The Bible holds more virtue than any other book!

” I note this to avoid confusion with the last paragraph in Pro’s R1, where he states “The resolution is: To provide the most documentation. .. .. ” Unlike his first sentences, that’s not a debatable resolution, that’s a method to affirm the resolution, so we should use Pro’s initial formulation. DefinitionsI accept Pro’s definition of “virtue” as a multifaceted term meaning, “A conformity to a standard of right : morality b: a particular moral excellence. A beneficial quality or power of a thing. Manly strength or courage : valor. A commendable quality or trait : merit. A capacity to act : potency. ” Neither Pro nor myself defined the specifics of our choice in R1 (which Bible or matchbook), leaving further clarification to our argumentation in R2. In his R2, Pro used both the English Standard Version bible[1] and the King James Version bible[2] and did not pick a definition. As those choices can be viewed as very different Bibles with very different meanings [3], I take Pro’s definition of Bible as “the collections of books commonly referred to as the Bible” and recognize that varying sects and denominations allow for different collections and interpretations of books comprising the Bible. I on the other hand, will define my choice more clearly, and choose D. D. BEAN & SONS Co. book of safety matches[4]. OutlineAs the rules reserve rebuttals for R3, I will advance my own case with two arguments dealing with the relevant facets of virtue: Conformity to a standard of right or morality A particular moral excellence/Beneficial quality or power of a thing I leave off several aspects as irrelevant. Manly strength, courage, and valor are properties of thinking beings, not non-sentient books. Merit, a commendable quality or trait, is defined synonymously with virtue[5]and is redundant at best and circular at worst. A capacity to act doesn’t apply as no inanimate book has an inherent capacity to act. I. Conformity to a standard of rightThis is the point on which I expect to win the debate. I will later propose that neither the matchbook, nor the Bible possess the other relevant facets of virtue. Here though, I will argue that the matchbook surpasses the bible. The Bible makes no attempt to conform to a standard of right or morality. Quite the opposite, it attempts to create a standard of morality for people to conform to. The Bible purportedly speaks for God, and as Pro said, “Therefore, God sets the standard for virtue. ”Setting a standard is the opposite of conforming to a standard. Instead of molding itself to a set of rules about what is right, the Bible creates its own, and thus fails to capture this aspect of virtue. The matchbook, on the other hand, does conform to a set of standards for what is right. Specifically, a set of standards for quality as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 16, Part 1202 . These regulations are, “necessary to eliminate or reduce the unreasonable risks of injury associated with matchbooks and that the issuance of the standard is in the public interest. ” [6] As these standards are meant to protect the public good through safety by restricting/compelling the actions of the matchbook manufacturer, they are built on moral principles concerned with what rationale justifies what action. Specifically, preventing injury to matchbook users is said to justify regulation on matchbook manufacturers. Thus, when the matchbook maker complies with this, they are conforming to the Code of Federal Regulations’ standard of morality. II. particular moral excellence/Beneficial qualityWhen considered in the sense of virtue, moral excellence means “conformity to ideals of right human conduct [7]. ” So we consider, does the Bible conform to ideals of right human conduct? Does it possess a beneficial power? The problem with those questions is that the Bible, by itself, is powerless. Left alone, it will sit upon the shelf gathering dust, much like a matchbook. Were we to leave the issue here, as the voters are welcome to do, then it is equal in moral excellence and beneficial power to a matchbook. (Possibly a little less so, since Bibles tend to be larger and thus would gather more unsightly dust. But anyway. .. . )But what happens when a person opens the Bible? Reads it? Is influenced by it? Does the Bible then gain moral excellence and beneficial power through its influence over that person? That depends on two issues: what standards we use to determine ‘right human conduct’ and beneficence, and how the person interprets the Bible. While I’m sure that Pro and I different on a few points of morality, we’re both members of the same nation in the same time period, and thus are likely to agree on the majority of big moral questions. Looking over the list of what Pro considered morally excellent in the standards created by the Bible, I’m in almost full agreement. Similarly, I assume that Pro would agree with me that equality of sexes and races is right while rape is wrong. I also feel safe in assuming that Pro will interpret the standards created in the Bible this way and use it to support those beliefs. However, over the course of history and in different cultures, the Bible was/is interpreted and used to support the opposite of those beliefs. The Bible was used to support the legality of marital violence and rape[8] as well as the inferiority of blacks[9]. Even today, African pastors are having children killed with anti-witch Bible interpretations [10] and gay people are denied equal rights by fundamentalists in America. I don’t mean to suggest that the Bible is evil or immoral, nor that Christianity is evil, and certainly not that Christians are evil or immoral. My point is that the person interpreting the Bible determines whether that interpretation would be what we would consider “right moral action. ” Will the Bible justify witch-killing, rape-justification, and discrimination, or will it encourage charity, love, peace, and everything else Pro and I agree is right behavior? It’s all up to the person who interprets it. The Bible itself has no more of a particular moral excellence or beneficence than the matchbook, which can start a campfire or burn down a school. It’s all about the person using the book. Questions1) If your plane crashed on a remote mountainside would you rather have a matchbook or a bible?2) Which is more morally correct to drop out of a window upon the heads of passerby - a matchbook or a bible?3)Wouldn’t Bibles with the couple’s name on the cover be a little tacky to hand out at weddings?4)If you carry a Bible inside a chariot of iron, is that like inviting a vampire into your house?5)Who would win in a fight - Bibleman or Aquaman? 6)If you turn a Bible upside down and shake it, will any of the virtue fall out?7)What is the last digit of pi?8)How many soda cans were on my desk while I was writing this argument?9)DHjkdhgfsdkljgheruiohxkjsnxcvcm,bnswhweruihyqwedl;lgf?10)Do you suppose the voters who previously insisted that any violation of the rules gives full points to the other debater will give me full points if you don’t answer and explain questions 7-9? Sources:[1]. http://www.openbible.info...[2]http://www.corder.org...[3]http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...[4]http://www.webstaurantstore.com...[5]http://www.merriam-webster.com...[6]http://law.justia.com...[7]http://www.merriam-webster.com...[8]http://www.bridgew.edu...[9]http://www.utlm.org...[10]http://www.huffingtonpost.com...