After reading your response to Krishna K, I have a question: Is your approach to argumentation just going to be question begging? In other words, are you going to expect us to allow you to settle an issue by just quoting a scripture? If so, I don't see how are we going to have a meaningful discussion on the other issues in your post that I have only partially responded to, because I certainly reject your premise that whatever the Bible says is necessarily true. I suggest that we put the issues in that post on hold and first tackle the statement below that I have quoted from it.
<<The bible is scientifically accurate, historically accurate and Spiritually accurate>>
Of course, there is no way to prove that the Bible is "spiritually" accurate, but if you will agree to affirm that "the Bible is scientifically and historically accurate," I will gladly deny this proposition. If you will subscribe to errancy@atheist.tamu.edu, you can post your affirmative arguments there, and I will respond to them. That way, others besides just you and me will have the opportunity to consider the arguments from both sides. I can't see why you wouldn't be willing to do that. Such a debate would give you the opportunity to defend the Bible before a group of skeptics that would otherwise be unavailable to you. At the same time, you could have people on your side subscribe to the list so that they could follow it too.
I would be very eager to participate in such a debate. What about you?
I propose the following guidelines:
As the affirmant, you would begin your defense of the Bible by defining your proposition so that everyone would know exactly what we are debating.
Your first affirmative posting would present only one argument, which I would then be obligated to respond to. By limiting each exchange to just one argument, this would enable the subscribers to follow the discussion better than if several arguments were presented in a single post.
In subsequent postings, you would be permitted to respond to my rebuttal of your argument but would present no more than one additional affirmative argument in each posting.
We will both agree to refrain from unsupported assertions and honestly try to present details to support each affirmative and rebuttal argument presented.
We will both agree to send each other CC's of each posting so that they can be received without going through the errancy list.
If this proposal is acceptable to you, we can begin the debate immediately, after which we could then return to a discussion of your prior posting about my exchange with the 14 year old. By, then, we should know whether there is any reasonable evidence to support your belief that an issue can be settled by just quoting a scripture.
Also, I would ask you to submit your own suggestions on how to improve the guidelines to make this a productive debate.
Farrell Till