The Instigator
lord_megatron
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
Sunfire315
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Agnostic (pro) vs any other stand on religion(con)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
lord_megatron
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 392 times Debate No: 91099
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (17)
Votes (3)

 

lord_megatron

Pro

Agnostic= a person who believes that not enough is known of the existence or nature of God and refuses to make a stand on it. I think agnostic is one of the most logical stands. If you want the definition to be changed, please mention in the comments.
Sunfire315

Con

I will take the stance of Christianity.
Debate Round No. 1
lord_megatron

Pro

Very well then. I think agnostic is the best religious stand is there is not enough data to declare whether God exists or not. It could be possible that there is a God who just created the universe and left it to us, and now doesn't exert any influence whatsoever. However, the idea of a being living in an unknown realm is just a bit hard to believe, especially with few evidences to prove that he is there, and therefore agnostic is the best stand. Christianity may or may not be true, who knows whether Christ was a mortal or a God, or a messenger? As for the Bible, it is a book written by mortal hands, and a mortal mind can easily fall to illusions. Waiting for con's points as to why christianity should be a better and more logical stand than agnosticism.
Sunfire315

Con

Sunfire315 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
lord_megatron

Pro

Come on why forfeit I want some good debate. Anyways to conclude vote for PRO
Sunfire315

Con

Sunfire315 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
lord_megatron

Pro

There is very little proof as to whether Christ was only a man or a "Messenger of God". The bible is written by human hands and is an opinion rather than concrete evidence. Many other religions have similarly weighted proof, yet each one of them tries to discredit the existence of another. Agnosticism is the best stand among all the religious stands as it gives you a neutral position over God, and in case God does exist, he won't have reason to smite you. On the other hand, if you take a affirmative religious stand and it is wrong, you won't have a pleasant afterlife. If there is afterlife at all.
Sunfire315

Con

Sunfire315 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Sunfire315 9 months ago
Sunfire315
At least that's what I had at the time
Posted by Sunfire315 9 months ago
Sunfire315
It is still possible that an intervening God exists in this world, not just some deistic background God.
If there was a being who could create the entire universe, then it would be child's play for Him to intervene in it.

There are numerous constants and quantities, which if even slightly different: would make the existence of life impossible.

A mortal mind can be deceived, but if you reject the bible because of this you might as well reject every other book written by human hands: because they were written by men too. The bible was written by man, but it was divinely inspired.

My argument for last round
Posted by lord_megatron 9 months ago
lord_megatron
@Boneyard As a former atheist I say atheism is wrong as if take God as a creator of the universe, it is possible that there is a being who created the universe and now is in stasis. But I get you
Posted by Sunfire315 9 months ago
Sunfire315
I haven't forfeited the debate.
Posted by Sunfire315 9 months ago
Sunfire315
Really? You have found absolutely no evidence for God?
Posted by Boneyard 9 months ago
Boneyard
Agnostic is unnecessary. Do we have any evidence for a gods existence and influence, no. An honest position would be, after considering all available evidence and finding none I announce my atheism. Anything else is faith.
Posted by Sunfire315 9 months ago
Sunfire315
Agnosticism vs Christianity is a bit vague. Are we debating their truth, or something else, like their viability as a way to live? Or all of the above?
Posted by vi_spex 9 months ago
vi_spex
there is no knowledge of unknown claims, knowledge is known
Posted by vi_spex 9 months ago
vi_spex
on his mission to end every last transformer, he bestows upon us from the sky, the rain of doom as he himself stands with the last of the transformers.. the end
Posted by Danielle 9 months ago
Danielle
Agnosticism is a knowledge claim (I don't KNOW whether or not God exists).
Atheism is a belief claim (I don't BELIEVE God exists).

They are not incompatible. In fact you are probably both. You can be a/n

gnostic theist - I believe God exists and I know God exists
gnostic atheist - I don't believe God exists and I know God doesn't exist
agnostic theist - I don't know if God exists but I believe God exists
agnostic atheist - I don't know if God exists but I don't believe God exists
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 8 months ago
Wylted
lord_megatronSunfire315Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit
Vote Placed by fire_wings 8 months ago
fire_wings
lord_megatronSunfire315Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: ffety ff
Vote Placed by mall 9 months ago
mall
lord_megatronSunfire315Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: It's agreed that agnosticism is the most logical because it's the most non belief system out there so to speak . Therefore it wouldn't classify as a religion due to its without belief criteria. The criteria is all about knowledge or not having knowledge . You can't expect religion to bring you evidence , it's more belief based . One can expect proof and get very little or enough to convince them. Their expectations will be disappointed. So agnosticism is nor a belief or non belief but whether to know or not of a god truly existing