The Instigator
jessij
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Gileandos
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

Are We Going To Hell?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/3/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,197 times Debate No: 17383
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

jessij

Pro

This argument is not to be taken entirely seriously. Potential contenders, please have a sense of humor.

So, are we all going to Hell?
Gileandos

Con


I can adamantly attest that we are all not going to Hell.



Historical View:


Throughout History there have been countless people who have never set foot into Hell, Norway.


They in fact, did not know or even believe Hell to exist!



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




Personal View:


I personally will never visit this tourist trap!




Comprehensive View:


My opponent would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that “we are all going to hell”.


I do not believe that my opponent could speak for the free will of all people on earth to make such a broad assessment as that.



Conclusion:


Though it is quite nice during the summer, it is a horrible place when Hell freezes over. Additionally, I believe that attractions such as below are far to limiting in its ability to attract “we all” as a destination:

Hell currently has a grocery store, gas station, and a retirement home. Until late 1995, the European route E6 highway was aligned through Hell and across the Hell bridge to Sandfærhus (nearby Trondheim Airport, Værnes). The new road now goes around the village.”



I thank my opponent for this debate and I wish him luck in the following round.
Debate Round No. 1
jessij

Pro

First up, I'm a girl. Just thought I'd put that out there, haha.

I concede to your argument relating to Hell, the geographical location.
However, in relation to Hell, the place of eternal torment, if we take into account every religion, then we are all damned.

Almost every religion believes in a sort of Heaven/Hell concept - a place of eternal peace and reward, and a place of eternal torment. Many of these religions also state that if you do not follow their beliefs, you will be subjected to eternal torment.
So, since there are more than 2 religions in existence, and it's highly likely that nobody follows every single religion, from a logical standpoint we are all going to Hell.
Gileandos

Con

I am glad to know that my opponent is a “her” rather than a “him”! Realize that my opponent brought her gender into the debate not I!


The fact it is a “she” rather than a “he”, assures the veracity of my viewpoint. As we all know women are very limited in their capacity to determine what is true. Her hormones at any point in time can completely impede her judgement.


Now readers, do not be concerned that I am a sexist. My wife completely affirms that indeed girls are unstable. One moment rational human being next moment… chaos!


Sadly, as you can see, this has already happened.


We are having a great dialogue over an absurd notion that “we all” would go to Hell (horrible place it is) and she brings up a place of eternal torment!


I am glad that she did indeed concede the debate but…


It does not stop there, she then goes on to claim that indeed all religions are true and all religions place of eternal torment, will affect all of us! That is just crazy!


Contention 1:


Imagine Yama is offended by the “good souls” of the Christian God Yahweh. Is my opponent indeed suggesting that Yama will attack Yahweh to steal the souls in Heaven to ensure they are punished to the satisfaction of the Hindu religion?


Absurd.



Lets just allow the “logic” play out as my opponent suggests.


Let’s review the claim that indeed we are open to the punishment assured by all hells.


Let’s imagine if Yama did indeed attempt to assert his punishment on the souls of Yahweh the Christian God.


Fade to dream scene with the fuzziness remaining around the edges…


Yama comes to the gates of Yahweh’s Heaven after the end of the world (roughly December 21st 2012).


“You are The Peter?” Yama asks of St. Peter.


“Yes I am and you are Yama, and you are slated to go to Hell according to The Book of Life”. Responds St. Peter without even looking at Yama out of his book.


Yama looks incredibly offended “How do you know my name and I do not submit to you. I am here to collect all of the souls in Heaven that should be in my Hell.”


St. Peter responds “Yahweh is omniscient and He knows everybody’s name and everybody’s deeds. You did not meet God’s qualifications to get into Heaven so you are going to Hell.”


Yama gets angrier. “I am the ruler in Hell, I choose who goes and who does not go. I have armies at my behest..”


St. Peter interepts “ They also are going to Hell btw.. please continue”


“How dare you. I will decide who does and does not go to Hell. I am here to collect the souls that go to Hell.” Yama starts towards the Gate.


St. Peter steps in his way after looking in his book the entire time to ask “Let me get this straight. You, Yama, are going to bust your way into Heaven, the Throne room of a Metaphysical Omnimax being and tell this being who has the following abilities:


1) Able to speak the entire universe into existence


2) Is completely Metaphysical and unable to be seen, touched, destroyed etc..


3) Able to divide himself into three persons yet maintain a single essence


4) Able to allow his person to become physical but allow his essence to remain metaphysical


5) Know the thoughts and motivations of everything in the universe


6) Has zero limitation as to time (Imagine his one second punch, in physical form of course!)


7) Able to speak Legions upon Legions of little gods, demi-gods, powerful beings, into existence within the blink of an eye.


8) Able to resurrect anyone that has died.


9) Able to regenerate faithful humans into beings more powerful than any other being in the known universe



And your grand idea is to stroll up to the person who has been put in charge of determining your housing arrangement for all of eternity and attempt to break in?” St. Peter pulls out his infamous sword and states with a smile “Good luck”.


*******************************************************************************************


You can see the absurdity of proposing that somehow logic dictates that all religions have an equal claim to their version of hell.



Conclusion:


Though most would find the veracity religions hard to pick between, I have not found it that hard.


This is the process:


Determine if the supernatural is possible


Determine if the omnimax being is possible through scientific validation


- (I have through math both validated the omnimax and the supernatural)


Eliminate religions that develop complexity outside of the omnimax


This should bring you to two religions. Pursue those Gods and discover which answers personally. (I have personally encountered Jesus)




Thus you will find that indeed that logically “we all” are not going to Hell.


My opponents notion that all religions could somehow be true does not play out in practicality.


I am certain I am not going to Hell.


I am very very uncertain for my opponent.


I would not mind having a serious debate on the process of discovering which religion is indeed the “True” religion. After all I wish that no single person would go to Hell and I personally have the ability to convince a large number of people that indeed I have the True religion if they are able to evaluate science and supernaturalism appropriately.

Debate Round No. 2
jessij

Pro

I concede to your argument, simply because I loved the scene at Heaven's gates.

You win, bro.
Gileandos

Con

I thank you for yielding the debate.

Please do let me know if you would like to have a serious debate on the "determining the veracity of a religion over all others".
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Kinesis 5 years ago
Kinesis
And here I though Pro was going to ruin this debate with an overly serious response. :P
Posted by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
I will accept, please change rounds to 3 total and indefinite voting period.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
If Hell's underground, and we're still on earth, then how can we be going to hell?

That is to presuppose that hell is within the earth...
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
jessijGileandosTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: "I concede to your argument" - Pro
Vote Placed by GMDebater 5 years ago
GMDebater
jessijGileandosTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
jessijGileandosTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wins argument for obvious reasons. I gave Pro 1 point for being subjected to Cons sexist remarks, although it was funny.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
jessijGileandosTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.