Debate: Is the bible 100% true
Side: yes

"By this I presume you mean to display some knowledge of physics, but you fail miserably. We are composed of matter, which fits the description I gave it. It is more accurate to say that we are a platform of potential energy which manipulates other forms of energy." The very atoms you are made out of are energy in motion. If the protons, electrons, and neutrons ceased to "move" the very matter itself would cease to exist. "All that was required in the first place was energy in one form or another and time. If you find the idea of an extant God so credible, why you find the idea of extant energy so ridiculous is beyond me." How would an extant energy create matter? Yes that energy could "assemble" matter, but where would it originally come from? I like how atheists resort to supernatural and unverifiable occurences to explain the origin of the universe. Pot calling the kettle black. "Your condescension does not affect me at all, so you might as well save the CreateDebate servers a few bytes of memory and omit any further slanders." Wow, you could have just said, "please don't say things like that" and saved those precious bytes with whom you are so concerned. "And thus, you say "MAGIC"."Extant energy on your part. "You have absolutely no evidence upon which to base that claim." The word of God, in scripture. You may not believe it, but it is evidence. "As aforesaid, I was simulating your logic. You insist that the universe has to have a creator, yet for some reason fail to understand why this posits a creator of the creator. I've dealt with this confusion before on CreateDebate, and it never ends well. For some time hereafter, you will simply repeat your dogma, saying God is beyond space, matter and time, providing not one shred of evidence, and making a laughing stock of yourself in the process." You have no evidence of your origin theory. I have the inerrant word of God. You don't believe this is true which is not our argument here. You not recognizing our science for that matter does not disprove it. You can't test or observe the supernatural. The same would go for you extant theory of energy. "As aforesaid, these are not my beliefs. They are the logical extrapolation of yours."No it is not at all. You are still limiting God to scientific law, like it or not I believe he is outside of it. Thus, he would not need a creator because he is not comprised of matter. Certaintly you can grasp this idea? "That is incorrect. Faith and beliefs are assumptions, not scientific theories. A scientific theory is a model which explains or proves a law. It is the highest level of acceptance and veracity a scientific model can get."http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory It explains the general principles, but it still is not a law only "widely" accepted. Just because it may be popular doesn't mean it is a definate fact. We have seen this in science through the ages. "The notion of a scientific belief is ludicrous. A scientist does not believe; he either knows or suspects."Suspecting is the same as belief. A belief is hypothetical much like a theory. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belief  "If you don't believe in evolution (I presume you speak of this, though you obviously mistake its meaning), and seek to refute it in this debate, I suggest you convert and abandon your course before you are annihilated by the sheer volume of evidence I am prepared to bring to bear." Please, bring it on.