The Instigator
Sitruk39
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
thegodhand
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points

Can you Convert me (christians only)

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
Con Tied Pro
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,130 times Debate No: 14148
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (8)

 

Sitruk39

Con

I am seeking to see if Christianity is in fact true I will argue against it if I am proven wrong or convinced it is true I will convert to the said religion. I only want a Christian to debate me.I will let "the contender" intiate his or her argument.
thegodhand

Pro

Christianity is the religion I believe to be true because-

I. Noah's flood claims that fish and other aquatic lifeforms were scattered to the mountains. This has been proven by science to be true. Other versions of the story exist as well, but the Christian version has the most basis in fact. For example, a traditional Australian version claims that the continents were created to flood. The continents existed because of a big fish someone caught of the side of an island, the only existing landmass at the time. The chopped-up fish became Europe, Asia, America, etc.

II. The Biblical version of the End Times closely correlates to modern events. For example, it claims in the Bible that the End Times will be coming after numerous prophesised events. Two of these are as follows-

A. Israel will be reunited.
1. This happened in the 1940s after World War II. The Israelites kept their heritage long enough to kick the Palestinians out (upwards of two thousand years), an incredible feat. Divine intervention?

B. A star named Wormwood will fall to Earth.

Anyone who has tuned into modern civilization for the last 25 years has most likely heard of the Chernobyl disaster.
Russian (or was it Hebrew?) to English translation: Chernobyl means Wormwood. Think about it- people in biblical times had no knowledge of atomic power. They could not fathom elementary particles. So it is reasonable to assume that an onlooker could misinterpret the event as a fallen star and write that a star named Chernobyl fell to Earth.

III. The Bible came first

A. The Israelis are God's chosen people, but the bible states that only the Jew RACE, and not the RELIGION, are the Lord's chosen. They came first by 1500 or so years, but unless you are pure Jew you are unsaved by these means. Even then the automatic Jew-saver is questioned.

B. Other popular religions, such as Islam, came long after the Bible. In the aforementioned's case, approximately 500 years after Revelations was finished. Does it not stand to reason that the good Lord would want to get his word here as soon as he humanly could? (No offense, God.)

The Godhand
Debate Round No. 1
Sitruk39

Con

First of all thank you for accepting my debate now I will begin with my rebuttal

1.How could such a structure (450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet deep) be built on gopher wood ? Johan's Ark (built by dutch creationist Johan Huibers in Schagen) is about half the size of the bibilicial Ark and had to be built on a steel hull which makes the arguement for the ark implausible (unless you credit divine intervention but we are talking facts here).Secondly it seems unlikely that a world flood happened when we have both salt and freshwater and each have their own distinct species how could a global flood create this?

2. In 1948 the State of Israel was declared but I fail to see how the Chernobyl disaster was a fallen star.While the word Chernobly(Russian) does translate to Wormwood it is hardly compelling that a series of explosions represents a fallen star , without biblicial evidence that a star represents a series of explosions it is simply speculation.Just because Chernobyl translates to Wormwood doesn't make it a fulfilled prophecy.

3.There were religions way before the bible people revered such gods as Horus and Mirtha.Just because a book is around for a long time doesn't make it a godbreathed collection of book to base your principles on.

My seperate arguement.

1.The Bible also has conflicting genealogies present in Matthew and Luke.Some Biblician Scholars say that one is through Mary and one is through Joseph but Joseph's would be irrevelant since he supposedly was Jesus's stepfather.
2.The Bible also was translated form 3 different languages.Languages often do not cleanly translate wouldn't that take away from the original meaning of the scriptures and take its supposed inerrancy away.
3.Why in Matthew is says Jesus healed one blind man out of Jericho while another states that he healed two.It also states that he saw two demon possessed men while another only mentions one, while they do not technically contradict each other if it is godbreathed it seems they would be closer to being identicial.
4.Stephan L. Harris stated : "Jesus did not accomplish what Israel's prophets said the Messiah was commissioned to do: He did not deliver the covenant people from their Gentile enemies, reassemble those scattered in the Diaspora, restore the Davidic kingdom, or establish universal peace.[Isa. 9:6-7] [11:7-12:16] Instead of freeing Jews from oppressors and thereby fulfilling God's ancient promises—for land, nationhood, kingship, and blessing—Jesus died a 'shameful' death, defeated by the very political powers the Messiah was prophesied to overcome. Indeed, the Hebrew prophets did not foresee that Israel's savior would be executed as a common criminal by Gentiles, making Jesus' crucifixion a "stumbling block" to scripturally literate Jews". This arguement is often countered by saying that Jesus will fulfill these prophecies during the millennial reign but once again, this is speculation. Why would the God of the Bible leave his followers to speculate on things written in his word?Why would he let his followers wonder about a Old Testament proprecy?
thegodhand

Pro

Thanks, Sitruk39.

BOP: You must prove that Christianity is false, or I must convince you it is true.

Rebuttal:

1. Noah was given extremely specific dimensions to build his Ark. These measurements are plausible, and have been tested to work. Also, gravity could easily pull the saltwater to a different place because it has a different mass.

2. A person seeing a "falling star" at the time would not interpret is a meteorite, but most likely a series of lights. Chernobyl most likely exploded in a burst of light. One might describe it as perhaps the brightest, strangest object in the then-known universe.

3. Christianity certainly isn't the first religion. But it is the first one clearly based in fact.

4. Technically, Joseph was created by God to impregnate Mary with Jesus.

5. There are so many versions and translations of the Bible, one can easily work off of the similairities.

6. Human misconceptions. Perhaps one mistook the demon for a second man.

7. Once again, Human misconception. God used lower humans to write his word, meaning something could be lost in translation.

Oh, and go read the Bible. Put up some more arguments- this is the point of the site.
Debate Round No. 2
Sitruk39

Con

My Second Rebuttal:

1.Even if he did give Noah specific instructions on the construction of the ark it still is not plausible that such a vessel could be built on gopher wood.

2.You said most likely but most likely isn't definite which gives bible readers yet another thing to speculate on.It is

3.It being based on fact can be disputed.

4.If that is true then how is the virgin birth possible?

5.Not everybody can work off these said simlarities. They are so many bible versions (KJV, NIV, etc.) why would god allow so many?

6.There was no standing demon in the Bible one Gospel (Matthew) says there is two demon possessed men two other Gospels (Mark and Luke) only mention one demon possesed man how would one man see two men and one man see two? Seems highly unlikely to me.

7.Why would God allow something get lost in translation in his word? You can not just assume when the bible has something wrong or something that doesn't make sense that something got lost. Why would God allow this?

8.You failed to disprove that Jesus did not fulfill all of the prophecies that the Messiah was destined to fulfill. He didn't fulfill all the prophecies

9.So many Christians are known to intolerant of homosexuals. The Westboro Baptist Church is known for it anti-homosexual protests they even protested the recently deceased Elizibeth Edward's funeral.There is one Christian oorganization known as GodHates....... I won't finish that but it rhymes with bags. They are several different Christian denominations. Why is God's word taken so differently between these people? Many Churches in the 1700's and 1800's approved of slavery. Our first few presidents (all but Thomas Jefferson confirmed to be religous) kept slaves in the White House. Catholic priest have somehow got out of the word they can molestate young boys.I am not saying all Christians are like this but it is obvious many are. You will surely agree with me the bible is misinterpted my question is why would God allow his word to be able to be misinterpted?

10.A lot of Christians believe that people who have never heard the Gospel go to heaven, I have found no biblicial evidence to support this. Why is sin inherited from our ancestors? Why is it that I am destined death (referring to hell) because my ancestors ate some fruit? Why would such a loving god allow sin to be transferred their descendants (all the people who have ever lived besides Adam and Eve). If someone has never heard the Gospel wouldn't they also condemed.For what because our ancestors made a mistake.

I will give you an article from a Christian about those who never heard the Gospel
http://www.gotquestions.org...
thegodhand

Pro

1. Many people have an architectural skill that simply cannot be matched. You could give any fool instructions, but could they make the Statue of Liberty? No?

2. Can you think of anything else that could be interpreted as Wormwood? Either the Chernobyl disaster was the Wormwood Star, or it has yet to happen if it will, meaning we cannot know.

3. There are many obvious parables and allegories in the bible. Since most of them are told by Jesus, we can assume that many of that what can be scientifically proven is hard fact, and what cannot be has a decent change of being allegorical.

4. Virgin Mary comes from Catholic subsects. I am anti-Catholic. Even though they have cleaned up, the fact is that Catholic priests are out to make money. Before Martin Luther (not that Martin Luther), they sold "saving charms' to wear and said that if you didn't pay for them you'd burn in hell for all eternity. Since Virgin Mary is almost entirely Catholic (they worship her as a second God), I don't believe in Virgin Mary.

5. God allows many so we can see every interpretation of His word, and not just one. This way we can have the broadest view of what was meant.

6. Viewing from a different angle.

7. "Lost in translation" can be good. Read 5.

8. The Bible says he will in the Second Coming, and many of the events leading up to this have started already.

9. You mean God Hates Douchebags? The Bible says sex is only for reproduction. Homosexuals cannot reproduce. Thus, the Bible forbids prostitution and other such things, including homosexuality. And don't get me started about Landover Baptist and homos. I hate both.

10. It depends on what you believe. Catholic Bibles contain five books most people do not believe are God's word. In these books it says that sinners cannot go to heaven. Because these were removed in Protestant Bibles, someone came up with the idea of "innocents." Retards, children, infants and those who had never received a chance to accept the Lord enter Heaven, because the good Lord will not punish them for not hearing his word. I believe in innocents because our God is merciful enough to do such.

It takes a little faith as well. I cannot give you faith. Read a Bible, especially Genesis, Exodus, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John and Revelations if nothing else. Accept Jesus into your heart, and walk away knowing your final destination is Heaven.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lfmskl 5 years ago
lfmskl
if you repost this debate i might accept
Posted by Sitruk39 6 years ago
Sitruk39
I find it ironic that I ever had this debate I have had a conversion experience since it. I could have been defeated if thegodhand had pointed out fulfilled prophecy or maybe even the empty tomb thing.
Posted by JLMPilot 6 years ago
JLMPilot
Debates like this are pointless. Debate is useful in many instances but it is completely unsuited to a topic as personal and indescribable as the Christian spiritual experience. Debate relies on logic, but as Soren Kierkegaard stated in his Expectoration from the Heart faith is something that cannot be logically justified. Faith is something entirely foreign to human nature. It can't be debated. I has to be felt. So even if Pro put forth a better argument and "converted" Con, Jesus wouldn't be any more real to him than before the debate began. Go talk to a priest if you have any legitimate interest in knowing Love.
Posted by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
There are too many of these debates and they almost always end in a crushing victory for the person seeking to be "converted."

There are some Christians on this site who are very skilled and articulate, both these debates are mostly used to prey on the fact that some of the Christians on this site fail to understand the simple premises of debating and can easily be beaten.
Posted by Shestakov 6 years ago
Shestakov
Just because you take a certain position in a debate does not mean that you cannot be convinced otherwise. Several times during my debating career I've taken a certain side on a topic but after research and several debates, I switched sides. And I'm sure this happens to everyone. Sitruk39 is perfectly able to convert but in this case he didn't because he won the debate (in my opinion).
Posted by GodSands 6 years ago
GodSands
It is evident that no one will convert you (con) because you have already decided that you do not want to be converted due to your position as con.
Posted by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
Conduct goes to con, because pro tried to convert him in the end. Argument goes to con, because pro used many false arguments based on zero facts. Sources go to con, because he used facts, which have been obtained through science.
Posted by Sitruk39 6 years ago
Sitruk39
@vardas0antras sounds fun
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
Sitruk39, would you want to debate me ?
Posted by Sitruk39 6 years ago
Sitruk39
I am no longer Protestant and Christianity is the only religion I am considering.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 11 months ago
KingDebater
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Rasliel 6 years ago
Rasliel
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Vote Placed by hauki20 6 years ago
hauki20
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 
Vote Placed by Cunit0814 6 years ago
Cunit0814
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by EuphoricTurtle 6 years ago
EuphoricTurtle
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 
Vote Placed by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Shestakov 6 years ago
Shestakov
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
Sitruk39thegodhandTied
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:60