argument readily accepts that there are eternal standards of what is right which are unchanging over time and place - otherwise, there would be no basis on which to condemn the practice of slavery, genocide, or murder. In as much as there is an eternal moral code, it must be derived from somewhere.

II. The Bible is a document which, taken as a whole, tells the story of humanity from its earliest follies to the fundamental triumphs of every person. Even though it is part history, part allegory, and part fairy tale, it is every person's story, and every person can recognize the fundamental truths it contains. That story ultimately centres on a few basic ideas, despite all the failures of a flawed humanity: Love your neighbour as you love yourself, all people are worthy of dignity and respect, act with justice, show mercy, remember your family. These are the essential truths and values which govern every successful society.

III. In as much as there are fundamental, eternal ethics, and these ethics are contained for all to see in the Bible, the Bible can be said to be an infallible work.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

my argument is obviously directed to those that think the bible is word for word, concept or concept infallible.
that there are points that are certainly true, and even if the bible is generally true, that doesn't show that the bible is infallible.

that you do not wish to engage the substance given, shows me that you believe it to be not infallible and my initial argument was correct.
i acknowledge your minor points though.
NapoleonofNerds

Con

Don't squirrel out just because you don't like where I took the debate. If you want to have a discussion about the bible, let's have a serious discussion about it. You didn't specify what infallible means, you just said the Bible isn't it.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

there's nothing to debate.
if you want to play word games, great, and i even don't disagree with you given how you define it all.

everyone knows when people call the bible infallible, that means that it means word for word, concept for concept it's infallible. i shouldn't be expected to define infallible in a way to appease someone who wants to play word games, or else i'd be defining everything endlessly, in fact paralysing myself because you could also play word games. if it was a reasonable distinction you made, then you'd have a point, but everyone knowledegeable about infallible knows that's not what it means. maybe you're not knowledgable about all that, i don't know. that's the only way you'd be at all vindicated in your distinctions and points.

it doesn't matter anyway, because i don't disagree with you.
the only thing for us to debate is whether your distinctions are reasonable. i'm not going ot dignify it beyond what i've said.
NapoleonofNerds

Con

As you wish, but when a normal Christian says the Bible is infallible, this is what they mean, not the crap spewed out by fundamentalists.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
Taking quotes out of context is the favorite hobby of the anti-Bible websites such as the one I'm sure you found them. Much of the old testament is a history lesson, not a guide on how to live for all time. Individual quotes, and even stories, can not be taken as if they happened in a vacuum.

The creation story, for example, is clearly symbolic and not intended to be taken literally. It is not teaching us that the world was created in 7 24hour days, nor is it saying Adam and Eve were the only people on earth as is clarified after Cain kills Abel and is then banished to live with the common people outside the Garden of Eden. The old Testament is a combination of history and symbolism put together in such a way that everyone can gain an understanding of God. It is a brilliant collection of writings when you consider the times in which they were written.

A 5 year old can understand the creation story, while many folks with doctorates don't fully grasp the theory of evolution. And the two don't necessarily contradict each other...
Posted by mjg283 9 years ago
mjg283
How does posting a bunch of quotes (out of context and without any real mention of the fact that there has been thousands of years of interpretation as to what those quotes mean and how they should properly be applied) in any demonstrate that the Bible is fallible or infallible?

What you're really saying by doing that is not the Bible is fallible or man-made, but that it simply contains a bunch of quotes and commandments that you don't like or agree with (based on your own interpretation of what they mean). That's a fine and legitimate point of view to have, but it doesn't get at the topic you're purporting to debate.

I don't see how one could ever prove or disprove that the Bible is the infallible work of The Almighty. That's a question of faith and belief, which doesn't lend itself to a logical debate.
Posted by longjonsilver 9 years ago
longjonsilver
Wonderful double negatives.

I think I will not vote con in the bible is not infallible debate.

Why didn't you just make the resolution, "The bible is fallible?"
Posted by Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
"[...]even if these are not the way things are done anymore, it still does not answer why it ever was, and by "God"'s command."

HOOOO YEAH. I want to see this debate!
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
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:61 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
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 
Vote Placed by YummyYummCupcake 9 years ago
YummyYummCupcake
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Gao 9 years ago
Gao
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Derrida 9 years ago
Derrida
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by QuiSteve 9 years ago
QuiSteve
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by azrael777 9 years ago
azrael777
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
dairygirl4u2cNapoleonofNerdsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03