The Instigator
Pro (for)
14 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Assuming the Bible is a Book of Rules, it Teaches Predestination

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/22/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,739 times Debate No: 6317
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (16)
Votes (3)




I will allow my opponent to make the first arguments, but I would like to point out that this is simply a debate of doctrine. Not about whether or not the Bible is a rule book. Assuming that the Bile IS in fact a rule book should in no way affect his arguments in this particular debate. Think of it as whether or not the Bible implies predestination if it suits you better. Either way the debate will turn out the same way.

I Affirm that the Bible teaches that some people are predestined to Heaven, and some people are predestined to Hell.




[Introduction and Greeting]

My opponent and I know each other to a degree, and I would like again like to welcome him to another debate on religion.
I hope to keep the following respectful and as polite as possible.

This debate operates under two very false and very large assumptions which I personally take great issue with.
1. The false notion that the Bible "teaches" and not that God teaches.
2. The false notion that the Bible is merely a book of rules which to me is near blasphemous.

[Definitions- as defined by my opponent in the comments section]

Predestination: The belief that God, before the foundations of the universe, chose some to be holy and blameless in His sight out of the riches of His mercy, and that some were chosen to go to Hell.

[Definitions - as defined by me]

Heaven - A place where God resides, where those who have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, have asked forgiveness for their sins, and have exhibited the fruits of the spirit enter for reward. A place where God is constantly worshipped. "Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward [is] great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets." (Luke 6:23)

Hell - A place described usually as a lake of sulfur. A place of torments, of suffering, sorrow, and "eternal punishment"
A place of torments -
"And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom" (Luke 16:23).

[Opponent's Resolution]

The Bible teaches that some people are predestined to Heaven, and some people are predestined to Hell.

[Refutations and Arguments]

As many Christians know, things changed after Jesus was sacrificed on the cross. Suddenly a link from earth and heaven was connected. Through Jesus Christ, everyone can enter into the Kingdom of heaven. Rules changed, old laws were struck down.

Essentially it is this.

Argument Base 1

1. Jesus became humans link with heaven
2. Jesus is God, God is Jesus. Neither contradict each other. They are one.
3. Jesus clearly is the only one who judges who goes to heaven and who goes to hell.
4. The old Covenant (laws) were rescinded when the new covenant was made.
5. The apostles are not the equivalent of Jesus.
6. Thus sin, and admittance to Heaven is only determined by Jesus.
7. Thus only direct quotes by Jesus are evidence for predestination
8. Jesus does not give any evidence for predestination.

Argument Base 2

1. Sentencing people to eternal punishment before their existence, clearly, is not love.
2. God's love is unconditional, everlasting, God loved us before we were made.
3. God is defined as being love.
4. Jesus said every commandment is based off of either:
"You shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart, with your whole soul, and with all your mind" (Deuteronomy 6:5).
"This is the greatest and first commandment. The second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' (Leviticus 19:18). All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." Matthew 22:40
5. God wants everyone to go to heaven
6. Thus the Bible does not teach predestination

[Scriptual Evidence Supporting Bases]

>>Argument Base 1
1. John 14:6
2. John 10: 30-33
3. Romans 5
4. Hebrews 8:13
5. Clearly.
6. John 14:6
7. Logic
8. Logic

>>Argument Base 2
1. Clearly.
2. Romans 8:35-39
John 3:16
Romans 5:8
3. 1 John 4:8
4. Matthew 22:40
5. 1 Timothy 2:3-4
2 Peter 3:9 -9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness.
He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
6. Logic

I await my opponents support and proof of his resolution using direct quotations from Jesus.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank my opponent for accepting my challenge, and trust it will turn out to be the debate I intended it to be.

Moving on, I will begin by refuting my opponents arguments.

"As many Christians know, things changed after Jesus was sacrificed on the cross. Suddenly a link from earth and heaven was connected."

You are correct in saying that things changed, but the change was that God gave all men access to His throne room through prayer, and confessions no longer had to be done through a priest. Remember, the veil in the Holy of Holies, when it was torn down the middle? The significance of this was that being in the very presence of God Himself was no longer limited to once a year for the High Priest only, but access was given to every man.

The need for blood sacrifices also changed, but that has nothing to do with the debate at hand.

Your argument bases are weak at best. It seems to be some sort of homemade logic, but really nothing more. You say in them that I am not allowed to quote anything but words from the mouth of Jesus, but I will not have that rule put on me, nor will I abide by it. I will use EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING I want out of the Holy, inspired Word of God. All verses I quote will be and must be counted as credible evidence.

In your second argument base you claim that "God is love," and must therefore condemn no one to Hell without giving them a choice. Your first major flaw is in you claim that "God is Love." Read the following verses and tell me again that our God is completely and totally a loving being.

Malachi 1:2---
"'I have loved you,' says the LORD. 'But you ask, 'How have you loved us?' 'Was not Esau Jacob's brother?' the LORD says. 'Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.'"

Psalms 5:5---
"The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity."

Psalms 11:5---
"The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, And the one who loves violence His soul hates."

Hosea 9:15---
"'All their evil is at Gilgal; Indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels.'"

See what I mean? The LORD does not love all men, nor is He completely a God of love. He is loving, yes, but He is also just, and justice in this case requires hate. You might consider these verses as speaking of the God in the Old Testament, and that things have changed since the death of Christ, but the Bible makes it clear that God never changes.

Malachi 3:6---
"I, the Lord, do not change."

Hebrews 6:17---
"In the same way God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath,"

Neither God nor His decrees ever change, therefore He must still feel the same way about sin as He did in the verses I quoted above.

Since we have established that God is not solely love, we can move onto the possibility that God does in fact damn some people to Hell. Where do I get this proof? Look to the book of proverbs, for example.

Proverbs 16:4---
"The LORD has made everything for its own purpose, Even the wicked for the day of evil."

God prepares even the wicked for His purpose.

Jude 4---
"For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."

Long ago men were marked out for condemnation? Yes, it is in fact true.

Wait, wait! What am I turning God into! This is horrible, I mean, how could I possibly call God good if He predestines people to hell?

The answer is found in Romans.

Romans 9:18-24---
"So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, 'Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?' On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, 'Why did you make me like this,' will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles."

We have nothing to say to God. We are His creations, and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING He did, does, or ever will do with us or any other of His creations can possibly be condemned as wrong. We cannot possibly see what He would be doing, but we don't have to. I don't know how God works, all I know is that I am eternally grateful to be one of His elect.

In response to your verses:

I concede the first 6 point of your argument base one, because we both agree. The point you make in them are obviously backed scripturally. I do not concede the last two points, however. we are not debating the credability of the apostle-written Bible references, we are debating whether or not the Bible teaches predestination, and therefore all scripture count as evidence. Concerning the final point of argument base one, I will counter it shortly.

Romans 5

You quote this passage, I will assume, with the idea that i refers to salvation as being a "free gift." I would have to agree with you, it is a free gift. The difference is that I do not think this gift can be refused, nor can we choose to accept it. It must be forced upon us. Why can we not accept the gift of salvation? Look to a different passage in Romans for the answer.

Romans 3:10-18---
"10as it is written:
'None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one. Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.'"

There is nobody that seeks after God. None. Accepting the gift of salvation is seeking after God, don't you think?

Genesis 6:5---
"The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Jeremiah 13:23---
"Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil."

There is none able to do any kind of good in his sinful, unsaved state, and therefore we are unable to accept a gift of salvation on our own accord. It must be by the divine power of God.

Moving on to argument base two.

1. So? who ever said everything God does has to be loving? I already quoted many verses saying God does not love everyong, and is not entirely love, as some would like to believe. That is what I call a watered down, sappy, mushy God.

2. He loves His childer this way, yes. In the verse you quoted is simply say "Us." Paul is writting to the faithful church of Rome, and is talking to faithful brothers in Christ.

3. In one verse, yes, because He is all loving and compassionate to His children, but not all people.

4. Yes, to love is the greatest commandment, but God is not required to love everyone, after all, we hate Him in our sinful state.

5. I find verses, the following verse from the very mouth of Jesus, that He does not want all people in heaven. (John 12:40) Your verse, however, will take time to respond to, and I do not have the space, so I will wait for the next round.




I would like to thank my opponent for a speedy response in what usually a busy time for most. I admire dedication and would like to thank him for replying in what probably was a bad time.

With this said let me proceed to the debate.


My opponent clearly misconceives his role in acting as Pro. My opponent has clearly made the resolution and is entitled to show proof of it. He has instead spent time refuting my arguments (and insulting them) as if I have the burden of proof, when it is indeed his resolution to prove. Personally instead of spending the bulk of his space refuting my words, perhaps presenting proof of his resolution would yield more fruitful results.

My opponent then goes on to insult my arguments instead of refuting them denoting: "it seems to be some sort of homemade logic." I do not know where my opponent derives his logic from, but the only place I receive mine is from myself, which I assume my opponent refers to as "home". If this is the case, then indeed my logic is "home-made" if you desire to refer to it as such.

My opponent can simply choose to use miscellaneous scripture from the old testament if he truly desires this to be a droll debate with copy and pasta style scripture, however I was merely hoping that he would show us at least menial proof from Jesus himself that man indeed has no freewill, and was predestined. As Jesus created the bridge for man to go to heaven, it would be suitable if there were at least some evidence of Jesus denoting predestination.

[Refutation, Clarification, Extensions]

>>>Opponent's Main Qualms with my argument base<<<

1. God is love.

My opponent instead of offering proof of his resolution has intended to debate that "God is love". My opponent by doing so, has chosen to make the claim that God is not Love. Instead of stopping at this my opponent has gone on to make the claim that God hates. However he does not go on to define hate (which I will do for you)

My opponent's proof:

A. Malachi 1:2 <--- Old Testament
B. Psalms 5:5 <--- Old Testament
C. Psalms 11:5 <--- Old Testament
D. Hosea 9:15 <--- Old Testament


In depth view of the verses:

A. What my opponent fails to understand about the Bible is the meaning of the word "hate". It is an easy thing to confuse, as in the Bible, three different types of hate are spoken of.

1. Hate - Malicious and unjustifiable feeling towards others. -- Matthew 5:43
2. Hate - "A feeling of aversion for that which is evil or wrong." --Hebrews 1:9 (and the other examples my opponent provided for us)
3. Hate - a relative preference of one thing over another. --Malachi 1:2 Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." Here the meaning is that Esau was loved less than was Jacob.

When the Bible says "God is love" it means God is love. Not simply that God is partially loving, or that God loves only a select group of people, but simply this: God is Love.

God loves everyone, everything he has created, he loves. He loves everyone so much that he was willing to sacrifice his >>only<< son.
ROMANS 5:6-8

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. – John 3:16 (KJV)

The most important words to note in John 3:16 are the words >>World<< and the word >>whosoever<<. He doesn't say that he gave his only son for God's elect, he says for the world, everyone.

Having established God does indeed love everyone, this refutation holds pending further interrogation and analysis by my opponent.

I move onto my opponents proof of predestination.

Opponent's Proof of resolution:
1. Proverbs 16:4 <--- Old Testament
2. Jude 4 <--- New Testament
3. Romans 9:18-24 <--- New Testament



--------1. At a glance this verse seems to fully support my opponent's resolution and I commend him for finding such a verse. However when we actually take the time to read the surrounding scripture, it is very easy to determine that this is what the verse truly means

The Truths:
God knows the future of every man, he is omnipotent which is obvious.
God creates everything; Again a given.

The Question:
Why does God create people who turn out to make poor choices? Why not take away their free will and only allow them to make good decisions, or only create people who, by free will make good choices?

The Answer: This Bible verse. God makes everything for a reason, even those he knows will (by free will) make poor decisions and go to hell. I don't pretend to understand those reasons, the Bible simply says there are reasons.

The Second Question: So doesn't this prove that ultimately men have free will, and thus affirm my opponents resolution?

The Second Answer: No, creating creatures who he knows will make poor decisions is not the equivalent of creating creatures whose decisions he controls.

The Conclusion: It should be obvious that God wouldn't willingly condemn someone to hell from the beginning. He gives them a choice, he simply knows what choices they will make.

---------2. This two is another excellent example of context, and again I comend my opponent on his verse selection. This verse simply means this:

It was foretold (prophesied) long ago that there would be false Christians who would use Christianity as a tool, to seem superior to others, when in fact they are not obeying the rules of Jesus Christ and are not true Christians.

The verse is not talking about specific people but is talking in generalities about false Christians.

------------3. Next my opponent chooses one of the most thought provoking bits of scripture in the Bible, but he again uses it out of context to prove his resolution. The following scripture means this:

God doesn't answer to man. Man has no right to question God's decisions (as they are perfect). He is not merciful because of man's actions, he is not merciful because we obey his rules. If God felt like it, he could use forces of nature and destruction to show the world he is God (as he did with the Pharaoh for Noah.) God is forgiving because he is God and not because of any action of man. These verses demonstrate that God is fully in control, not that he predestined anyone.



1. Conceding the first 6 points of Base 1 includes point number 5. Thus only direct quotations from Jesus are evidence for predestination.
2. I quoted Romans 5 for Romans 5:6-8 and also the gift. A gift
3. Romans 3:10-18 is simply 8 verses of Psalms joined together by Paul its simply a description of those who sin and don't seek God, not that absolutely no one seeks God.
4. I do not understand your point of Genesis 6:5? Simply that at the time many people were wicked?
5. Jeremiah describes the difficulty of changing ones ways, I don't see how it relates to this debate.

Base 2
1. The Bible? God is love, that doesn't leave too much up for discussion.
2. ROMANS 5:6-8 I'm not so sure.
3. He created all mankind in his image, thus mankind are his children.
4. It is clear God loves eve
Debate Round No. 2


You begin by claiming that I presented no argument in my previous post. On the contrary, I have, though you may have failed to recognize it. My argument, in a nutshell, was this:

We must have been predestined, because we are unable to ever accept a good gift in our fallen state. My evidence was this:

Genesis 6:5---
"The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Jeremiah 13:23---
"Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil."

Thus, we are so evil in our fallen state that we only ever dwell on evil thing. It is a good thing to accept the "free gift" of salvation, therefore it would be impossible for men to accept were it up to him.

Rom. 8:7---
"Because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,"

That was my argument, so no, I did not watse my post. It still awaits refutation.

You asked for quotes for the mouth of Jesus Himself, and though I am not obligated to give them as my only souce of evidence, I will give them, simply because it packs an even greater punch. You claim that there is no evidence out of the mouth of Jesus for predestination, but you are quite mistaken.

John 15:16---
"You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you."

We did not choose Him, but He chose us to bear fruit. You, I would imagine, would claim that Jesus is refering only to the apostles, and that He is referning to choosing then for apostleship, and not salvation. While this is a tempting position to take, cconsider the following verses...

Eph. 1:4-6---
"just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved."

There is no talking around the fact that He chose us IN HIM before the ceration of the world. For this reason we can reasonbly believe that Crist was in fact refering to salvation, becuase He elsewhere states that He chooses men before the foundations of the world to be holy in His sight. He did not foreknow, and predestined accordingly, because...

Titus 3:5-7---
"He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness [which He would have foreknown], but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

2 Tim. 1:9---
"who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity,"

...but He chose us only according to what pleased (and pleases) Him.

Once again, I would like to point out that we would be unable too accept this gift were it up to us to accept, for...

"...the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him;
nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

So who then can be saved? if all men are unable to accept Christ, as Rom. 3:10-12 states, how then are we saved?

Acts 13:48---
"When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."

2 Thes. 2:13---
"But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth."

As many as have been appointed for salvation shall believe, and that is that. As Jesus Himself says:

John 6:44---
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day."

Now I move on to refitation and defense.

You say that God is love, and refute all of my arguments by inventing a defenition for the word "hate." I would like to know where you get your defenition, because the defenition I get of the greek word used in this context is much different. The greek word used, and you can check me on this if you will, is "miseo," or "mee-SEH-oh," and the defenition is hate, despise, or disregard. The usage of the word in context with the malachi verse I quoted is aorist.

Contrary to what you would like to think, this word does not indicate "preference," but real and burning hatred. God despised and disregarded Esau.

Therefore my argument that God is not entirely a being of love, but also a very solid and just being, unwilling to look over sin still stands and awaits refutation. God is no pushover.

I am also a bit confused as to where you are coming up with these several forms of hate. There is one kind of hate, just as there is one kind of love. True, undying, Christ-like love, and true, undying, burning hatred for sin. We are in no position to hate people, because we did not create them. God on the other hand...

Yet you are right in saying that God is love, because He is most definately love towards His people. He is the greatest example of love ever to be. Do you think, on the other hand, that God is the ultimate example of love for those people burning in hell fire? Nope. Try the perfect example of justice and hatred if sin.

Your explanation of Proverbs 16:4 is interesting, though it has holes. The problem is, you seem to add the concept of free will into the verse. All it says is that God created even the wicked for the day of judgement according to His purpose. It does not say He created the wicked to CHOOSE judgement, but that He created them FOR judgement, just as a child might build a tower of blocks for the purpose of knocking it down. (Note I am in no way comparing God to a child, but simply making an analogy.) You need to further explain where you get the concept of free will in this verse before using it to explain it.

At the same time, I, the same as you, do not claim to understand why God would create some people for judgement. All I know is that God executes His perfect Holy will, and that He knows best. All things are for the glory of God.

You quote John 3:16 as evidence for you side, but all this verse says is that anyone who believes in Christ has eternal life. Note this verse says nothing about how these people believe, whether by free will or predestination, thus is a moot point.

Concerning Jude, You miss the point that they were "long ago marked out for this condemnation." The context speaks for and defends itself.

You are correct in saying that God does not answer to man, and that man has no say in what God does, nor the right to question His decisions. You miss, however, the Q/A of the context. The question is why God finds fault in those he predestined to wrath, and hardens, such as Pharaoh. The answer is that God has the right to do whatever He wants with us, His creations.

Note I almost quoted the verses. Again, they speak for and defend themselves.

I made it clear that I will debate using all scripture equally.

Yes, Rom. 3:10-22 and such refer to those who sin and don't seek God, but that decribes all of us before we are saved, and according to your beliefes, you accepted Christ while you were unable to accept Chrsit because you were dead in sin. It makes no sense.

I will have to wait for my final round to address whether or not God wants all people in heaven, because I am down to 68 characters. Sorry for the inconvenience.




askbob forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Since my opponent forfieted his last round I have little to say, however I wouls like to take this time to respond to his claim that Jesus wants everyone in heaven.

If this were so, and Jesus did in fact want all people in heaven, first off it would contradict the verse found in Matk that says:

Mark 4:10-12---
"And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. And he said to them, 'To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, so that "they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven." '"

This is out of the mouth of Jesus that He speaks to some in parables so they do not turn from their sin. He did not want those certain people to be forgiven.

But wait, what about that verse in Timothy that explicitly says Jesus wants all men in heaven?

Well, this presents us with a biblical contradiction, does it not? The answer is no, it does not. How do I explain it? The explaination is quite simple.

In the Bible we have many cases of the word "all" not necessarilly meaning all men on earth, or all possible men in the given situation. Example is as follows.

Matthew 3:5-6---
"Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him, and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins."

All obviously does not mean every possible person, as in every steert, ally, house, building, and bathroom was empty. It mean all the people meant to be there.

Thus, I think it the only reasonable solution to say that "all" in your verse does not mean every person, but it means all ELECT people.

Thats my take.

Thanks for the debate!



askbob forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wheelhouse3 7 years ago
You're welcome=)
Posted by Renzzy 7 years ago

Thanks for the referecne! Don't worry about the timelyness of the reply, it's no matter. I will definately look into it! Once again, thanks a bunch!

Posted by wheelhouse3 7 years ago
I'd love to give you some links. The best one is It can give you loads of information including ways to contact local missionaries who can give you in depth lessons about what the LDS church believes. The church is actually very scripturally backed if you actually take the time to learn about it and research it, which, it sounds like, you are very willing to do. I think it's great that you are so open-minded and really willing to hear about other religions, and it is even more admirable that you are willing to do this while still staying true to your beliefs. Thank you for asking and I'm so sorry that I couldn't get to you sooner. I hardly ever come on anymore because I can't vote without having a phone that recieves text messages, and I just can't afford that right now. Thanks again for your time and interest. Well wishes!
Posted by Renzzy 7 years ago
Ah, don't worry too much about it, I have done the same thing in the past. What the heck, I am spending way too much time in Oblivion Elder Scrools lately... like 12 hours in the last two days... yea :P So don't worry much about it. It's not about the votes anyway, I just like debating.
Posted by askbob 7 years ago
I feel majorly shitty for bailing in the last two rounds Rennzy, I've really been slacking off on this site lately, and I apologize. Also I've been spending way too much time on LM's mafia game, but still no excuse. You win by default for me having poor conduct.

Posted by Renzzy 7 years ago
You got 19 minutes left... don't fail me now... :P
Posted by askbob 7 years ago
Hey Renzzy I might not get to this argument until tommorow night sometime (which is past the time remaining) I have to apologize beforehand for this inconvience but when it comes to partying all night and debating, you know the obvious choice, sorry dude.

I'll post it in the comments section then if you could respond to it, I'd be very grateful.

Happy New Years!

Posted by askbob 7 years ago
I truly wish it were that way mate. It actually used to be until the apple was eaten.

The apple representing knowledge (i.e. free will)
Posted by Renzzy 7 years ago
Don't count on that one, although it is very thuoghtful of you. I see God as infinitely more loving and sovereign if we are predestined and have nothing to do with out salvation, because I firmly belive that we CANNOT have any part in out salvation. I can 100% gaurantee you that my beliefes will never change.
Posted by askbob 7 years ago
I don't think it harsh, simply misguided. I understand how you got this impression, I personally suggest that you do more reading of the entire Bible, especially the New Testament. In my opinion I pity you, you have yet to discover the depth of His love for mankind. When you do finally (and I hope you will) see how much he loves everyone, you will hopefully begin to draw more sheep inside instead of repelling them in the name of fate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
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 
Vote Placed by SolaGratia 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70