The Instigator
BIGSTRO64
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
WriterSelbe
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

the Bible the Myth

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 1 vote the winner is...
WriterSelbe
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,354 times Debate No: 19826
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

BIGSTRO64

Pro

The bible the myth, all great civilizations tried to explain the natural occurrences that happened in there daily lives, most failed. Some had great ideas and theories, but all explained things that could only be understood as supernatural. The bible is an account of such occurrence. a book to educate the illiterate masses and give them a moral path to follow. As time passed we grew and obtained a vast amount of knowledge the writers of the bible couldn't even grasp.
From the outside looking into the bible it reflects the myths of the ancients and feels in the gaps with knowledge of their time. It has no relevance with today's culture or technology. We need only to look upon it as a attempt in history, society, but nothing more. It is the moral code of conduct of the time and just for bronze age Palestine. It has no place in the moral realm of today, nor is it justifiable.
We as a species need to understand what the bible has to say, understand that it had a time and to place but we have surpassed the knowledge bronze age man, it is no longer needed to be that moral guide. We no longer need to search its text for meaning. The truth is there its a myth nothing more.
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for this interesting debate. I shall now attack my opponent's case.

Firstly, my opponent states that most explanations for the accuracy of the Bible are failures, yet my opponent fails to provide these statistics or references. Yet here (http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com...), I provide evidence of truths written in the words of the Bible.

Then he states that the Bible is 'a book to educate the illiterate masses and give them a moral path to follow.' Firstly, my opponent fails to elaborate on the first part of this statement, calling the Bibl education for the illiterate. However, a book cannot be read by anyone who is not literate, so this part of the statement is false. Next, the second part of the statement only states that it provides a moral path, but this cannot be proven as bad or prove the Bible a myth. The government provides rules and morals for everyone yet the government itself cannot be proven a myth as it is not.

'As time passed we grew and obtained a vast amount of knowledge the writers of the bible couldn't even grasp.'

--The Bible references the circling of the universe and the existence of dinosaurs, and it also provides an open-mind for evolution in the symbol of '7 days.' See above link.

'From the outside looking into the bible it reflects the myths of the ancients and feels in the gaps with knowledge of their time.'

Here (http://en.wikipedia.org...) are instances where Jesus is referenced outside of the Bible, proving that Jesus himself existed. Many relics of Saints referenced in the Bible exist and can be provided as evidence for the fact that the Bible is not a myth.

'It has no relevance with today's culture or technology. We need only to look upon it as a attempt in history, society, but nothing more. It is the moral code of conduct of the time and just for bronze age Palestine. It has no place in the moral realm of today, nor is it justifiable.'

When examining the laws, one can see that they resemble a lot of what is said in the Ten Commandments of the Bible. Also, I already provided proof that Jesus and other elements in the Bible are accurate and truly exist.

'We as a species need to understand what the bible has to say, understand that it had a time and to place but we have surpassed the knowledge bronze age man, it is no longer needed to be that moral guide. We no longer need to search its text for meaning. The truth is there its a myth nothing more.'

Regardless of whether or not the Bible is needed, my burden is only to prove that it is not a myth, which I already have. I already proved that many of the truths known today were referenced in the Bible and that the morality exhibited in the Bible is exhibited in society today. Seeing all of these truths, one can say that the Bible is not a myth.



Debate Round No. 1
BIGSTRO64

Pro

Thank you for accepting.
I have to admit that this is my first debate and have very poor essay skills. i May not have been clear with my first statement so ill explain.

The bible was originally an oral tradition. The people of the time didn't know how to read or write. so the bible was compiled over time only by mouth than put to paper once the written language came about. It was a moral guide for the illiterate masses of the time. the people would gather and listen to the preachers preach. It taught them what was right and wrong. Again most couldn't read and there knowledge minimum. It was a moral path for them,then.

Thanks for the ref. They only show that maybe somewhere in that book there might of got somethings right.Should we base our morals on this and our country our species survival. On a book for that last 2000 years can be dwindled down to a few scriptures that may be true. Most fairy tales have truth in them.

Even if i believe that jesus was a real person and he was documented at the time dose not prove that he is the son of god or that his teachings are moral. I cant site wiki as truth.

Again "It is the moral code of conduct of the time" the ten commandments would need a great over haul to meet today's standards. Here i can only let Christopher Hitchens explain.

http://youtu.be...

Sorry but my opponent did not prove the bible is not myth only that it may contain some truth only if you look really hard. But all myths have some truth they all have a base from witch it gets its form.

My opponent speaks as if this book is one book of truth. it is a combination of many books that mostly contradict themselves. Written all at different times and then combined , by popular vote, make the bible. These are oral traditions pass down over hundreds of years and revised once written to fit the masses. I am surprised to find any truth at all.

Sorry for the lack of quotes or ref. i dont use much as i tend to take from the books ive read on this subject, bible,torah,quran, book of mormon,mahabharata,book of enoch,these are my ref. unless i quote or put in videos.
WriterSelbe

Con

I thank my opponent for his reply.

'The bible was originally an oral tradition. The people of the time didn't know how to read or write. so the bible was compiled over time only by mouth than put to paper once the written language came about. It was a moral guide for the illiterate masses of the time. the people would gather and listen to the preachers preach.'

Preaching isn't the Bible. Preaching is preaching. The Bible is the written word. Also, here (http://www.truthnet.org...) shows that there was indeed writing in the times before the Bible was completely compiled, therefore written evidence of the occurences in the Bible.

'It taught them what was right and wrong. Again most couldn't read and there knowledge minimum. It was a moral path for them,then.'

Again, I agree that the Bible offers a moral pathway, but I already proved that there was truth within the words of the Bible so this only supports my case, saying that the morality of the Bible, the Bible itself, is ever-present in today's society, such as in the government.

'Thanks for the ref. They only show that maybe somewhere in that book there might of got somethings right.Should we base our morals on this and our country our species survival. On a book for that last 2000 years can be dwindled down to a few scriptures that may be true. Most fairy tales have truth in them.'

My previous reference proves that in the Bible are supportings of scientific facts that have been proven in the last one-hundred years or so, so this point is void.

'Even if i believe that jesus was a real person and he was documented at the time dose not prove that he is the son of god or that his teachings are moral. I cant site wiki as truth.'

Regardless of whether or not Jesus is proven as Son of God, documentation of his existence disproves the Bible being a myth. Jesus's existence disproves the theory that the Bible itself is mythology.

'Again "It is the moral code of conduct of the time" the ten commandments would need a great over haul to meet today's standards. Here i can only let Christopher Hitchens explain.'

The standards of today are references of the Ten Commandments. Please offer textual evidence.

Sorry but my opponent did not prove the bible is not myth only that it may contain some truth only if you look really hard. But all myths have some truth they all have a base from witch it gets its form.

There is a difference between saying I offered no evidence that the Bible was not a myth and proving that I offered no evidence of the Bible's not being a myth. Myth: a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature. Seeing as the Bible explains the natural phenomenoms of evolution and water cycles truthfully and has fact within it, the Bible cannot be considered a myth.

'My opponent speaks as if this book is one book of truth. it is a combination of many books that mostly contradict themselves. Written all at different times and then combined , by popular vote, make the bible. These are oral traditions pass down over hundreds of years and revised once written to fit the masses. I am surprised to find any truth at all.'

While my opponent says the Bible contradicts itself, he fails to provide instances or evidence of contradictions within it. I also already provided evidence that there were written records during the times of the Bible.

'Sorry for the lack of quotes or ref. i dont use much as i tend to take from the books ive read on this subject, bible,torah,quran, book of mormon,mahabharata,book of enoch,these are my ref. unless i quote or put in videos.'

Again, please provide written, textual evidence. A video is not something I have access to at the time.

Again, I thank my opponent for this debate and await his response.
Debate Round No. 2
BIGSTRO64

Pro

BIGSTRO64 forfeited this round.
WriterSelbe

Con

Seeing as my opponent forfeited, I extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Skynet 5 years ago
Skynet
I'm glad Pro put this argument up. Too many people make assumptions about core beliefs, and never bother to question them.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
BIGSTRO64WriterSelbeTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I have plumbed Pro's title and opening post, looking for a resolution. Couldn't find one. Con seems to think the resolution is something like, "The bible is myth." Con defines "myth" as a traditional story about an event or being---and then claims that the bible is not such! Ridiculous. Con also thinks he can link to other people's arguments rather than arguing himself. Fail. But Pro didn't argue either, or didn't support his argument, whatever it was. Pro has burden of p