The Instigator
Terefall
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
headphonegut
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Agnosticism/Ignosticism is more sensible than any form of religion or theistic view.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/11/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,637 times Debate No: 10427
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Terefall

Pro

The debate will begin in round two. I want to keep this debate fast paced.
headphonegut

Con

can you clarify the resolution (definitions)

How is it more sensible (agnosticism/Ignosticism to "any form of religion or theistic view)?

what is a "theistic view"?

It is the buren of the Aff. to provide proof to how the resolution is true
Debate Round No. 1
Terefall

Pro

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Google is your friend.

I would like to start off the debate by saying that in no way I am rebellious, amoral or indecent. Just because I don't believe in a God does not make me a horrible person. If you have this belief, you must think that Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Lance Armstrong, and many others are rebellious, amoral or indecent. A disbelief in God, according to many, is not always out of rebellion. It's simply a more intelligent and reasonable view.

My first contention - Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
We all have heard this quote at some point, and this contention will be short and sweet.
It seems as science progresses, Christianity weakens. Atheism/Agnosticism is a more dominant today than it has ever been. It is simply because more non-theistic evidence for evolution and the origin of the universe are being discovered.

Now, the non-theistic Big Bang theory is more or less an extraordinary claim. Well, we seem to have extraordinary evidence.
http://www.talkorigins.org...

If you can show me adequate evidence for a supernatural being, please do.

Now for my second contention - Christianity is like every other religion.
Why are Christians so full of their religion? What makes Christians so different than Muslims, Scientologists or Satanists?
ALL of them make claims like:
-Splitting a sea in two
-Healing the deaf and blind in an instant
-Loading every animal species in an arc that must be ridiculously large
-Coming back from the dead
-Angels flying around killing every first-born
-Talking bushes on fire
etc etc etc

Do we see events like this every day? No. According to the Bible, these were every day things.

Contention Three - Prayer is weak.
From my point of view, Prayer is simply doing nothing but feeling you're doing something.
People sit on the couch or drive to the Church and pray, but what seems to make more of a difference, by common sense, is getting up and actually doing something to help. If a loved one was dying, it would clearly make more of a difference and be much more of an effort to help to go research the disease and try to find a cure. The effort is what matters.
headphonegut

Con

Ok his introduction is irrelevant. My opponent is basing his contentions on peoples belief in god and religion, but in his contentions he doesn't disccus the and since his failure to do so I will for the sake of keeping this debate intresting refute and I ask My opponent again How agnosticism/ignosticsim is more sensible than ANY FORM OF RELIGION or theistic view

negation contention 1- this contention is his oppinion he says "as science progresses, Christianity weakens yet christianity is one of the three major religions. "agnosticism is a MORE dominant today than it has ever been" no think about that does that seem right I would like to know when Atheism/Agnosticism became or went above Eastern orthodox, muslim,catholic,christian religion? because my opponent is implying that agnosticism is higher than and if he means that there has only been a slight raise in percentage or high even then it is still not above the 4 religions stated here. and so Ignosticism is irrelevant now is that is now it's atheism or has Ignosticism stayed the same

2n1my opponent does show what he says is extraordinary so I ask him why isn't the bigbangTHEORY accepted?
since in the end it is still a theory and the so called evidence amounts to nothing.

3n1 I will assume that he means deity according to his definition now
now first we need to know what we mean by proof and I will say it will be the science sense now although logically and scientificly some may say god does not exsist first the non-exsisten of god can't be proven for one cannot prove a universal negative, but the exsistence of god can be proven The universe for there to be amazing things such as the big bang there has to be a creator logically for this. Jesus Christ life was well known documented ( life, death, birth, ressurection,) we even use the day of his birth as a basis for our calender jesus miracles were seen by many and documented redundantly for future corroboration was seen by at least 500 people after his ressurection his transfiguration was seen by peter,james,and john and his wisdom was astounding remember people were still developing changing going through evolution (darwins theory he is a christian)

negating C2- if christianity is like every other religion then why are there many different religions well it's not only if they believe in God it's their bible,koran,and several others religious books. christians are so fulol of their religion because they have faith and believe in god. well not only the names but their culture their traditions their view of how god is real and if jesus was the messaih and worshipping and the time that they worship how they worship and where they worship. their religious leader and how the leader interprets their religious book examlple a preist gives a sermon on genisis now he can't read the whole dam* genisis chapter, but he can tell you how he interpreted it and you'll believe him because he has studied the bible for 12 yrs. basically this contention is just lashing out at religions and his misinterpretaion of the bible wich I assume is interpreting incorrectly.

1NC2- no you are wrong it's accumulative it happens over time/happened over time

NC3- "MY POINT OF VIEW" no evidence

next time if you wish to argue the exsistence of god please put that as the resolution because throughout the case you said absolutely nothing pertaing to the resolution just that your presentation was based on religion and god and in case you forgot the resolution here it is

next time please show and provide proof to how the resolution is true.

I await my opponents response and thank you for making this debate.
Debate Round No. 2
Terefall

Pro

Terefall forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

I eagerly await my opponents rebuttal
Debate Round No. 3
Terefall

Pro

Terefall forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

headphonegut forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Terefall

Pro

Terefall forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

headphonegut forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
NOT way off topic
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
somewhat off topic
Posted by Terefall 7 years ago
Terefall
Atheism is not included in the end part of the resolution. It's only theistic.
Posted by Rainsborough 7 years ago
Rainsborough
Agnosticism and Theism are not neccesarily mutually exclusive. Theism or Atheism deals with belief and Gnosticism and Agnosticism deals with knowledge. They are different things.
No votes have been placed for this debate.