The Bible is not evidence for God

I understand that God has many names in the bible but nevertheless they are all referring to the same character also known as God. The names are irrelevant in the overall picture. As Shakespeare once said, "A rose by any other name...." We have determined that the book is real. Some like to accept the fact that it is an allegorical book since it has proven allegories contained it. All logically thinking humans also understand any literature containing talking animals were never written as historically accurate documents. I say again in spite of your denial that you did not specify which God you were talking about or whether you were talking about a mythical God or a real God. Everyone knows there is only one main God in the bible but the bible also mentions other gods which according to the main God don't exist but he still mentions them anyway. However that does mean everyone believes that main God to be real. There is indeed a vast difference between a mythical god and a "real" god. It all depends on how you define the word God. For example, the very first mention of God in the bible is in Genesis 1:1. The Hebrew word is 'elohiym . When we look up the meaning of that word it is not referring to anything invisible or intangible. It is a plural word which does not refer to any single entity. It refers to a group of many. One of the meanings of Elohiym is simply "rulers and judges". We can have very real rulers and judges in this world who are normal humans. On the other hand we can also have imaginary people as rulers and judges in any fictional story. Just because people are real does not mean they cannot also be imaginary and mythical. The same applies vice versa but usually the mythical ones do things which no ordinary person can do in reality and that is why they end up being super heroes in the fictional stories. If you perceive the Elohiym in Genesis as referring to rulers and judges , that could easily be referring to real people. It all depends how you look at it and interpret the allegories. I could call one of my teachers "a dragon" and prove she existed. She would be real but the term dragon is an idiom and does not mean she was a physical dragon even though she may have been perceived as one by many students. Some call police pigs but does that turn them into real pigs? When you see a pig running around the farm is the pig the police? The word God is an idiom in that sense. It can refer to any rulers and judges you wish to attach it to in reality or in a myth. The owners of this site for example are the God of this site. What they say is law and if it is disobeyed, the disobedient and rebellious get thrown out of their "kingdom" as it were or face whatever punishment applies to the "crime". I am glad you agree with me . You claim that is not the topic of the debate but you left the title open to be interpreted that way. I know there are people in the world who believe that the Bible is true in the real world. To those people it is because of the way they perceive it. They cannot show you how they perceive it any more than they can show you their invisible friend to prove he exists. Pro wrote " I really don't know why you picked this debate (I don't want to know)." then his final remark he wrote "You clearly did not understand the concept of this debate. It seems to me that we agree on just about everything. So why did you want to debate me?" Apparently Pro is confused about a lot of things and can't make up his mind whether he wants to know or does not want to know an answer. I picked this debate to prove that there is more than one way to perceive God and the title "God" can be used to relate to any real rulers and judges as well as being perceived as a mythical character. I do believe the God of the bible exists in the bible just as I also believe the three talking pigs exist in their own fairy tale. Whether God is real or mythical is a matter of definition and perception. One of the bibles own definitions of God is that God is Love. Is Love real or imaginary? Can you prove Love exists in tangible reality? If you believe in love then according to the bible definition of God as love you also believe in the bible God whether you are aware of it or not. You agree with me that the mythical character referred to as God is fictional. Do you understand that the bible defines God as something immaterial and invisible like the wind ? Can you prove the wind exists? It has no color shape or form. It cannot be observed under a microscope. It cannot be put in a box. You cannot find its beginning or end. However you can know it exists because you can feel it and observe the consequences of it passing by. The same with love. Do those immaterial things exist or are they all a figment of our own imaginations? Any mythical character can appear to be real if a real person decides to become that character in reality by adopting all their morals and principles. If you see a person dressed up as Santa does that not make Santa tangible and visible? I did not agree to prove the bible is a historically accurate document. I took the challenge of proving that the bible is evidence of God. I explained why it was not necessary to prove the bible is a historical document to prove it is evidence of the characters within its own pages. It is irrelevant whether the bible is historically accurate or not. It still remains evidence of the characters within its own pages regardless of whether they are real or not. Therefore I have confirmed that the bible is indeed evidence for God in the same way the story of the three pigs can be seen as evidence for three fictional pigs. If you wish to debate whether the bible is a historically accurate document you need to start a new debate and make sure you explain to the opposition that they will need to prove the historical existence of talking animals and dragons with seven heads if they take on the challenge.