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

Con has failed to understand that inconsistencies in the Bible make it inauthentic. Today, we know that there is no copy of the copy of the copy [etcetera] of the original Bible. Let us assume that the main message of the Bible [i.e. belief in God, Jesus, prophets] is the important one, and that many verses have been distorted, and are therefore contrary to each other -- how can we know which verses are authentic? How can we know whether the original Bible told us to believe in one God, or two, or more than that? How can we know what has been distorted and what hasn't? If the answer is that only verses that are contradictory to each other aren't to be taken literally, then you cannot believe that Jesus is God (see: round 2, point 7). My point is that we do not have the original Bible today, so we do not know what it really tells us. Those that are here today are transmitted through many centuries, so how can you prove to me that the inconsistencies are mistranslations and mistakes made through transmissions, but when it talks about the main message, it is authentic? How can we determine what is authentic and what is not? Scientific error = mistranslation. Contradictory verses = mistakes made through transmissions. Main message = authentic/unchanged. That just doesn't hold water. Assume that I make ten rules that must be followed by my relatives, even after I die. The main rule is that they have to be modest. The main part of my relatives have the original paper with rules on it, and the other part never had the paper, but it was transmitted to them orally. One day, after several years, the main part loses the paper, and the rules have only been on that paper and in their minds. Then both parts decide to write them on a new paper, and each of them must write it on their own paper. After doing it, they find out that their papers [i.e. rules they've written that they knew by heart] are contradictory to each other. Only one of many others have the main rule on his paper. Then they get into a fight, and after a few years, the new members (including the old) decide that they must find a way to gather all the rules into one paper. They do it, and the result is that the main rule [i.e. that they have to be modest] is not the original one, but they don't know it. Through generations, the (original) main rule that I've written is not there. The same applies to the Bible. If it has so many flaws, how can we determine what is a flaw and what is not? How can we determine whether the original Bible told us to believe in two gods, and not one God? 1) Con stated that all religious books come under scrutiny for contradicting facts throughout work, and uses the Qur'an as an example. First, the Qur'an has remained the same since it existed, and there is evidence for that.[1] Second, the Bible faces problems when the Qur'an says: [Qur'an 2:279] Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah [God]," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. [Qur'an 4:82] Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah [God], they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy [i.e. inconsistencies, errors]. The Qur'an has remained the same, and the Bible hasn't. This is the problem for the Bible. If we assume that the Qur'an has inconsistencies (it hasn't, but we can discuss that too if you wish), just like the Bible, then why should anybody pick the Bible over the Qur'an? Both scriptures tell us to believe in one God, Jesus, and teach good things, but the Bible isn't the same, and the Qur'an is. That is my main question. Qur'an and Bible, same main message (the ultimate religious message Con is referring to), but the Qur'an is original, and the Bible isn't. I'm not trying to prove that the Qur'an is right and Bible isn't in this debate, I am merely trying to tell you that it is illogical to pick an inauthentic source over an authentic source, even though they share the same ultimate message. 2) Con stated that the amount of horses Solomon had was completely irrelevant to the lessons in the Bible. Is it irrelevant that Jesus himself says that God is greater than everything, and that he himself can do nothing, but what God wills? Is it irrelevant that Jesus himself says that God is greater than him? Jesus being God is - according to the Christians - a lesson of the Bible, then how come Jesus never said that he was God, and that we should worship him? In fact, he said that God is greater than him (see: round 2, point 7). This plays a huge role. If those verses are mistranslated, then the whole Bible is mistranslated, and does not teach what the original did. That is logical. 3) Con responds to the point about the hare I made, by saying that 'arnebeth' does not mean 'hare'. The interesting thing though, is that those who defend the claims about errors and contradictions, only claim that a word that represents an error [e.g. hare, Leviticus 11:6] in reality means something else [e.g. hare = an unidentified animal], but when it comes to verses and words that are free of errors, the translation is just as it should be. This does not hold water either. 4) Let me now represent something that - if unfulfilled - proves that the Bible is not the word of God: prophecies. A prophecy cannot be mistaken, if it is coming from God. All Prophecies in the Bible come from God. The Holy Ghost inspired holy people to write down prophecies, and they are those we can see in the Bible. 1. [Luke 1:32-33] [Speaking about Jesus]: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (33)And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." This is an unfulfilled prophecy [i.e. one that no longer can be fulfilled]. Today, we know that the one who reigns over the the house of Jacob [i.e. Israel] is not Jesus. The verses clearly state that Jesus will reign over Israel forever. The prophecy is so wrong that not only isn't Jesus the rules, but his enemies - the Jews. 2. [Genesis 4:12] [Speaking to Cain]: "When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth." In this verse, God tells Cain that he will never be a wander [i.e. he will settle, not do anything]. A few verses later, Cain builds a city. [Genesis 4:17] And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. This is also an unfulfilled prophecy. 3. [Jeremiah 36:30] Therefore thus saith the LORD of Jehoiakim king of Judah; He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost. The verse says that no one will sit on David's throne after Jehoiakim. In the next verse, it says that Jehoiakim's son [Jehoiachin] reigned in his stead. [2 Kings 24:6] So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. I can mention many other unfulfilled prophecies, but I will leave it at that. I thank my opponent for accepting my challenge. It was a pleasure debating with her. Sources: [1]http://www.islamicity.com...