' Christianity, Islam, and Judaism abrogate their common religious responsibilities '
Debate Rounds (5)
Hi Rami, I will concentrate on one point at a time if that is ok. You said something very interesting in comments that caught my attention . You said(Rami), 'I could defend just Judaism.'
In many respects I feel the same way about Judaism so why include them in this 'blame game'. It is a valid consideration. What shared responsibility do they carry if any. Let me give you an example. I was in Rome during an organized student protest about college fees. Student organizations sent people to Rome to march in their thousands. The march descended into violence and chaos and some people were injured. In truth the event was sabotaged by a collusion between right wing hooligans and 'stiff' authoritarian sources. These possibilities existed before the march began so therefore we must consider the responsibilities and the culpability of the organizers in not protecting their members. Was it reckless endangerment and imprudence on their part. It probably was.
Now let us consider Monotheism and Judaism.
Just like the students right for fairness and opportunity, I feel that the Jews of the OT had a right to have and use a God (Yahweh) that suited their needs. They are credited with bringing about the first real example of 'structured' monotheism.
When you look up the word, you get this
monotheism: the doctrine or belief that there is only one God.
Judaic monotheism was never this. The Israelites were very aware of the existence of many Gods among the surrounding nations and tribes but they affirmed a pact with Yahweh to ignore all others. Therefore, monotheism as purported by Judaism should have read
monotheism: the assertion that there is one appropriate God for you to follow.
Just like the organizers of the student march they have now released upon the world, Judaism 0.1(Christianity) and Judaism0.2 ( Islam). Within these evolved versions the assertion is that there is in fact 'only one god'. This imposes the Christian God on all and within Islam it is again perceived that all people are under the jurisdiction of Allah regardless of their being Muslim or not.
What a mess. Sort it out.
You cannot have this advertising scam continue without consequence. We have not got room for these perceptions of a 'one God'. I must include the Jews in this unfortunately if only for being by default the parent host to this absurdity. What do you think Rami?
Imagine if Coke insisted that drinking Fanta was reprehensible in that Fanta wasn't really a soft drink. Imagine if they insisted that the people drinking Fanta were really wishing to drink Coke and that in a way they were unwittingly searching for Coke. Can Islam say that Yahweh is not a God. Can Christianity say that Yahweh is not their God? If they can and they do then they need to explain it.
Islam maintains that the one God changes 'peoples' depending on their worthiness and that a nation can loose this God thing. This explains to them how the defiled Jews lost their God who was Allah. They now hold on with real fervour to that God in case they in turn loose it to the Christians. The Christians believe that the Jews are still using an internet explorer god, and they wait for them to upgrade to their Chrome version. The Jews are sticking to what works for them and feign disinterest in the two other 'rogue' versions that are 'doing the rounds'
Is the manufacturer of fireworks responsible for the reliability of his product. Is an older brother responsible for the example his actions provide to his younger brother. Judaism wants to ignore this thing but I feel that that would be akin to Coke ignoring counterfeit versions of their drink. What would Coke become if such a lax attitude prevailed. These new versions of monotheistic Judaism need to be reigned in and Judaism has a part to play here. Jews looking after Jews has not worked and their own children are rebelling on their parents. What do you think, ,Rami?
"Judaic monotheism was never this. The Israelites were very aware of the existence of many Gods among the surrounding nations and tribes but they affirmed a pact with Yahweh to ignore all others. Therefore, monotheism as purported by Judaism should have read"
This is a twisted version of the truth. There are two mistakes my opponent made:
1. The Israelites knew pagans worshiped other gods, but not that they were real. It's as if the pagans had this propaganda of history, and the Jews don't believe in the propaganda. They acknowledge that the propaganda existed, but not that it was valid
2. The gods of the pagans were nature base, so they weren't gods to start with. Let me explain: Since all their gods were basically nature, it is such a removed idea of the Jewish version of what is 'God'. Their gods needed to eat and sleep, but this ran contrary to the doctrines of the Jews. On this basis, you might claim that a Jew could theoretically believe in two all-powerful gods, but that idea is rejected all throughout the Torah.
"We have not got room for these perceptions of a 'one God'. I must include the Jews in this unfortunately if only for being by default the parent host to this absurdity"
"The march descended into violence and chaos and some people were injured. In truth the event was sabotaged by a collusion between right wing hooligans and 'stiff' authoritarian sources. These possibilities existed before the march began so therefore we must consider the responsibilities and the culpability of the organizers in not protecting their members"
There is problem with this analogy. Protests are all about expressing anger against something. There is inherent anger in protest. Although there are many protests that are peaceful, there is still a motive of anger. Anger can spill easily into violence. My opponent will have to prove that there is a proponent of Judaism that would spill into something extreme.
In the comments, my opponent said that I need to prove that a full abrogation is realistically impossible. I thought this was pretty simple. The only authority that ALL Christians would accept is God. The pope isn't accepted by all Christians. With some many factions of Christianity, there would be an impossibly low chance of them uniting under one type of pope. And get this: Jews wouldn't accept a change, even from God. One of the 13 principles of faith, recited every day in synagogue, is that God will never change the Torah. So even if it seems clear that God said to abrogate, Jews wouldn't.
I think I'm done for this round. I hand the debate mic back to Pro.
Argument 2 With great power comes great responsibilities
We are not talking 'stamp collectors' here. We are not even talking Disney or Microsoft. Multiply them by ten and you might have an approximate of the scope of influence that these people hold and maintain. It they are not going to use it then simply get off the stage.
I feel for the people of Paris this weekend.. Be under no illusion that this is anything other than a religious 'phenomena' a purely religious phenomena. I was listening to an analyst on RT news and he stated that we have to stop simplifying these jihadists as hate filled terrorists. He mentioned that they are hooked into a doctrine of 'significance' which I thought was a very profound assessment of what is happening. On a Friday in Paris you can get on with your day to day existence or you can take the step to be part of a specific and well preached religious narrative. You can become a martyr and enter everlasting happiness in the space of one afternoon. This doctrine might seem absurd to you or I but it is in effect the 'espresso' version of a watered down Abrahamic expansion story that is repeated in Mosques, Churches and Synagogues throughout the world. Tell me that moderate Muslims do not carry any responsibilities here. If theie religion is so persuasive to be a form of hallucination then it need to be handled with the care that such a volatile substance warrants. What do you think. Again apologies, written in 5 mins.
Rami forfeited this round.
zeromeansnothing forfeited this round.
So, to sum up, you are saying that religion should be held responsible for these attacks. I counterclaim by saying bigotry is responsible.
Bigotry is the refusal to tolerate other beliefs. The Muslim terrorists think the whole world should be Muslim. But bigotry is not exclusive to Islam. Rather, it is universal. There are countless examples of this. I do not think I need to provide eamples, but if Pro insists, I'll post them next round.
To conclude, should bigotry be completely eliminated, then these attacks would not occur.
zeromeansnothing forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff more rounds, so conduct to Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.