If the Bible were to Be God's word; then it needs to be clear, authoritative, and inerrant.

Thank you for your quick reply and careful response. Remember, all I need to prove is that the Bible is necessarily clear, authoritative and inerrant for it to be God's word. I do not need to show anything that is not clear, not authoritative, nor errant in order to win this debate. Good luck.I find Pro's premise 2 problematic because the Bible is not unclear because of how its written, but rather, because of the background beliefs of its readers. For God to make it more clear, would require men to have the same religious viewpoints and methods of approaching Scripture, which would call for his tampering with our freewill – the great gift he has given us which distinguishes us from animals. I do not think that this is a violation of free will. Jesus allegedly performed many miracles and people still did not believe. It was clear that Jesus was the Son of God if he really did do all those things, yet many people refused to believe. Remember that I said that it should be clear, authoritative, and inerrant as far as the centeral doctrines--which, of course, are not so. Gen 2:7 and 3:19 are very clear man was made from dust and returns to dust, which is confirmed whenever we see carcass rotting and returning to dust. I honestly do not think that this is a scientific fact. Rather, these passages explain why it appears we return to a dust-like state. Animals also rot and "return" to dust yet they certainly were not created from dust.Yet, the Christian Scientist don't believe people really die, and say this is merely an illusion. Why? Because the verses aren't clear?... So I don't think it's the Bible that is at fault, but the problem is with those interpreting it. God did make the texts he inspired sufficiently clear for us to grasp the meaning if we approach it with an open mind, and not with the intent of forcing our biased views into the texts.So which interpretation is correct and which one isn't? My opponent asks a good question. What if the parent was clear and the child still burns down the house? Then the fault will return on the child because the parent (i.e. God) did everything he could to "prevent" and to "tell" the child the correct way. Pro asks me to give a place in the Bible where the Bible touches a matter that affects our salvation. The Bible can't even make up its mind on the salvation method! However, keep in mind that it is NOT my job to give you errors in the Bible, rather to prove that If the Bible is the word of God; then it is necessary for it to be clear, authoritative and inerrant. That is my task, not provding contradictions.(P1) The Bible is inspired by God.(P2) God cannot lie.(C) Therefore there cannot be errors in the Bible. None of this has been responded to. In the words of my opponent: Unlike John, who saw in vision from God the things he put in the book of revelation, the 4 gospels do not claim to be inspired by God, hence, they simply put the things they saw, or received from the eyewitness to Jesus' life in their own words. this creates certain contradictions like which colour Jesus cloak was, red or purple? how many people did he cast demons out of? (one gospel says 2, another says 1, which might not be a contradiction but appears so because it is being written from different perspectives.) the bible contains scrible errors and interpolations. The last 12 verses of mark in the kjv are interpolations, as well as the story of the woman caught in adultery and the 3 in 1 passage at 1 john 5:7-8...paul says there were 12 apostles to whom Jesus appeared after being raised when there were only 11 cause Judas was dead.So was Jesus' cloack red or purple? how many people did he cast demonst out of? How can Paul say that there were 12 apostles to whom Jesus appeared after being raise since Judas was dead?My opponent has yet to respond to my accusation about the failed prophecy.I respectfully urge a PRO vote because: My opponent has not yet proved why the Bible does not need to be clear, authoritative, nor inerrant; and My opponent has not yet provided reason behind the failed prophecy.