The Christian Bible contains contradictions.

"Since he didn't die, he couldn't have gone to Heaven. Keep in mind, people of that time used the word heaven to refer to the skies." If the word heaven can refer to the skies and it's my opponent's position that Elijah did not go to heaven but was carried into the "sky" couldn't the same be said of Jesus? John 3:13 "No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man." "No one has ascended into the sky except he who has descended from , the Son of Man." Furthermore, why does Elijah have to be dead in order for him to go to heaven? According to the Bible, a person has entered heaven without dying, namely Enoch which can be found in Genesis 5. Yet another contradiction that someone ascended to heaven other than, "the Son of Man." To further cement my position let's take a look at the following; 1. No team has ever won a football game when trailing by 5 points. 2. Manchester United won a football game after trailing by 5 points. Using my opponent's logic; Football can also mean American Football and it's clear that the author was referring to American Football and Manchester United is a Soccer team. Soccer is known as football outside of the U.S. Football is the same word but has different meanings. 3. The New York Jets won a football game after trailing by 5 points. The New York Jets are an American Football team and if 3 is true it contradicts 1 in the same way that John 3:13 - "No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man." Is contradicted by Elijah going up to heaven as well as Enoch going to heaven. As further evidence that no particular order was intended, chapter 1 puts the sea animals, and fowl being created on the fifth day, land animals and man on the sixth day. However, in chapter 2, they are lumped together. Also in chapter 2, man is mentioned before trees, but in chapter 1, the trees come first. I think this is proof that chapter 2 was for giving further information, and there was no intent, or need, to put things in a particular order, as that had already been established in Genesis 1. In order to provide further information on a subject one must add further detail. For example, If Genesis 1 is the chronological order of creation and my opponent states that Genesis 2 is to provide further detail, than Genesis 2 would provide information on how sea animals, land animals, etc. were created. Simply stating something that has already been stated does not provide further information. Furthermore, to state that events are not categorized chronologically in Genesis 2 is false. 18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. 25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. Reading 2:18-:25 it reads in correct chronological order. Interchange 20 and 19 or even 24 and 23 and the passages would not read correctly nor make sense. So it is meant to be read in chronological order with regard to the creation of man and woman but not the creation of all else simply because it would contradict Genesis 1? To further my argument that the Bible contains contradictions let's take a look at Ecclessiastes 1:4 "One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever." Abideth means remain so the "earth will remain forever. Also, Deuteronomy 4:40 - "That thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for ever." Pretty clear, that the earth is here and will be here forever yet this is contradicted by the below; Psalm 102:25-26 -The earth and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish. Matthew 24:35 - Heaven and earth shall pass away; but my words shall not pass away. It's clear that not only the will earth perish/pass away but heaven as well. Something cannot exist forever and be destroyed as well, a very clear contradiction. I now pass this debate to my opponent and look forward to his rebuttal.