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

christianity or islam

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/20/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,235 times Debate No: 33923
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)




Bible: "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." [Roman 3:28]

Quran: "Do men think that they will be left alone on saying we believe and they will not be tested! But We did test those before them and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. [29:1]

im sorry..i was a christian but after 8 years of reading converted to islam..yes im for 24 years old from india...


Hello, sorry about the delayed response, I'd written a reply that got erased after clicking the Text link, so am rewriting it again. I do think Christianity is true and not Islam, and the Judaic scriptures, not Islamic. The following is my reasoning:

1. Recency.

Islam throughout the Quran (which I have read parts of, albeit briefly) claims it has the correct version of what happened in the Bible concerning numerous patriarchs ranging from Abraham to Moses to Jesus. Maybe that would be a decent argument if we didn't have a wealth of manuscript evidence showing the Bible has been reliably preserved, and that the Old Testament was wholly preserved in its present form before the time of Christ. However, we've discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls dating 350 B.C. to 50 A.D. showing the Old Testament has been reliably preserved. The Sahidic Coptic Version preserves the entire New Testament by 250 A.D., as do the Codexes Sinaiticus and Vaticanus (350 A.D.), and some N.T. manuscripts like the John Rylands papyrus date from 125-200 A.D. In one case a passage of the Old Testament is preserved as old as 1,000 B.C., over 3,000 years ago, per recently discovered Khirbet Qeiyafa pottery. The following is my comprehensive list of Biblical manuscripts:

So we have a wealth of manuscript evidence showing the Bible was preserved reliably through writing as it claims throughout, and not unreliably through oral tradition like Hinduism or Buddhism with the Rigveda. That means the Quran with its contradicting claims made 500 years after the New Testament, let alone the Old Testament, should be viewed as seriously suspect.

2. Internal Evidence.

The Bible was authored publicly with numerous witnesses by multiple people. The Quran was written by one man, in a cave, with no witnesses. It's easier for one witness to lie and distort the truth than many. Essentially you have one guy calling everyone else, and indeed an entire nation, liars. And all these Muslims just believe him. Very odd.
Debate Round No. 1


Bible: "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." [Roman 3:28]

Quran: "Do men think that they will be left alone on saying we believe and they will not be tested! But We did test those before them and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. [29:1]

im sorry..i was a christian but after 8 years of reading converted to islam..yes im for 24 years old from india...
let me Quote the Quran :::
"And (remember) she who guarded her chastity. We breathed into her of Our spirit, and We made her and her son a sign for all peoples (21:91).
[While describing people who were good examples for others] "...And Mary, the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her chastity. And We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit. She testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations, and was one of the devout (servants)" (66:12).

"Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how God makes His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!" (5:75).
"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).

"O you who believe! Be helpers of God -- as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved. But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).


"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).

"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is but a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them; how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of God, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him! (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)" (9:30-31).

Jesus never claimed to be God.i will give one example.In matthew chap 19 verse 16..
one jew comes and asks Jesus good teacher,wat good thing shall i do tat i may have eternal life?
Jesus replied why do you call me good? no one is good but one tat is God.

see how humble Jesus is he din even accept goodness.then how would Jesus react if we call him God?
i ask this question to pastors but they don seem to have convincing answers so m asking u please don mind.

Jesus says to reach heaven we need to keep commandments but many pastors say if we don believe Jesus as God and our saviour we will not go to heaven..but jesus did not say anything like tat..wat Jesus said in matthew chapter 5 versus 17-20

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law(old testament), or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus never in his own words said he is God..
paul has wriiten 13 out of the 27 books in new testament..jesus did say i and the father are one but read tat verse in context ie from john 10:23-38 .wat Jesus meant was tat i and father one in purpose not in power..

the messengers of God are referred to as Gods in hebrew language.even in old testament god says to moses tat i have made you god to pharoah.

moreover we are going against the first command of the ten commandments by calling Jesus as God..
wat ever jesus told to his diciples many times they misunderstood mentioned in john chapter 14 verse 5 to 9..every messenger his way to god during his time..and philip asks Jesus show us the father..but jesus answers him metaphorically because the jew law says no body can see the jesus says if u have seen me u have seen the father..wat jesus meant was if u had understood me you wouldnt have asked tat silly the verse 10-12...and also jesus says the one who has been sent is not like the one who sent ...jesus also says i can of my own do i hear i judge and my judgement is right because i seek not my will but the will of my father..

Brother read john ch 10 verse 34 "jesus answered them "is it not written in your law you are gods and read 35 the old testament messengers of god are referred to as gods or son of god so jesus is not claiming to be god..

and very important jesus rose physically u said and so do the bible but paul says wen a body ressurcts it will be spritual form not physical and jesus never talks about trinity..

wen Jesus was asked which is the greatest commandment jesus says wat moses had said (Mark 12:28)"The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

And brother you know wat the bible is fully corrupted because the priest have been adding and deleting versus..for example gospel of mark i think u may be knowing it..

and see this 2 kings 19 and isaiah 37 are identical word for come??
jesus says to keep the law( old testament) to reach heaven but we don follow it..we jus belive in Jesus as saviour and we attain salvation this is not wat jesus said..i think we are going against Jesus..Brother i still have so many Questions please don feel bad and i want to discuss about it..and john 1:1-14 u have to read tat in greek because the word for "a god" is different than " the god" it is "a god" meaning any god not "the God"

do u still believe in bible?? if u havent read completly please read it..because God din give his words to be put in show case right? we need to read it and god has given us intellectual to think logically..i really want to tell u some thing u see bible is not the word of god for example read ezekiel 23:21-22( read the full chapter 23) and jesus is not god in human form..


Well, I can't see that you really addressed my point that the Bible is reliably preserved through extensive manuscript evidence, so all of those verses you quote from the Quran are clearly written much later than either the Old or New Testament. You claim they are corrupted, but have yet to show evidence that the Quran is correct in its version of what occurred and the Bible is not. There are over 30,000 New Testament manuscripts and 100,000 Dead Sea Scroll fragments, as well as many other manuscripts, showing that the Bible has been reliably preserved through writing as it repeatedly claims. What evidence does the Quran have if examined by the same standard?

Was Jesus God? Jesus, the Angel of the Lord

The essence of your argument appears that "Jesus never claimed to be God." You then quote the Bible even though you believe it was corrupted (which again contradicts the wealth of manuscript evidence showing otherwise). However, I contend Jesus did claim to be the Son of God, and the Angel of the Lord who was worshiped as God by the Israelites when leading them out of Egypt. Jesus was the God of the Israelites who spoke with Moses.

John 8:56-58 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

It is a common misconception that God the Father spoke to Abraham, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses, and Joshua, and was the one who was called God. Actually it was Jesus, called in the Old Testament the "Angel of the Lord."

Key Scriptures

Genesis 22:11-12 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

Genesis 31:11-13 And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I. And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee. I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me: now arise, get thee out from this land, and return unto the land of thy kindred.

Genesis 16:10-13 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren. And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, Have I also here looked after him that seeth me?

Exodus 3:2-6 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

Judges 2:1 And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.

Other examples where the Angel of the Lord is called God include Genesis 32:28-30; Judges 6:22; 13:21-22; and Zechariah 12:8.

Jesus Claimed to be God

Jesus claimed to have existed at the time of Abraham, and that "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." Jesus then continued "Before Abraham was, I am." That's a direct reference to the following verses, making crystal clear that Jesus was claiming to be the original God of the Jewish people. "I AM THAT I AM" or "The Self-Existent" was the personal name of God to the Jewish people. Abraham rejoiced and worshiped God, who Jesus claimed to be.

Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Genesis 12:7 And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.

Jesus Claimed to Exist With God the Father Before the World

Jesus as seen in John 17:4-5 claimed He had finished the work God the Father had sent Him to do on earth, and was ready to be glorified with God the Father with the glory which they'd had together before the world existed. Jesus in vv. 1-2 claimed God the Father had given Him "power over all flesh" and to "give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him."

John 17:1-5 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Old Testament Prophesied This

However, this is not a New Testament invention. Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah to come would be called "The Mighty God" and "The Everlasting Father." The Bible elsewhere attests to the deity of God's Son in Proverbs 8:22-31 and Psalms 2.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus revealed the deity of the coming Messiah as a riddle to the Pharisees by pointing out that if the Messiah was to be a normal human being, then David should not call his future descendant "Lord."

Matthew 22:42-45 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

Other Points

Concerning why 2 Kings 19 and Isaiah 37 are identical, it may be that Isaiah's was the original account and preserved later in 2 Kings. This practice is actually followed throughout the Bible, the book of Chronicles for example repeats some of the Genesis genealogies. Parts of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles parallel one another as well. You have to realize that Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles did not cover a single time period, but multiple kingdoms spanning the reigns of Saul, David, Absalom, Solomon, Joab, etc. In other words, there were later scribes researching older documents and putting information from those together as a composite whole to record the nation's history. Isaiah's chapter 37 was likely one of the sources they used.

Jesus did not just say to believe for salvation, He also said we must repent and change our ways to do what is right. (Luke 13:2-5) Jesus forgave the adulteress, but also told her to go and sin no more. (John 8:11) Saving faith should produce works as evidence, see Ephesians 2:8-10. I wish I could address this more but am out of space.
Debate Round No. 2


johnnn forfeited this round.


As far as the Old Testament Law the New Testament teaching is that while the Old Testament Law, including Leviticus 19:5, was a just Law (1 Timothy 1:8, Romans 7:7), it cannot justify any human (Romans 3:20), but by it all are guilty of death before God. (Romans 6:23) As Paul says, the Law is just (Romans 7:7, 1 Timothy 1:8), but was just a schoolmaster to show us our faults (Galatians 3:24-25) that we might repent and turn from them (Romans 6:1-2, Galatians 6:7-8, Philippians 3:18-19), forgiving others as God wants so He can forgive us. (Matthew 7:2; 18:32-34; Luke 6:37; 11:4; John 8:7)

Romans 3:19-20 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Galatians 3:19-25 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

1 Timothy 1:8-10 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

The book of Hebrews shows that the Law served as a physical example of the spiritual realities to come, it was just a "shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of those thing." (Hebrews 10:1) Sacrificial offerings symbolized the coming sacrifice of Jesus (Hebrews 9:9-12) and could not make a person clean before God. (Hebrews 10:1-4) God stated in the Old Testament He had no pleasure in burnt offerings (1 Samuel 15:22, Isaiah 1:11), that the offerings wearied Him (Isaiah 1:11-15; 43:22), He never wanted the burnt offerings to begin with (Isaiah 43:22), did not want them (Jeremiah 6:20; 7:21-25), and that He wanted mercy, knowledge of God, and kindness to the poor, orphans, and widows instead. (Isaiah 1:16-18; Hosea 6:6; Micah 6:6-8)

Hebrews 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

Hebrews 9:9-12 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 10:1-6 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

The Law, the Old Testament or Old Covenant, was a right condemnation of evil, but could not make the doers perfect, it could not cleanse and justify. (Hebrews 7:19; Acts 13:39) Thus a new covenant was needed by which mercy and justification could come; the Old Testament Law was just the symbol. The Israelites had not kept it and so God brought in a new covenant, as He had promised. (Hebrews 8:4-13; Jeremiah 31:31-34)

Hebrews 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Hebrews 8:4-13 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
Ultimately, the debate premise was not of my selection. I merely accepted the debate, and am still a bit unsure what exactly its premise is. I suppose that while it may be a "false dilemma" to only examine Christianity and Islam when other alternatives exist, one can examine by degree, which is "more" correct.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
continued, Ravi's arguments:

"You may ask, Why does assuming a moral law necessitate a moral lawgiver? Because every time the question of evil is raised, it is either by a person or about a person"and that implicitly assumes that the question is a worthy one. But it is a worthy question only if people have intrinsic worth, and the only reason people have intrinsic worth is that they are the creations of One who is of ultimate worth. That person is God. So the question self-R03;destructs for the naturalist or the pantheist. The question of the morality of evil or pain is valid only for a theist."

In other words, one cannot ask why evil occurs to person without assuming people have inherent worth given by a Creator. And to ask why evil occurs assumes the existence of evil and good, but you cannot have that without a moral law to the universe, which can only be implemented by a moral Lawgiver; furthermore the Law must have a standard, i.e. God.

Another argument for God's existence involves the existence of matter. Since big bangs do not occur all around us, it makes no sense that matter can pop into existence from chance. Indeed, such would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the law of conservation of energy. Matter decays, is temporal, and is not self-existent. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only change form. For a Big Bang you need particles and are always left asking where they come from or could self-exist if committed to a naturalistic, purely physiological universe. Only by assuming a spiritual Creator outside the physical realm and capable of eternal self-existence can one explain why anything now exists at all.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
Manuscript evidence does not prove the religious claims themselves, but it does prove they have been reliably preserved. Historians use this to examine how reliably an ancient document has been preserved: examining how long the document in question was reliably preserved, how many reliable copies were made, and how close to the original documents the oldest copies we have are. Josh McDowell addresses this in Chapter 4 of More Than a Carpenter, "Are the Biblical Records Reliable?" While the Bible's manuscript evidence may not prove the claims themselves are accurate, it does show that the Bible has been reliably preserved for 3,000 years.

You are correct that archaeological evidence only shows some of the historical statements are accurate. Nonetheless, the more accuracy is shown, the more evident it is clear the writers cared about making factual claims, and were careful in their statements. There is more reason to believe them more broadly as a result.

Logically, I do think there are arguments in favor of God's existence, like those made by Ravi Zacharias. To quote Ravi:

"When you say there is evil, aren't you admitting there is good? When you accept the existence of goodness, you must affirm a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But when you admit to a moral law, you must posit a moral lawgiver. That, however, is who you are trying to disprove and not prove. For if there is no moral lawgiver, there is no moral law. If there is no moral law, there is no good. If there is no good, there is no evil. What then is your question?"
Posted by serp888 4 years ago
Manuscript evidence is insufficient for proving religious claims. Scientology, for example, has the most recent, and the most abundant "manuscript" references.
Since you like wikis so much, here are some of their manuscripts as well. You wouldn't agree that just because Scientology has manuscripts, then it must be factual. Manuscripts can be made up, like the flying spaghetti monster or Scientology. It's called a scam.

There needs to be scientific evidence if you're going to prove one way or the other. By scientific evidence, I mean valid graphs, pictures, or deductive reasoning.

Archaeological evidence only proves some of the historical statements in the bible such which battles occured. it does not prove that Christianity is more correct than islam, just because more artwork exists. Furthermore, it does not prove any of the central claims made by Islam and Christianity are valid. These central claims include that life has purpose or meaning, that the universe was created, that God created life, and that God, for some reason, cares about humans.

My point was that the debate premise is inheritly wrong, by providng a false dilemma--that it is either Islam or Chrstianity which is correct.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
And furthermore, my site page, which I referenced, provides 63 different sources which include a number of scanned copies of the manuscripts referenced and credible sources like the Smithsonian, CNN, the Library of Congress, and Encyclopaedia Britannica. It's easier for me to just reference the page where I sourced everything than to try pasting all the information here, plus would make the debate hard to follow. Anyway, I took sourcing seriously when I authored that page, and don't think it should be just written off like that.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
As for other religions, the debate doesn't deal with those. I didn't choose the debate topic. Ultimately however, the Bible has far greater manuscript evidence than the other major religions out there. Buddhism in particular was preserved through oral tradition and the oldest copy of the Rigveda dates to the 15th century A.D. The oldest copies of Buddhist scripture are about 50 birchbark documents recently discovered dating to about 50 A.D.

Archaeological evidence has overwhelmingly supported the Bible's claims, also. Wikipedia has a decent list for summary purpose, assuming you don't mind publicly collaborative sites as sources.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 4 years ago
Serp888, do you mean "my" source link? What are you talking about random and anonymously editable? That's my personal website, and I'm one of only two people who can edit it. I wrote all of it myself. I furthermore designed the website so that only debate, user, and talk pages can be edited by registered users. I'm the only one who edits content pages. It may be a wiki but is my personal site and content is written by myself.

I sourced my own research there, I wrote the page. I thought that was clear from my post.
Posted by serp888 4 years ago
I also laughed when i saw Johnnn's source link. He expects a random, anonymously editable web page to consist of true and unbiased information? Any ethos you had is now gone.
Posted by serp888 4 years ago
What about Zeus, or thor, or Apollo, or the great juju under the sea? Don't they get to throw in their five cents? I assume you mean Christianity is true, or Islam is true, but aren't you ignoring 15,000 other possible choices? 1/15,000 is not good odds for either pro or con. I say that both pro and con lose.
Posted by johnnn 4 years ago
im sorry..i was a christian but after 8 years of reading converted to islam..yes im for 24 years old from india...
No votes have been placed for this debate.