Instigator / Pro
0
1476
rating
336
debates
40.77%
won
Topic
#4346

You cannot find a bonafide contradiction in the scriptures.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
0
3

After 3 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

b9_ntt
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
3
1500
rating
2
debates
75.0%
won
Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Biblical contradictions you find not. Any you think you can find or think you have found, I will attempt to debunk them as contradictions that are perceived to be.

Questions on the topic, leave them in the comments.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro doesn't address the arguments of con on the basis that it is witness testimony, but fails to properly uphold that as a reason. Witness testimony is still a contradiction in the bible as con shows.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con presented well-structured arguments with evidence highlighting contradictions, while Pro merely reiterated unrelated Scripture, failing to address Con's points effectively.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con provided a proper definition of Contradiction. Con provided proper examples of what appeared to be contradictions, from scriptures as required. Conduct on Pro is not good. Changing definitions, the comment "gotten too deep for you ", Formatting for Con was great, and for Pro it was terrible. It was hard to follow. Finally, I agree with Con's assessment. " it appears that by enlarging the context of a statement, Mall thinks that he can resolve any contradiction". Effectively Pro is arguing that Con is using contextomy, when in fact it is the reverse.