Instigator / Pro
1
1617
rating
21
debates
73.81%
won
Topic

The Bible is internally consistent.

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Voting points
1
0

With 1 vote and 1 point ahead, the winner is ...

Patmos
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Religion
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
20,000
Contender / Con
0
1487
rating
85
debates
46.47%
won
Description
~ 636 / 5,000

I (pro) will be arguing that the bible is internally consistent in all significant ways. with significant being defined as a "contradiction" that can't be reasonably attributed to a translation error.

My opponent (Con) will attempt to prove that the Bible contradicts itself in a significant way.

Rules:
1. Forfeit=autoloss
2. No new arguments from either side in the final round
3. The translation we'll be using is the "New Revised Standard Version" without the Apocrypha.

Structure
R1: pro waives the first round Con provides a constructive
R2: pro's rebuttal, Con's rebuttal
R3: Pro and Con rebuttals
R4: Final Focus and Summary.

Added:
--> @Patmos

Doesn't each person have TWO grandfathers?

Added:
Contender
--> @Patmos

I agree

Added:
Instigator
--> @SirAnonymous

By my figuring, those would both be external inconsistencies. Which falls outside of the resolution.

Added:
--> @Patmos

"significant being defined as a "contradiction" that can't be reasonably attributed to a translation error."
You may want to change that wording. By that definition, I could win by establishing a contradiction that wasn't explained by translation, but instead by logic or historical information.