You can provide a bonafide biblical contradiction.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with the same amount of points on both sides...
- 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
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.
By the choice of Pro to miss 2/5 of debate.
This one stuck with just those who have seen God’s face and lived.
Con defends by citing one passage from much later that adds an explanation. Pro accuses this of being another change away from what the earlier books stated.
Con insists pro is cherry picking, not giving enough surrounding text so that it misleads the audience. Pro states he has read it and requests con show what part of the context from those passages is missing; which con then refuses to do.
Cons explanation of what constitutes missing context (things like /I’m dead lol/ cutting out the lol) supports this outcome, as he shows context is given close to the text; not several books later in a series.
I keep seeing this topic.
I consider him a floppy disk without memory storage once it is pulled out. What he learns in the debate stays in the debate and the same lessons cannot be cross-applied in different debates on the exact same topic.
But he isn't not trying. He is just simplistic, in my opinion.
I would differ in your opinion as the disclaimer talks about learning. Not once have I seen any form of agreeableness or capitulation which I think k is very important in life and as an effective debater.
We used to consider him an Elo printer until we don't because we would have to wait 5 rounds of frustrating and gruesome repetition that just makes debating unfun all of a sudden. Looks like he is ok with it and he is fine with himself not "winning" any of them. Truly a man true to his disclaimers.
The instigator has 5 of these debates in play right now. Everything you say will be retorted with "if you read it in context, it makes sense". Mall is just trying to publically intellectually masturbate a bit.
Please define "Bible" ( i.e. Old and New testaments together, or one without the other" . Please define what constitutes a " bonafide biblical contradiction".