It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Round 4: americandingbat vs Maxmars "Faith or Proof? Which Do We Want?"

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:39 AM
The topic for this debate is: "The Missing Books from the Christian Bible were Removed to Conceal the Truth"

americandingbat will be arguing the pro position and will open the debate.
Maxmars will argue the con position.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

There is a 10,000 character limit. Excess characters will be deleted prior to judging.

Editing is strictly forbidden. For reasons of time, mod edits should not be expected except in critical situations.

Opening and closing statements must not contain any images and must have no more than 3 references.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements, only two images and no more than 5 references can be included for each post. Each individual post may contain up to 10 sentences of external source material, totaled from all external sources.

Links to multiple pages within a single domain count as 1 reference but there is a maximum of 3 individual links per reference, then further links from that domain count as a new reference. Excess quotes and excess links will be removed before judging.

Videos are not permitted. This includes all youtube links and other multi-media video sources.

The Socratic Debate Rule is in effect. Each debater may ask up to 5 questions in each post, except for in closing statements- no questions are permitted in closing statements. These questions should be clearly labeled as "Question 1, Question 2, etc.

When asked a question, a debater must give a straight forward answer in his next post. Explanations and qualifications to an answer are acceptable, but must be preceded by a direct answer.

This Is The Time Limit Policy

Each debate must post within 24 hours of the timestamp on the last post. If your opponent is late, you may post immediately without waiting for an announcement of turn forfeiture. If you are late, you may post late, unless your opponent has already posted.

Each debater is entitled to one extension of 24 hours. The request should be posted in this thread and is automatically granted- the 24 hour extension begins at the expiration of the previous deadline, not at the time of the extension request.
In the unlikely event that tardiness results in simultaneous posting by both debaters, the late post will be deleted unless it appears in its proper order in the thread.

Judging will be done by a panel of anonymous judges. After each debate is completed it will be locked and the judges will begin making their decision. One of the debate forum moderators will then make a final post announcing the winner.

[edit on 5/22/2009 by semperfortis]

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:39 PM
My deepest thanks and regards to Semperfi, americandingbat, and everyone here at the Debate Forum. I have been looking forward to the continuation of our practice of debating interesting topics, of which this is a good example.

The topic for this debate is: "The Missing Books from the Christian Bible were removed to conceal the Truth"

I will depart from my usual opening routine to point out a rudimentary and fundamental analysis of the topic at hand. While my obligation is to negate the assertion, there is more than one avenue from which to take on this challenge.


Begging the questions:

"The Missing Books from the Christian Bible were removed to conceal the Truth"
Object: The Christian Bible
Subject: the Truth
Event: removal of textual content
Motive: denial of information, accurate and meaningful, to those with access to the texts


The first and most fundamental axiomatic agreement we must reach is on the subject of the validity of the premise that the Christian Bible contains a ‘truth’ which can be diminished by editorial control. Accepting that such a truth is (or was) in fact a component of the collection of texts in the first place is clearly non-negotiable, or the point of this exercise becomes increasingly moot.

Many of those interested in the historical record often confront the moment of decision to suspend disbelief regarding the Christian Bible. And it is important that we recognize that the ‘specification’ of “Christian” is quite demonstrative of the root, or seed, issue. The Bible cannot have been intended to be labeled, ‘flavored,’ or ‘branded’ by the Author (or authors – depending on your point of view). Other than being the divinely inspired voice of the God of Abraham, and other prophets of God, how the books were compiled was a non-issue.

As a matter of fact, until such time as the Bible became useful as in inter-cultural tool of political relevance, its existence as a collection of disparate accounts was quite acceptable. The creation of a ‘duly accepted’ volume (bible) of separate texts was as much an exercise of diplomacy and negotiation as it was a labor of the divinely inspired.


Interestingly, the notion of ‘truth,’ be it philosophical, ideological, or cultural, has never been an easy target to acquire. Such distinctions are made in a subjective mindset, and will often lead to disparate claims of what is and isn’t truth, per se, as well as how that truth is to be contextualized in the living reality of those rendering the judgment.

Assuming there is a truth, which can be identified and isolated from the biblical library, I would be compelled to inquire as to its nature, and enduring pertinence.

Obtusely, I might ask “What truth is missing?” in order to address the specific matter and the facts surrounding its removal. But I am inclined to inquire less obliquely instead, “Is there a truth particular to the biblical record that renders the Bible ‘incomplete’ by its omission?”
While the volumes of writings which were considered and discarded by the body of that group which compiled and ‘accepted’ the current biblical form, do in fact raise questions of relevance, to accept that the Bible is not complete, as it is, is to undermine the foundational arguments raging since the Bible became freely available to scholars, mystics, and believers.


The Bible, as we have adopted it in common society, never existed prior to its compilation. Nothing has been removed since that effort was undertaken. It is true that there were numerous candidate writings, commonly accepted and wholeheartedly embraced by communities of believers across the world. It is also true that after some level of review certain writings were excluded from acceptance as canonical. But since they were never part of the Bible which we are discussing, they can’t be said to have been ‘removed’. It would be more accurate to state that they were never included.

The spirit of the assertion is, nevertheless, understood. And I will grant that the decision to discount certain religious texts can be, from a certain perspective, be discussed from a perspective of purposeful incompleteness.


Why? There are many reasons why some writings could have been judged as not ‘belonging’ in the final version of what was to be considered the “Holy Bible”. Political, social, and ideological disagreements notwithstanding, there are personal reasons and subjective or petty motivations that can be attributed to the editorial license. If, however, there were some truth who by its very nature, threatened the survival of the church dedicated to scriptural dogma, it could have been removed.

There are many examples to study of this process. But perhaps we should extend that portion of the debate to a later stage.

I close my opening at this point; hoping to have provided fertile ground for our discussion, and also hoping that some of the perspectives I have shared may form a common foundation from which we can work.

Thank you for your patience.


posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:18 PM
My sincere regrets to semperfortis, Maxmars, and the rest of the Debate Forum participants and readers. I have a lot of stuff going on in my offline life right now and just have not been able to focus on this debate.

It is an excellent topic, one I have long wanted to tackle in one form or another, which makes it even harder to admit that I simply can't do so right now.

I therefore concede the debate to Maxmars. I hope however that we can face off again in the future, on this or on another topic. Best of luck to Maxmars in the rest of the competition.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

May your load be lightened. I will gladly take a rain check. I hope all goes smoothly for you on the road ahead.

Be most well.


posted on May, 29 2009 @ 09:40 PM
Maxmars advances and will face 44soulslayer in the CHAMPIONSHIP BOUT!!!!!


new topics

top topics

log in