EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
587

There are good reasons to believe in Christianity

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
4 points
crossedcrossed (PRO)
 
firstly i want to apologize for how long this took me. i wanted to get this right.






evolution vs creationism


for many years people have wondered why animals have traits that make it easier to survive in there environment for
example the owl roams at night so to see it has night vision. jungle creatures are cameo because the live in the forest and needs to hide. carnivorous have big teeth because they hunt and need to eat flesh. herbivores have small teeth because they only eat plants. the beaver has massive teeth because it needs to chew through trees to so they can get wood for there dams. humans that live in deserts like Africa  Afghanistan and places that are hot are black so they do not get sun burn as easily meanwhile white people live in colder climates like Europe china Asia japan they are white because they do not need protection from sun because they live in colder climate.







examples of what me as a christian believes happened and what an evolutionist believes. which is more logical


owl and night vision


evolution says  the owl roams at night so over millions of years it evolved and gained night vision so that it can see better at night
https://www.owlpages.com/owls/articles.php?a=5

christian say
is it not more likely that the owl has night vision because god created it to roam at night so he designed the owl with night vision

Night vision of the owl by mataleonerj on deviantart
meat eaters

evolution says
predators like t Rex saber tooth tigers bears wolfs have really big teeth evolution say that these creatures needed to to hunt and attack other animals so over millions of years they got some really big teeth by adapting to there nature and evolving.


christian says

is it not more likely that god designed these animals to hunt and kill so to do so he designed them with really big teeth

plant eaters

evolution says

plant eaters like the zebras deer giraffe horses have really small teeth because they do not need to hunt because they eat plants herbs evolution says this is because they over millions of years adapted to there environment



christian says
is it not more likely that that these herbivores have small teeth because god designed them to eat only plants.

deer teeth
people


black skin people live easier to heat while white skin people have hard time in the heat and live in cooler places. evolution says they changed skin color by adapting to there surrounding while i as a christian say god designed them with there skin color according to were he stuck them after the tower of babble
https://health.howstuffworks.com/skin-care/beauty/sun-care/sun-affect-dark-complexions.htm

beavers

evolution says
beavers have really big teeth beavers need to chomp on trees to build dams evolution says over millions of years the beevers grew big teeth so that they can chew down trees.



christian says
is it not more likely that god designed the beaver with large teeth so that it can chew down trees


clownfish

evolution says
the clown fish lives in a anemone. its predator get stung by the anemone when they try to get the clown fish. evolutionist say that the clown fish evolved and developed a mutation that allows it to not get stung by the anemone.

is it not more likely that god created the clown fish to live in the anemone so that it can hide from its predators



evolution says that the angler fish grew a light bulb because it lived deep in the ocean were you cannot see so over millions of years it grew a light bulb. because it needed to see and needed a way to lure fish 


christian say

is it not more likely that god created it with a light bulb so that it see in the deep ocean were there is no light 



evolution says


that the lizard develop a defense mechanism were if an animal like a bird grabs him by the tail and trys to eat him it can make his tail fall off so it can get away and later grows it back


christian says

is it not more likely that god designed the lizard with a tail that falls off it if it grabbed so that it can get away 



evolution says


chipmunks have balloons for mouths that they use to carry nuts. evolution says that over millions of years the chipmunks mouths turned relastic because it could only carry a single nut with its paws and needed a better way to carry nuts so over millions of years it adapted to the nature and grew balloon cheeks 

christian say

is it not more realistic to say that god designed the chipmunk with elastic cheeks so it can carry more nuts





evolution says that over millions of years the lion turned yellow to blend into the yellow desert so that it can hide thus hunt better   




 christian says


is it not more realistic to say that god created the lion yellow so that it can blend into the yellow desert so that it can hide better when hunting



what make my theory better than evolution


now i can hear you saying what makes my christian believes better



were are all the bones of these animals that supposedly failed to adapt or evolved



like this video says if we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys.

this video also makes fun of the evolution theory that an explosion from nothing produced life. how can an explosion happen if there is nothing


no need to watch im just sourcing it


here is a huge problem that evolution does not explain why do plants have medical properties.


how would an explosion from nothing produce a plant that regenerates the brain and heals damage from the brain stem. turmeric http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/how-whole-turmeric-heals-damaged-brain-1

http://www.thespicedetective.com/blog/2015/11/17/how-turmeric-can-regenerate-a-damaged-brain-boost-brains-stem-cells




continental drift does the bible hint at such after the flood


the earth looks like it could fit together like one big jigsaw puzzle


this has caused many theory's like the continental drift. basically the earth was one big chunk of land than via an earthquake or a flood all the land cracked up into continents and spread apart

it is believed that before the flood the earths land was fit together but after the flood the earth cracked apart. this is believed because of a part of the bible that says this



To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg5(for in his days the earth was divided), and his brother’s name was Joktan.

https://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Chron%201.19


this would also explain why all the animals got back to there ideal climate the ground litterally carried them to there ideal climate

the continental drift thing came from here

https://www.gotquestions.org/pangea-theory.html





dead sea scrolls were found shows the accuracy of bible



they have recently uncovered many dead sea scrolls that support accurate of bible


summary of story

so some person in Qumran area was throwing rocks in a cave and he heard a breaking noise he then found out that he broke a pot and inside he found 4 scrolls he went to have them tested in Bethlehem an antique dealer confirmed them to be real and he bought them from him for 150 dollars he then sold it to another person this all happened in 1947. such news did not stay secret for long a year later a Hebrew university professor came along and looked at them he talks about how his hand shook when holding them and that it looked like he was reading psalm. 1954 the wall street journal had a add about the third owner about the 4 scrolls. they later digged deeper of were those 4 scrolls were found and they found complete copy's of all the biblical books in the bible except esther. more scrolls and thousands of ancient fragments

https://lifehopeandtruth.com/bible/is-the-bible-true/proof-2-dead-sea-scrolls/


the dead scrolls prove the accuracy of the Masoretic Text. which is the basis for what we use today with the old testoment

https://lifehopeandtruth.com/bible/is-the-bible-true/proof-2-dead-sea-scrolls/


https://probe.org/the-dead-sea-scrolls/



national geographic says that it is very likely that Jesus did exist


https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/12/jesus-tomb-archaeology/

https://upholdingthefaith.wordpress.com/2019/02/03/do-we-have-proof-jesus-was-a-real-historical-figure/


thing that the bible says that can be backed up today

eating right
in  the bible the kid who brother sold to Egypt the female who lied and got  him imprisoned wanted him because he ate right back in the day when  chemicals were not in food

with Joseph in charge, he did not concern himself with anything except the food he ate. Now Joseph was well-built and handsome,
7 and after a while his master’s wife took notice of Joseph and said, “Come to bed with me!”

in genesis in 39
https://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/


satan makes people rich than haunts them

you  know on how almost all the haunted houses are big mansions. why is it  always rich people and not poor people i believe that this is because  these houses once belonged to people who had sold there souls to Satan  in exchange for wealth



god  predicted the the earth floats in space years before anyone had been to  space. back in the day when everyone believed the earth was flat job:28  "He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the  earth over nothing.

" https://biblehub.com/job/26-7.htm



being depressed can kill you
we all know how being unhappy can kill you early. and how stress can have a huge negative effect on your health
bible got it right first
https://heartmdinstitute.com/stress-relief/what-stress-can-do-to-your-body/

A cheerful heart is good medicine,
but a crushed spirit dries up the bones.

when you are depressed and not happy  you die faster
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+17:22


wine was discovered to be bad in the 1970s
"The  angel of the LORD appeared to her and said, “You are barren and  childless, but you are going to become pregnant and give birth to a son.  4 Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and  that you do not eat anything unclean"
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+13&version=NIV

"Then  the woman went to her husband and told him, “A man of God came to me.  He looked like an angel of God, very awesome. I didn’t ask him where he  came from, and he didn’t tell me his name. 7 But he said to me, ‘You  will become pregnant and have a son. Now then, drink no wine or other  fermented drink and do not eat anything unclean, because the boy will be  a Nazirite of God from the womb "

alright  so when the angel told samson mother that she was going to be pregnant  with him. she said do not drink any wine or strong drinks it was the  1970s when we found out that that drinking while pregnant was bad

article
https://outlandermedicine.com/2016/05/14/a-historical-perspective-on-alcohol-in-pregnancy/

article says
"It wasn’t until the 1970s that Fetal Alcohol Syndrome was defined and
fully recognized. Work to educate pregnant women of the dangers of
alcohol in pregnancy"

plus i found this article that talks about how we prescribed wine to as medicine to pregnant females in the 50s

https://outlandermedicine.com/2016/05/14/a-historical-perspective-on-alcohol-in-pregnancy/


alcohol as medicine to treat morning sickness
"Alcohol was often medicine
– whisky for colds or laryngitis, hot brandy punch for cholera,
rum-soaked cherries for a cold. Doctors prescribed champagne as a
treatment for morning sickness. Pregnant women in labor would take a
shot or two of liquor to ease their discomfort. Wine was often
recommended during pregnancy to help pregnant women relax.

beehive-brandy



gay marriage

god does not hate gay people he just want them to have relationships the way he designed them to have relationships which is 1 male and one female. it is still a sin



Return To Top | Posted:
2019-02-28 06:52:31
| Speak Round
adminadmin (CON)
I'd like to thank my opponent for engaging in this debate with me. I do enjoy a good religious debate.

What is Christianity?

Christians tend to believe all of the following:

"What is Christianity?" is best answered by saying that it is a relationship with the true and living God through the person of Jesus Christ by whom we are forgiven of our sins and escape the righteous judgment of God. (source)

This leads us to a series of statements about the basic beliefs of Christianity:
  • That there is a single true and living God
  • That a relationship may be made with this God through the person of Jesus Christ
  • That God has righteous judgment but Jesus forgives it

God is generally defined by Christians in the following terms (source):
  • God is self-sufficient: He does not require us to exist; He is more than just "an idea in somebody's head"
  • God is eternal: God exists beyond time and space, at once being in every time and space
  • God is good: God is described as merciful, kind, loving and gracious
  • God is almighty: Apparently with God, anything is possible
There are more, but these four are sufficient to prove my case.

What pro needs to prove is:
  1. That ALL of the above points are true. It is not enough to prove that only one of them is true - pro must defend that there are good reasons to believe in all of Christianity as opposed to a part of it.
  2. That alternative explanations are excluded. A good example is that proving the existence of God does not usually preclude the possibility that there could be multiple gods - something Christianity requires.
  3. That there are no compelling reasons to disbelieve these explanations, including any points I will raise.

In addition to these broad, overarching beliefs, there are also issues of doctrine that need to be considered in light of scripture that Christians hold sacred, as documented in a very long, boring anthology of books called The Holy Bible, and its follow-up, Hogwarts School of Prayer and Miracles. These beliefs may be literal statements, as we see in the below representative examples:

  • The Bible literally states that some dude called Moses led some slaves out of Egypt, therefore, Christians tend to believe this
  • The Bible literally states that some dude called David killed some dude called Goliath, therefore, Christians tend to believe this
  • The Bible literally states that some dude called Adam and some chick named Eve lived in some garden called Eden but got shut out by an invincible, flying, flaming sword, therefore, Christians tend to believe this
  • The Bible literally states that some dude called Job suffered for no reason other than a friendly bet between perfectly-good God and his evil arch-rival Satan. Christians tend to believe this.
  • The Bible literally states that some dude called Elijah got set on fire and pulled up by a tornado directly into heaven, and survived, and came back from Heaven a second time (although he never technically died) although this time he called himself John The Baptist and died for reals. Also it says he's coming back from the dead AGAIN whenever the world ends. Oh yeah, and Christians tend to believe this.

In addition to these representative examples, doctrine can also include interpretations of laws and commandments that have evolved over time. A key point in this evolution for most Christians is the coming of Jesus, who provided "new" commandments and helped explain some old ones. However, various schisms in church denominations over time have led to different interpretations of these rules over time. Here are some examples of what I'm talking about:
  • Almost all Christians think loving your neighbor is a good idea, but somehow, lots of them seem to disagree on what this means
  • Christians also don't like stealing, although some think it's ok to steal from the rich if you're giving to the poor, for example
  • Christians are also forbidden from religious intermarriage, but no major denomination has been very strict about this for about 500 years
  • Women are not allowed to be Christian priests, but some churches are loosening up on these rules recently
  • Some churches even are not obeying the rule that requires them to stone athiests like me, allowing me to spread these false heresies on any websites I please.

All this is even before we get into the whole quagmire that is the Christian position on gay marriage. My opponent says a few words about this, but his argument is not substantively doctrinal - rather, it entirely depends on his blind watchmaker argument, which I will address shortly.

It is my contention that my opponent must therefore effectively show not only that the Bible as a whole is likely true - and that includes the core beliefs stated about - but also that at least one Christian perspective on doctrine is ethically sound. Moreover, Christianity requires that its own doctrine be sound for the Bible to be true, because prophecies about the end times in the Bible repeatedly directly refer to aspects of Christian doctrine. It is also abundantly clear, for anyone unfamiliar, that Christians do not believe that the end times have already happened, especially since the Bible promises this will be accompanied by cool stuff like a dragon and an ocean of fire.

I am not denying that the Bible is mostly similar to how it was many centuries ago - although the ancient codexes are not entirely in agreement - but rather that the important claims of the Bible are mostly false. Unlike, for example, Islam, Christianity does not specifically guarantee that nobody shall ever alter the Bible, and there are surprisingly few commandments against misquoting Jesus. In fact the Bible has frequently been changed in history for political reasons in minor ways - I have no characters to describe it all here, but I will recommend this book:

Why God cannot exist
Reason 1: If God is almighty, can He get rid of evil?
It seems logically incompatible with a just, benevolent God to allow bad stuff to happen, given that the world could be more just. If free will exists (as required by Christian salvation), this is a huge problem, as the eternal unchanging goodness of God would require Him to respond to all instances of injustice, not just the few pointed out in the Old Testament. The very idea of a "chosen people" runs contrary to an omnibenevolent God. In the New Testament, Jesus dies for the sins of humanity, but this is entirely unnecessary as God could have done this without essentially committing suicide. Furthermore, God's plan to save people from evil clearly didn't work. After all, Donald Trump was elected president.

Reason 2: Can God do the impossible?
It is logically impossible to do the impossible. If something is logically inconsistent then it can be said to both exist and not exist, which means the statement that God does not exist must logically be true. On the other hand, if we limit God's power to doing things that aren't nonsense (which seems pretty reasonable, until you realise that not all infinities are the same size, which complicates things) then we have a limit to God's power.

Even if His power were not contradictory, other attributes of God inherently face the same problem. For example, if God is all-knowing, can He know something He doesn't know? The traits of God are also internally contradictory in this way - an eternal God, for example, is incompatible with God's ability to destroy himself.

Reason 3: If God was real, the universe would suck much less
Let's face it, if God exists, He chose a pretty roundabout way to create everything. Science is pretty clear the universe had to go through over 13 billion years of craziness before we reached this point, and entropy is only going up, not down. The path to our existence is laden with disasters and catastrophes entirely un-necessary for either biogenesis or human thriving. While it is certainly plausible this could be part of a grander plan beyond human comprehension, a far simpler explanation is that the whole universe is entirely inhospitable to humans except for in an extremely tiny fragment for an extremely brief period of time. Of all the wonders of the cosmos, we have only found a single place capable of sustaining human life, and we've almost destroyed it by (basically) finding ways to do cool tricks with fire thereby releasing carbon dioxide into the air (along with other greenhouse gases).

Why Jesus is probably a myth
I've frequently argued before that even if there was a historical Jesus, the evidence is pretty limited on who exactly he was. This is significant because the Christian narrative depends on Jesus not only existing, but dying for the salvation of mankind. Even if my opponent could definitively prove Jesus' existence, Christians typically take it on faith that Jesus died for the salvation of mankind, without further good reasons why this should be the case. I would note the following:
  • The earliest gospels were written a generation after the lifetime of Jesus (going by life expectancy at the time) and written by people writing at (at least) the fourth remove from the person himself.
  • The gospels show evidence of legendary development, for example, the birth narrative is not a part of the earliest gospels or Christian letters.
  • The gospels are internally contradictory, for example, Jesus has two different genealogies listed which are incompatible with each other.
  • The gospels contain facts in contradiction with known archaeological, geographical or other historical facts, such as the names of the consuls when Jesus was born, Matthew's idea that mustard grows on trees, and Luke's placement of Nazareth on a hill.
  • The story of Jesus shares marked similarities with other myths known around the Roman empire at the time.

There is also a lack of corroborating detail from other non-Christian sources:
  • Josephus, a Roman turncoat Pharisee, mentions the name in passing a few times to emphasize how bad the Jews were. However, the text is known to be heavily edited by medieval Christian copyists.
  • Three Roman writers make passing mention of Jesus, but none seem to have had any firsthand evidence, rather are just copying other sources we already have. These writings date to many centuries after Jesus.
  • Gnostics also had sects devoted to Jesus. These texts typically depict Jesus as being a metaphysical apparition, occasionally appearing to the masses by revealing his secrets to only a few. Christians generally view these texts as heretical even though they are more numerous than the Christian Bible, and have every bit as much internal reliability as the Biblical texts do.
  • There are also "Sayings Gospels", most famously the Gospel of Thomas. This is like a book of quotes attributed to Jesus. It reminds me of a quote said by the great Abraham Lincoln: "Don't trust every quote you read on the internet". I suspect the same logic applies to Jesus.
  • Pro points out that National Geographic, a modern publication partially funded by Christian lobbies, says Jesus "probably" existed. O - K.

If there is no Jesus then there is no salvation - a basic requirement for Christianity. Without God and Jesus, pro cannot win this debate. He must show that by God, through the person of Jesus, one may find the way, the truth and the light. Then he may use this to defend his interpretation of Christianity, and if he can provide a good rationale there, then I deserve to lose.

Rebuttal
The interpretation he has chosen to present, however, has not been a particularly good one.

Broadly, pro's assertions may be characterized as a "blind watchmaker" argument. The rationale is that a watch implies a watchmaker simply by its complexity - it cannot be random. It is true that evolution believes things evolved over a long period of time, and that this process became more complicated by adaption to difficult conditions, and a process of natural selection. These are historical facts; the implication pro is making, I think, is that God must have guided this process.

First, no animal - certainly not humans - is particularly well-designed. Even within our own environment, our bodies have numerous flaws and defects. To give just one example in case anyone thinks they're perfect - human DNA is mostly viral material which has been rendered inactive. We carry tons of inactive ancient super-viruses within each of our bodies. Literally there is no solid reason for a perfect, loving God to design humanity with that many self-destruct buttons embedded in every single one of the trillions of cells in our body. The same is true of other animals, plants and creatures. Despite what Christians say, creation is not perfect nor are imperfections the result of sinful actions - rather, our design is fundamentally flawed, but well-adapted to our conditions. This makes the evolution argument more likely than God in every case, because while pro has pointed out many positive adaptions, he is ignoring all the ways in which the same creatures may be limited.

For the sake of bones of animals that failed, which pro denied the existence of, I will direct my opponent to any local museum in his area. Here's a dinosaur skeleton:


Pro asks why there are still monkeys. The answer is that we did not come from monkeys, but share a common ancestor in ancient history. What happened was that the species diversified in response to different conditions they had to adapt to. Not all will do so in the same way. It's like asking if life began in the water why are there still fish - it's because not all the fish had to adapt to land, some were quite happy to stay.

Pro asks how an explosion of life can happen from nothing. The answer is that life did not begin with nothing - rather, it began with chemicals that already existed coming together in a very specific way. There was no magic explosion as far as anyone can tell. Neither science nor the Bible supports that theory. In logic we sometimes call this a "strawman" argument because it is totally irrelevant.

Pro also said some stuff about continental drift, mostly that the Bible supports it. You know, you'd think an all-knowing God could have added a bit of a "by the way, Solomon, maybe you should tell everyone about continental drift - it'll advance science by a couple of thousand years" but nah, he kept that to himself.

Finally, pro thinks the Bible has sound medical advice. Funny how little it says about medicinal plants, actually. Not only does it not list how to make useful medicines like penicillin, it also gets a lot of stuff wrong. Just check James 5:13-15, which says all you need for any illness is a bit of prayer and oil. Apparently this cure doesn't work so well for cancer. The same is true of many other verses.

The resolution is negated.

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-05 08:15:52
| Speak Round
crossedcrossed (PRO)


i believe con does not get my evolution vs creation argue point


i was simply stating that the owl have night vision and roaming during the night and my many other examples were proof of intelligent design. i did not say it is so complex it must have been god. you misunderstood me. and i'm not a catholic I'm a born again believer


the creator wether it be god or chemicals wouldn't it need to be able to think and say hay it is pretty dark during the night i better design the owl night vision so that it can see.


to know that the owl would have trouble seeing at the night without night vision proves that the creator was aware of this and gave the owl night vision, this would take thought this would also take intelligence to know that night time is dark then act upon and give the owl night vision



kangaroos have these little pouches that they keep there babies in. without these pouches the babies would probably be eaten by other animals the babies kangaroo can not hop that fast let alone walk so if it had to follow its mom. the mom would be miles ahead of the joey and would technically abandon it. this is if they did not have a pouch. but god must have known this so he gave them a little pouch to hold there babies in. this is intelligence design. if the creator was a bunch of chemicals how would you make the case that the kangaroo pouch was designed for the babies kangaroo. since chemicals can not design something to complement another thing because they can not think that like saying my stuff animal dragon did it.




what makes jeans intelligent created but not the kangaroo


the kangaroo having a belly pouch to hold a joey is intelligent created by god

my jeans having pockets to fit a pen is intelligent created by humans at jean factory


god designed the belly pouch on the kangaroo so that it can hold babies

the jeans company designed my pants with pocket so that i can put a pen in there.

again how would your chemicals be aware and know that a kangaroo would need a pouch to carry its babies. i can see a human putting pockets in pants so that you can carry thing is that not the same thing here but with god and a kangaroo.




con said

Finally, pro thinks the Bible has sound medical advice. Funny how little it says about medicinal plants, actually. Not only does it not list how to make useful medicines like penicillin, it also gets a lot of stuff wrong. Just check James 5:13-15, which says all you need for any illness is a bit of prayer and oil. Apparently this cure doesn't work so well for cancer. The same is true of many other verses.

oh how your wrong you are i purposefully left out stuff about medicine because it would make a good follow up i got a 337 page book on chrismas about the medical properties in essential oils i am going to destroy you.





con probably believes that we need to create medicine to treat great disease like autism osteoporosis stoke heart problems stuttering etc and to create these medicine would require men of great IQ to make these pills like scientist pharmakeai pharmakon pharmacist and doctors to create such drugs. but what if i tell you that the chemicals that you believe created the universe has out performed these men of great iq and have created plant with medical properties that out performed pills that took years to create. how would a bunch of chemicals create medicine that is better than scientist unless those chemicals were god.


con states that oils and prayer can not cure cancer well your wrong olive oil when consumes kills cancer cells 1 hour after ingested. pharmakeai or pharmacon people or as you know them pharmacy' doctors' pharmacist surgeons anyone in the business of big pharma use this treatment called chemo therapy this is when they start killing off cells in the hope to kill the cancer cells. they use a drug which kills cells but this poison does not just kill cancer cells it kills normal cells to because the drug can not tell the difference between normal cells and cancer cells. but olive oil only kills cancer cells because  it can tell the difference 1 hour after use. btw if you get rid of cancer cells the cancer is gone cancer cells are what make up the cancer. a tumor is just a bunch of cancer cell molded together. how would chemicals create  a plant with medical properties that are more effective then a treatment scientist made. god must have created olive oil


' doctors'  drug there patients with cell killing drugs in the hope to kill cancer cells thus curing them of cancer but the drug kills normal cells to
https://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatments-and-side-effects/treatment-types/chemotherapy/how-chemotherapy-drugs-work.html
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancer-in-general/treatment/chemotherapy/how-chemotherapy-works


olive oil does the exact same thing but only kills cancer cells.
https://www.medicaldaily.com/olive-oil-compound-kills-cancer-cells-less-hour-all-powerful-oleocanthal-322904


both are just as effective but olive oil you do not suffer side effect

many people have rightfully pointed out and basically said well if olive oil kills cancer cells does that not cure cancer.
https://www.drweil.com/health-wellness/body-mind-spirit/cancer/can-olive-oil-cure-cancer/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150302141241.htm


chemo therapy has sever side effects
  • Blood-forming cells in the bone marrow
  • Hair follicles
  • Cells in the mouth, digestive tract, and reproductive system
  • Fatigue
  • Hair loss
  • Easy bruising and bleeding
  • Infection
  • Anemia (low red blood cell counts)
  • Nausea and vomiting
  • Appetite changes
  • Constipation
  • Diarrhea
  • Mouth, tongue, and throat problems such as sores and pain with swallowing
  • Nerve and muscle problems such as numbness, tingling, and pain
  • Skin and nail changes such as dry skin and color change
  • Urine and bladder changes and kidney problems
  • Weight changes
  • Chemo brain, which can affect concentration and focus
  • Mood changes
  • Changes in libido and sexual function
  • Fertility problems
  • A fever of 100.5°F or greater (taken by mouth)
  • Bleeding or unexplained bruising
  • A rash or allergic reaction, such as swelling of the mouth or throat, severe itching, trouble swallowing
  • Intense chills
  • Pain or soreness at the chemo injection site or catheter site
  • Unusual pain, including intense headaches
  • Shortness of breath or trouble breathing (If you’re having trouble breathing call 911 first.)
  • Long-lasting diarrhea or vomiting
  • Bloody stool or blood in your urine

https://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatments-and-side-effects/treatment-types/chemotherapy/chemotherapy-side-effects.html

24 best images about seborrhea on pinterest | henna for hair, health and tea tree oil

frankincense oil does

frankincense oil can help with autism but so do 9 other oils

https://draxe.com/autism-natural-treatment/



promoting memory.


Stimulates Urination


Acts as Tonic


Anticancer Properties



Promotes Digestion


Reduces Scars


Prevents Gas Buildup


Boosts Immune System


improving skin health,
https://www.organicfacts.net/health-benefits/essential-oils/health-benefits-of-frankincense-essential-oil.html


chamomile oil does

Relieve anxiety.

Treat depression

Relieve nerve pain and fatigue.

Eliminate internal parasites

Improve digestion

Treat insomnia

Easing menopause

Detoxify the body

Treat the skin

Heal wounds
https://www.offthegridnews.com/alternative-health/10-miraculous-healing-uses-for-chamomile-oil/
juniper oil does


Promotes Sweating

https://www.organicfacts.net/health-benefits/essential-oils/health-benefits-of-juniper-essential-oil.html
etc


bergomot oil does



etc
https://www.organicfacts.net/health-benefits/essential-oils/health-benefits-of-bergamot-essential-oil.html

Bergamot essential oil | herbs info

coriander oil does

 Treats Spasms



Increases Libido



Weight Loss


Eliminates Gas

Health benefits of coriander essential oil - infographic
https://www.organicfacts.net/health-benefits/essential-oils/health-benefits-of-coriander-essential-oil.html


34 best cholesterol images on pinterest | young living essential oils, young living oils and ...
Health benefits of coriander essential oil - infographic
Health benefits of coriander essential oil - infographic
peppermint oil does



http://modernessentialoils.com/



sorry i got lazy this took way longer than i suspected there are several more oils than this but to pot all of them would take the rest of my life. if i could do it in a life time. so many oils
here is a list of oils
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_essential_oils
etc almost all the oils in the world have health benefits the only one i think that does not is the oil for cars.









the only way these plants would have such properties is if god designed them with these properties. i mean how does roots end up with properties that cures stuttering and speech problems with honey.
sweet flag cures stuttering
http://www.nftips.com/2014/01/natural-tips-and-remedies-for.html


did you know that cannabis helps with schizophrenia
https://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/home/topics/schizophrenia-and-psychoses/cannabis-and-schizophrenia-trigger-or-treatment/



the creator whether chemicals or god created medicine better than scientist
con probably believes that we need to create medicine to treat great disease like autism adhd  stoke heart attack etc and to create this medicine would require men of great iq to make these meds like scientist pharmakeai pharmakon pharmacist doctors to create such drugs but what if i tell you that the chemicals that you believe created the universe has out performed these men of great IQ and have created plant with medical benefits that out performed pills that took years to develop.

the saffron flower has anti depressant properties that are better than the drug prozac

https://saveourbones.com/curcumin-and-saffron-natural-scientifically-proven-alternatives-to-bone-damaging-antidepressants-including-prozac/

Herbs vs. Drugs: Get the Facts About Medicine

https://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/herbs-vs-drugs-facts-about-medicine-zmaz06djzraw
con says

 END TIMES PROPHECY FULFILLMENT

Isaiah said Israel would be reborn in one day


8Who  hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be  made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for  as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+66%3A7-8&version=KJV



Israel was declared a nation in 1948 in one day thanks to USA

https://therefinersfire.org/israel_born_in_one_day.htm
 

the bible talk about the end time trumpets being sounded


this page talks about some of the trumpets being sounded and some of the bad things that happened because of it
https://www.endtime.com/blog/revelation-seven-trumpets-shall-sound/


strange trumpet noises coming from the sky heard world wide the  news media covered it
    


rebuttal

  • The gospels contain facts in contradiction with known archaeological, geographical or other historical facts, such as the names of the consuls when Jesus was born, Matthew's idea that mustard grows on trees, and Luke's placement of Nazareth on a hill.
mustard tree can be 20 feet tall



the mustard tree can grow up to 20 feet tall
https://www.reference.com/home-garden/tall-mustard-tree-grow-8684a2711707ef6f

con sayed
In addition to these broad, overarching beliefs,  there are also issues of doctrine that need to be considered in light of  scripture that Christians hold sacred, as documented in a very long,  boring anthology of books called The Holy Bible, and its follow-up, Hogwarts School of Prayer and Miracles. These beliefs may be literal statements, as we see in the below representative examples:
  • The Bible literally states that some dude called Moses led some slaves out of Egypt, therefore, Christians tend to believe this
  • The  Bible literally states that some dude called David killed some dude  called Goliath, therefore, Christians tend to believe this



i guess these things would seem silly if you do not believe in god but these things are pretty reasonable if there was a god




What pro needs to prove is:
  1. That  ALL of the above points are true. It is not enough to prove that only  one of them is true - pro must defend that there are good reasons to  believe in all of Christianity as opposed to a part of it.
i will show you things that the bible has got right and that life is created intelligently which is what i have spent so much time on.


  1. That  alternative explanations are excluded. A good example is that proving  the existence of God does not usually preclude the possibility that  there could be multiple gods - something Christianity requires.
i believe that the gods are just demons pretending to be gods


All this is even before we get into the whole quagmire that is the
Christian position on gay marriage. My opponent says a few words about
this, but his argument is not substantively doctrinal - rather, it
entirely depends on his blind watchmaker argument, which I will address
shortly.

alright what doctrine am i not following


con said

Christians are also forbidden from religious intermarriage, but no major
denomination has been very strict about this for about 500 years

god expectation of us on breeding has not changed in 500 years he not going to change the rules just because almost no one is following them

  • Almost all Christians think loving your neighbor is a good idea, but somehow, lots of them seem to disagree on what this means
who disagrees
  • Christians
    also don't like stealing, although some think it's ok to steal from the
    rich if you're giving to the poor, for example

i am not for the robin hood idea socialism sucks and who misinterprets love thy neighbor


the woman and priest is a catholic thing i am a born again believer a man can not forgive your sins only Jesus
and the stoning an atheist we are suppose to convert you not stone you silly. the bible does not have anything about stoning atheist i follow kjb


con said
Can God do the impossible?

god can do anything so nothing is impossible


con said



Why God cannot existReason 1: If God is almighty, can He get rid of evil?

yes he will do so after the rapture then no evil will get rid of evil and he will toss all the evil in hell good will be in heaven

im hitting the 15000 word limit so i will rebuttal the rest in my last and final post

dna is not a faulty design. it screws up because of what we do to our body. the only mental illness that was prevalent past 1900 was the incest done by the royals they did not have the mental illness epidemic we have today. mental illness almost never happened it was as prevalent as finding gold. today you can not walk anywhere without finding someone suffering from it.

for example many foods damage dna
https://dailyhealthlifestyles.com/20-foods-that-can-damage-your-dna/10/
alclymide a is formed when sugar is cooked over 325 degrees so its in all food causes DNA damage
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/acrylamide-fact-sheet


heavy metals when in body mutate genes
https://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology.com/heavy-metals-harm-body/

im guessing you probably do not think this is a problem but chances are you have high amount of lead mercury aluminum in your body
http://nourishbalanceheal.com/hair-tissue-mineral-anaylsis/


and wifi can damage your DNA especially g5 internet it looks like it would end humanity
https://www.electricsense.com/12399/5g-radiation-dangers/


alright con state something about other text about Jesus that are more reliable then the bible but does not show them or tells how there just as reliable





Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-08 06:31:25
| Speak Round
adminadmin (CON)
I thank my opponent for continuing this debate.

My evidence
I gave a very long, substantive analysis of the burden that pro needs to prove. His rebuttal may be summed up in two words: "I believe". Here are the main points from pro, quoted verbatim with notes from me in italics (all Bible verses quoted are examples only):
  • i guess these things would seem silly if you do not believe in god but these things are pretty reasonable if there was a god (begging the question ... just wait until you go to Sunday School and learn that that Elijah / John the Baptist guy also wrote a letter while he was in heaven and got it delivered! I mean it's actually kind of funny if you think about it that heaven has a post office...)
  • i will show you things that the bible has got right and that life is created intelligently which is what i have spent so much time on. (and the Bible never says God did this. I challenge pro to show me any Bible translation that includes God saying the phrase "Let there be foxes!" - instead, God tells the world to produce life-forms, rather than designing them himself - and that's according to Christian scripture!)
  • i believe that the gods are just demons pretending to be gods (not really like 2 Peter 2:4-12 says, then?)
  • alright what doctrine am i not following (with this burden-shifting statement alone, 1 Peter 3:15, apparently)
  • i am not for the robin hood idea socialism sucks and who misinterprets love thy neighbor (you do, because of 1 Timothy 6:18)

  • the woman and priest is a catholic thing i am a born again believer a man can not forgive your sins only Jesus (pro should read 1 Corinthians 14:33-35; also Catholics would agree with you; also Catholic literally means "universal")
  • the bible does not have anything about stoning atheist (except in passages like Deuteronomy 13:6-10)

Please note the following:
  • None of this gets remotely close to proving the existence of God, any of the attributes of God, or precluding alternative explanations
  • Pro has no evidence Jesus existed
  • Pro has no evidence Jesus rose from the dead to forgive sins
  • Pro has no evidence we have sins that need forgiving
  • Pro has no justification for his beliefs other than that he believes them (circular logic)
  • Pro has not even provided scriptural support for any of these ideas, let alone support from other sources (bearing in mind that in a book as long as the Bible, scripture can often be cited to contradict other scripture, so even if he did this I can immediately rebut with scripture to the contrary)
  • Pro clearly views himself as having the correct interpretation of scripture, without acknowledging his fallibility, which really makes the resurrection quite pointless and is more commonly known to Christians as the sin of "pride"
  • Numerous books have got things right. The Illiad correctly described the position of Troy but that doesn't mean Zeus is real.

Truly, I feel I have gained a deeper understanding of Proverbs 14:15 this day.

As to what the Bible did not get right, I gave numerous examples. Pro attempts to rebut just one - the mustard tree example. In fact his own link says mustards grow on shrubs, although they are sometimes trained as though they were trees by people. In fact, mustard does not grow on trees, it grows on shrubs, and the Bible was wrong about that. Anyone who has ever cared for a mustard shrub from germination knows that, because it does not naturally grow like a tree does. It was also wrong about lots of other stuff, as I said in my previous round.

Arguments against God
I presented three. Pro ignored the third one entirely. Presumably it was just that good.

My first he also didn't really rebut, he simply affirmed his belief God can do the impossible. Therefore, as I said, it must be true that God can not exist (as opposed to the logically consistent statement that God might exist). This is, of course, impossible, but pro just affirmed that God does the impossible all the time.

Pro had more to say about my second argument, regarding evil. He concludes God will do so after the rapture. However, he has already conceded God is eternal and does not change his mind, regardless of whether the rapture has happened or not. Moreover, it would logically be more benevolent to bring about that rapture now even in that case. In fact, you'd expect a forgiving God to immediately forgive Adam for eating from the tree of knowledge and becoming slightly smarter than before.

A brief comment about his statement that "he will toss all the evil in hell good will be in heaven". Although I find the idea of God casually flicking evil away to be funny, I can't find any church that actually believes this. According to mainstream Christian theology, only God is good, we're all evil, but thanks to God's love and grace, we can be saved from eternal suffering anyway. As I explained before, that's thanks to Jesus dying for our sins on the holy cross, then rising from the dead to symbolize overcoming those sins. It would be kinda evil of God to flick away his own followers after promising them salvation. Christians tend to believe God is just, honest and benevolent. Pro's statement is wrong on so many levels, even from a Christian viewpoint.

Arguments against Jesus
Pro has about one sentence to say on this topic. In my view, this is not sufficient to overcome the hefty weight of evidence I presented.

All he says is: "alright con state something about other text about Jesus that are more reliable then the bible but does not show them or tells how there just as reliable." This is basically onus-pushing. It's pro's job to show why the Bible is the most reliable source about Jesus, not the other way around. But for the sake of fun, I'll do it anyway:
  • The other texts are less affected by copyists through the ages as they were less widespread. While the Bible, once compiled, was quickly copied to numerous other churches, which introduces the potential for scribes to make small errors, other texts were either forcibly kept secret (eg gnostic texts) or only kept in libraries (eg Josephus' writings). Although I can not claim that scribes did not alter these texts also, the potential for errors goes down as less errors are found.
  • The other texts are more numerous than the Christian ones and appear to present a compelling overall picture that Jesus may never have existed in physical form.
  • The rarity of evidence for Jesus outside the Bible is itself evidence against the very existence of Jesus. If Jesus did not exist we would not expect to find many independent works discussing Jesus. In fact this is what we have - only a small handful, written long after the fact.
  • The biblical texts themselves provide some evidence that Jesus is a myth, as I mentioned last round. 

Blind Watchmaker
Pro's counter-point is that I do not understand him, as he is not defending intelligent design. In his very next sentence, however, he states: "the creator wether it be god or chemicals wouldn't it need to be able to think..." - this is literally the meaning of intelligent design. To quote Wikipedia, which isn't a great source but will suffice for this purpose: "Intelligent design (ID) is a pseudoscientific argument for the existence of God, presented by its proponents as "an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins". Proponents claim that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." ID is a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, so it is not science." (source)

Effectively, this is all my opponent has offered. He has presented a series of claims that amount to evolution requiring a thinking process to direct it towards certain ends, such as owls with night vision or kangaroos with pouches. He even compares the process to humans in a jeans factory making jeans marketing decisions, much like people have thought about watches implying watchmakers for centuries. An alternative, presented by me and supported by the weight of scientific evidence, is that species have adapted by a process of natural selection. Pro has not answered my rebuttal.

For the sake of argument, however, I will try to explain the same point another way. If humans were suddenly forced to live underground, wouldn't we expect people with more resistant lungs to survive longer? Wouldn't we think that they'd have more children on average, as other people succumb to lung illnesses from living in dusty underground mines? If so, then adaption is virtually proven. It isn't an act of God that people would have lungs able to withstand underground conditions, it is that anyone who couldn't do so gradually died out, or married somebody who could.

Medicinal Plants
Ok so of all the points pro wanted to destroy me on, he chose this one that is hardly even relevant to the debate. Ok, bring it on!

First of all, pro cites a book but doesn't say what it's called. Its claims seem very dubious. The letter of James does not mention olive oil specifically, certainly not modern purified variants. Oleocanthal - which does not naturally occur in olives and is a by-product of the usual production process of extra-virgin olive oil - can also be created in numerous other natural and synthetic ways. When applied directly to cancer cells of a certain type grown in a lab, the scientists found the cells started dying quickly. This is the only illness it may be able to cure, unlike James' proclamation, but it is too early to tell because they haven't started trials on humans with cancer (currently they're doing mice-trials). There is no evidence of pro's claim that it is just as effective as chemo. The reason chemo has such severe side-effects is that it is a last-resort method to try to save somebody basically already dead. Nobody has ever been cured of cancer by drinking olive oil, and numerous people have been cured after several rounds of chemo. The method of administration will likely require ingestion as opposed to anointing as James suggests. At the same time, other compounds created in the process of cooking with oils, including some olive oils, have been proven to cause cancer and heart diseases, especially lipid peroxides. Scientists, not priests, discovered these properties of some oils. None of this is mentioned in the Bible, which is my point.

I want to take a break here and point out that fish oil was once promoted using the same language, not too long ago. That's because it has very similar active ingredients - never mind that it's basically entirely synthetic - but of course, the side effects thereof are now much better understood, after lots of people started overdosing to get maximum health benefits. I have no doubt we will look back on olive oil in a similar light soon. A much bigger effect size on cancer rate reduction can be observed, in every case, by simply eating a balanced diet. This includes fats like olive oil and the others pro mentions - in moderation they're probably health promoting, but they're not miracle cures either.

In my blind watchmaker point, I already addressed how plants can adapt. Being useful to humans is a good way to ensure survival. But more importantly, a chemical produced by a plant for one purpose does not necessarily have the same effects when used by humans. A good example of this are the numerous poisonous plants, which have no health-promoting properties. A few isolated exceptions notwithstanding of chemicals people can extract from plants which are helpful, most plants are actually very harmful when consumed. The fact that a small number of chemicals may improve health in specific circumstances when artificially extracted from a plant certainly does seem like random chance when compared to the overwhelming number of harmful chemicals. Outside of plants, most other chemicals on Earth and in the universe more broadly are also harmful to human life.

End Times
Con believes the end times are imminent. In the Bible it is clear that those who wrote the New Testament thought so too, almost 2000 years ago. Jesus himself said it would happen soon. Unfortunately time has not ended and Christians have been making false predictions about it for thousands of years. I don't know the future so I can't rebut the point, but my opponent also doesn't know the future so his point can hardly stand in the debate. This is true even if his "evidence" was accurate, which it isn't - signing a treaty is not the same as founding a nation, and I too can make a strange trumpet noise in the sky, along with numerous examples of natural and man-made phenomena.

And with that, I'll hand back over to my opponent.

The resolution is negated.

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-14 09:26:24
| Speak Round
crossedcrossed (PRO)
con seems to not understand my intelligent design argue point. i am terrible at explaining things so its probably my fault but i think i babied it down enough. i will try to explain it in two different ways.



knowledge is something only a being with intelligence can possess. so having knowledge means your intelligence. i assume you agree with this. but what if i told you that animals show that the creator has knowledge and is intelegence

example of how the creator must have had knowledge when creating the animal


god created the dog to shed its fur during the summer because he had knowledge that it is hot during the summer and getting rid of the fur would help cool the creature down
Fed up with excessive summer shedding? try adding this nutrient to your dog's food bowl ...


god created the dog to grow a thicker coat during the winter because he had knowledge that it is cold outside during the winter.








god created the owl with night vision  because he had knowledge that it is
dark during the night and would need a way to see

Night vision of the owl by mataleonerj on deviantart
cats have scratchy tongues god must have had knowledge that a normal tongue would not be able to scrape off all the meat on the carcass of a fish

this works with my other examples.





god gave bat the echo location and colored them black this proves that god had knowledge that you can not see well at night so he gave them echo location so they can get around without needing to see and that he had knowledge that black would make the bat easier to hide during the night so he colored them that












































2nd way to try to explain my intelligence design point if you did not understand


this is the definition of intelligence

The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.

‘an eminent man of great intelligence’

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/intelligence




how god apply s knowledge

lets start with an easy one to understand the night owl and night vision this how it shows intelligence by apply knowledge


 the creator would have had to have knowledge that the owl would live at night  and would have trouble seeing so he applied that knowledge to the owl and gave the owl night vision.

https://www.owlpages.com/owls/articles.php?a=5




god knew that it is dark outside and the owl would have trouble seeing. so to fix this he designed the owl with night vision.

Night vision of the owl by mataleonerj on deviantart


the creator must have had knowledge that dogs would be hot in the summer so when creating the dog he applied this knowledge  and gave the dog the ability to shed its fur to cool down during the summer.


Fed up with excessive summer shedding? try adding this nutrient to your dog's food bowl ...

god must have had knowledge that it is cold during the winter so god applied this knowledge and gave the dog a way to grow a winter coat for the winter so it can stay warm




cats


cats have scratchy tongues this proves that the creator is intelligent because he must have had knowledge  that it would be hard for the cats to lick off all the crud off its fur  so that it can have a shiny coat. if its tongue was soft it could not  get all the junk out of its fur it is like a brush. so the creator applied this knowledge and gave cats scratchy tongues so that it can groom its self

http://pawsonyourheart.com/facts-about-cats-why-do-cats-have-scratchy-tongues/






evolution is impossible

the people who created the movie genesis is history make a good point

dna has a a repairing system that helps prevent mutations
http://pediaa.com/how-does-dna-polymerase-prevent-mutations/

this is this guy who came up with the evolution is impossible because the dna repair try to prevent mutations
https://insight.org/about/chuck-swindoll


mitochondria eve

the mitochondria eve is the female that everyone can  trace there ancestor to. each time a mom gives birth she leaves record  of that mother in the mitochondria eve and the mothers before her.so we  can see the records of your mother mother mother mothers all the back to  one female and everyone can trace there ancestor to this one female.  scientist have tried to dismiss her as the first female and say but we  have bones of older humans but these bones have been proven false  because they were just a mixture of human bones with monkeys bones.

so  my theory is if we count every female in a persons family tree lets  say 20 years per female all the way back until we get to one female that  everyone can trace there past to we should be able to get an accurate  reading on how old the earth is.

and if everything is created intelligently then the mitochondria eve lady is the same age as the earth


evolution bone frauds

java man fraud
https://evolutionisntscience.wordpress.com/evolution-frauds/


lucy fraud
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1651429/posts



HELL
just want you to know that hell is a very real thing. i am just trying to warn you of its dangers



And I just want to mention this almost 1/3 of  the world believes in Jesus. for gods heaven and hell system to work it  would have to be most  of the planet and this is after you consider that this is a godless time  period. And places cut off from the world like north Korea.  Christianity is thriving.

https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...-are-persecuted-but-strong-in-faith/38410.htm

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...gious-group-but-they-are-declining-in-europe/


It was 1/3 but Christianity has had it really ruff lately


satan makes people rich than haunts them you know on how  almost all the haunted houses are big mansions. why is it always rich  people and not poor people i believe that this is because these houses  once belonged to people who had sold there souls to Satan in exchange  for wealth


god predicted the the earth floats in space years before  anyone had been to space. back in the day when everyone believed the  earth was flat


job:28 "He spreads out the northern skies over empty  space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

" https://biblehub.com/job/26-7.htm



starving yourself makes you smarter
and there health benefits to fasting should not starving yourself hurt you not heal you ?????? unless god designed it


https://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/health-benefits-of-fasting/


rebuttal


con states that the earth clearly needs couple billion years but i say to you if the earth is as old as the mitochondria eve lady then this would be proven false.


con says

believe that the gods are just demons pretending to be gods (not really like 2 Peter 2:4-12 says, then?)

that says nothing about false gods not being demons


demons or gods
con says


con says
've frequently argued before that even if there was a historical Jesus,
the evidence is pretty limited on who exactly he was. This is
significant because the Christian narrative depends on Jesus not only
existing, but dying for the salvation of mankind. Even if my opponent
could definitively prove Jesus' existence, Christians typically take it
on faith that Jesus died for the salvation of mankind, without further
good reasons why this should be the case. I would note the following:


as i mentioned before the dead sea scrolls back up the bible.
https://college.oneforisrael.org/dead-sea-scrolls-new-testament/


god telling man to produce life

con says
i will show you things that the bible has got right and that life is
created intelligently which is what i have spent so much time on. (and
the Bible never says God did this. I challenge pro to show me any Bible
translation that includes God saying the phrase "Let there be foxes!" -
instead, God tells the world to produce life-forms, rather than
designing them himself


god saying to go produce life meaning go have kids.

god said  he created the animals plants etc

animals
the fifth day. 

And God said, “Let the land produce
living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures
that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its
kind.” And it was so. God made the wild animals according to
their kinds
, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the
creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God
saw that it was good.

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in
our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the
sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild
animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

con said
alright what doctrine am i not following (with this burden-shifting statement alone, 1 Peter 3:15, apparently)


i think im doing fine



con  bible supports socialism

con said
that this bible quote prove that the bible supports socialism. but it only says money is evil and that those who seek riches are stupid.

6But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. 8But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. 9Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.






Medical plants

i was showing the accuracy of the bible medical advice and doing an intelligent design argument

god and impossible
My first he also didn't really rebut, he simply affirmed his belief God
can do the impossible. Therefore, as I said, it must be true that God
can not exist (as opposed to the logically consistent statement that God
might exist). This is, of course, impossible, but pro just affirmed
that God does the impossible all the time.

he is god he can do anything


stoning

the bible does not have anything about stoning atheist (except in passages like Deuteronomy 13:6-10)



this talks about nothing about atheist but those who worship other gods and make them leave Christianity causing them to burn forever. they stoned them so they would not send anyone else to hell which is worst then death.

which is worth someone leading people to hell

or someone going to hell by himself

stoning has nothing on hell fire


con says
  • Numerous books have got things right. The Illiad correctly described the position of Troy but that doesn't mean Zeus is real.


but a nation being born in one day is a little harder to predict



End Times
Con believes the end times are imminent.  In the Bible it is clear that those who wrote the New Testament thought  so too, almost 2000 years ago. Jesus himself said it would happen soon.  Unfortunately time has not ended and Christians have been making false  predictions about it for thousands of years. I don't know the future so I  can't rebut the point, but my opponent also doesn't know the future so  his point can hardly stand in the debate. This is true even if his  "evidence" was accurate, which it isn't - signing a treaty is not the  same as founding a nation, and I too can make a strange trumpet noise in  the sky, along with numerous examples of natural and man-made  phenomena.

you have to remember the original life span of humans before the flood was 1000 years before god changed it. so that's only 2 generations
https://askjohnmackay.com/life-spans-genesis-methuselah-lived-969-years-long-life-spans-real-years/


plus god said 1000 years is like a day to the lord
http://www.christiantruthcenter.com/one-day-is-with-the-lord-as-a-thousand-years-and-a-thousand-years-as-one-day/

but these sounds were  heard all over the earth.


Israel was not a nation may 13 1948. but became one on may 14 1948 because everyone was sorry for them after Hitler and they thought Israel needs a home back so hours later they declared Israel a nation.


con says
All he says is: "alright con state something  about other text about Jesus that are more reliable then the bible but  does not show them or tells how there just as reliable." This is  basically onus-pushing. It's pro's job to show why the Bible is the  most reliable source about Jesus, not the other way around. But for the  sake of fun, I'll do it anyway:
  • The other texts are less  affected by copyists through the ages as they were less widespread.  While the Bible, once compiled, was quickly copied to numerous other  churches, which introduces the potential for scribes to make small  errors, other texts were either forcibly kept secret (eg gnostic texts)  or only kept in libraries (eg Josephus' writings). Although I can not  claim that scribes did not alter these texts also, the potential for  errors goes down as less errors are found.
  • The other texts are  more numerous than the Christian ones and appear to present a  compelling overall picture that Jesus may never have existed in  physical form.
  • The rarity of evidence for Jesus outside the   Bible is itself evidence against the very existence of Jesus. If Jesus   did not exist we would not expect to find many independent works   discussing Jesus. In fact this is what we have - only a small handful,   written long after the fact.
  • The biblical texts themselves provide some evidence that Jesus is a myth, as I mentioned last round.


my reply show me these text that are more numerous then the christian one and show me how much more of them there are.
there more copy's of the bible how does this make it unreliable.and many of the books were written by Jesus disciples as i say in my last post.

the dead sea scrolls prove that the bible is what really happens and not these story's that cropped up
you  need to prove that these text are more numerous than others you don't  source thing how do i know what you say is true. these text could not be  real because you do not source your argument.
where are these text that say jesus never existed in physical form.
here  is no rarity of proof outside the bible. wrong dead sea scrolls. and  the book of Luke was written by Luke and his time with Jesus i know some  books were written hundreds of years later but many of the books in the  bible were written by the people who were with
Jesushttps://www.thoughtco.com/gospel-of-luke-701053
and i proved you wrong with those biblical text but i skipped some because lack of space i will do now


The gospels contain facts in contradiction with known archaeological,  geographical or other historical facts, such as the names of the consuls



i could not find anything about the consuls but this
https://www.thoughtco.com/who-were-the-roman-consuls-120821
and the bible is right there was a king David

maybe the had different names like Hitler was also known as the Führer


http://history-of-israel.org/history/chronological_presentation11.php


some of those points i think i missed were
The story of Jesus shares marked similarities with other myths known around the Roman empire at the time.

 probably because it happened and is true

con talks about how it would be more logical for god to just forgive adam and eve. but would that make them think it is ok to disobey god


con also talks about claims i have done nothing to prove Jesus existed. which is wrong i some of his prophesy's that have come true. national geographic people say he existed plus dead sea...

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-16 23:49:36
| Speak Round
adminadmin (CON)
This is the last round, excepting our summary speeches, so I want to use this opportunity to examine what pro has managed to prove to you today.

Evidence for God
Rather than provide evidence for God, pro has provided evidence for an intelligent designer. This is not what Christians believe. As I stated at the very beginning, Christians have a very defined, long list of criteria of what they believe God must be. This includes things like the eternity of God, the grace of God, the love of God, the power of God etc. However, pro has ignored this burden. They have only attempted to show that the life on this planet was intelligently designed. I pointed out numerous problems with this level of burden. Among them, I have argued that this does not preclude multiple intelligence - pro has given no reason to suppose the universe was created by one god alone. It does not prove this creator has any attributes of God, or is even around today. Ancient alien theorists, for example, also believe in "intelligent design," but they have an entirely different concept of it. Even if pro's argument is entirely successful, at best, all he has shown is that life was intelligently designed.

His "proof" consisted entirely of numerous images of animals that were well-adapted to their environment. He has made the argument, which he claims I simply do not understand, that these adaptions must have been the result of an intelligence. He literally started off this debate by saying that people have, for many years, wondered about these adaptions. So did some dude called Charles Darwin. He produced a perfectly good theory to explain it all centuries ago. In case judges have skipped high school science classes, I have also explained the basics of evolution and natural selection in this debate. When my opponent did not respond to this answer, given that he felt misunderstood, I re-explained it another way in round 2. Bolding the word "knowledge" in round three changes nothing for pro. His entire argument is that the creator must have had it, but this presupposes that there is a creator. That's pro's burden to prove. I feel pretty confident in resting my case on the merits of this alone, but I will continue.

What I've shown is why adaption through evolution, is different from creation. For example, that dog that grows more fur in winter, wasn't created to grow more fur in winter. It evolved to grow more fur because the dogs with less fur were not as successful at reproducing. Moreover, as I pointed out in round 2, pro has provided no evidence that the Christian God created dogs. I just double-checked my Bible, and nowhere does it state that God created dogs. To this, pro brings up Genesis 1. He even quotes it, so all judges can see for themselves that it does not state God directly came up with those creatures. It does say God created them according to their kinds, which means Christians believe (wrongly) that it was God who classified the animals into species. But it does not say that God thought up what kinds of animals there should be after he instructed the Earth to produce them (allegedly - I mean, who really knows, it's not like the authors of Genesis were around to check). This is all from a Christian fundamentalist perspective. What we then also have is concrete scientific evidence for evolution being a thing.

Pro broadly states DNA has a mechanism to prevent mutation. This is true, but it also doesn't mean mutations never happen. If mutations were impossible, there would be no cancer. The truth is there are numerous mutations even in the human genome. For example, I can't roll my tongue. Maybe you can. Appealing to the authority of Chuck Swindoll, who has no science background and is a Christian preacher, doesn't change that fact. If cells did not avoid mutation, things would mutate all the time and, probably, multi-cellular life would not survive very long. The vast majority of mutations, after all, are not helpful but incredibly harmful, despite what x-men would have you believe.

Vaguely, pro referenced the divine insight some Bible passages bring. I referenced how wrong they were too. I'll deal with the mention in Job that the Earth is suspended over nothing. Psalm 93:1 also states the Earth is immovable. On this basis, Christians until quite recently thought the Sun must go around the Earth, since the Earth must be still in one spot. I wonder if my opponent would be willing to defend this Biblical proposition? Daniel 8:10 states that stars can fall from the skies. Will my opponent defend this Biblical proposition? A little later in Job, chapter 18 verse 37, the sky is described as a large, hard vault - indeed, as hard as cast metal. I wonder if this is a Biblical proposition my opponent will defend? The same is in the Bible passage pro brought up - Genesis 1 clearly describes the sky as a firmament, separating the waters from the air. Here is the point - the Jews had no supernatural knowledge of the universe before their time. Pythagoras, the famous Greek mathematician and scientist, had already figured out the Earth was round and flying around in space when the book of Job was written. There is nothing to see here.

Everything else he states here is irrelevant to the debate. I don't care if he can get an accurate age for mitochondrial eve even if this was the same as the age of the earth, because I haven't seen the evidence for God. That's what he needs to prove. The garden of Eden story etc entirely depends on God's existence. If he cannot show God's existence, his entire argument crumbles. Likewise, I don't care if 1/3 of the Earth believes in God. I don't care if literally everyone else on the planet believes in God. My opponent has still not proven God's existence. I don't care whether hell is a real place - it is immaterial to the issue of whether God exists, which pro has not proven (along with the righteous judgment aspect, which he has forgotten about since I brought it up in round 1).

Evidence for Jesus
Pro wanted me to give him a list of how many ancient texts are against a wholly material Jesus. Well let me give you a brief list:

The gospel of Judas, the gospel of Peter, the gospel of Basilides, the gospel of the Hebrews, the gospel of truth, the gospel of the saviour, the testimony of truth, the letter of Peter to Philip, the gnostic apocalypse of Peter, the prayer of the apostle Paul, concept of our great power, the Tripartite Tractate, the epistle to Rheginus, the fundamental epistle, the teachings of Silvanus, the acts of Thomas, the acts of John, the holy book of the great invisible spirit, the second treatise of the great Seth, the sophia of Jesus Christ, the acts of Peter and the twelve, "the thunder; perfect mind", the Trimorphic Protennoia, the Epistle of Barnabas...

The list does go on, but the point is simple: there's a lot. The early church was super concerned with exactly what the nature of Christ was. It wasn't until the council of Nicea that an orthodox position was really formed. Some believed Jesus' mind was divine but his body was physical. Others thought his body didn't resurrect and that he lived on as a symbol or idea. Others thought that's all he was all along. Some thought he was partly physical, but he was basically a shape-shifter and kept changing because of his divine nature. Some thought he was a kind of hologram of Seth from the book of Genesis. Some thought a flying cross made of light kind of floated beside him, and chatted with him about God and stuff (seriously), and some thought that this floating cross was the messiah. Some even thought instead that Jesus himself transformed into a flying shining talking cross after he died and flew around the sky for a bit. Yeah, early Christian heresies sure were weird! And these are just some of the ones that have somehow survived over 1500 years of the church trying their best to totally destroy them forever. How many more don't we know about?

Let's talk about how many were written by Jesus disciples. In those times it was common to attribute writing to other people. Numerous books of the bible - revelation, the epistle to the Hebrews, both letters of Peter to name a few - patently avoid taking a position on the topic, which is especially surprising for Peter, who was said to be best buds with Jesus (many non-canonical gospels dispute this). Only John, in his second letter, is willing to say "nope Jesus absolutely 100% existed as a human being, not some weird cosmological space talking cross stuff" (paraphrasing). In his gospel he makes a point of especially criticizing Peter as a total failure and occasional Jesus-denier. Paul broadly agrees, but he's in an odd position because the only time he saw Jesus, he reported just seeing a very bright light, not a human figure. In an apparent (and sort of hilarious) attempt to show they were almost as cool as Paul, numerous Christians then followed his lead and reported various bright lights as speaking to them.

Even the gospel authors are annoyingly vague to the point. John's opening is especially contested, because Jesus is literally characterized as a light. This leaves just Mark, which is the basis for Luke and Matthew. And all of the gospels have numerous errors that prove they were not written by eye-witnesses. One example is when Jesus is questioned about whether a woman who divorces her husband to sleep with somebody else commits adultery. This would be a valid question literally anywhere in Rome except in Judea, where it was impossible for a women to legally divorce. The best authorities conclude that Mark was writing at the third or fourth remove from Jesus, while the author of John was at least the second (ie Jesus was a friend of a friend). The point is this - there is nothing to suggest that the Bible has the most accurate information about Jesus.

Pro especially contends Luke was a great and careful historian, which is funny, because Luke makes some of the funniest mistakes. His gospel literally states that Nazareth is on a hill (it's not), and that the sermon on the mount was actually delivered on a flat plain. He also copies almost everything wrong in Mark's gospel (which there's a lot of, because Mark was not from the area and appears to know little of Jewish law or geography). In fact there's little evidence Luke even wrote the gospel of Luke! That wasn't established until about 200 years later by Irenaeus.

The dead sea scrolls only prove the Bible is old. Nobody contests that, as I've said before. A lot. National Geographic also isn't exactly divinely inspired truth.

The other myths that sound similar to Jesus cannot all be true, like those of Mithra, Dionysus and Osiris, who all share many of the key legendary figures of the Jesus narrative (virgin birth, persecution, do some miracles, die, resurrect). If they were it undermines Jesus' whole purpose.

From a Christian perspective, everyone disobeys God anyway, and that's ok so long as you believe in Jesus (apparently).

No response to my numerous other examples of analysis to this point, so I just extend everything else I've said. :)

Evidence for a doctrinal position
Pro states 2 Peter 2:4-12 says nothing about demons pretending to be Gods. Let's fact-check with a reading - 2 Peter 2:4 to begin with:

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

These "demons" in a Christian view are not sitting around on Mount Olympus hoping people will worship them. They're in hell, which is a prison, all chained up, and awaiting trial. This is followed by a couple of verses of examples where people make their OWN decisions to follow or not follow God. In fact, let's check 2 Peter 2:11-12:

Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

So these "demons" are not rebelling against God the same way that the sinners are. Indeed, the passage makes it clear that sinners are committing a much worse sin, because the demons will not accuse God of stuff, like how I accuse God of not existing. 2 Peter 2:5-10 make it clear that there is a way, through God, to avoid this fate. If demons were pretending to be God, this would not make any sense. Simply stating that "that's not what 2 Peter says" is not only a poor argument for pro's position, but actually kind of annoying. I happen to know the Bible very well. Even so, he must show not only the correct interpretation of the Bible, but that his interpretation can be considered morally good, since Christians believe that God is good. Likewise, saying "I think I am doing fine" does not invalidate the Bible's prohibition on Christians shifting the burden of proof in a debate, something pro literally has done several times and won't admit.

One last thing - pro says contentment is good but socialism is evil. The Bible also states it is good to pay taxes. It does not say anywhere that it's necessary to earn whatever you get. Government hand outs should therefore be met with contentment by my opponent. :D

Note all these are just his responses to my case. He has not built up his own case in any way in this debate.

Conclusion
Pro has failed to make an original case. He wanted to argue that there was an intelligent creator. He hasn't shown that, and even if he did, he didn't show the creator is God, and even if he did, he didn't show why this God is necessarily a Christian God. I've also made a number of rebuttals. Hopefully people liked them. If even one of them is ok, then I win this debate. If pro has not completely proven their case beyond your reasonable doubts, I win this debate. If pro's case does not address the entirety of the resolution, I win this debate.

The resolution is negated.

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-23 09:51:21
| Speak Round
adminadmin (CON)
To be honest, I think my summary in my last round was pretty sweet. I wish my opponent good luck in the judging :)
Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-29 21:54:43
| Speak Round
crossedcrossed (PRO)
i would like to thank con for his kindness and i wish him the best of luck.

i'm going to try one last time to explain what i have been trying to say.summarize it if you will and clear up cons last points

what do all of these have in common the creator knew that cats would have trouble cleaning there fur and eating all the flesh off a so he created the kitty with scratchy tongues that make it easier to clean the fur and lick all the meat off the fish bones.

humans have trouble brushing there hair so they created hairbrushes with little bristles that make it easier to get all the gunk out of your hair

the creator gave the mountain goats feet that make it easier to climb mountain so he designed them with feet that make it easier to climb.


the car has round wheels because the creator knew that square wheels do not roll


the creator made the chipmunk with elastic cheeks so that it can carry nuts


the creator of the balloon uses helium instead of air because helium floats and it floating would make a better toy



firstly cats without scratchy tongue would not die out simply because they can not lick there fur clean and fish bones clean. so were are all the non scratchy tongue animals. and what do all these examples have in common





i have tried to prove Jesus existence in 3 ways throught the debate



the bible prophesy's that have come true

example

Israel being reborn in one day. which Israel became a nation.the other way



i tried to prove Jesus existence was the dead sea scrolls which say tells the same story that the king James says so the oldest record of these events say the exact same thing that our bible says. so all those other stories that con points out do not hold water.



the third way iv shown that Jesus exist is that life is intelligently created


cons huge mistake


con says that genesis does not say god created life. he then says that i prove this and reads the first bit of it. and says see it does not say it. pro nicely posted it and it does not say god created animals. but then you look up and it does say that and i even bold it



other stuff con says that these adaptions must have been the result of an intelligence.


no i say that animals being equipped to live in there environment is proof of intelligent design.it proves that they were  not just randomly placed on the earth but that the creator specifically created them to live in there environments. the polar bear is white because the creator knew that white fur blend well into the snow adaptations are not fact its a theory. evolution is a theory. the only fact is that polar bears are white because they needed to live in the snow. i say that this proves that the creator was aware when creating the animals and knew that the creature he was making was going to need to hide so he designed the creature with white fur



con said What I've shown is why adaption through evolution, is different from creation. For example, that dog that grows more fur in winter, wasn't created to grow more fur in winter. It evolved to grow more fur because the dogs with less fur were not as successful at reproducing.a dog not being able to shed is still able to reproduce. and simply


not having the ability to shed during the summer does not mean that the species will die out it just means there going to be hot during the summer.


con says nope Jesus absolutely 100% existed as a human being



the new testimony is about god implanting his seed in a woman and Jesus comes out so he is a human. doing stuff and dieing on the cross. they don't have to say that he is a human being




fallen angle locked up forever.


the book of Enoch which was taken out of the bible says that those are the watcher



. he is only doing that to the watcher which is a specific group of fallen angles

http://hiddenbible.com/enoch/online.html/



chapter 5 of enoch 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men 3 and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not 4 indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations 5 not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves 6 by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount unto Michael:



'Go, bind Semjaza and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves 12 with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is 13 for ever and ever is consummated. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: and 14 to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed


i am just speculating. the bible says whoever add stuff to this book shall have all the plaques in the book so i am just speculating. do not take this as fact or anything i say that way so do not take anything on this subject as word if i screw up i get the thousands of plaques depicted in bible do not take anything as fact


http://hiddenbible.com/enoch/online.html/dead

sea scrolls back up king James bible books your other story's don't as far as i know. i don't think you realize why the scrolls are important


con says Pro has failed to make an original case. He wanted to argue that there was an intelligent creator. He hasn't shown that, and even if he did, he didn't show the creator is God, and even if he did, he didn't show why this God is necessarily a Christian God i showed that life was created intelligently then showed the stuff in the bible that backs it up


first there is a god and i make the case its the christian one



con said From a Christian perspective, everyone disobeys God anyway, and that's OK so long as you believe in Jesus


you have to follow gods law to or else he won't consider you saved.



con says




One last thing - pro says contentment is good but socialism is evil. The Bible also states it is good to pay taxes. It does not say anywhere that it's necessary to earn whatever you get. Government hand outs should therefore be met with contentment by my opponent. :D


socialism is not truly free, someone has to pay for it


con says
No response to my numerous other examples of analysis to this point, so I just extend everything else I've said. :)because that response was meant for all of them


all those example depict something that would be illogical if there were not an all powerful god



and since the book is about an all powerful god they are perfectly reasonable
and lastly con points out a bunch of things in the bible that have been covered by others


One example is when Jesus is
questioned about whether a woman who divorces her husband to sleep with
somebody else commits adultery.
here

https://youtu.be/JtmmpE8y0tA?t=204

and lastly shooting stars exist

earth fixed and immovable

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q7.htm



Nazareth on hill

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/4-29.htm


 humans in the bible use to live to 1000 so 2000 thousand years is only 2 generations a thousand years is like one day to the lord. so he means it when  he says coming soon

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-04-05 08:56:06
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
adminadmin
Not entirely convinced my opponent's arguments in this debate weren't sponsored by some alternative medicine center.
Posted 2019-04-15 02:51:38
Phos HalasPhos Halas
Oh boy....
Posted 2019-03-18 11:48:28
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2019-04-12 23:25:28
dpowell3543Judge: dpowell3543    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
Though I didn't agree with Con and was disappointed that he didn't really give us Christian's much benefit of the doubt, I'm still giving them my vote. This is simply because, all of Pro's arguments in this debates are irrelevant to the point and do nothing to prove the point of the debate. A bunch of animals having features and plants having some theoretical, medicinal qualities does no prove, in any way, that there are good reasons to believe in Christianity. Con easily shut down all of Pro's arguments, which they proceeded to repeat throughout all of their rounds. Pro added little to nothing new to the debate and provide invalid, irrelevant sources to back them up. Con had it real easy with this debate, when proceeded to provide much more for his side than was really necessary, which I appreciate as a reader/judge.

Feedback:
admin: You did a great job. You went all out and you got your point across. I just hope you don't really have such a negative view on us Christians. The only thing I can think of is provide sources. Give your arguments some more backbone. You may not have needed it, but it can't hurt.

crossed: Again. Work on your grammar, stop repeating your arguments over and over and actually focus on the topic of the debate. Try actually rebutting your opponent. An easy rebuttal for their claim that Jesus is possibly a myth would be the fact that just a few years ago, archaeologists and/or historians discovered the cloth Jesus wore when he was entombed before he rose again. They also performed forensic tests to further prove that it could possibly be Jesus. Also, even history books acknowledge the existence of Jesus, though they call him Jesus of Nazarene. Now before you go do this debate again, please note that there are many Christians who acknowledge the fact of evolution to be true.
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 3 rounds
  • 15000 characters per round
  • Reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds means forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 1 week
  • Time to vote: 2 weeks
  • Time to prepare: None
1. Both sides must have fun
2. Judges must be amazing