The Instigator
Se7en7h_Phenom
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Magicr
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Christianity vs. Your Choice of Religion

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...
Magicr
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/21/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 827 times Debate No: 31514
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Se7en7h_Phenom

Pro

Whoever accepts this debate may choose the religion or ideaology of creation they would like. I am for christianity. First round is acceptance
Magicr

Con

I accept. In this debate, I will be defending naturalism.
Debate Round No. 1
Se7en7h_Phenom

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate and I look forward to a good debate.

Naturalism is based on the theory that everything is material, physical really. So here is my debate.

Evolution
I will not go that far in to this, since it is not a major part. Evolution has many problems such as the lack of good mutations to affect the DNA strand. The majority of them are hurtful and takes away information, in thus, no evolution happens. No good mutation has ever been seen.

God
There are many pieces of evidence for God, such as the bible having no problems in it. The Bible has accurately explained many things in history and has predicted many things in science. Priests in the old times were commanded to run their hands under running water after the sacrifice. Many years later, it is found that this helps clean out the pores more. There has never been reasonable evidence against God.

Feelings
My honest problems is that naturalism feel that everything is physical. How can you write off all the feelings as nothing more than leftovers of the physical. Pain has been known to put great strain on the body, how does naturalism explain this.
Magicr

Con

My opponent has raised a few points objecting to naturalism as well as one point attempting to validate Christianity, but it is not difficult to see that his objections do not provide a very strong case for Christianity.


Evolution


My opponent’s claim that “o good mutation has ever been seen” is blatantly false. Several examples of beneficial mutations that have been observed are the adaption to high and low temperatures by E. coli, adaption to growth in the dark and selection for large size in chlamydomonas, adaption to a low phosphate chemostat environment by a clonal line of yeast, evidence of genetic divergence and beneficial mutations in bacteria after 10,000 generations.

http://www.gate.net...


God


Pro’s argument in favor of Christianity is that the Bible has no problems in it. Not only is this in itself a rather poor piece of evidence for Christianity, it is also false.

Contradictions in the Bible are obvious problems. I will just mention a couple.


Order of Creation

There is a discrepancy in the accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 regarding the order of creation. In Genesis 1, God creates plants before he creates Adam, yet in Genesis 2, it states that Adam was created at a time when there were no plants. In Genesis 1 it states that Adam was created after animals, but in Genesis 2 it explains that God created the animals after creating Adam.

http://www.biblegateway.com...


The Last Words of Jesus

The Bible is also inconsistent in how it portrays the last words of Jesus. Matthew 27 says that they were “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” while Luke 23 says they were “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,” and John 19 says they were “It is finished.”

http://www.biblegateway.com...
http://www.biblegateway.com...
http://www.biblegateway.com...

Numerous other inconsistencies are present in the Bible, and the existence of just one of these errors is enough to dismiss my opponent's depiction of an errorless Bible.

My also argues that “There has never been reasonable evidence against God.” This arguments commits the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. By my opponent’s logic, it would be reasonable to conclude that there exists an invisible flying pink unicorn on Mars because there has never been reasonable evidence against the existence of such a creature.

Additionally, I would contend that an absence of evidence where evidence is to be expected is evidence of absence. One would expect there to be evidence for a God, and I contend that there is a lack of said evidence, therefore this can count as evidence of an absence of God.

My opponent’s arguments fail to affirm Christianity.

Feelings


My opponent’s final argument against naturalism is that our feelings and pain cannot just be parts of the physical world.

Despite my opponent’s incredulity at this idea, we have a decent understanding of how the brain and nervous system process both emotions and pain, leading us to the conclusion that these things are, in fact, natural.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://faculty.washington.edu...

Debate Round No. 2
Se7en7h_Phenom

Pro

Se7en7h_Phenom forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Se7en7h_Phenom

Pro

Se7en7h_Phenom forfeited this round.
Magicr

Con

Q: What do you get when you cut an avocado into 6.022*10^23 pieces?

A: Guacamole!

Debate Round No. 4
Se7en7h_Phenom

Pro

Se7en7h_Phenom forfeited this round.
Magicr

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Xerge 3 years ago
Xerge
Se7en7h_PhenomMagicrTied
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: Forfeit
Vote Placed by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
Se7en7h_PhenomMagicrTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: 4 feet.
Vote Placed by Typhlochactas 3 years ago
Typhlochactas
Se7en7h_PhenomMagicrTied
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: Obvious vote is obvious.