No "god" of the bible would be stupid enough to use text as a form of communication

I am new to this. This is my second debate, And I only joined a few weeks ago, So I’m still trying to learn formatting. The reason I used a YouTube link is because some example debates used links. In the future, I’ll provide the title of the videos. >I am a Christian. Absolutely not… it has nothing to do with this debate. You made this a requirement to debate you, So I assumed it was relevant. What an odd requirement if it’s not relevant. In terms of your essential Christian practices, I have divided from my family, And I love my enemies. I have given up all my possessions in the sense that I recognize that they are only to be used in a way that glorifies God. This does not necessarily mean that I sell everything. It could in some cases, And it certainly did in the case of the man in Matthew 9:21. This is a command for the particular person Jesus was speaking to because his wealth was an idol. If we are not willing to give up our idols, Then we cannot be his disciples. > jesus was not a god in the first place, But a lowly unproved nothing at best. “For in Him[Christ] all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9). >To prove it, I"m god. Now prove me wrong. Numbers 23:19 says that God cannot lie. Yet you have lied when you said “God is stupid”. Your authority is not self-attesting because you are not the Creator and Sustainer of all things. You are not Ultimate. And you admit that you are not self-attesting because you ask for proof. >So this guy was able to talk directly to god and NO ONE else can/ could? No, There were other prophets. >So he MUST be correct and EVERYBODY else is wrong, Especially with their interpretations or should I say misinterpretations - correct? The writers of Scripture were in full agreement with each other. As non-inspired readers, We can be wrong about some interpretations of the Bible, But not on the fundamentals. If we were debating Baptism, Then my view could be wrong. But I cannot be wrong when I say “God exists” or “Jesus is risen”. Also, Majority opinion does not determine truth. In fact, In a world where everyone is a sinner, With many false converts, We should expect wolves to disagree on essential Christian doctrine. >do away with ALL creationists. How about do away with all evolutionists? If evolution is true, Then we evolved to survive. Our mental capacities have only developed this far so that we have the best opportunity to survive and pass on our genes. They did not evolve so that we would receive maximum truth, Only that we would survive. If survival means filling your heard with many lies, Then evolution will allow for this. So, If evolution were true, Then you have no reason to believe it’s true, Since your brain did not evolve with that intention. BUT if creationism is true, Then we have sufficient reason to believe that God created us in the Image of God, Thus endowing us with reliable cognitive faculties. So we have good reason to believe our logic and say “evolution is false”. >They will not put…God on trial God is not on trial. You are. >Faith is the reason people give when they don"t have evidence… So any sources that you have are also invalid for the same reasons. So, You’re saying that you a priori reject my reasonings? Sounds like you have a lot of faith. >Tyrant and King are two different and totally apples and oranges with each having totally different meanings. Same denotation, Different connotation. Maybe that’s why they changed the word – because the connotation of “Tyrant” became negative in English usage over time. >he words "evil" and "disaster" and "bad" are completely 3 completely different words that have 0% of nothing to do with each other and completely change the meaning of the verses. They’re actually pretty similar, And most fair readers would agree. That being said, The Hebrew is less technical on this word. I am fine with any of these words being used. But this is a good example of how Christians should devote themselves to studying the original languages. >make sure that the interpretations are correct and sound in which in no possible way are they? There are many Bible translation ministries like Wycliffe Bible Translators which do a very good job. They don’t do guess-work. > I really should end this debate right here and now on those grounds alone. I think you should hold yourself to the exact same standard you are holding me to. For example, You said we can’t know “IF ANY” copies were made. This is really an absurd statement. If we know that some copies of copies of copies exist, Then this would presuppose a copy of a copy, Which would presuppose a copy, Presupposing an original. How can we have an effect without a cause? The reason that this number was not made up is because we have 1st and 2nd Generation Christians quoting New Testament Scripture at length from all over. The only way this could have happened is if a high number of copies were made and distributed. No original manuscript survives, But we have a family tree of wealth of manuscripts, So that we can reconstruct the original. Again, Atheists accept this method of textual criticism. >Aron Ra We can easily distinguish between the God of Israel and God’s law. Biblical slavery (neither promoted nor abolished) is not the same as 19th Century American slavery. We can easily distinguish metaphor and fact. It’s like other collections of literature in which genre and context makes interpretation clear. - Can we tone down of the blasphemy and insults please?