The Bible contains errors and contradictions, and it can therefore not be the word of God

Thank you for accepting my challenge. I expected that my opponent would reply to the points I made by saying that a contradiction I pointed out is not necessarily a contradiction. Imagine if I - on a random date in the year 2007 - told my mother that on my 10th birthday, I wished for nothing else than to be happy. Then, a few hours later, my mother asked me what it was I wished for on my 10th birthday because she forgot it, then I told her that on my 10th birthday, I wished for nothing else than to live in Australia. This proves that my statements would be contradictory to each other. You may call it lying, mistaking, or something else by your wish. The God Christians believe in is perfect. He would never misinform people. However, by looking at those mistakes in the Bible, it is misinformation. My opponent is right when she says that the Bible survived through oral transmissions, however, would the God we get familiar with in the Bible allow such thing to happen in a book that supposedly is a message from Him? If the ultimate message in the Bible is to prove that there is a God, then what about other religions that share the same message in their scriptures, but without errors and contradictions? What makes the Bible more authentic than their scriptures? This is a question that has to be answered. 1) Con said that it is not necessarily a contradiction if one passage claims that Solomon had 40,000 stalls for horses, and another one claims that he had 4,000 stalls. This is where more knowledge than what you gain by reading one passage is required. It says in Deuteronomy, chapter 32, verse 4, "He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." This passage clearly claims that God's work is perfect. Let me make it clear, God's 'work', not just God. It also says that He is a God of truth. How do we get to know what the truth is, if we through God's work cannot conclude whether Solomon had 40,000 or 4,000 stalls for horses? The passages claiming that Solomon had 40,000 and 4,000 stalls are contradictory to each other, simply because they talk about the same thing, namely whom Solomon bestowed in the chariot cities, and with who. Con's example that if Solomon had 40,000 stalls, then he also had 4,000 stalls, is invalid, simply because this is not an IQ test, but information that is being given to us. 2) It is possible that Arah had so many children, just like it is possible that some Prophets have lived for hundreds of years. This is again the same case as in the other contradictions. One thing you did not respond to was regarding [Luke 23:46] and [John 19:30]. This is not about numbers, but last words. What were Jesus' last words? What will a Christian tell me if I asked him? It is undeniable that those two are contradictory to each other. 3) My point regarding the moon is that the moon according to the Bible has its own light. I was looking for a translation of the Hebrew word, which is "lamp" in English, but I found "luminary" as another word and used it to support my claim. 4) If we assume that Con is right about "the four corners of the earth", then what about the point you were missing about the high tree in the middle of the earth? That passage is not metaphorical. It claims that the sight from a high tree placed in the middle of the earth reached to the heavens, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth. This is a scientific error because even if you climb up Mount Everest, and have an extraordinary vision, you will not be able to see the other side of this planet because it is round, not flat. 5) Regarding 'hare' and 'cud', Con claimed that those two words are probably mistranslations, and that I cannot prove that the hares were not chewing cud in this particular story. Firstly, the Hebrew translation of 'hare' and 'cud' is "'arnebeth" and "gerah". There is no mistranslation here. Secondly, this is not a story, but a law; a command from God for us to abstain from eating the hare because he chews cud (which is wrong). The entire meaning can be found if we read the verse in context, from Leviticus 11:1 to 11:6. [Leviticus 11:1-6] And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them, (2)Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth. (3)Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat. (4)Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. (5)And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. (6)And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. There is no mistranslation nor misinterpretation from my side here. It mentions that God spoke unto Moses and Aaron, telling them which animals they are allowed to eat. Then it mentions that all those animals that chew cud are permitted, except the following: coney, camel, and hare. I have now proven not only that there is an error here, but also that Con was wrong when she said that I cannot prove that hares were not chewing cud in this particular story, simply because this is not a story about a hare chewing cud, but a law/order from God to us. 6) The Bible has no flaws when it comes to the oneness of God, however, it has flaws when it comes to trinity, and Jesus being God. I will talk about that in my next point. What is really important is for the Bible to be free of errors and contradictions, merely because if another monotheistic religion has the same message about God with same historical evidence in its scripture, but without errors and contradictions, then the Bible is wrong. It is pure logic. Why should we pick the Bible which has the same message as another scripture, except that the other scripture has no errors and contradictions whatsoever? It says in Psalms, chapter 18, verse 30, "As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried [i.e. flawless/inerrant]: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him." If the word of God is flawless, then the Bible is not the word of God. Passages from the Bible are proving it. 7) Con said that I have not yet challenged any of the lessons taught by the Bible. I will now challenge Christians' belief that the Bible speaks about trinity, Jesus being the divine son of God, and that Jesus is God. Firstly, Jesus himself claims that God is greater than him in several verses. He even says that he himself can do nothing, but only what God wills. [John 5:30] I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. [John 10:29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all [John 14:28] [Jesus said]"...I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." [Matthew 12:28] But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. [Luke 11:20] But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. Jesus also never claimed that he was God, nor did he say that we should worship him. If you use John, chapter 14, verse 6, which says, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." -- in no way are you proving that Jesus claimed he was God. You have to read the verse in context. If you read John, chapter 14, verse 1-5, you will get to know that Thomas asks Jesus how we can know the way, and then Jesus replies in verse 6 that Jesus himself is the way to God, not God himself. It is known from the Bible itself that even other Prophets, i.e. Moses, were the way, the truth, and the life. Finally, Jesus is not the only son of God. See: Luke 3:23-38