God, as portrayed in the bible, cannot reasonably exist to the words of the bible.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two months
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Personal interpretations of the bible will not be used in this debate, it will be a debate solely around what the bible says. This means that the Bible will be interpreted from a literal standpoint and not a metaphoric one. As this is regarding God's portrayal in the bible, texts outside of the bible will not be taken into account. Both the old and new testaments will count as the bible for this argument. BOP is on Pro. This debate relates to "the words of the bible" as commonly accepted in English. Con may only assert that a section of the bible cannot be used if they bear BOP to prove that the section of the bible cannot be true (such as due to a translation error), obviously ignoring the argument that it cannot be true as it contradicts other parts of the bible for the purposes of proving this. Forfeiting any rounds auto-forfeits the whole debate. My opponent auto-forfeits if they are someone I am currently debating on a similar subject (such as Mall).
"You cannot interpret the metaphors metaphorically"
very interesting rules
bump
bump
If you would like, I would be willing to debate you on this same topic.
bump