The Bible is the literal and inerrant word of God

First off, I'd like to state a few things. Firstly, this is not a debate on whether God exists or not. If anything, this debate starts off with knowing God is real. The only task that is now at hand is to determine whether or not the Bible is God's word. So with this, there are a few problems. Which Bible are we taking about? Specifically, I would go with the most accurate, and most reliable Bible - the King James Version 1611 Bible. I say it is the most accurate and reliable due to it's creation and history. Moreover, I am not a Catholic or picking other denominational Bibles. I picked the King James Version because of the history of the Bible's creation. If you'd like to raise questions on that, I understand. Lastly, I need to comment on the term "inerrant". With "inerrant" I am not saying specifically every single word of the Bible is correct. What I am saying is that the interpretations and meanings are correct. If you want to ask questions on that subject, it is understandable and we can talk about that. Now with all of that out of the way, let's get this debate started. My first job before I even prove the Bible is the word of God is to prove it's legitimacy. Since within the Bible it is noted as the word of God, how can it be the word of God if it has no legitimacy? Basically, if there is nothing factual within the Bible, why even believe it's claims? To start off, I'd like to talk about Rehoboam. He is the son of Solomon and grandson of David. Rehoboam can be understood by reading 1 Kings 14:21-31(1) and 2 Chronicles 11(2). I suggest you read it before we continue. After reading you should understand two things: Firstly, the reason Rehoboam upset God is because he was disobedient to God and worshipped other entities. Secondly, the king of Egypt Shishaq invaded during his reign. To prove this from an alternative source than the Bible, I'd like to talk about the Bubastite Portal. To summarize quickly what this place is, "This Bubastite Portal gate is located in Karnak, within the Precinct of Amun-Re temple complex, between the temple of Ramesses III and the second pylon. It records the conquests and military campaigns in c.925 BCE Israel of Shoshenq I, of the Twenty-second Dynasty. [1] Shoshenq has been identified with the biblical Shishaq, such that the relief is also known as the Shishak Inscription or Shishaq Relief. [2]"(3). So this place is in Egypt. They were well known enemies of Israel. If the Israelites were telling a bias or an illegitimate account of the events that happened, then they would have a different story than the Egyptians. . However, the same story is told, ". .. among which I found, as it should be, in full, Ioudahamalek, the kingdom of Judah, or the Jews. This matches the commentary in 1 Kings 14, which recounts the successful arrival of S"sonchis at Jerusalem: the identity that we have established between the Egyptian Sheschonck the S"sonchis of Manetho and Schesch"k or Shishak of the Bible, is confirmed in the most satisfactory manner. "Jean-Fran"ois Champollion, Lettres ecrites d'Egypte et de Nubie en 1828 et 1829[4]"(3). Basically, in Egypt as well as in the Bible there are accounts of the same event happening. This just proves that there is legitimacy within the Bible. I can always go to the fact that Jerusalem exists and Egypt, or other such things as that. However, my main goal was to prove that events within the Bible are legitimate, not so much as landmarks. Moreover, there is another interesting thing found at this location, "Another scene shows Sheshonq grasping a group of captives by the hair and smiting them by his mace. Behind and below him, there are the names of Canaanite towns in several rows. Many of these are lost, but originally there were 156 names and one of the most interesting names which were mentioned is 'The Field of Abram'"(3). The interesting thing about this is that "The Field of Abram" is a Canaanite town. So, what is a Canaanite? Basically a tribe of people to simplify it. The reason it's interesting to be called "The Field of Abram" is because of Genesis 13:11-16(4), Genesis 12:5-7(5), etc. I think you get the point. Abram had inheritance to the entire land, so there being a place called "The Field of Abram" as one of the towns in Canaan is very interesting. Moreover, the fact that it talks about Canaan in the first place is interesting since they practically no longer exist, and they are mentioned within the Bible. Lastly, a question for my opponent which will make this debate easier for me. Do you claim, within the context of this debate, God to be 1 entity on his own or a collective group of entities? Basically, is God like a government or a president? To conclude my opening, all I am doing is proving there is legitimate claims within the Bible. I don't think there will be much of a refutal by my opponent, but more of an attack which I will try to prepare myself for. Moreover, I would like to thank my opponent again for this debate. I am learning a lot as I go and study things I should know more on. Regardless, this will be interesting and I have a lot I'd like to address in further rounds. God bless you all and thanks for reading this. Resources: (1) . http://www.biblegateway.com... (2) . http://www.biblegateway.com... (3) . http://en.wikipedia.org... (4) . http://www.biblegateway.com... (5) . http://www.biblegateway.com...