The Bible is not a reliable source of information.

I truly look forward to debating this with you. Since your first round didn't state the setup, in this round I will post my first argument as well as a rebuttal to each if your points. Opening Statements/ Introduction: For the sake of the debate, I will define a few important terms to make sure we are on the same page and clear everything up. Bible- The main religious text in Christianity. Reliable- consistently good in quality or performance; able to be trusted. So, we are arguing whether or not the Holy Book in Christianity is able to be trusted. My argument is yes. In the following argument I will attempt to show you why. The Dead Sea Scrolls: In 1947, one of the greatest archaeological finds in history was made along the cliffs of the Dead Sea. In these cliffs were jars with many manuscripts containing many of what is found in the Bible. "The leatherbound papyrus manuscripts include hundreds of distinct works. The predominantly Hebrew writings are a wellspring of information about the Holy Land from the third century B. C. to the second century A. D. , including the birth and growth of Christianity and the new faith's religious and social relationships to Judaism. .. The finds include a nearly complete Hebrew Old Testament Bible, which has allowed scholars to date the existence of that text to no later than A. D. 70. In addition, the Copper Scroll was a sort of archaeological treasure map guiding scholars to dozens of other hidden texts. And the Temple Scroll contained detailed construction plans for the Temple of Jerusalem. Many scholars believe that the documents belonged to a Hebrew religious sect that lived in the area during the first century A. D. The scrolls' guardians may have hidden them from the Romans during the First Jewish Revolt (A. D. 66 to 70). "-. http://www.nationalgeographic.com... These were translated and found to match what is found in the modern day Bible. Manuscript Evidence: Some of the most famous writers, such as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer, have never had their authenticity questioned. However, the manuscript evidence for each of these is far less than the Bible's New Testament. The Iliad and The Odyssey- Written around 900 BC Earliest Available Manuscript was 500 years later. Total Manuscripts: 643 Works of Plato- Written around 427-347 BC Earliest Available Manuscript was 1200 years later Total Manuscripts: 7 Works of Aristotle- Written around 384-322 BC Earliest Available Manuscript was 1400 years later Total Manuscripts: 49 New Testament- Written throughout the first century Earliest Available Manuscript was 30-40 years later. Total manuscripts: 5,800 (with some adaptations from kingjamesbibleonline. org) Conclusion: I could have written a little bit more, but WilliamsP asked me to post a little sooner and I was running out of space any way, since I'm so long winded. I feel that the Bible, even if it cannot be proven 100% true, is at least reliable, just like other theories such as evolution that only have some supporting evidence but are still accepted. No other book has had an impact on humanity like the Bible or has sold so many times. The Bible can be trusted. Here are my rebuttals to each of Pro's points, by number. You say that until creationism can be proven true, you will believe in evolution, but there is no actual certainty that it is true either. Rebuttals: 1. This argument really doesn't mean very much in this debate. You said that it has been translated many times from its original copy. The topic at debate here isn't, "The modern day Bible is not a reliable source of information. ", but rather, "The Bible is not a reliable source of information. " That means that your case is saying that the original transcripts are not reliable, so saying that it has been translated to many times is almost irrelevant. You aren't saying that the new edits have been distorted and aren't reliable, your saying that the Bible in general, even the Greek and Hebrew version, are not reliable. Also, you cannot say that you just know something is a fact, but then say you can't find anything to support it. If I am misunderstanding what you meant, I apologize and ask you to let me know. 2. I expected this to be brought up, and am prepared because of it. The Bible does not have an author, it has authors. Many authors. About 39 authors wrote the Bible over a period of about 1,500 years. They started as scrolls that Jews and Early Christians used that were written by those people and they were the holy books. Then the Early Church, and this is historical, put together the books into one book for the religion. So, it does not have just one author. It was many authors accounts of things that were put together. 3. Discussed in my arguments above. 4. We can not know for a fact that it is true, we trust it because of the things you mentioned in this point. But, the topic we are debating is whether it is reliable. There is no 100% certainty that evolution is true, because nobody actually has seen it happen. We just assume it is because of other facts and say it is reliable.