Debunking the Old Testament is not Debunking Jesus as Messiah

Is "debunking" the Old Testament actually "debunking" the Old Testament? The Bible, religion, and God, just like life, can not be viewed from a black and white perspective. This is why I named the debate is "debunking" the Old Testament "debunking" Jesus as Messiah? The debunking isn't debunking in the first place. Sometimes critics use particular rules of thumb and interprets these as absolute principles. Critics equivocate. The "debunker" uses the same sense of a word in two sets of verses, when sometimes it is the case that the word has two meanings. For example, peace could mean lack of war or it can mean an internal sense of tranquility. Critics many times assume that the Bible is written in one perspective or a literal account. While the Bible does contain literal accounts, it also contains many other Styles. The Proverbs list rules of thumb, the Psalms use poetry, and many prophecies and teachings are hyperbole and metaphors. Parables contain deeper messages, but debunks through using literalism are inaccurate debunks, therefore not debunks at all. The Bible is actually many books of different genres by many authors. The debunker's assumption leads them off course if it is used to create contradictions. In some cases, it is the fact that aspects of Hebrew idiom are not always captured in English translations. Some "debunkings" claim contradictions. Consider the verses below. Proverbs 26:4 "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him yourself." Proverbs 26:5 "Answer of fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes." "Debunkers" will claim these verses as contradictory teachings seeing it as "oh so obvious" because the verses are right next to each other. In fact, this is very illuminating that these teachings are closely tied. They highlight the fact that Biblical thoughts do not neccessarily fall under the either/or criteria, but can be more properly understood in terms of both/and. Another typical debunking mistake is to take things out of context. It is easy to create contradictions when there are none by violating the context of the passage in question. In closing, unless the "debunker" knows ancient Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, there is no debunking in the first place. Taking a verse written in English(which is a translation), then deciding if it is is literal, poetic, rules of thumb, etc., then translating a translation and possibly misinterpreting or taking the verse out of context does not make for a debunk. It makes for a maze of blind assumptions. This is why when a believer reads the Bible, they must not overanalyze, but use the teaching to get what can be reasonably taken from the passage. Any proveable, "divine" writing would have to be the true, original version. In Genesis it says this. Genesis 11:6 King James Bible 6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Genesis 11:7 King James Bible Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. If God is divine and forsees no good purpose in revealing certain things to mankind or making them obvious to mankind yet, debunking attempts and attempts to block debunks are just a part of the division of man and language barriers used to keep us in a place of faith currently for a purpose only known to he himself. Having said that, my closing statements are, debunking the Old Testament is not debunking Jesus as the Messiah. If Jesus is the Messiah, God is real, and God is allmighty, what God declares, debunking can not undeclare.