The bible makes a claim and you can not use the source of the claim in an argument, circular reasoning.

Honestly, if you know the bible really well you can use it against them. The bible contradicts itself a lot!

If the bible is their only source of reference, they might as well use the Harry Potter series as their source of magic.

I was a true believer for many years so I know a fair amount about the Bible and enjoy debating it if they're somewhat honest. Most won't debate the Bible but only their interpretation of it. That's not what it really means. You're using the wrong translation. Of course the most popular is using it to prove itself and because god says it so it's gotta be true. Noooo. It's still fun to point out the shear nonsense and lack of morality contained in it's pages. Those are low hanging fruit.

I dunno that debating a true Sky Fairy addict accomplishes anything at the end of the day. If they are knowledgable and well versed in their belief enough to debate...I think we're the loser right off the bat. They are so heavily invested in the dogma at that point that nothing will dent the armour of their One True Gawd who controls the Universe. How could we? Especially when the debate gets to the point where you've pinned them down and they start the circular verbalization escape route about gawd's famous 'plan'.

learn it better than they know it and make them a bit peeved.

Why bother? Find other areas where you have common interests. I just say right upfront "I am more interested in our being friends than about differences in religion and politics. What is your favorite quote? Mine is "'Shut up' he explained."

All you can do is attack the bible, because the person you're debating takes it as, well, bible.

The bible is so ridiculous. I would just say I don't really care what the bible says show it to me in a science or history book. At least a book that was written in this decade.

If all they are using is the bible to prove the bible is true, they're a lost cause. They aren't worth debating if they are not willing to use multiple corroborating sources, secular sources, ect... All you have to do is demonstrate how demonstrably false the bible is, and if they can't accept that, then it's almost a lost cause.

The easy way:
Explain to me how you read this and come to the conclusion that god is "good"?

That's pretty much a conversation stopper right there.If they ask, "Who is man to question whether god is good?" then respond with this

Genesis 3:22 - King James Bible
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

If it were written in soft absorbent paper then I could imagine a use for it.

Good for use as rolling papers

Do you mean debate or argue? If he accepts science and historical evidence, then a debate is possible. If he doesn't, then you will just have
an argument. It would be facts vs opinions and hearsay. No resolution possible.

If the person is a rabid Christian or some other type of religion, he or she is too far gone to listen and appreciate an opposite view.

Two lines to me say it all.
God gave man feewill.
Everthings is Gawds grand plan.
Whaaaat?

Tackle the Bible. It is not a reliable witness, and this is really easy to demonstrate.

I like to start with Moses. I like to do so, because Moses is the lynchpin of them all. (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, even Mormonism). Without Moses, you have nothing. He received the primary revelation and the Law according to the Book. This is the core foundational story of the entire lot.

From the 1970s into the early 1990s, Israel sent her best Jewish scholars, historians, and archeologists into the field with a virtually unlimited budget. They were charged with finding the evidence to support their religious and cultural history.

What did they find? Not only did that NOT find of evidence of the history they sought, they discovered an entirely different story. The broad outlines of that history is now very well established with discoveries made over a wide area and spanning many centuries of digging.

1. There was no Exodus. Today, we can ready contemporary Egyptian records. And we've got a ton of them. If there was an Exodus, no one noticed. Not even the population. Not only that, the whole idea of large numbers of Jews being in bondage in Egypt is simply not true. They were not there to escape.
2. There was no 40 years in the desert. Ignoring how astoundingly stupid that story is on its face, a million souls kicking around in area for 4 decades would leave HUGE evidence. It would be easy to find. Today, with satellite mapping in multiple wavelengths, we can pretty well see where all the trading routes and posts were for 1000s of years.
3. There as no conquering of Canaan. It is now clear those city-states collapsed from within. The few places where there is evidence of battle and attack, it is all in the wrong place. Popular revolt, not conquering from without.
4. So, who are the Jewish people? In fact, they are the Canaanites they claim to have killed and displaced.

This is a really big deal. It cannot be overlooked. Jesus is now the Son of who, exactly? By his words, he certainly didn't know Moses was fiction.

The bible makes a claim and you can not use the source of the claim in an argument, circular reasoning. as jlynn said
THAT SAID
MOST believers belong to one sect or another, and these sects TEACH differing versions of the tale. They cherry pick verses to support the Dogma they endorse.
IF you learn some of these it is not hard to illustrate their own Bible often tells them differently than what they think.

For instance fundamentalists often are literalists who believe matthew wrote matthew, and few realize that in the margin of their own Bible it lists the author as unknown. It is a Church Tradition to attribute it to Matthew.

The same with almost every point of Dogma.

I often point out the Death of Judas Iscariot, How did he die? Sects teach this very differently.
In Matthew he is despondent, repentant, throws the money at the priests and goes and hangs himself.
In Acts he is unrepentant, keeps the money, uses it to buy a field and god punishes his wickedness by having him fall down and explode.

Christian Apologetics says both happened
BUT you can't be both unrepentant and repentant, keep the money and buy a field and throw it away

So
ONE is wrong

THEN you can use this

"Why don't Jews believe in Jesus?" Let's understand why – not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify the Jewish position.
Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:
Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
Jewish belief is based on national revelation.
But first, some background: What exactly is the Messiah?
The word "Messiah" is an English rendering of the Hebrew word Mashiach, which means "anointed." It usually refers to a person initiated into God's service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, 1-Kings 1:39, 2-Kings 9:3)
(1) Jesus Did Not Fulfill the Messianic Prophecies
What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? One of the central themes of biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4, 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)
Specifically, the Bible says he will:
Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).
If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be the Messiah.
Because no one has ever fulfilled the Bible's description of this future King, Jews still await the coming of the Messiah. All past Messianic claimants, including Jesus of Nazareth, Bar Cochba and Shabbtai Tzvi have been rejected.
Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming. Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the Bible no concept of a second coming exists.

What do you mean by "correct"?
If you want to waste your time, sure, have fun "debating" someone who will continue throwing bible verses at you. I did that, it can be hilarious. Or depressing. But I would say the chances for that debate to be useful to either of you both are close to zero otherwise.

I often use the bible as a source for the ludicrously and incongruity of the christian faith. The dogmatic verses they choose to expound on while ignoring their context. Case in point: My Daddy used to throw around the "honor/obey thy father and mother" verses (of which their are several AND a commandment.) BUT Colossians 3:20&21 AND Ephesians 6:1 both basically state:
20- Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. 21- Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.
So basically at about 16 I told him fine, I would honor and obey him as long as he did not piss me off. We became good buddies after that.
IMO The bible says to “Study to show thyself approved unto God... rightly dividing the word of truth.” 2 Timothy 2:15 You should study the bible as well, there are some nice things there and I believe Sun Tzu's The Art of War "Know your enemy and know yourself" If you must "battle" them use their own arms/words against them. ESPECIALLY when they cherry pick from the OT.

The bible is fictional, not a book full of facts.

If you wish to debate them on the content or meaning of the bible then yes. Otherwise it sounds like a waste of time. Bible=True thus Zzzzzz