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

There are no Contradictions in the Bible

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/21/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 720 times Debate No: 119114
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Give me three contradictions to start with.


Happy to think with you today.

The number of contradictions in the bible is in the hundreds. Many of them are small things. Differing numbers, Different accounts of the same situation, Et cetera. Often they clash directly with each other.

As a matter of respect for the debate, We'll assume the existence of God. We'll also try to stay with examples strictly from the Bible itself, And not an imposition of human morality on it.

Here are three that strike me as major ones:

1. Genocide versus "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

There are many places in the Bible where people claim that God has commanded them to genocide populations. (1) The Amalekites are one example of this. God commands that you exterminate them from the planet. Man, Infant, And child. Also to take the females as sex slaves, But that's another matter. God commands you not to kill, Then commands you to kill. A direct contradiction. God has shown himself fully capable of spreading plagues or storms to kill people in the past. Why command against your own command? If the commandment stated "thou shalt not kill unless I permit it. " This would not be a contradiction. As it stands, It is. There are numerous examples of this.

2. Free WIll versus Hardening the Heart of the Pharaoh

In the Bible, Many verses are said to support the idea that God gave us free will, Or the ability to choose. It also states that "The Lord hardened the Pharaoh's Heart. " Meaning that the Pharaoh may have given in to Moses and let his people go far sooner, Before all the plagues had come to be. God directly counters the free will of the Pharaoh, And says so in no uncertain terms. He then punishes all of Egypt, Including killing all their firstborn sons because of the Pharaoh's refusal to obey, Even when he couldn't! This is by far one of the worst examples of contradictions in the Bible. It should frighten every Christian out there. Free will isn't so free if it can be taken away at God's convenience.

3. Who is the child of God?

In the Bible it is said we are all the children of god. Then it is said Jesus is the son of god. Then it says Jesus is the son of God because he was resurrected. Unfortunately, There are numerous resurrections in the Bible. This isn't uncommon. Lazarus was raised, Matthew says the graves were emptied and the bodies of the saints arose. These things can't all be true. If we are all the children of god, Why is Jesus special? It certainly can't be for his resurrection in this case.

You have asked for three and I have supplied three. There are hundreds left, If you can answer these.

May your thoughts be clear,


(sources for this debate will all be The Bible, More or less)
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for doing this debate. I will be happy to answer your contradictions.

1. The Amalekites and "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

To begin one must get the context of 1Sam. 15. Verse 2 says, "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did ti Israel, How they laid wait for him in the way, When he came up from Egypt. " So obviously God is reminding Samuel about what Amalek did to Israel when they were in the Wilderness after they had left Egypt. Here we turn to Exodus 17:8 where Amalek comes out to fight against Israel and God promises vengeance on the Amalekites. In Deuteronomy 25:17-18 we see why God was furious and wanted Amalek to be utterly destroyed, "Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, When ye were come forth out of Egypt; How he met thee by the way, And smote the hindmost of thee, Even all that were feeble behind thee, When thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. Here we see the Amalekites swooping down on the rear of the marchers and beginning to slaughter them. This was composed of the people who could not keep up with the stronger. The old people, The infirm, The women with child, The women with small children, I. E. Babies and three year-olds. The Bible says, "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord. " 1 Sam 15 was an act of revenge, Not of genocide.
As for the command of "Thou shalt not kill" it is a prohibition of taking an innocents life, Or murder when read in the original Hebrew.

2. Free Will vs. Hardening of Pharaoh`s heart.

This is actually a tougher one, Since it took me a while to think about it. I want to point out that out of almost 20 times that his heart was hardened 10 of those Pharaoh hardened his own heart. It`s clear after the 6th plague God starts to harden Pharaoh`s heart. God hardened his heart for His glory. It was already clear that Pharaoh had already hardened his heart toward God. Pharaoh was considered a god and people worshipped and feared him. God was saying, You are worshipping and fearing a finite man that you should not be concerned about. God says not to fear man who can only kill the body, But to fear God who can kill body and soul in hell. Here God is establishing His name on the earth for all people to know who is the only true God. It is better to fear God rather than men.

3. Who is the child of God?

I would like to know where in the Bible it says that everyone is the child of God. That is a Catholic teaching that is not true. The answer to your question is found in John 1:14, "But as many as had received Him, To them gave He power to become the sons of God, Even to them that believe on His name. " Therefore only if you have received Jesus in your heart and believed on His name to take away your sins can you become a child of God. Those who are not the children of God are the children of the devil. John 8:44 says, "You are of your father the devil, And you want to do the desires of your father he was a murderer from the beginning, And does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him Whenever he speaks a lie, He speaks from his own nature, For he is a liar and the father of lies. " Also 1 John 3:10 says, "By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, Nor the one who does not love his brother. "
Jesus is special because He is God.


1. Genocide

The children and infants of the Amalekites were innocent. The women were probably innocent as well and they got a fate worse than death.

This was a genocide. Killing every last Amalekite so they become extinct is not 'eye for an eye. ' Israelis were clearly not 100% wiped out. Revenge is getting even, Not getting more than was taken from you. On top of that, Revenge would be against the people who slaughtered them. Not against those who didn't. If I kill someone, My wife and my daughters are not imprisoned or killed because of it. No one would call them guilty of my crime. No one would seek to genocide my entire family if I kill one of theirs and claim that is proper revenge, Or that it isn't murdering innocents.

If your God wanted revenge killing to be justified, Seems like it'd be pretty simple for him to add that to the commandments. Maybe commandments shouldn't be one-liners but a bit more specific.

Your answer to this contradiction is unsatisfactory. You must explain to me how the women deserved to be raped repeatedly and kept as sex slaves before they were killed. Why their children and infants were complicit in that act. You must also answer why God had not made Revenge Killing justified in the Commandments, And why God wouldn't simply take revenge for them. Perhaps you could also explain how the cattle of Amalek were also complicit in this action.

2. Pharaoh's Free Will

What does it matter at all if the Pharaoh wouldn't give in the first few plagues? The contradiction is that God made us with free will and won't violate that. That doing so would be to enslave us and make us his toys rather than his children. He violated the Pharaoh's free will and commit a genocide of the firstborn of Egypt for it. Your justification for this is that "God wanted to make sure men feared God! " If God was known to exist no one would be afraid of anything else. No one would have cause to fear anything else even back in those times had he chosen to make himself known among the majority of the world instead of isolate himself to the illiterate ancient middle east.

Fear of God is not justification for God to go against his word and violate the free will he gave to men. This contradiction also goes unanswered.

3. Child of God

It is hotly debated even among Christians it seems and no one really gives the same answer. It's things like this that make it hard to take religions seriously.

Some Christians view these things as three separate entities, Some view 2, Some view just a single being. None of you are very specific about the matter.

You largely ignored my point in that there were plenty of people raised from the dead around this time in the Bible. It seems strange that we associate Jesus as the 'son of god' when as you quoted immediately after you asked, The bible refers to us as 'children of god. ' Even if we are made this after we accept Jesus, That would still make us his children afterwards and no different if Jesus is said to be the Son of God.

So in your view, Jesus is the Son of God, And he is God simultaneously. Why then did the concept of Jesus need to exist at all? Did God believe he could not be loved himself?

Frankly, You ignored the question of resurrection and why that proves Jesus is who he claims to be. Exorcising demons is no different, Many were said to have done so. Priests still claim to do so to this day. Miracles have been 'confirmed' from many who were said to be 'saints. ' Miracles then don't prove Jesus is who he claimed to be. What is left? Walking on water or turning water to wine?

What exactly confirms for you that Jesus was the son of god and not a charlatan? My contention in this section was to point out that there is apparently nothing special about the resurrection. This has been left unanswered as well.

To conclude,

I have plenty more contradictions, But it seems you need to clarify and/or actually answer these first. I submit to the readers you have not. You have "answered" them by stating several things without evidence. It seems if you leave even one unsolved in part you have conceded the debate. You seek to put words into God's mouth by trying to personally redefine or clarify the words he wrote in his commandments. If God told me 'thou shalt not kill' I would be afraid of stepping on bugs lest I kill a bug, Much less try to justify killing infants or children. Much less raping women before killing them. I would think the Israelis might ask for a bit of clarification on this, And would think it'd be clear enough it needed to be clarified for them to take note of it in their book. You say that "The Pharaoh hardened his heart first! " even though the Bible has stated God hardened the Pharaoh's heart. You state that "Catholic teaching is not true" and then go on as if you don't have to prove that point. Who is the true Scotsman, Pro?

May your thoughts be clear,

Debate Round No. 2


I actually believe you are putting things in God's mouth. Let me know where in the Bible it says the Amalekite women were raped or used as sex slaves. This is something you claim without providing evidence. Therfore you are assuming.

God says, Only He can revenge for he does it in justice. Man only does it in anger.

As for the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" you must have forgotten that I said in the Hebrew (FYI te language it was written in) it means murder. In other words "Thou shalt not murder. "

You should also look into the history of the Amalekites, They were a band of nomads who attacked travelers between Egypt and Israel these people literally raped women, Killed infants all the way up until Saul destroyed them. So please look into history before you debate.

The point about Pharaoh is that he was't going to soften his heart. Just like you will not accept Jesus as your Savior.

Yeah, I understand why you feel it is hard to take Christianity seriously when many "Christians don't know the Bible and make interpretations to make other religions feel good, But he Bible verses I showed you can tell you that not everyone is a child of God.

Since Jesus id God He can raise anyone He wants from the dead without anyone's permission to do so. Jesus had to exist to pay for your sin so you could have eternal life. However, That discussion is for another debate.

I thought this was about contradictions, Not about why Jesus is God. I am debating someone on that very topic if you want to look for it. Or we can go through that in another debate because it is very long.

In another debate on why biblical christianity is the only true Christianity I go further into the subject on why the Catholic church is no the true church. It is another long debate with a lot of information.

If these answers don't satify you. Let me know and post some more contradictions.


I can drop Contradiction #3. It's unnecessary.

I've won this debate already on point #2. You've given no answer to this. God hardened the Pharaoh's heart. You can't say that the Pharaoh did it himself. No interpretation of this denies that god has suspended free will.

I can't let you weasel your way out of #1 either. The rape and sex slave claim may have been false. It seems The Amalekites did this to the Israelis. Either way, This has no effect on the claim. God could have written the Ten Commandments to allow revenge killing if he intended it. To say he couldn't would mean he isn't God. He could've written it, Were he god, In a way that would be unmistakable to acknowledge this.

As far as the Amalekite infants and children go, Here's another contradiction for you.

Deuteronomy 24:16
"Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, Nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. "

You may concede the debate at any point. I'm more than willing to leave it to the judges at this point. You have no defense.

May your thoughts be clear,

Debate Round No. 3


"Pharaoh with a Capital "P"

Pharaoh is not one single king in Exodus. If you pay attention, You"ll see that this royal title refers to a sequence of Egyptian kings over many generations. It raises the interesting question of why the author doesn"t actually name the Pharaoh who opposed Moses (was he Thutmose II or III, Or Ramses I or II? ). This was almost certainly on purpose. The author doesn"t want us to focus on one single king. Rather, He wants us to see Pharaoh as an archetype of the pattern of human rebellion that began in the garden and culminated in Babylon (Genesis 3-11). This king, Or sequence of kings, Is the epitome of human evil. He embodies the strange and tragic turn the human heart can take when one person or society places their own values and well-being above another person or society. Pharaoh is what happens when an entire nation redefines good and evil apart from God"s wisdom. You get an Egypt building its wealth and security on the backs of an abused, Oppressed, And enslaved Israel. As the story develops, Pharaoh even places his own reputation and pride above the well-being of his own people. This is a horrific situation, And it"s the Bible"s diagnosis of the human condition in corporate terms. The Egyptian empire and its Pharaoh is the Babylon of Genesis ch. 11 on steroids. God has to respond.

Evil Turned Upside Down

A common question readers have about this story, Concerns the repeated theme of Pharaoh"s "hard heart. " Sometimes we"re told Pharaoh hardens his heart against God, But other times we read that God hardens his heart. Who is really behind all this evil? And what does this story tell us about God"s relationship to evil at other times in history, Or in our own lives?

To answer this question you have to be patient, And read the story slowly and in sequence. Otherwise you"ll short-circuit the experience the author wants you to go through. In Moses" commissioning (Exodus 3-6), God first says he "knows" Pharaoh will resist the demand to let the Israelite's go (3:19-20), And so God says that he will harden Pharaoh"s heart (4:21 and 7:3). So, God knows the hearts of humans and can anticipate their responses, A sobering thought echoed throughout the Bible (see Jeremiah 17:10). God will turn Pharaoh"s evil back on his own head, But does that mean God is responsible for Pharaoh"s rebellion from beginning to end? You have to keep reading, And stay alert.

Hardening of Hearts

In Moses" and Pharaoh"s first encounter (Exodus 7:13-14), Pharaoh"s heart "became hard. " Now, There"s a translation issue here that unfortunately complicates things, So get your Bible-nerd hat on! The Hebrew verb for "became hard" (pronounced, Khazaq) is not passive, Nor does it indicate who is initiating the action (it"s called a "stative" verb, Meaning it doesn"t say whether it"s Pharaoh or God). If you"re reading in the NIV, It"s ambiguous, Which seems to be the point. However, Some other modern translations have unfortunately inserted their interpretation into the text and rendered this verb "was hardened. " In other words, They turn it into a passive verb, So that you walk away from ch. 7 thinking God was hardening Pharaoh"s heart from the first, Which isn"t what the text says. As you read on, You"ll notice a fascinating pattern emerge. In the first five plagues that God sends on Egypt, The hardening of Pharaoh"s heart happens by his own will, Or is again ambiguous, Just as we saw in the opening scene. In the last five plagues, The pattern changes.

*The Ten Plagues and Pharaoh"s Heart

Blood: Pharaoh"s heart "became hard" (7:22)
Frogs: Pharaoh "hardened his own heart" (8:15)
Gnats: Pharaoh"s heart "was hard" (8:19)
Flies: "Pharaoh hardened his own heart" (8:32)
Livestock die: Pharaoh"s heart "was hard" (9:7)
Boils: "The Lord hardened Pharaoh"s heart" (9:12)
Hail: Pharaoh "hardened his own heart" (9:34)
Locusts: God announces that he has "hardened Pharaoh"s heart" (10:1, 10:20)
Darkness: God "hardened Pharaoh"s heart" (10:27)
Death of the firstborn: God "hardened Pharaoh"s heart" (11:10)
Here we are able to draw several conclusions. First of all, In plagues 6-10, We hear four times that God has hardened Pharaoh"s heart. Can you see how this is a distinct change from plagues 1-5? In those stories, Pharaoh explicitly hardened his own heart (plagues 2 and 4), Or the source of the hardening was ambiguous (plagues 1, 3, And 5). Interestingly, In the 7th plague of hail, We first see Pharaoh harden his own heart (9:34), But afterward the narrator uses the ambiguous verb "became hard" to describe it. This means that all of the other uses of the ambiguous verb (plagues 1, 3, And 5) do not imply that God hardened Pharaoh"s heart, But just the opposite!

The Point

Why does the author use this back-and-forth technique in describing Pharaoh"s heart? It"s all part of the brilliant diagnosis of the human condition in this story, Which is about the mysterious nature of human evil. God called Pharaoh to humble himself and acknowledge that God is his authority and that he cannot redefine good and evil on Egyptian terms. Pharaoh"s response (see 5:1-2) is to balk at the God of Israel. After this, God gives Pharaoh five opportunities to repent and humble himself, And five times he hardens his heart. The author wants us to see that even the most heinous and absurd forms of human evil are not a true threat to God"s purposes. He can steer even this kind of evil toward his plan to bless all humanity through Abraham"s family.

The Climax

Ultimately, Whether it was God or Pharaoh, At the end of ten plagues, Pharaoh wants the Israelites gone. After losing his own son, Pharaoh releases the Israelites. Not surprisingly though, Pharaoh has yet another change of heart, And goes back on his decision to let the Israelites go (14:5). Pharaoh musters his army, And we"re told that God "hardens his heart" (14:8). We know how this story ends. The evil turn of Pharaoh"s heart turns back on himself, Resulting in an empire-wide catastrophe.

The Romans Response

Romans 9 is the lengthiest reference Paul makes to Exodus in the New Testament. Many point to this chapter to say that God was ultimately behind the evil of Pharaoh from the beginning. Romans 9:18 says, "Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, And He hardens whom He wills. " Paul sees in Pharaoh"s hard heart, A pattern that was again at work in his own day, Namely the rejection of Jesus the Messiah by many of his own, Jewish, People. In this passage, Paul is not offering a commentary on the complicated theme of Pharaoh"s hard heart, Nor is he claiming that God alone was responsible. He is summarizing the main point of the Exodus story"s diagnosis of Pharaoh"s evil (God"s purpose to bless cannot be thwarted by heinous human evil), And applying it to an apparent tragedy in his own day. Jesus" execution was actually part of God"s plan to bring blessing to all the nations. It is Paul"s exploration of God"s justice and mercy. The fact that God can steer evil towards his purposes does not mean he engineered it. Pharaoh is responsible for his own evil, Just as Joseph"s brothers were. However, There is no force of human evil that can resist God"s purpose to bring salvation and blessing to all nations.

What did this mean for Pharaoh, And what does this mean to me?

When human evil goes unchecked, Bad things happen, And bad people can sometimes turn into monsters. The author of Exodus is showing us that Pharaoh was responsible for the evil in his heart, And at a clear point in the story (after plague 5), He crossed a point of no return. At this point, God re-purposes this "vessel" (as Paul puts it in Romans 9) for his own good purposes. The point of the story is not to tell us that God engineers evil, Rather, It is a cautionary warning to you, The reader, Saying, "Don"t be like Pharaoh! " Strange things happen in the human heart and mind when we let the evil urges of our broken nature go unchecked. God will always graciously offer us chances to turn back (would you have given Pharaoh so many chances? ! ), But sometimes a person can cement themselves in a destructive path and reach a point of no return. God can and sometimes will allow our evil to destroy us. BUT, The good news is, If that last sentence kind of freaks you out, You"re not Pharaoh! The fact that you"re asking the sobering question, Means that your heart is soft, And wants to do the right thing. As we progress through the rest of the biblical narrative, You"ll see this theme of the hard vs. Soft heart develop more. For now, Let"s ponder the mysterious justice and mercy of God, Who wants to save us from ourselves. " I hope this helps.

So you admit that you really haven't read these passages. I suggest you read the Bible more carefully and for yourself in order to look into these contradictions. As I said before God does not allow man to revenge kill. I don't know where you got that from. God used the Israelites to revenge himself against the Amalekites, But it would have been wrong for the Israelites to seek revenge on the Amalekites. The story actually says that God remembered what they had done to the Israelites. If God allowed revenge, Then the Israelites would have completely destroyed the Amalekites while they were in the Wilderness.

"God could have written the Ten Commandments to allow revenge killing if he intended it. To say he couldn't would mean he isn't God. He could've written it, Were he god, In a way that would be unmistakable to acknowledge this. " I don't know what you are trying to say here.

The command in Deuteronomy is for the Israelite judges (the government), But God visits the sin of the parents on the children, Because while man is fallible and can make mistakes, God judges righteously. I can explain more on this in the next round if you want.


1. Pharaoh

You spend so much time explaining a section of the literature that is pointless for this debate.

The question is, When God says we have free will and insists he doesn't violate it, Why does he then violate free will? It matters not if the Pharaoh's heart was hardened for 99 out of 100 scenarios. The only thing I need for this to be contradictory is for God to have violated free will once. The contradiction remains.

2. Genocide

I've read the Bible in its entirety and threw it off when I was eight. Without interpreting things 1. As charitably as possible and 2. With liberal use of imagination you can't shake off how wrong the vast majority of the book is.

My point still stands. God has approved genocide or revenge killing. This is not open to interpretation. His law doesn't stipulate that his commandment may be violated even by him. He either needs to change his commandments, In which case he was mistaken upon initial creation, Or his commandments should hold. There is no defense from this. The most basic human lawmakers create laws more clearly than God's. Isn't this evidence for God's absurdity? Can God not be expected to make clear laws when the punishment for violating those laws is so clear? When the majority of people can't even read the book he has put the laws in?

Here's some more fun quotes for punishing the sons for the sins of the father, And for not. So many contradictions. I'm only going to post a few here but I assure you there are many, Many more on this topic alone.

Beloved, Never avenge yourselves, But leave it to the wrath of God, For it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, Says the Lord. "

God should have taken his wrath out without commanding the Israelis to do the killing.

Isaiah 14:21 ESV
Prepare slaughter for his sons because of the guilt of their fathers, Lest they rise and possess the earth, And fill the face of the world with cities. "

Slay the sons for the sins of the father.

The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, "The Lord, The Lord, A God merciful and gracious, Slow to anger, And abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, Keeping steadfast love for thousands, Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, But who will by no means clear the guilty, Visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children's children, To the third and the fourth generation. "

Slay the sons for the sins of the father.

And whenever you stand praying, Forgive, If you have anything against anyone, So that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. "

God gives you a chance for forgiveness, Unless you're an infant or baby of course.

Then Peter came up and said to him, "Lord, How often will my brother sin against me, And I forgive him? As many as seven times? " Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, But seventy times seven.

Israelis aren't so forgiving of their Amalekite brothers it seems. Is this principle not true simply because it was said later? Did Jesus correct God?

You show steadfast love to thousands, But you repay the guilt of fathers to their children after them, O great and mighty God, Whose name is the Lord of hosts,

I wonder how many Christians nowadays actually believe the sins of the father belong to the child, The third, And the fourth generations. And yet we still believe in God's morality somehow?

3. Examples of many. (1) The website is deleting my post so I have to remove the Bible citation numbers. . .

GE DT God tempts (tests) Abraham and Moses.
JG God himself says that he does test (tempt).
1CO Paul says that God controls the extent of our temptations.
JA God tests (tempts) no one.

Tempt/Test versus Not

GE EX NU 1SA 2SA God does change his mind.
NU SA JA God does not change his mind.

Change his mind, Or no?

GE 1CH LK God is omnipotent. Nothing is impossible with (or for) God.
JG Although God was with Judah, Together they could not defeat the plainsmen because the latter had iron chariots.

Omnipotent or no?

GE God decides to "go down" to see what is going on.
PR JE HE God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

Omnipresent or no?

Examples of small inconsistencies like these are spread throughout the Bible. There are hundreds. They aren't so interesting to debate, So I'm leaving them here at the end.

To conclude,

My opponent can't defend God's violation of the free will of humans. He can't defend genocide of babes when the commandments prohibit killing. He says the sins of the father only don't apply to Israelis, But not for anyone else. Strange how morality only applies to some select few humans, But not others, And not to God. I submit he has not answered these contradictions. I've presented a few more that he also cannot dispute, But I do this only because 5 rounds was 3 more than I needed to win this debate, And we may as well keep things interesting despite my opponent's attempt to distract from the point of the contradictions.

May your thoughts be clear,


Source in Comments
Debate Round No. 4


Pharoh hardened his own heart and if he was going to repent he would have, But he didnt just like you haven't.

God is just and can punish a people anyway He wants, Using whoever He wants. Just like in WWII he used the allies to take down Hitler. Genocide wasn't mentioned when we killed many Germans and Japenese. God avenges because only His vengence is perfect. Humans are not perfect in their vengence.

The children who died went to heaven.

Sorry I could not be more clear, But I have a lot of grading for last month. I might respond in the comments.


Pharaoh clearly didn't harden his own heart. There is no way to interpret the words written in the bible which clearly say "god hardened the pharaoh's heart" to mean the exact reverse. You are simply trying to win a debate instead of conceding the truth.

My own heart is none of your concern. I happen to love everyone and consider everyone my brothers. Even those who have forged manacles for themselves with imaginary Gods. I seek to free people like you from their prisons.

God is not just simply because you define him to be so. You have no logical argument to attribute omnibenevolence to God.

Genocide is mentioned at our killing of Japanese, Particularly the bombings all the time. War casualties are not defined as genocides, But the atomic bombs are very close if not 100% genocides.

"The children who died went to heaven. " So there's nothing wrong with infanticide now? It's curious to hear religious people justify the murder of children and infants with this but be so against abortion when it spares the child decades of human suffering and shoots them straight to heaven. Odd, Isn't it, How this logic could be used to justify the murder and genocide of all humans, Not just the ones you justify killing in your God's name.

Heaven doesn't exist. It logically cannot. It is a nightmare realm. I'm happy to debate you on the omnibenevolence of god or the logical problems with the existence of heaven or infant killing as far as your religion goes any day. Your religion has no answers for these questions and problems, But that is not this debate.

My opponent has failed to answer the contradictions I have put forward. He attempts to reword his own holy book for his own convenience. I hope the contradictions I presented were more interesting than the hundreds of simpler ones in the Bible. Please remember that in order to win this debate I only needed to prove that one contradiction exists.

May your thoughts be clear,

Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
R4 Sources

1. Infidels org contradictions in the bible (Not all of these seem perfect examples, But decent enough)
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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