The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
9 Points

The Bible is Valid

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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,863 times Debate No: 48284
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (36)
Votes (3)




I will be giving evidence that the Bible could be true. To clarify, the debate will not be about whether or not the Bible is definitely, absolutely, positively, beyond the shadow of a doubt true. It will simply be about whether or not it is at least valid. I actually believe the Bible to be absolutely true, but debating with someone about the topic would not hurt.

Round 1- acceptance and any remaining questions only (must have a clear relevancy to the debate)

Round 2- Logos

Round 3- Ethos


I accept.
Debate Round No. 1


We can actually apply the Bible to our own lives, and famous Christians will tell you the same thing. If you ask Louisiana pastor and Duck Dynasty star Alan Robertson, he will tell you that the following passage happened to his family:
Psalm 128:1-4: "Blessed are all who fear the LORD, who walk in obedience to him. You will eat the fruit of your labor; blessing and prosperity will be yours. Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table. Yes, this will be the blessing for the man who fears the LORD." I read this on page 2 in the Duck Dynasty cast's book, "The Duck Commander Devotional." How does the passage apply to them? Robertson's father, Phil Robertson dedicated his life to God and to Jesus, then he was able to start Duck Commander, and then he married a very kind woman named Kay, who is often referred to simply as "Ms. Kay." In the passage and others like it, "fear" means "obey," and "walk" means "live."


Simple and straight foward.

p1. The bible at the very least assumes jesus of nazareth walked the earth.

p2.Jesus didn't exist.

Thehistoricity of

Jesus Christ.

Every argument that attempts to show that Jesus existed, has logical or evidential fallacies. Anyone who says that Jesus definitely existed is merely giving their opinion, because the evidence clearly shows that Jesus is just a fictional character who never existed.

If you value evidence and logic you will accept the

non-existence of Jesus Christ.

The case supported by evidence .
1. There is not one single writing from or about Jesus during his supposed lifetime

Like the supposed founders of countless religions, Jesus left no personal writings of any kind, nor any trace of his existence. No writing, graffiti, or evidence of any kind has ever been found from the period in which he supposedly lived that establishes the existence of Jesus.

If we are to take the view that Jesus was actually the son of God, and god himself…Then it would be peculiar that he was unable to write and chose to write nothing himself. Of course the counter argument to this is that God wanted people to have faith so he intentionally didn't leave any evidence of himself.Absurd.

Howeve even if we take the view of Jesus was just a real person who was a teacher and the leader of a religious movement, then we could surely expect that this person would have produced his own writings, since other rabbis, theologians, and teachers did.

Scholars state that based on the information given in the Gospels Jesus had to have died in either the year 27, 30, or 33 CE. With a supposed ministry of Jesus that lasted from 1 to 3 years, we are looking at a date range from about 24 CE to 36 CE as the period during which we could look for writings about Jesus that were produced during his "lifetime".

Even the Gospels themselves state many times that "scribes" were present during the various acts of Jesus, yet we have no records from these supposed scribes. Nothing in the Jewish midrash of the time mentions anything about Jesus Christ or any of the events in the Gospels.

Not only this, but there are many people that lived during the supposed lifetime of Jesus, whose written works have been preserved, and whom we could expect to have written about him.

Here are some of the primary persons who lived during the supposed lifetime of Jesus, whose works we have, and who we could reasonably expect would have mentioned Jesus had he existed, yet they do not

Justus of Tiberias, Philo of Alexandria , Pliny the Elder, Seneca the Younger, Valerius Maximus, Velleius Paterculus. These were all historians that lived during the time of Jesus yet not one of them mentions him.

All of the mentioned above lived during the same time that Jesus supposedly lived and are prime candidates for being potential witnesses and documenters of the existence of Jesus.

The overwhelming lack of commentary about Jesus in the historical sources of his supposed time has troubled Christians from the very beginning.

The Gospels make many claims that are contradicted by the historical record

Even though the Gospels only cover a brief time-span, there few claims which are made that can be checked against the known historical record.

Here are a few examples of claims that are made in the Gospels which are either contradicted by the historical record or are unconfirmed outside of the Gospels.

  • Star of Bethlehem - No record of such a celestial event
  • Roman census in Jesus birth storyNo record of any census that matches this description.

  • Massacre of the Innocent - No record of this event
  • John the Baptist – Killed early in the Gospels, died in 36 CE according to Josephus.
  • Death of Jesus – Accompanied by blackout of sun, earthquakes, and raising of the dead
  • Absolutely not a shred of evidence of any of the above.

The bible is not valid.

Since jesus didn't exist.

Debate Round No. 2


Although it is not beyond the shadow of a doubt, there is legitimate, genuine evidence of God's existence, which is given here:

The existence of God implies that the Bible is valid as an important statement in the Bible is that God loves you. The verses saying that God loves you are shown at this URL:

If He loves us, why is there punishment, suffering, and hell?

Hell-Because God can't let lack of salvation into heaven or it won't be any different from hell, which it is.

Punishment- For humanity's sins.

Suffering- to strengthen our faith. After all, if a ghost inexplicably appeared out of nowhere and made all the bad stuff quit happening, would you not simply think you were seeing things and forget it ever happened?

-If you read the entire book of Proverbs or Psalm, you will likely find something in there that you will know applies to you.

-There is no archaeological proof that any Biblical character (e.g. David or Samson) did not exist or that any major event (David killing Goliath, though Goliath was a giant, and David was short, for instance) never happened. Also, there is no archaeological proof of David actually being huge or Goliath being the weakling, so it still remains logical to believe the Bible.

How do we know that there are not a bunch of deities? Just give me any deity that anyone ever believed in besides the Christian God (e.g. the Greek god Zeus) and I can disprove them.

Conclusion: the Bible is valid because God is real, He loves us, and He is the only God.


I almost don't feel the need to post anything. Neverthless I will.

The existance of or non existance of The God of the bible which is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction is irrelevant to this debate.

Indeed the God of the bible which is a petty, unjust, unforgiving
control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic

and a capriciously malevolent bully is irrelevant to this debate.

This debate is about >
"The Bible is Valid"

Not about the existance of any god

Pro has yet to make one argument to support

the resolution that

The Entire bible is a valid book.

I've shown how jesus never existed.


The Bible however it is most certiantly
Not valid.

Vote Con If you value evidence and logic.
Debate Round No. 3
36 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
Here are 101 scientific facts that were written in the Bible before they were discovered:
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
YoureSmarterThanMe98, I'll tell you who the most unpleasant character in fiction is: Mario. That's right, Mario "Jumpman" Mario.
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
Sagey, I think you are stalking me.
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
Then I would have won this debate
Posted by Jabuticaba 6 years ago
I wonder what the world would be like without stupid science, or illogical logic. They say logic is evidence, however this is worldly logic. What about godly logic? Something so complex, we try to understand. The only evidence that people can come up with is the lack of evidence. It's obvious there can be a god considering no one seems to be able to go against it.

Logic is the only reason people believe in science. What if logic was illogical this whole time?
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
I don't need you.
Posted by Sagey 6 years ago
No you might not Loveshismom, but by posting your beliefs in the debate, you were Begging for criticism!
Thus you deserved it!
Posted by Loveshismom 6 years ago
I don't need this.
Posted by Sagey 6 years ago
Legitimate reasons: Okay,
But are those reasons empirically testable or are they just valid to your own experience.
This is the danger of putting untested, subjective based concepts onto public spaces like DDO.
They will be criticized by Rational, Critical Thinkers.
Unless you can validate your beliefs Rationally and Critically to satisfy Rational Critical Thinkers, then you must be prepared to have them criticized and even Denigrated.
That is a fact with pushing your beliefs on Public Sites.
They will be Tested and Ridiculed.

That's just a fact of life you must accept.
If you don't want your beliefs criticized, don't put them onto public websites.
I'm a Critical Thinker and I've been criticizing Irrational, Subjective only beliefs for decades.
I used to be a Troll on religious websites, and I have toned down my criticisms a lot over the years.
So, now I spend a lot of my time warning such people of the pitfalls of posting unsubstantiated beliefs.
As you will meet many like I used to be.
And the criticism I used to dish out was much more offensive than anything I've given you here.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Sagey 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's evidence did not support his assumption that God is real and the conclusion of this unsupported assumption is thus also unsupported, though the rest of Pro's argument concerning a Show does not make any sense, thus leaving Con's ramblings as the only sensible arguments available in this debate.
Vote Placed by TF2PRO 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con very clearly showed how jesus did not exist. Therefore the bible isn't valid. Giving grammar to Con because of use of fonts and far less errors. CON used sources to back his arguments up. Pro had none.
Vote Placed by amik10 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: The basis of CON's case is "jesus didn't exist." He did. It is a historical fact.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.