The New Testament contains no genuine contradictions of consequence

Greetings. I would like to propose this debate to any takers. Prior to the debate I would like to define some terms and establish some rules for the debate. [Terms] The New Testament - The 27 books of the established cannon recognized by the Christian Church. Contains - Contradictions that are WITHIN the text. It is not a viable argument to present the New Testament as contradicting with anything outside of the text, including Science, the Church, Other Religions, Other Documents from the 1st Century, etc. Genuine Contradiction - An actual contradiction. An example of two texts that cannot both be true. Consequence - A contradiction that poses actual threat to the meaning of Christian doctrine. The converse would be trivial contradictions, such as slight variations in dates or counting. Such trivial contradictions are typically easily explained, or pose no challenge to the truth being taught or the accuracy of the historical retelling. [Rules and Debating Proceedure] In the first round, Con must present any contradictions they believe are insurmountable. Please number them for clarity of response (Contradiction A, B, C, etc). In the following round, I will respond to the contradictions and attempt to explain how they are either A) Not Genuine Contradictions, or B) Not Contradictions of Consequence. Con may respond in round 2 either with challenging my response, or presenting new contradiction (or both). In Round 3 I will respond to his challenges or new contradictions. In round 3, Con may only respond to my answers. In round 4 I will respond to his challenges. In the close of round 4 Con may not present new arguments or responses to my challenge (that gives us each 3 rounds since my first round is being used only to describe rules). In Round 4 Con will enter "Closing Round" or something similar. If Con presents new arguments or rebuttals in Round 4, they are in violation of the terms of this debate and forfeit all 7 points to Pro for the debate. [A note about Burden of Proof] This debate does not have burden of proof in the way normal debates do. My burden of proof will be to reasonably explain any apparent contradictions that Con identifies. Con's burden of proof is to provide adequate biblical citations so that I may find the passages he is referencing. In addition, please use the ESV as the translation (It can be found at ESVonline.org) as it is both accurate and readable, and using only one translation prevents us from slipping into confusion over variant readings in different translations. If space is a premium, ESVonline provides a link shortening service to link to verses. Simply type esv.to/verse reference and you will get a link. For example. esv.to/john3:16 will link to John 3:16 [Limitation of Space] Since it takes more space to answer an apparent contradiction than it does to claim one, My opponent will be limited to 5 active contradictions. If he wishes to add a new contradiction, he will be required to drop a prior contradiction. Dropping a contradiction equates to acknowledging that contradiction as invalid. If there are any questions, please pose them in comments prior to accepting the debate. By accepting you agree to all the stipulations and rules that have been given above. I look forward to my challenger.