CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Is The Bible accurate?
I know there are like a million religion debates on here, but I want to start another one. I want strong supporting evidence on both sides. I don't want to read "God exists because I feel him in my heart". I want people who know what they're talking about and can back it up. If you have good evidence supporting your claim posted in other debates, then copy them and bring them over here. This debate doesn't have to be entirely about The Bible, it can be on your religious views in general too.
Does the Bible consistently show Gods power? Yes. It follows the standard, rule, or model that has been established by its authors and is accurate by definition.
Definition number 2 also is true, because it was meticulously written. Proof of this is found in the era in which it was written. No ball point pen, quality paper, spell check etc. Meticulous describes the Bible to a tee.
Now before you get angry at that 2nd grade comment, I would like to introduce you to: The Story of Elisha.
In the story it says that as Elisha was walking up to Bethel, when 42 kids gathered up from behind him to say "go up, thou baldhead, go up" (because Elisha was bald.) Because of this, God had summoned 2 bears from the wild to brutally kill these 42 children.
1. Think about how those children would feel. (They have freewill do they not? Wouldn't it suck for it to be taken away like that?)
2. Think about what their parents would feel. (They did nothing to deserve losing their children.)
3. Think about what God would feel because he is so loving and omnibenevolent. (OH WAIT, he just brutally killed 42 children in a death that involves a great amount of pain. He obviously didn't care about how they would feel and acted in a cold-hearted manner. Actually, not a cold-hearted manner... a freaking-mental-child-serial-killing manner.
This means that the bible is morally broken. And possibly you, for following it.
And from the bible Hebrew text, there have been spelling mistakes/grammatical errors around the bible, cleaned up through translations. It'd be hell to place this evidence in my argument, so I will just post you to a link. Now before you start calling this site biased; it is not. The spelling errors are real, and have not been altered. Check it yourself on other sites.
I mentioned the power of God; Where does it say in the Bible that God is not powerful? In order for what I said to be false, there would have to be accounts of this.
Secondly I never said that there are not spelling errors in which there is not. There are no spelling errors because the language was not standardized. Take the American language for example, one cannot say there were spelling errors before Daniel Webster worked to put in print a standard for the language. The word chusen was commonly used instead of chosen. Ben Franklin even used chusen often in the materials he printed.
I mentioned the power of God; Where does it say in the Bible that God is not powerful? In order for what I said to be false, there would have to be accounts of this.
Has the story of Elisha left your mind?
Secondly I never said that there are not spelling errors in which there is not.
You just did.
(No ball point pen, quality paper, spell check etc.) And spell check, which implies that they were able to do spelling without aid from it.
Take the American language for example, one cannot say there were spelling errors before Daniel Webster worked to put in print a standard for the language. The word chusen was commonly used instead of chosen. Ben Franklin even used chusen often in the materials he printed.
It doesn't cover for the contradictions, grammatic and logical errors in the bible.
And the moral error of the story of Elisha. Why the hell have you chosen not to dispute that? And where the hell did that down-vote come from, despite you ignoring some of my arguments.
Re-read the previous argument and see what you have missed.
Where in the story of Elisha, does it say God is not powerful? In order to dispute some one, you have to point out where they were wrong. One cannot dispute some one by stating something different, that is not a dispute. It is an entirely different argument. Not a dispute
Second point, basically the same as stated above. Logical errors are not spelling errors. No dispute here. etc. etc. etc.
Learn the difference between disputing and stating a new argument. My points are still valid since you are not disputing these, you are just bring up other arguments.
Read, think, reread, comprehend, and then make an argument or dispute what is written.
Where in the story of Elisha, does it say God is not powerful? In order to dispute some one, you have to point out where they were wrong. One cannot dispute some one by stating something different, that is not a dispute. It is an entirely different argument. Not a dispute
It definitely grinds your views in the dirt of God being all loving when he is a messed up, evil and false God. Or can't you see that?
Definitely a dispute for what you believe in.
Second point, basically the same as stated above. Logical errors are not spelling errors. No dispute here. etc. etc. etc.
Learn the difference between disputing and stating a new argument. My points are still valid since you are not disputing these, you are just bring up other arguments.
Read, think, reread, comprehend, and then make an argument or dispute what is written
My new argument doesn't even need to be directly disputing it. It's already destroyed your belief system, so there's nothing else to say after it, other than; your views are broken and false, out of the thousands out there.
I've seen your arguments and your bias to atheists.
You're the one attacking my beliefs and I'm biased? Have I said anything about your beliefs? No. Get the facts straight Mitt.
Are you even going to try justify the story of Elisha in your word of God?
Why do I have to justify anything to you? I am not an expert on the Bible and I am unaware of this story, frankly I don't plan on doing the research to convince somebody with a preconceived notion that Bible is something that it is not.
You're the one attacking my beliefs and I'm biased? Have I said anything about your beliefs? No. Get the facts straight Mitt.
But I am doing so with powerful proof. You're not aloud to have a side anyway, since I have utterly destroyed you.
Why do I have to justify anything to you? I am not an expert on the Bible and I am unaware of this story, frankly I don't plan on doing the research to convince somebody with a preconceived notion that Bible is something that it is not.
Brazenly admitting ignorance of your own beliefs. The bible says what it says. It's just the cherry picked version you were indoctrinated by that makes it difficult for you to accept what it clearly says. There's no lesson gained from God murdering 42 children other than; this is a broken religion, or cult. No different from Islam or Judaism.
You disagreeing with the Islamic or Jewish scriptures would be no different from dismissing the lunacy of the bible, such as the story of Elisha. These scriptures are no different.
Not really. You haven't said anything to prove me wrong, except opinionated statements.
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed about evidence."
You are only wasting your time, unless you debate with me logically about the bible verse of God killing children.
You believe in Adam and Eve, do you not? Then you'd have to believe the other stories of the bible- Jesus's resurrection, Moses and the 10 commandments. These are what make up Christianity, and people take them seriously everyday. But they discard the story of Elisha. Well, this part of it- where God murders 42 children. From the people reading it, what does that teach? What would you expect it to teach? Your religion is broken.
One is only ignorant when they speak of something they know nothing about, as in your case.
The sad thing is; so do you.
You expect something magical underneath it, yet there isn't. Think this way of the Q'ran. It's no different.
Just dispute it logically. What it says is what it says. There is no verse after or before it that justifies it. I've read the whole verse, and that's what it says.
You failed.
Dispute my argument or don't reply at all. Dispute the story of Elisha or don't reply at all. If you value truth, or security in your religion, research into it. I've done it, and all that can be interpreted from it is what it says. It wasn't even meant to teach anyone about anything lawful, it was just there, destroying the very message it was meant to convey.
It all depends on how you look at the Bible. Do you take it all literally or metaphorically? Do you think of it as exactly what God said happened or what prophets said about/for God? You can't read the Bible and expect it to all have happened exactly the way it did but maybe it was just another parable? Maybe it was metaphorical? Take Adam and Eve, for example. I don't believe that happened exactly as it says it did. I don't believe that a snake came and spoke to Eve and that Adam and Eve started the whole of human life on this planet - and I don't believe that Earth was created in seven days. I do, however, believe that God created Earth and I believe he created science as well.
I'm not trying to force beliefs on anybody, by the way, this is purely what I think of the Bible.
Yes, the Bible is accurate. If you were to see copies of the original manuscripts you would find that each of them were copied with extreme accuracy. The huge number of the copied manuscripts is also a good argument here. 10,000 manuscripts of the Old Testament alone were found in the Cairo Geniza. Another 600 manuscripts of the OT were found in Qumran. If you look at the New Testament, you will find that there are nearly 5,700 manuscripts. This is huge compared to other works, which are listed here.
Plato-7 manuscripts
Herodotus- 8 manuscripts
Homer- 643 manuscripts (This is largest number of ancient manuscripts that we have today.)
Considering the numbers here, the Bible is definitely accurate. There is a very slim chance that there are any errors in the Bible except for some typos and the occasional missed word since there is such a large amount of ancient manuscripts, which were copied down with extreme accuracy and preciseness.
I will dispute all of that project reason contradictions but not right now I will once I read all of those contradictions. It will take months for me to break this. So watch out.
this is the message you sent to me which i cant reply to:
"WOW! Your such a coward for banning me from the debate! You are so dumb!"
and you claim to be a christian i guess you better ask for forgivness or go to hell oh wait you are already going to hell for believing in a phony man written bible
I am not going to hell because I believe in Jesus Christ who is the Son of God and the Savior of the World. You shouldn't be telling people who is going to go to hell and who isn't because your not God. Only God makes that decision.
Why do you believe in God then? God is from the Bible and you said that the Bible is bullcrap because its written by men correct? So why are you believing in God?
just how stupid are you? man written bible is not entirely wrong just mostly. why are you so arrogant to believe wrong bible written by pathetic mortals is correct? the first testament is for jews (who will all go to hell)
have you ever spoken to god? i mean really spoken to him? because I HAVE!!!!!!!!!!
Yes I have spoken to God and that is called prayer and I pray everyday to God. In fact I will pray for you so that God can open your eyes and see the errors of your ways.
The Old Testament is for Jews but if the believe that Jesus was the Messiah then they will go to Heaven but some Jews still believe that the Messiah hasn't come yet(which He already did come if they read the New Testament)
The New Testament if for Christians because it talks about how Jesus died for our sins and rose from the grave.
Yes prayer is speaking to God because your telling God what you need help with and you give Him glory and honor and praise and as Christians we are suppose to pray God talks back to you by giving you an answer.
Also you can't tell me not to respond because I will respond if you can't handle me responding to me then I suggest you leave this site right now because if you can't handle me responding to you then you will probably to the same to all the other people.
You are sinful to because everyone sins including you and I nobody is perfect except for God because God has never sinned.
The notion of hell has been passed along through many religions. Christianity was not the first to introduce it. The concept of hell doesn't even appear in the Bible until New Testament. As a matter of fact, many Christian beliefs echo an earlier religion known as Paganism. Pagan beliefs are now seen as myths, just like Greek mythology. It is a religion that has died out. But why is Paganism seen as a myth? After all it did introduce heaven, hell, demon posession, sacrifice, prophecy, holy meal, holy spirit, baptism, immortal soul, and monotheism. All common beliefs and practices in Christianity.
The modern view of hell didn't come from the Bible though, it came from a book called The Divine Comedy. A poem in it called Inferno went into detail about hell. The author of this book was very well respected in his time, but he was certainly no religious scholar. He wrote a story and people hung onto the imagery that he created. Just like if you were to see the movie The Da Vinci Code and then go and read the book. Tom Hanks played the main character in the movie, so it is only natural to picture him while reading the book. Same goes for hell.
Also keep down-voting because soon it will start to say that you are rating the argument to fast and it won't down-vote me and I have a friend who can up-vote all the arguments that you down-voted.
Nope its 101kakashi who is currently on right now! Also I don't have any multiple accounts anyway. Go ahead and report to me nothing is going to happen.
Go ahead and report all you want nothing is going to happen to me if you keep reporting me and if you report me then its called false accusation and that means you lied and God says that you shouldn't lie.
I am still working on it because its very long. I actually will do this when on my video on youtube once I get my new microphone that's supposed to come next wednesday.
Luke, a Bible writer, is one example. His details about Roman officials such as "Sergio Paulus of Cyprus," "Gallio, the proconsul of Achaia," "Herod the Great," "Pontius Pilate," and "King Agrippa,"are all confirmed by ancient Roman historical records and archeology. Even unbelieving scholars agree that King David, King Solomon, the Philistines, and countless other persons mentioned in the Bible were real people, and that such cities as Ephesus, Philippi, and Thessalonica were real places. The ancient Ebla Tablets, a collection of 17,000 tablets discovered since 1968 and written around 2,500 B.C. mention the biblical cities of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar, found in Genesis 14. The Mari Tablets, 25,000 tablets written in 1,900 B.C., mention the names of Abraham, Jacob, Nahor, Dan, Levi, Benjamin, and Ishmael, found in the book of Genesis. Also a Canaanite bronze calf was discovered a couple of years ago and reported in Time magazine, confirming the Bible's account that pagan nations worshipped calves. Do some research before you make such a statement.
Well if the term modern humans would be implicated on us then yes it was checked. Millions of people have read the Bible from cover to cover and are still studying it until now. Therefore that argument is invalid.
no. the current bible was not approved by my lord and savior. man wrote it and he messed up a lot of things like most of the old testament that was for the jews.
So your saying that the Bible isn't accurate? I thought you were a Christian? All Christians believe that the Bible was accurate I am actually surprised that you don't believe that the Bible is accurate.
I believe in God and I believe that the Bible is all correct and I remember you used to tell me and accuse me of multiple accounts well guess what I don't have anymore multiple accounts!
well i believe in my god! the real god not the one written by men and if dont have anymore multiple accounts then i was right that you did have multiple accounts and you lied to me when you said you didnt. the god i know and love doesnt like people to lie
Well God used earthly men to write the Bible and God breathed his word into the men. I already admitted to everyone I did and now the creator deleted them and so now I don't have anymore but yes I did lie but God will forgive me if I stop lying so I am forgiven. And yes Jesus does love me even for all the things I have done and you too! :D
thats gross god is not gay and he dont approve of gays
"I already admitted to everyone I did and now the creator deleted them"
then you lied to me and i seriously doubt that god as creator deleted your phony accounts as he has better things to do
Jesus is in hell for being a fraud and the jews will join him. my god is the true christian leader the bible is largly wrong as it was written by men and not god
Well then don't believe in the Bible then because it was written by men but God spoke through them.
That's not what I meant by God breathed his word into men. He used the Holy Spirit to tell writers what to do.
Ok if you seriously doubt that go look up theses accounts that he deleted, avenger777, srom1884, SHMECKLES34, avenger77, and prayerwins because I just looked them up and they those people don't exist now anymore.
Why would Jesus be hell when Jesus is God? Jews also go to Heaven if they believe in the Messiah(Jesus). So do you believe that the Bible was written by God or by man?
jesus was a fraud and was just a jew. he was not god, man wrote that down and its wrong. accept my god, the only real god or go to hell to live with the jews and your pretend first testament.
Jesus was God I can give you verse from the Bible! Also many of the disciples witnessed Jesus Christ and saw what He did like rise people from the grave, perform miracles.
If you go here that is where you will find out the verses that say Jesus was God.
What is a Christian and person that follow Jesus Christ and you say your a Christian right? Then you believe that Jesus Christ is God.
So why are you a Christian then? Christians believe in God and believe in the Bible so what's the point of you being a Christian when you think that the Bible was written by God?
Also you are dumb for banning me from your debate! Seriously you are a coward for trying to do that and you probably banned me because you didn't want to speak with me. What a coward. That proves that you don't want to talk to me.
I will pray for you since you need serious help from God to open up your eyes and see the error of your ways.
There is no legal means of editing it since it was created from a spacious difference in time period from then to now. Therefore any evident change would destroy the authenticity of the Bible.
It would depend on your definition of accuracy. If someone handed you an encyclopedia collection in paper book form (imagine it's nineties..... ok, ok the eighties) and it has volumes A B D G H L M O Q T W Y Z. Would you consider that an accurate collection, knowing that there was once or may still be a collection containing more? Several Roman councils were held in Europe during the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries in attempt to for the religious leaders to unify the Christian faith and as well as for the government to unify the people by adopting the unified religion. This is were many books that were held as part of the Biblical canon were thrown out, not because people didn't believe or because they weren't sound teachings, but because they conflicted with the laws of the government. The most profound argument ever made against Christianity was from none other than one of America's founding fathers, Thomas Paine. In his essay, The Age Of Reason, he points out the gaping holes found in the gospels of the New Testament and the validity of their authors who were all born decades if not centuries after the historic Jesus' recorded death. Anyone that claims to love others owes it to themselves and others to do their history on Christianity. It really isn't hard to find substantial evidence the problem is that most people grow accustomed to the tradition of it they forget to check the facts.
The Bible speaks in figurative verses and should not be interpreted through Scientific means. The term it cannot be moved means that the Earth is on its present state and no mere man can move it himself thus divine providence can be the only way to do so. Then the second verse states that the sun and moon are important to the Earth and plays an important role in life here.
No. Here's but one example why: EVERYTHING after Mark 16:8 is an interpolation (fancy Christian way of saying forgery). The Church acknowledges it but do they remove it? Hell-to-the no. Why not? It would also require acknowledging falsehood. Not gonna happen.
The error in this translation is the use of the word fowls from the Hebrew word owph which literally refers to any flying creature. The original
Hebrew text is explaining what flying creatures were acceptable for consumption and which ones were not. Because the bat is technically a
flying creature, it was accurately included in this list.
You might ask - Why didn't the Bible just classify the bat with other mammals?
Answer: At the time, the bat fit best under the classification of winged creatures. The extensive scientific classifications we have today did not
exist 3500 years ago. (and we know definition which matters, not the subject discussed: For example, the Pluto is no more a planet today and it was a planet some years ago) The Bible listing the bat with other winged creatures was literally and technically correct. Just because modern definitions
have changed does not make the 3500 year old classification of winged creatures incorrect. [I am going to create a web page within six months where you can find all of the answers of your so-called contradictions. I could have answered here, but you atheists are getting jealousy of any theist who refutes your men-made contradictions. For example, you all atheists used (and have been using) offensive languages when failed to refute my right clarifications of your so-called contradictions. And I was compelled to set my debates private, as you know it is filled more with obscene languages of atheists than real debate arguments and I fear if some of theist will see such obscene words wouldn't hesitate to show his/her anger because of your obscene languages (as a result of despair). And do you know, all these shows the character of a person? It shows what a person is - gentle or third grade... You know, though I scolded you (all) for your obscene words, I never used such words. And you atheists take credit after using such words. I am really amazed. I am sorry to say that, most of the atheists (seeing their vulgar/obscene languages in disappointment) are not grown in families i.e. they never experienced social life Therefore, unless and until you atheists promise me not to use such words I won't make my debates public. Even if you don't promise me, I have decided to watch all your activities, i.e. if atheists use vulgar/obscene words being disappointed with the debate with the theists or not... and when I will come to know that, most you do not show your disappointment, then I'll make my debates private.So, why should we invite strife? May God bless you.]
That phrase was used figuratively. It was termed as dust meaning coming from nothingness. It means that out of the void, man existed due to a primordial motion in which triggered our existence. The creation of women was used figuratively as well. It means that women were not created from the head to rule men nor created from the feet to be stepped upon, but from the rib to walk with them and guide them. Therefore both statements are used figuratively and thus may not be considered invalid.
Right, that was one of the figurative parts of the Bible. Like the parts about Jesus Christ; he never existed, he was just a metaphor, a figurative example.
The Bible was written by men inspired by God. Therefore every literary style in each book differs. Therefore not every statements are figures of speech. The Bible was also not written overnight, it was written at different time periods from the Babylonian captivity until the Reign of the Roman empire. Therefore the information indicated there varies upon understanding and points out to different audiences.
The Bible was written by men inspired by God. Therefore every literary style in each book differs. Therefore not every statements are figures of speech.
I'm not sure where you're getting the bit about the Bible being inspired by god, but even if I grant that assertion as fact I don't see how you can conclude, "the Bible was inspired by god therefore the literary styles differ therefore not every statement is figurative. How does divine influence have anything to do with different literary styles? In fact, if it was the same dude (god) who was responsible for all the revelation and inspiration in the Bible, wouldn't that go to say the stories should all be in a similar literary style, as they're all coming from the same source?
Therefore the information indicated there varies upon understanding and points out to different audiences.
This argument for why we should pick and choose from the Bible makes a lot more sense, but in my experience Christians don't pick and choose which verses they want to follow on the basis of who the writer of that scripture was addressing. They pick and choose based on their personal opinion of the moral merit of the verse, which explains why every Christian I've met follows part of the Ten Commandments, but not all of it. Christians will accept one verse because it's a morally sound verse, and reject a verse not half a page later (i.e. very much still in the same book, which has one audience and one literary style) because it's morally abhorrent.
What I don't understand is why Christians will claim this is because the verse they like was supposed to be taken literally and the verse they don't like was supposed to be taken figuratively. I know for a fact almost all Christians reject outright literal commands from the Bible. They just seem unable or unwilling to admit that they, themselves, without the Bibles help and against the Bibles wishes, chose to follow morally good verses and ignore morally bad verses because they (you) are a higher moral authority than the Bible.
