Faith: a legitimate Trump Card?

[boatsnguitars]

While debating the trustworthiness of the Bible, Otseng made the comment that "the Bible is also a human book" and therefore, prone to errors. But what other than human could it be? Ovine? Alien? What reason could there be to presume it is of divine origin (which was clearly the implication)?

If you presume Dianetics is of Supernatural origin, then it doesn't matter if you find errors in it, or if you question its source. So why debate it?

Take any claim based on Faith: Greek, Roman, Norse, Polynesian, etc. stories. Just start with the idea that its of divine origin - then argue away any objections.

It seems that this is - obviously - the wrong way to debate.

One might argue that I'm presuming it's not of divine origin - but that's what we are trying to ascertain (even if we determine something is of divine origin, we still have to wonder if it is reliable - because we don't know if Gods are fickle, tricksters, unclear, etc.).

So, is it prima facia wrong to use Faith as a part of an argument? Does Faith have a role in an honest debate?