God is represented better in the Qu'ran than in the Bible

As we shall see my opponent makes some crucial errors within his arguments that introduce question upon his understanding of the bible. 1- MOSES CORRECTS GOD Do the actions of a mortal decrease who God is? My opponent states : "Is it acceptable to approach an all powerful supreme being and remind it of a promise it made? This action alone would eliminate the one who is being reminded of being worthy of worship because it has displayed that it is not omnipotent , as it claims. " Definition of omnipotent : Having unlimited power; all powerful My opponents arguments amount to ; "Moses displayed unacceptable conduct, as a result God is not omnipotent and thus is not worthy of worship. " The fallacy of this argument is irreconcilable! It is inexplicable how my opponent came to the illogical conclusion that God in the bible is not omnipotent because of the actions of a mortal. Moses' "bad manners" are in no logical way, related to what God can do within his power (omnipotence). This is a terrible argument and is soundly refuted by the bible itself which teaches God's omnipotence : "Ah Lord God! Behold, You have made the heavens and the earth by Your great power and outstretched arm. There is nothing hard for you. " (Jeremiah 32:17) "I know that you can do all things , no plan of yours can be thwarted. " (Job 42:2) 2- JUSTIFYING SLAUGHTER My opponent says : "I fail to see where the children and women of the Amalekites were guilty of being hostile towards the children of Israel. " This is a case of subjective isolation. Subjective isolation is the act of isolating a single point and formulating and argument around it. And from this, formulating a conclusion. The WHOLE nation of the Amalekites were wicked. The Amalekites knew very well who the God of Abraham was, yet they turned to foreign gods. This alone is worthy of their slaughter as the punishment of sin is death. The Amalekites not only participated in paganism but, as a WHOLE nation (women,children,men,slaves,nobles etc) hated the Israelites and supported the actions of their army. God's judgments were justified by the notion of ; "those who oppose Israel, oppose God" and hence are in line to feel His wrath. My opponent ignores the fact that the Amalekites were an extremely wicked people. They were not only wicked spiritually (paganism) but were wicked in the flesh too (their unjustified warlike nature). Their armies actions were not the sole reason why God ordered their slaughter, but rather their wickedness in its entirety. My opponent is thus guilty of isolating an aspect of the Amalekites' wickedness and constructing an argument on this one particular aspect. However God did not order their slaughter based on this one premise, but rather took into consideration the entirety of the Amalekites' wickedness. Hence my opponent's whole argument proves futile due to subjective isolation, and presents a false portrayal of God's justified judgment upon the Amalekites. 3- GOD CANNOT SEE INTO THE FUTURE? My opponent quotes Genesis 6:5-6 and incorrectly concludes that God cannot see into the future. He concludes this because of the false logic that if God could see the future, He would not have grieved when he saw the evils of man in Genesis 6:5-6 because he would have already known that theses very evils would take place. Here is an everyday situation which falsifies the logic used : Family members of a prisoner that is on death row, receive a notification of the date of execution of their relative quite some time before the day arrives. Yet despite their foreknowledge of the events to come,on the day of execution, the family still grieves. According to the logic of my opponent, all the families that have been in this situation should not have grieved due to their foreknowledge of the future. This logic however is falsified by the fact that on countless occasions, the families do grieve on the day of execution. His logic fails to take into to account the emotions of the family towards the prisoner. Their love for the prisoner is the reason they grieve. In the same way God grieves Genesis 6:5-6, despite knowing the future, because of His love for man. In fact the bible verily teaches that God knows the future : "Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book BEFORE one of them came to be. " (Psalm 139:16) "BEFORE a word is on my tongue, you KNOW it completely, O Lord. " (Psalm 139:4) For more on this topic ----ï¿½ . http://www.biblehelp.org... 4- DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GOD IN THE BIBLE AND QUR'AN My opponent references Genesis 1:26 and concludes that ; "Image is another word for reflection, so if I have a nose then the Creator has one, and so on. Does this sound like a being worthy of worship? " Firstly, this is an argument from opinion. Simply because my opponent does not like the idea of God having a nose, he relegates God to not being worthy of worship. This is extremely opinionated and is not a valid argument. Secondly my opponent displays his extreme lack of knowledge concerning christian theology in genesis 1:26 Many people like my opponent repeat the same mistake of thinking that man being made in the image of God (as in Gen 1:26) deals with the physical likeness of God, in the sense that God has a body of flesh and blood. This is completely erroneous. The bible explicitly teaches that God is spirit (John 4:14) and a spirit does not have flesh (Luke 24:39). Consequently Genesis 1:26 cannot be read literally as my opponent does as this will contradict John 4:14. And Luke 24:39. So what does the bible mean when it says man was made in the image of God? It simply means that man is in the likeness of God, in that man attains some of the attributes that God has e. g. Just as God loves, man loves too; just as God is merciful, man too is merciful. Due to man being made in His image, man can reason,be compassionate,think deeply, grieve, be joyful, be holy, anger etc For a more well-constructed explanation follow this link : . http://www.carm.org... The bible firmly teaches that no one is like God : "No one is like You O' Lord, You are great and your name is mighty in power" (Jeremiah 10:6) #FAITH OR WORKS The bible teaches that man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law. However the bible also strictly teaches that faith is not faith if it does not have works (charity). Hence the bible teaches BOTH faith and works because they are inseparable : "Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, Is dead. " (James 2:17) #THE PROPHETS First of all Lot is not a prophet in christianity but is seen as a righteous man. Secondly this argument (argument of the prophets) is not applicable simply because Islam's and christianity's views on the state of prophets is contradictory. Christianity teaches that ALL men (including the prophets) are sinners but Islam believes the prophets were sinless. So my opponent trying to use the sins of the prophets as mentioned in the bible is not a valid way to asses God's wisdom in whom God chooses his representatives to be, simply because he could only choose from sinners (christian theology). Christianity and Islam do not share common ground concerning the state of the prophets and thus a constructive argument cannot occur. FYI the prophets in the bible were the finest men in their day despite their flaws (sins). MY OFFENSE : I just realized that the rules show that the BOP is on Pro. So as a result I do not need an offense. All I need to do is refute Pro's arguments and thus prove that the bible either equally or better represents God than in the Qur'an. However I might include an offense in the later rounds if I so wish. REFERENCES : *. http://www.pastoralmusings.com... *. http://www.netbiblestudy.net... *. http://www.kingmessiahproject.com...