The Instigator
AlecRemington
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
airmax1227
Con (against)
Winning
30 Points

Believing the Mormon doctrine is unreasnable.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 6/30/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,382 times Debate No: 17334
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (5)

 

AlecRemington

Pro

I was once agnostic. However, after a period of much study -- study that as unbiased and very strict -- I became a Christian. Among the religions I studied was Mormonism. I have come to the conclusion that to adhere to the Mormon faith is to adhere to a belief system that cannot be trusted. I offer the challenge for a debate respectively.
airmax1227

Con

I think my opponent for this debate and hope I can offer a respectable counter to his resolution.

My opponent contends that Mormonism is not a reasonable religion. I believe that he, being a Christian, should not believe it is unreasonable.

I hope reframing the debate this way is acceptable to my opponent, and I will thus open the debate.

The BOP is upon my opponent to prove that Mormonism is unreasonable, though I will open the debate with a short opening, by showing Mormonism has a similar origin to all other religions and sects, and is as reasonable as any one of them, including Christianity in general and its various branches.

Most religions come into being due to an act of "individual revelation".
Individual revelation refers to the revelation of any religion, sect, or cult that was begun by the revelation of just one or two individuals, and spread from there.

Let us take a look at religions containing strong elements of the "Individual revelation" characteristic. This is not to say that any of the following revelations or religions should not be believed, just that since most originate from very similar patterns, they are all equally reasonable.

Buddhism:

Buddhism begins with the experience of Siddhartha Gautama, born into wealth he abandoned on his search for truth. Siddhartha Gautama describes his experience and it's methodology as a way towards enlightenment. Siddhartha Gautama "put him self into a trance, intent of discerning both the ultimate reality of all things and the final goal of existence." [1]

While Siddhartha Gautama was alone, he was able to do the aforementioned, "He passed through the eight stages of transic Insight, and quickly reached their highest point…Then he had achieved correct knowledge of all there is to be known, and he stood out in the world as a Buddha. " [2]

--While there are many more details that are important to the life and significance of Siddhartha Gautama, this is a story of one individual and his revelation of what leads to enlightenment.

Islam:

Islam finds its root from the experiences of Muhammad, whom, at the age of forty, "had an experience in which a message somehow became present in his mind; and eventually he came to believe that this was a message from G-d."[3] Muhammad would continue to receive messages that would be gathered into suras that make up the Koran.

--Once again, there are more details that are important to understanding Muhammad specifically, and Islam in general, but the revelations that lead to Islam, is the revelation given to a single individual.

Christianity:

30 years after the death of Jesus, Saul, a Jew, who was traveling alone on a road to Demascus, has a revelation when Jesus appears to him. Saul, changed by this revelation that was shared with him, changes his name to Paul, and converts to Christianity.

--There is obviously more to Christianity than this (which I imagine will be the focus of the next couple rounds), but this is its origin as an organized religion, culminating in Paul's writing of 13 books of the New Testament. [4]

Newer religions that also follow a similar individual revelation characteristic:

Mormonism:

Joseph smith has an individual revelation, and convinces others to believe him.

Saint Germain Foundation:
Guy Ballard has individual revelation when he is approached by the reincarnation of Comte De Saint Germain, while he is hiking alone near Mt. Shasta.

The Unification Church:
Based upon the individual revelation of Sun Myung Moon, whom Jesus came to when Moon was 16 and told him to proclaim himself as the new messiah.

Eckancar:
Begun by the individual revelation of John Paul Twitchell, who claims to be the 971st ECK Master and spiritual descendant "of an unbroken chain of Vaiargi Masters".

All of the aforementioned groups have a significant number of members, and are similar in their origins, of one man, who convinces others, of their personal revelation.[5]

I believe all of these religions are equally reasonable, I look forward to my opponents reply.

[1] Asvaghosa, The Buddhacarita, (second century Buddhist narrative), reprinted in Ninian Smart and Richard D. Hecht, eds., Sacred Texts of the World: A Universal Anthology, New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1982, p. The Cros.road
Publishing Company, 1982, p, 233-4.
[2] Ibid., P. 234
[3] W. Montgomery Watt, "IsIam," in Ian Harris., Stuart Mew.. Paul Morris., and John Shepherd. Contemporary Religions: A World Guide. Essex, UK: Longman Group Ltd., 1992. p. 21.
[4] http://www.vexen.co.uk...
[5] http://www.simpletoremember.com...
Debate Round No. 1
AlecRemington

Pro

AlecRemington forfeited this round.
airmax1227

Con

I hope that my opponent is safe, in good health, and that his reason for forfeiture of this round is due to being unable to get to a computer. Perhaps this is because of the extended July 4th weekend, and he is currently out of his regular dwelling vicinity, and unable to get online.

Regardless, due to the unfortunate lack of a rebuttal, I must defer to my argument above:

Mormon doctrine is perfectly reasonable within the context we have set, and it's followers are no less rational for believing in the Mormon faith than any of the aforementioned religions, including Christianity in general.

So, as it stands, Mormonism is entirely reasonable.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
AlecRemington

Pro

AlecRemington forfeited this round.
airmax1227

Con

With 50% of my debates having now ended with the forfeiture of my opponent, I may need to reconsider the strength or style of my opening arguments so that I can somehow get my debating fix.

My opponent has failed to prove that Mormonism is unreasonable.

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
"I bet you wouldn't debate this again."

I wouldn't, but the crux of my argument was based on the relative aspects of what should be considered reasonable to believe.

I wouldn't personally believe in Mormonism, and I don't disagree with anything you mentioned. but I also wouldn't believe in plenty of other things that many people believe in.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
AirMax, Mormonism is unreasonable. It was formed by a guy who was arrested several times for counterfeiting artifacts and he formed a religion with the main evidence for the religion being this artifact.

Not to mention all the historical inaccuracies with-in the Book of Mormon. Such historical inaccuracies as horses existing in America, before they ever did among numerous others.

I bet you wouldn't debate this again.
Posted by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
Reformed arsenal:
The following link seems to be a reasonable chronology of events from Acts and other parts of the New Testament...

http://www.xenos.org...

"...we would arrive at late 33 A.D. or sometime in 34 A.D. as the time of Paul's conversion."
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
What in Acts possibly gives you that idea?
Posted by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
Reformedarsenal:
This subject alone would make for an interesting debate.
It seems to be implied in 'Acts' that it was around 40 years later, around 44-48 CE. This would contradict sources in Paul's epistles, and in Galatians, where we can ultimately place the event anywhere from 1 year after to 60 (as the actual writing of these events occurred even later than the 30 years) . Even at 1 to 2 years later I believe my upcoming points in this debate would be the same, though this is not all that crucial for the sake of this debate.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
"30 years after the death of Jesus, Saul, a Jew, who was traveling alone on a road to Demascus, has a revelation when Jesus appears to him."

Where in the world did you get 30 years?!? This is WAY off... Paul likely converted within a year, two at the most, of Christ's death.
Posted by AlecRemington 5 years ago
AlecRemington
Okay. Thanks for accepting. Let's go.
Posted by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
I believe I understand your initial definitions, and can give you an honest debate regarding the reasonability of Mormonism with the context you have laid out.
Posted by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
too*
Posted by AlecRemington 5 years ago
AlecRemington
I don't believe so. I became a Christian for a few reasons:

- Fulfilled prophecy.
- Archaeological evidence that strongly supported the Biblical text.
- The evidence for the Resurrection of Christ.
- The trustworthiness of the Biblical text (as I judged).

Those are but a few of the reasons that made up my cumulative case for becoming a Christian. However, I found nothing in Mormonism that was likewise. No fulfilled prophecy (in fact, two that failed to fulfill, one known in history as The Great Disappointment), no reason to believe miracles, powerful evidence against the trustworthiness of the texts; I would argue that where one can be within reason and adhere to Christianity, one would be outside of reason to adhere to Mormonism after learning many of the facts I intend to speak on in this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
AlecRemingtonairmax1227Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
AlecRemingtonairmax1227Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
AlecRemingtonairmax1227Tied
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: FF
Vote Placed by ApostateAbe 5 years ago
ApostateAbe
AlecRemingtonairmax1227Tied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
AlecRemingtonairmax1227Tied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit