Whether the Bible is infallible.

He or she has been a fine opponent and skilled debater. I would like to begin this round by referring again to my original question. You replied that the Bible was “authored” by an infallible God. How do we know this? You dont have to answer this question if you dont want to, it is becoming a tangent and henceforth I will try to keep on topic with the debate. Rebuttals: Of my first and second scriptural “contradictions”, Pro did a masterful job in showing me that they were not contradictions. I concede that these were not contradictions, and I ask Pro to forgive me for not reviewing these fully. I only want to present true information, and that fact that I failed to do that in this instance appalled me. I am grateful to be proven wrong on these points, and walk away with a better understanding. But you will find there is one contradiction in the scriptures I can be sure of. I will present that later in the round. However, over the scientific contradictions I must still persist. Let us observe parts of your response to my first argument, concerning talking snakes: “. .. we know it was not a snake who talked but Satan who TOOK the form of the snake. .” I would like to raise several questions. First, how do we know it was Satan or that he took the form of the snake? There is no context clues whatsoever to suggest it was Satan merely “taking a form. ” Regardless of this fact, he, even taking the form of a snake, still wouldn't be able to talk. Why? Because snakes dont have larynxes or vocal cords, as I pointed out earlier. It would be impossible for a snake to talk. You also stated, “it says clearly in Revelation 12:9 that Satan. .. is the dragon and the great serpent. ” I would respond that this verse is vague and lacks clarity. How does the “great serpent” indicate that Satan was the snake in the garden? Is every serpent mentioned in the Bible Satan? Because of the problems with your rebuttal, I will maintain my position that the Bible mentioning talking snakes is an error. Now, let us review what you said to my allegation that the Bible supports a Heliocentric view. “When Ecclesiastes claims that the sun rises and falls, its not talking about the sun literally rising and falling. ” Why not? It’s not unreasonable to think that the author of this book was talking literally. A geocentric view was very common at the time. “‘And hurries back to where it rises’ this can also be classified as figurative speech because its in the same sentence. ” I can say with relative certainty that this verse was not meant to be figurative speech. Just ask the The Catholic Church, the main denomination and most influential Christian force in Europe. While today they may have conformed to the secular view that the Earth revolves around the sun, for many centuries it was quite the other way around. Three popes have declared the Bible to support a geocentric view, and there are many, many Bible verses to support this. [9] See the link I have provided for more information. Up until heliocentrism was proven by science, Christians believed exactly what the Bible teaches, that the Sun revolves around the Earth. This is an error. It seems more and more that every time science disproves something, it becomes figurative speech according to most Christians. But regardless of this, the fact is that this scripture in the Bible was intended to be taken literally. That’s what most people believed before it was disproven. And that’s why this verse was taken literally, up until the entrance of scientists who disproved the geocentric theory. Thats how it was intended. The Bible is in error here. This was not intended to be figurative speech. Finally, you disputed my allegation that the God does His math wrong. You stated, “Pi is an irrational number. .. and cannot be written down in its accurate form. ” I agree with this, however, I must disagree with your conclusions. The fact is, the Bible describes a bowl “10 meters in diameter” and “30 meters in circumference” which, as we have agreed upon, would result in pi equaling exactly 3. I agree that pi cannot be written down. But the assertion the Bible makes, that is, pi being 3, while being close to the actual number, is just plain wrong. Pi is not 3. This is not the only problem. It is impossible for a circular object to have the dimensions that the Bible describes. A circular object could not have a circumference of 30 meters and a diameter of only ten. That would make pi equal to exactly 3, which we know it is not. Thus, the object the Bible was describing is either a) an error, or b) does not exist (also an error). If the Bible had said something equivalent too, “the circumference was roughly 30 meters” or something of that sort, I could accept that this is not a contradiction, and the author of the Bible was somewhat knowledgeable about mathematics and maybe even possibly divine. However, every indication in the verse implies that pi is exactly 3 and would lead us to that conclusion. We know this to be a falsehood. The facts that the Bible asserts, that a circular object could have these dimensions, and that pi is 3, are both false and just plain wrong. The Bible is a fallible document. New Argument:Contradiction: According to the Christian Bible, God is sinless. He cannot sin, or have any part in sin. [1] However, over the course of scripture, one can observe multiple times where God allegedly sins. Take for example Galatians 5:19-20, which epitomizes “jealousy” as wrong and sinful, along with other sins such as “sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft” etc. [2] The word for jealousy used here is zelos[3], a Greek word translating either in some contexts “an envious and contentious rivalry, jealousy”, and in others “zeal in behalf of, for a person or thing or the fierceness of indignation, punitive zeal”[4]. Why is this important? Well, if we turn our pages back to the book of Exodus, we will espy that God describes Himself as a “jealous” God. We particularly notice this in Exodus 34:14 “For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:”[5] The Hebrew word employed here is “qan·nā”[6], which translated in English as “jealous”. However, this is not a complete definition, as there are different types of jealousy. In order that we might better understand the word, a typical approach would be to look at the root word from which it stems. Its root word is “qinah”, which can be translated as “anger (1), envy (1), jealousy (24), passion (1), rivalry (1), and zeal (14). ”[7] Another source gives a more specific definition, and says that qan·nā means, “to be jealous of, to be envious of, to be zealous for, to excite to jealous anger…”[8] Hebrew: qan·nā - used to describe God “Envy” “jealousy” “Jealous anger” “To be zealous for” Greek: zelos - used to describe sin"envious""jealousy""fierce indignation""punitive zeal"It is reasonable then to assert that “zelos” and “qanna” mean essentially the same thing, or at least share the same essence of meaning in different languages, since they do translate very similarly. What does this mean for God? Since God apparently is guilty of jealousy, he is guilty of sin, even by his own standard. This question can be summed up in a logical thesis:“It is sinful to be jealous” (Galatians 5:19-20)“God is a jealous God” (Exodus 34:14)Therefore, God is a sinner (guilty of sin). This is clearly contradictory to the Christian claim that God is sinless. Either we must admit that God sins, or we must accept that the Bible, or at least Galatians or Exodus, are contradictory and severely errored. Must we not? I will be presenting another new argument in the next round. It will be my final new argument. Thanks Pro, and good luck! - Con[1]Psalm 18:30 - “God! His way is perfect;. .. ”Deuteronomy 32:4 - “The rock: his acts are perfection! ”Since sin is literally “a mistake”, God logically cannot sin. [2] . https://www.biblegateway.com...;[3] . http://biblehub.com... [4] . http://www.biblestudytools.com... [5]. https://www.biblegateway.com... [6]. http://biblehub.com... [7]. http://biblehub.com... , . http://biblehub.com... [8]. https://www.blueletterbible.org... [9]. http://www.scripturecatholic.com...