Any believer in the bible has to agree that the land of israel belongs to the jewish people

Ok for the last round, thank you everyone for reading. I will respond to my opponent's words; however it should be clear that one cannot believe in the bible and think that the story of the exodus is a myth. Half of the book of exodus is describing the exodus; the exodus is referenced hundreds of times in the bible. Dozens of commandments of the bible the reason given in the bible is as a remembrance of the exodus of Egypt. Included amongst those commandments are the first of the Ten Commandments "I am the lord your g-d that took you out of Egypt", the major biblical holidays of Passover, sukkot and Shavuot are all about the exodus. I could go on and on, but obviously whether I find my opponents statements blasphemous is irrelevant, the salient point here is that he does not believe in the bible. Every orthodox Jew in the world would consider my opponent a heretic. This is America he has that right, but I find it offensive that he calls himself an orthodox Jew. My counterpart had not kept the condition of the debate of actually believing what it says in the bible. Now to respond, my opponent went into some kind of back and forth about the boundaries of Israel. He posed some kind of problem about what the exact borders are, because g-d told Jacob that this land which you are lying on will be given to you. I guess my opponent understood that the verse meant the 5 feet or whatever amount of space that Jacob was lying on. Obviously that interpretation has no place in the context of the bible. The verse is clearly referring to the country. Now I'll be frank at the risk of being a little rude. My opponent is either ignorant of the bible or doesn't care what the bible says, because the bible clearly says the exact borders of Israel. So his whole back and forth, that some "scholars" interpret it this way and some this way, is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. Let us quote the bible, numbers chapter 34 verse 3 and on, quote "Your southernmost corner shall be from the desert of Zin along Edom, and the southern border shall be from the edge of the Sea of Salt [the Dead Sea] to the east. The border then turns south of Maaleh Akrabim [elevation of Akrabim], passing toward Zin, and its ends shall be to the south of Kadesh barnea. Then it shall extend to Hazar addar and continue toward Azmon. The border then turns from Azmon to the stream of Egypt, and its ends shall be to the sea. The western border: it shall be for you the Great [Mediterranean] Sea and the border this shall be your western border. This shall be your northern border: From the Great [Mediterranean] Sea turn yourselves toward Mount Hor. From Mount Hor turn to the entrance of Hamath, and the ends of the border shall be toward Zedad. The border shall then extend to Ziphron, and its ends shall be Hazar enan; this shall be your northern border. You shall then turn yourselves toward the eastern border, from Hazar enan to Shepham. The border descends from Shepham toward Riblah, to the east of Ain. Then the border descends and hits the eastern shore of Lake Kinnereth. The border then continues down along the Jordan, and its ends is the Sea of Salt [the Dead Sea]; this shall be your Land according to its borders around". Here is a link with the map of biblical Israel as well as map of present day Israel.http://commons.wikimedia.org... https://www.google.com... There are those that may be familiar with the idea of greater Israel "from the Nile to the Euphrates". Indeed there is such a prophecy, but i haven't brought it up because the Talmud proves from a few verses that this is going to happen in the messianic era. In all the verses it talks about conquering the land of the seven nations, but in the messianic era we will conquer the three nations of kani, knizi, and kadmoni, as g-d told Abraham and we will have greater Israel. But for now g-d had given the Jewish people a piece of land,the holy land, and they should cherish it. In conclusion over the course of this debate, my opponent has presented two arguments. First that the covenant with the Jewish people is null and void, as I discussed at length in the second round. Then he mounted another argument that either no physical land was meant or we simple don't know and it could be a tiny piece of land. To which I responded with one source (and there's many others) which discusses the exact boundaries, which obviously refutes his argument. So I think it's clear who won. Thank you again Mr. whatever your name is, for this debate.