God is Dead

Thanks to my opponent for agreeing to this debate. I'll begin by dismantling the idea that the Bible is an authoritative document. I sincerely hope that my opponent doesn't believe in the literal reality of Genesis, since modern science has demonstrated it to be false. If he doesn't, why did Jesus? Jesus clearly believed Genesis to be true, as evidenced by his references to Adam and Noah within the book of Matthew. Did he know they were myths and not say anything? For anyone to argue that Jesus knew the Flood and the Fall to be myths, they'd have to explain what purpose he would have had for spreading what he knew to be a lie. If Jesus knew that Genesis wasn't true, isn't Matthew 24 ("For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away." - NIV) a blatant example of Jesus lying? If he didn't know Genesis was false, why? The omniscience of the Son only goes so far I suppose. Not to mention the shaky ground Jesus stands on as it is. Bible scholars like Richard Smoley and Bart Ehrman have pointed out that we really know nothing about Jesus. Though many people believe that the Biblical Gospels were written as first person accounts (by people who saw and knew Jesus) Ehrman shows that the Gospels were really written decades after Jesus died. The language spoken by Jesus and his followers was Aramaic, and he lived at a time when very, very few people could read or write, and even fewer could read or write well. The Gospels were written in Greek in a different period by several different authors who were clearly highly educated. Not only this, but they get more mythic in nature as they go forward (Matthew - the first, barely has any miracles, while John, the last, has the iconic water and wine scene, the raising of Lazarus, etc). This is clear evidence of how the mystique of Jesus became more grand as time went on. You know, like an urban legend. More time and more retellings equal more spectacular legends. How can my opponent argue that Scripture is "inerrant" when there are so many contradictions within it? The Bible claims that Jesus had divine authority to perform miracles, and yet Pharaoh"s magicians had the ability to perform miracles as well. Jesus says that immediately after death, a soul is judged and can not come back to the living, and yet the story of King Saul says that he spoke with the ghost of the prophet Samuel. Genesis 11 says that God caused confusion at the Tower of Babel, but 1 Corinthians 14 says that God can"t cause confusion. In Romans and Matthew, we are told to love nonbelievers as ourselves, and yet the book of Deuteronomy tells us to stone them to death. And what about the horrifying acts of violence sanctioned by God? The book of Leviticus (chapter 21, when God tells the Jews how the priests are to conduct themselves) says: "If a priest"s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire." Three chapters later we read: "anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them." A common cop-out used by Christians is to say that the myths and horrors of the Old Testament deserve to be separated from the feel-good message of the New. I urge voters to be on the lookout for this tactic. Realize that both Testaments are held to be the inspired word of God. Why would a righteous creator leave his chosen people with the idea that dissenters are to be executed and homosexuals persecuted? Why the obvious mythology? Why blame the problems of the world on giants, and witches, and evil spirits, and sea monsters? My opponent is a conservative; why didn't his God introduce democracy, and science, and industry instead of myths, intolerance, and passages he knew would be used to justify genocide and war? Thank you for your time.