The Instigator
FritzStammberger
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
ishallannoyyo
Con (against)
Winning
42 Points

Debate.org is crawling with atheists hostile to christianity

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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 11 votes the winner is...
ishallannoyyo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/24/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,532 times Debate No: 29517
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (11)

 

FritzStammberger

Pro

Debate.org is crawling with atheists hostile to christianity. Thus it is nearly impossible for a christian to win a debate on debate .org due to the biased voters even when the christian presents a superior argument. Jesus experienced the same hostility from the intellectuals of his day even to the point of being killed despite his superior logic.
ishallannoyyo

Con

I thank my opponent for his response. I'm assuming that this debate was created in response to the fact that my opponent has lost all three of his previous debates, and all three of them were related to God in some form. Thus, my opponent's assumes that the reason he lost was because atheists voted on his debate, though he completely ignores the possibility that he might have lost the debate because his opponent made superior arguments.

I define the following term:

"Crawling" - Roughly around 50% or more of people actively (at least once a week) using DDO

However, I await my opponent's first arguments. If he wants to contest the definitions, I welcome him to do so in the comments.

I look forward to an interesting debate :)
Debate Round No. 1
FritzStammberger

Pro

first of all I never said that "crawling" was defined as 51%

I would consider "crawling to be about 20-40%

let's see

it say's here 20% atheist

2% buddhist (= atheist)

1% pagan

I'll take half the agnostics for this count so

6% agnostic (atheists really)

I'll also take the 2% jews who are probably non believers"

That makes 31%

Hey" these stats on this link you provided from debate.org only add up to 84% Wheres the other 16%???

I'll assume that's the rest of these darn atheists that debate.org is "crawling with"

That makes 47% Atheist. I think that will do.
ishallannoyyo

Con

I thank my opponent for his comments. However, I find it unfair that my opponent has defined “crawling” as 20 – 40% when 20% of people have identified themselves as atheists. However, this is irrelevant really and I will go with my opponents definitions and go with a rough 30% which is a halfway point.


MY OPPONENT’S MATH


Firstly, the fact that the percentages only add up to 84% is only more evidence against my opponent’s case. The demographic page really cannot be trusted because of how easy it is to manipulate the demographics. The demographics page claims that roughly 500 people are part of the American Nazi Party, but does that really mean that 500 or so people are really members of the party? For example, I could easily put on my page that I am a Christian, however that does not mean I am actually Christian. Furthermore, even if we accept that the demographics are the perfect representation of all the members of DDO, the resolution was that DDO is crawling with atheists hostile to Christianity. My opponent has still to provide proof that all of those atheists are hostile to Christianity. The fact that they are atheist’s does not mean that they hate Christianity, it is illogical to assume that.



Thus, my opponent has completely failed to even debate the resolution and has instead attempted to persuade us that atheist = hates Christianity and the demographics page is 100% accurate, which of course is illogical to assume.

Debate Round No. 2
FritzStammberger

Pro

1.
Con
"I will go with my opponents definitions and go with a rough 30%" (to be considered "crawling")

Pro
(shows in round two that debate.org is roughly 47% atheist according to the debate.org stat page.
http://debate.org...
(note: we have no reason to assume these stats are wrong or manipulated as con implied. )

Thus we have firmly established the first part of my contention that ;

"Debate.org is crawling with atheists"

Now let's move on to my second contention.

2. Those atheists are hostile to Christianity.

- an atheist by definition does not believe in God.

Gods absolute #1 rule for mankind is written in the book of Mathew as follows;

Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

Jesus said unto him,

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment."

Matthew 22:36-40
http://www.biblegateway.com...

also in Mathew 12:30 and Luke 11:23
the Lord Jesus declares;

"He that is not with me is against me;"

http://bible.cc...
http://bible.cc...

Revelation 21:8 says

"But the fearful, and UNBELIEVING, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

Thus

God has made it perfectly clear that He who is not with him is against him.

- atheists are literally "against him".

- Debate.org is roughly 47% atheists as I have shown.

Finally;

"Debate.org is crawling with atheists hostile to christianity."

I have proven this to be an objective, undeniable, demonstrable FACT.
However, I will most likely lose this debate NOT based on the logic of the arguments but because the majority of people who will vote on it will be atheists.

as a final note; If there are even two or three atheists on debate.org who are hostile to the Lord God, Creator of the universe and all that is in it. Then I consider debate.org "crawling with atheists"

I highly recommend that you repent of your sins and turn to the Lord for forgiveness and mercy through Jesus Christ, amen.
ishallannoyyo

Con

STATS


Just to help my opponent out, here are the stats on those who voted on his previous lost debates:


Bible/Jesus is God debate: 2 Christians, 2 Not Saying, 50% of voters were theists, all of them voted against you


Atonement of Sins: 2 Christians, 3 Not Saying, 40% of voters were theists, all of them voted against you


Evolution: 1 Christian, 2 Atheists, 6 Not Saying/Other, you plagiarized so how can you expect to win? Furthermore, the Christian voted for you even though you plagiarized, yet you are claiming that atheists are biased?


The 16% Thing


I have just realized that my opponent decided to add 16% to the atheists because of the missing 16%, but this really doesn’t make sense. If these 16% identified themselves as atheists, then we would have 16% more atheists. In fact, these 16% could potentially be not saying (which =/= Atheist, it means “I don’t want to tell you”), so it is really roughly around 31% atheists.


(note: we have no reason to assume these stats are wrong or manipulated as con implied.)


Clear logical fallacy, lack of evidence is not evidence. Even if we don’t have proof that these stats are manipulated, that doesn’t mean that the stats are true. It is extremely easy to manipulate these stats, as I have shown with the American Nazi Party stats. Thus, the first part of the contention is false.


God’s absolute rule/Bible stuff


My opponent has decided that a disbelief in god somehow equals a hostility and hatred towards Christianity, which is clearly illogical. My opponent has ZERO proof that these atheists are HOSTILE to Christianity, he has only attempted to prove that the atheists don’t believe in God, which is apparently wrong.


He who is not with him is against him.


Against him does not equal hostile/hates him, furthermore, this debate isn’t about who is hostile to God, but who is hostile to the religion (Christianity).


I will lose this debate because the voters are atheists assumption.


This is also ridiculous, if you lose, it will probably be because of your complete lack of logical thought and your assumptions that atheists hate and are hostile to Christianity. Furthermore, Christians who voted on your debates voted against you, so it is illogical to assume that it is because of atheists that you lost the debate.



My opponent really has no concrete stats, they are all assumptions, this is an easy VOTE CON.

Debate Round No. 3
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Sagey 4 years ago
Sagey
Well, My point is that:
Anybody can win a debate if they are good enough at debating and can construct a convincing argument.
Regardless of which side they take.
Had a mate (at a Christian boarding school) that was so good at convincing others almost anything.
He had a hall full of adults holding onto their wooden seats when he convinced them there was going to be a flash flood.
He never lost a debate, whether he agreed or disagreed with the side he was given to defend.
Never was good at mathematics nor science, just good at convincing people and professional in his debating tactics. I often lost because I was not as tactful as he. He would beat me without any effort. :-( I suck @ debating, coz I'm like a bull in a china shop.
Naturally he went into politics.
Don't need mathematics nor science for that.
Posted by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
You missed the point, Sagey. That comment was in direct reference to a comment made that said Christians can't win a debate, due to the assumed prevalence of atheists here. jh1234l was pointing out that it was simply not true.
Posted by Sagey 4 years ago
Sagey
LOL @ "Muted is a Christian who argues against evolution, and has won 16 debates."

Yes, Creationists are known for being excellent at winning debates, simply because they are trained in and concentrate on the art of winning arguments and debates. Debating are an art form or even a science.
Those Creationists who are great at debating often have no real knowledge of Evolution, nor science for that matter, you don't need to have such knowledge to win debates.
Though winning debates against evolutionists, in absolutely no way shows that evolution itself is wrong. It only loses a debate, but the science behind evolution is still correct, but the anti-evolutionist was just better and more apt at winning votes, that's all.
It certainly doesn't make the winner correct anywhere outside the debate.
The winner is simply better in the art of debating, not better at science, nor knowledge.

In the real, scientific world, Evolution is millions of light years ahead of Creation in the reality stakes.
Less than 5% of scientists even consider the Creationist view and less than 0.5% may actually consider it has any truth.
Debates mean nothing in reality, it's simply a public battle of opinions.
No changes to underlying concepts nor scientific theories ever came from debating in public.

Scientific theory alterations only come from research results.
Creationist argument alterations (they have no real theories) only come from paraphrasing and distorting scientific discoveries to try and foist it as propaganda against evolution.

Aye M8z! :-D-
Posted by FritzStammberger 4 years ago
FritzStammberger
Thanks! a new friend!
Posted by jh1234l 4 years ago
jh1234l
"Thus it is nearly impossible for a christian to win a debate on debate .org "

Muted is a Christian who argues against evolution, and has won 16 debates.

http://debate.org...
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
Look mate, everyone is not out to get Christians, or Muslims, or Atheists here. We are a fairly tolerant community, in general. You must have realized referring to those who don't share your faith as "crawling" and "hostile" wasn't kind nor compassionate. Perhaps your prior loss or someone's comments got you upset and off on the wrong foot, but many here are rather forgiving. Let's try again. Welcome to this site, and may your time here be enjoable. :)

Ephesians 4:32 - "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you."
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
"Finally, as a fellow Christian, Ephesians 4:32 tells us to be kind to one another, to be tenderhearted, and to have grace."
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
I don't see any videos. Multiple Christians have already voted and left detailed RFDs.
Posted by FritzStammberger 4 years ago
FritzStammberger
can I get just 1 christian to comment on this video? anyone?
Posted by DudeWithoutTheE 4 years ago
DudeWithoutTheE
I've found the opposite. It's crawling with Christians who will vote for the pro-Christian side even if they clearly lose heavily.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's contention is "it is nearly impossible for a christian to win a debate on debate .org due to the biased voters even when the christian presents a superior argument." Pro didn't provide evidence that debates with superior arguments were lost due to atheist bias. Con provided evidence that Christans were voting against certain arguments by Christians. There are certainly plenty of anti-christian atheists on DDO, but Pro didn't provide a reasonable resolution that could have been affirmed. Failing to capitalize "christian" is an unforgivable S&G error for Pro
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 4 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Lol, this debate was entertaining. I laughed the entire time. Con used numbers to prove his position. I'm Catholic.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: How many atheists it takes to be "crawling" would be hard to establish. I wouldn't know which way to vote on that, given the performances of the debaters. But the "hostile to Christians" part is easy. Pro created that resolution. Pro had the burden of proof. Pro never addressed the issue. Con wins.
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Whether or not Pro proved the "crawling" argument is irrelevant. He failed to address the "hostility" part. The default atheist position towards Christianity is not hostility but rather silent acceptance. You cannot use your holy book to define my position as hostile, either; that's not for you to decide, only me.
Vote Placed by Locke33 4 years ago
Locke33
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Con won the argument gets the points
Vote Placed by OhioGary 4 years ago
OhioGary
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I think it's difficult to say that a population is crawling, perhaps use of another word may dissolve ambiguity? In any event, 1/2 way through the debate Pro then changed the definition to mean that 2 or 3 athiests would constitute too many. Pro offered Bible verses but none of them proved that DDO has lots of athiests and that those athiests (if any) are hostile to Christianity. I am not an athiest, nor am I hostile to Christianity as I am a Christian. So, I disproved your assertion. And, so did Con. Arguments & Sources to Con. Pro had numerous grammar errors; S&G to Con. Finally, as a fellow Christian, Ephesians 4:32 tells us to be kind to one another, to be tenderhearted, and to have grace. Pro does not know anything about Con's background or life, yet Pro asked Con to repent of his sins. As a Christian, I couldn't imagine Jesus talking like that. As a debator, Con deserved better conduct. Conduct to Con.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: The only one Con didn't win was sources, and that only because there weren't a lot of sources to use. Pro completely failed to make a valid argument in support of his case, several of the points he did make were, to me, bad conduct. S&G should be obvious.
Vote Placed by DudeWithoutTheE 4 years ago
DudeWithoutTheE
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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: There are individuals on DDO who can make the case for Christianity cogently, and without resorting to personal attacks. Pro is clearly not any of these people.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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: 'If there are even two or three atheists.. I consider debate.org "crawling with atheists"' Fritz uses pejorative terms to describe those who do not share his beliefs, so I deduct a conduct point. Pro's intolerance is obvious, and I suspect he projects that onto others. ** The biblical verse states that those who are not with God are against him. That is not the same as saying they are hostile (angry and/or aggressive) towards Christianity. Pro defined crawling as "20%-40%" and he does not provide evidence that such a percentage of atheists hostile towards Christianity exist on this site to support his point. Arguments to Con. *** I hope Fritz someday overcomes his own hostility and intolerance and learns to accept his defeats with grace and learn from them.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 4 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
FritzStammbergerishallannoyyoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't actually know how to vote. Mostly cos my brain hurts trying to understand what on earth was just written. I'm tempted to vote CON b/c the bible verses aren't an argument relating to anything, but at the same time, it's just... No. I'm refraining from even taking part in this charade. This was a waste of time and should never have existed.