Regardless of the existence of God, the Bible is wrong about many, many things.

"--> The Council of Trent were Roman Catholic. This was their answer to the reforming of the other churches at the time. I assure the voters,... this is not the universal 'laws' of Christianity." I defined it as the Council of Trent's doctrine. This is because there are no "universal laws of Christianity." You accepted my definitions, you accepted the impacts of said definitions. Sorry. "- None the less my opponent failed to provide the decree and session that proved his claim of man having free will. - This point is null and void." Even if you don't believe in free will, the ONLY denomination that even remotely rejects free will is Presbyterianism, as it follows the teachings of John Calvin, who teached that there was pre-destination of the saved. Free will is more or less universally accepted in Christianity, and I offered a link showing this. "--> According to the Bible it is man that are the works of God." And he gave us free will, that's doctrine, interfering with us is interfering with free will, he does not do that. "--> All of my opponents claims are brought full circle to make the point that all is to be forgiven. The Bible tells us that foregiveness was not given, and repent was not part until God provided a son to be the Savior of man. All of my opponents claims in regards to contradicting Gods forgiveness are false,... as the Savior was not born until after ALL of the events my opponent has claimed above. The new testament speaks of foregiveness. Old testament speaks of damnation." Thank you. You have proved my point. There is contradiction in the Bible. But, anyways, the coming of Jesus Christ, Our Savior was not due to the events I mentioned. The coming of Christ is not dependent on the obviously contradictory event sof the Old Testament. Furthermore, they were not given forgiveness simply because Christ came, Christ was the beacon of this, however, repentance was given as an option. Do you really think Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Isaac, Moses, Joshua, and David are all burning in Hell? "--> My opponent claims in one hand that free will exists,.. yet that free will goes away if God communicates with them,... I don't see this at all,... The will to act and be concious of the actions would not be limited in any ways, and my opponent has yet to prove otherwise." Not so, free will means you have the ability to choose whether or not to believe. If God communicates, he takes away this choice, by showing his existence, he takes away the very element that gives belief value. "--> But the results of the assumptions are to seperate ones,... If you are to assume the existence or non existence,.. you are obviously giving FULL REGARD to the existence of God,...Your resolution calls for us to be unmindful, without concern towards, without regards towards the existence, ( non or otherwise), of God." "Assuming regardless of the existence equals to, not including the existence of God, I accept." These were your words, and you better hold to them. Furthermore, to prove something "regardless" you can prove it assuming both ends of the spectrum, so there is no contradiction. "--If my opponent requires the assumption of Gods existence to back up his claims, he is in turn opposing his own resolution by asking all of us and himself to give regard to the existence of God." I am disproving the claims of the Bible by accepting it as completely true, and showing how it contradicts itself, that is called a reductio ad absurdum my worthy opponent.