The Bible stories, The Tower Of Babel and Noah's Ark are false.

Thank you! Yes, I think it's great that you stayed in this debate too, as it has been very interesting. Now, onward. I will try to stay to the pattern of the final round. Rebuttals first. Well, the first argument part you wrote last round was hardly a rebuttal, so I must mention it. If it was not our last round of the debate, I would ask you to clarify it, but alas. Here it is: "Your whole Bible argument is worthless. I don't even know why you posted it." Why? Your statement is not valid in any way unless you give me a reason to think it is. You gave no back up proof (example of my worthless argument, etc.). Isn't this supposed to be ABOUT the Bible's authenticity? I gave a rightful argument and you didn't even try to refute it. You say rather sassily: "Fake history? You give no reason why this source isn't credible and then, because you can't think of any other ways to refute it, claim it's fake history. Nice try. You then preach about how we should believe the Bible over historic proof. Please, JFS." Funny, you gave no example of me doing that, either. I merely said that the Bible IS historical and gave proof that there is historical evidence for it (see my part for Round 2). You, again: "It was a simple question. What were the skin tones of the parents?" You did not clarify. Yet I gave an answer. Yet you did not tell me if the answer was relevant. So I will not say it again, since I don't barely know what you are talking about in the question. "If Adam and Eve would be the father and mother of the human race, they would have to bear at least one male and female child of all races." No, and I already explained why not. But I will do it again. It has been proven that a race can form out of two opposite, different races/genes. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.jarnot.com... Much of what Pro aid was utterly irrelevant to this debate. I.e.: "Even according to the Bible, man has free will. Now, here is where my logic comes in. We govern ourselves. To someone, abortion may be moral to save the mother's life, to others, no. Morality is determined by man and its society." This is what you said: "Bias sources, arguments that don't apply to the debate, all of these are used by you to derail the reader and tricking them into thinking your arguments are relevant." Well, if the voters decide that the arguments are completely irrelevant, so be it. That's their job, but it's yours and my job to JUST debate. You say that I dropped this argument: "How can two dogs cross breed into all the dogs in the world?" But actually I had previously asked you if it's impossible for two dogs to cross breed into all these dogs. So...I wonder who's fault it really is. To answer you question I will give these two links. Please don't call them bias or irrelevant! http://ask.metafilter.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://creation.com... http://creation.com... You say that this was poorly refuted. "Time span of reproduction." This is a vague statement. It seems like you also made a poor argument for it, if any. But here we go, since I have the opportunity to refute it now: The Bible record is found in Gen. 4:16,17. After Cain had killed Abel, he departed from the land where he and Abel had lived. He moved to Nod, a land east of Eden. There he and his wife had a son whom he named Enoch. He also built a city which he also named Enoch. The fact that Cain, the son of Adam, built a city tells us much about the increase in population in the early history of mankind. If a city was built in the lifetime of a son of the very first man, it follows that population grew rapidly and was quickly civilized (in contrast to the views of evolutionists). God had commanded Adam and Eve to reproduce and fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). Men in that time, before the flood, lived to great ages (see chapter 5). Adam, for example, lived to be 930 years old before he died (5:5), and most of his descendants before the flood lived about 900 years. If there are no gaps in the genealogies, this means Adam would have been alive following the birth of Lamech, father of Noah, 8 generations later! Hence, although they eventually died, people lived many years before they died. This greatly multiplied the number of people living on earth because, at any one time, there were many generations still living. Further, men were capable of having many children, and large families were common. Noah was having children at age 500 (5:32). All men in chap. 5 are recorded as having "sons and daughters." In such long lifetimes with long periods of fertility, many children could be born. By the time Cain died, there could easily have been 120,000 people on the earth (certainly enough for there to be cities). By the time of Noah there could easily have been seven billion - more than on earth today! Do not think of Cain, Adam, and other such people as walking around on a bare, lonesome, uninhabited earth. From the above information it is clear that there would have been many women available for him to choose from eventually. With people living such long lives, it would have been no problem for a man to marry a woman 50 or even 100 years younger than him. This would be no different, by comparison, than a man today marrying a woman 5 or 10 years younger than himself. http://www.gospelway.com... Think of the span of reproduction like this. You believe God had a purpose and a plan for us even from the beginning, do you not? Then why would it be wrong for Cain to intermarry? Why would it be impossible for dogs to get this sophisticated and abundant in about 6,000 years? God sent the Flood not out of complete wrath, but also out of his great love for us that we might begin properly and prospering. Genesis says (6:5), "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." From another perspective in considering why God sent the Flood, we must first realize that those living upon the Earth were completely and utterly wicked beyond the hope of changing. There were no innocent bystanders caught up in the Flood; everyone was guilty of the most deplorable sinfulness. The rebellion against God that we saw taking root in Cain and his descendants had now reached a fruition that God could not overlook. http://answersfromthebook.org... You do not say anything more about the Tower of Babel OR the Flood in Round 4, surprisingly! You are either avoiding it or you know that I refuted your arguments about it. Thank you for reading, everybody, and I'm sorry if it got a bit rough. I hope we all can see a little clearer now that we've discussed this.