The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

God inspired prophets and a book

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/30/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 206 times Debate No: 94270
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




I am arguing against the idea that God inspired prophets and a book like the Bible, Koran, etc. This has nothing to do whether or not there is a God. This is a unique debate I am starting but there is a string attached. The string is that you must first start this debate by answering "yes" or "no" at the end of my little essay. I will not debate anyone who does not answer. Here goes:

If I were God, I would want those created by Me to know who I am, why they are here and what I expect from them. I would make sure they knew all of these things without any chance of mistake or confusion.

In order to get my message to people, I would not pick out individual prophets to hear from me who would in turn repeat my message to my creation. Prophets could be questioned and doubted and why should anyone believe that I chose the prophet? A false prophet could just as easily say I was speaking to him and who could know the difference? I think choosing prophets to speak for me would be a recipe for disaster. In fact, false prophets could inspire all types of different religions and branches of even the right religion. Leaving people to figure out who is and is not a true prophet is asking for mistakes and confusion, something I already said I want to avoid.

I also would not leave people a book. A book would be subject to the writer and whether or not the writer got his words from my instruction. A book could be questioned, doubted, altered and changed. That too would lead to mistakes and confusion. Anyone would be able to say "God inspired me to write this and if you don't believe me, you are in trouble." Again, people would really have no way to know if I inspired the writer or the writer is just writing to express what he believes or he could be just another false prophet. False prophets could have different books that have a different religion. That could leave many religions on Earth. That could happen if I left mankind a book. A book would also be subject to the availability of it and the ability of mankind to get it copied and printed. This did not occur on a mass scale until the printing press leaving most of mankind living their whole life with no access to my message. I would not want that.

Not that I would but if I did leave people a book, it would be so flawless that it would be unmistakable. No one would need to attend classes on what the book means. No one would have to listen to lectures and read books about my book to try to make sense of it. There would not be two people on the planet who disagreed on what the book's message is in every aspect. There would not be any possibility of people who took things out of context or misinterpreted something. If I were God, I could get it exactly right to the point where people would no more disagree with any aspect of the book than they would disagree on the shape of a circle or the issue of whether water was wet or dry. It would be that simple. There would never be a need for any books or teachings by those of higher learning to explain or interpret what my book says.

Here is how I would get my message to mankind: Being a supernatural God who can do anything, I would get them the message supernaturally. I would write my messages in the air right in front of people's faces. All one would need to do is to blink their eyes three times and I would display a message or many messages to that person. It would be in their language at their level. If they were mentally retarded, they would still completely get Me. If they were old and senile, they would get Me. If they were open to read all day, the messages would be there all day. The hungrier one would be to learn, the more the messages would feed their soul.

By doing this, I would be eliminating many things.

1. All need for evangelism of any type. No one would need to go out and teach anyone because I would be the greatest teacher in the universe. There would be no need for foreign missionaries raising all kinds of money to go out and preach to those who have never heard of Me because everyone who looks up and blinks their eyes will know exactly who I am and what I expect. People can fail at teaching but I would not. This way, there would never be anyone who ever lived who could say they did not know what I am about and what I want from people.

2. There would never be a money issue. There would be no evangelists anywhere asking for money to support this ministry or that mission trip. No one would be on TV or any gathering place begging for more and more money for the sake of getting my message out. Everyone would have easy access to my message right there in their own language! I would eliminate all traces of mistakes and confusion.

The only issue between mankind and Myself is whether or not people will choose to follow Me or not " whether they will obey Me or not. All the debating about what my message is and who or what the true God is would never even exist leaving people all the time in the world to decide if they want to follow my instructions.

This is what I would do if I were God.

Here is the question: Do you think my method of communication, if I were God, is a good one? Also, I would prefer to debate with a born again Christian.


Jesus fulfilled 365 Jewish prophecies of their future Messiah.

Denying that Jesus is the "Son of God" is antichrist by Biblical definition.

(1 John 2:22)
"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist, denying the Father and the Son."

(1 John 2:23)
"No one who denies the Son has the Father."


About Jesus-

(Revelation 19:16)


(Revelation 17:14)
"These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful."

In the hadith (Sahih-Al-Bukhari Bk 73; Num 224) Mohammed said, "The most awful name in Allah"s sight on the Day of Resurrection, will be (that of) a man calling himself Malik Al-Amlak (the King of kings)."


Muhammed and demons-

Here is the story told by Muhammad's wet-nurse, related in Guillaume's translation of Ibn Ishaq, page 72:
"His father said to me, "I am afraid that this child has had a stroke, so take him back to his family before the result appears. -" She asked me what happened and gave me no peace until I told her." When she asked if I feared a demon had possessed him, I replied that I did.""


"(The Antichrist)"The beast"

(Revelation 13:16)
"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:"

Muslims are looking for a "beast of the Earth" who will "mark foreheads".


And when the Word is fulfilled against them (the unjust), we shall produce from the earth a beast to (face) them: He will speak to them, for that mankind did not believe with assurance in Our Signs."

"R01;Qur'an, sura 27 (An-Naml), ayat 82

In the Biblical book of Revelation there are 2 "beasts". One is the "False Prophet". He directs his followers to worship the other "beast" (The Antichrist) and renounces Jesus as the "Son of God".


The "beast (Antichrist) is set up at the Temple Mount proclaiming himself as God. He opposes Christians and has them beheaded.

(Revelation 13:6-8)
6"He opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7"And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
8"And those that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb."

(2 Thessalonians 2:4)
"He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God."

The Dome of the Rock bares a full fledged antichrist inscription.

"It befitteth not the Majesty of Allah that he should have a son."


(Link to the full inscription)


Revelation 13:17)
"..had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name."

Revelation 13:18
"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of his name; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."

Walid Shoebat, ex Muslim, tells us 666 in Greek reads "In the name of Allah" in Arabic.


In the Bible, the followers of the Antichrist bow to an image.
Revelation 20:4

Muslims do bow to an image
(Video proof)


Acts 2:17)
"'In the last days, your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.

Muslims everywhere are claiming to see the divine Jesus in dreams and converting.


Antichrist's followers behead Christians-

(Revelation 20:4)
"And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God.."

ISIS is beheading Christians in droves.


(Matthew 24:21)
"Then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been nor ever will be again.

Christians will soon be gone in the Middle East.

Matthew 24:14
Gospel preached worldwide

2 Thessalonians 2:3
Then a rebellion against and falling away from God.

2 Peter 3:3
Finally, mass mocking of God.


Any doubt? Let's go to the OT.

Genesis 17:1
"But my covenant I will establish with Isaac."

God chose no covenant with Ishmael's descendents. Why?

Genesis 16:12
"He will be a wild man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him.."

So of course Muslims claim Ismael as the "Father of Muhammed", "The Father of the Arabs, and the "Father of Ilsm".
Debate Round No. 1


Is there something wrong with your reading comprehension skills because there was not one word of your argument that complied with the topic and criteria of this debate. Please read my original post and especially the last couple of sentences and no more copy and paste propaganda. I did not read any of it once I realized where you were going.


Con, in his haughty "Atheistness" was trying to use a forced strawman argument and doesn't like being called on it, and thus exposed his real nature of simply wanting to attack someone. He was called out, then began whining like a schoolgirl and moaning like a hound.

Con posed a system where you can do one of two things.

1)Praise his "awesome" proposal, while then trying to dismantle your belief by saying, "Well your God is not like that", which dismisses all thought of omniscient morality(knowing how all things end and what all people think), and declaring a "highground" of logic by dismissing God's omniscience and a number of other philosophical arguments that make his proposal intellectual suicide and a philosophical false dichotomy by ommission.


2)You dismiss his proposal as good, of which he then points to the "illogical" stance you are making by declaring things like, "This is what I would do if I were God." He knows it all sounds good and lovely to the ignorant mind, hoping his opponent doesn't have the intellectual insight to know that doing what "sounds nice" or "sounds pretty" is not always the correct thing to do.


I talk to my child in a soft tone, befriend them, and treat them as my equal. It almost sounds nice. reality, my child turns out spoiled, a drunk, and commits suicide because I didn't teach them anything about real life, teach them skills, or parent them.

What Con is proposing is a logical fallacy based upon a strawman. His "rules" corner you by making you choose the left strawman or the right strawman. Then he knocks down the strawman he has forced you to pick.

What Con did not expect was brontoraptor, who couldn't care less if he wins or loses debates as long as he challenges piss poor concepts, ideologies, and ideas.

If Con still wants to take me on in this debate, he is welcome to continue. If not, well...

(Bronto stands over this debate and it begins raining on the debate. Wait....that's not rain!)

(Bronto scampers off into the weeds)

(Bronto theme music plays)
Debate Round No. 2


I am 2 for 2. I have proposed this question to two Christians (if that is what you are) and you have refused to answer because you are afraid to answer the yes or no question. It is really a simple question. Do you think my method is a good one? There is no need to be afraid but here is exactly why you are afraid to answer:

Here is how the religious person's mind works: There is a wall. On your side of the wall, there is your entire belief system about everything you believe. On the other side are doubts and questions." You cannot look on the other side of that wall because you know that would be the same as questioning what is on your side of the wall and your brain cannot let that happen. Only the rare person lets that happen.

You and I both know that, in your mind, the method of God's communication through prophets and the Bible went like this: God told prophets who told other people that "God told me to tell you..." God revealed to these prophets to write a book and now we have the Bible. Many false prophets have arisen through many religions using the same "God told me to tell you" lines. They also wrote books that God "told" them to write. Therefore, we have exactly what we have today, chaos and confusion. We have Muslims, Catholics, Hindus, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Free Will Baptists, Southern Baptists, Rostafarians, Buddhists and really, we both know the list goes on and on. We have prophets like Isaiah and Paul and Joseph Smith and Jim Jones and Muhammed and many more all giving different messages. All have different ideas as to who God is and what man's responsibility to God is and many are even reading the same book." You believe in this message that YOUR belief just happens to be on the right track because you will not look on the other side of the wall." You can actually believe God chose to do it that way which led to all that confusion or you can choose to believe that my way is a better way."

The problem in your mind is that you cannot make that choice. You know that I am just a man, a finite, faulty, often failing man and there is no way in this universe that you can allow your mind to believe that my way is a better way than the wise, all-knowing, perfect God of the universe's way. That too would be looking on the other side of that wall....something you cannot allow yourself to do.

When it comes to spirituality, there are 2 things you need to be concerned with:

1. What is true about God as far as who he is and what he expects?
2. What will you do with that truth?

One cannot even get to #2 above without getting past #1." In this world, most people have lived their whole life and never got past #1 so how could #2 be relevant for them? It cannot. My method, if I were God, completely eliminates any issue with #1 so that leaves only #2 to be concerned with, something you can choose to follow or not, to obey or not. If you were God, would you want the human race to not know who you are or to quickly get past that point and get to the worshipping and obedience and guidance parts? What makes sense - to have people deceived by Muhammad who claimed God spoke to him thus leading Muslims to kill millions of people over land they claim is theirs...or my way?

The problem is that if you accept that my way is a good way, you know that it truly is the best way you have ever heard of and one that you know God should have thought of himself. Ask yourself if God knows the future and if he does, surely he foresaw all the religious confusion as to who He is and what he wants. Surely, he knows more than I do! In order to continue your current belief system, you have to convince yourself that 90% of all the people who ever lived will have never even heard of Jesus and the message and many more will distort it and many more will simply have a completely alternate religion and God will be okay with that because somehow for some reason, that is how God designed it.

"That is what you have no choice but to believe. You have to believe that God inspired a religion from prophets and a book that led to many prophets and lots of writings that were false and He did not think of a better way to get his message across! It is almost as if he had no idea what was coming.

If you were honest with yourself (this is hard to do when it comes to religion), you will admit that my way is not only better, not only much better but infinitely better that the way you currently believe. It is so much better, it is like comparing chocolate to dirt. By believing my way is better and admitting it, you would have to look over that wall because how else could you admit to yourself that my way is better than the way of the current God you believe in?

You can throw all your fancy words and phrases like "strawman argument" and such but the fact is that you are afraid to answer this question because it will challenge your entire belief system, thus challenging the idea that it is correct. You will lie to yourself all day long before you admit that my way is better than the way you currently believe because the way you currently believe comes from your "God." You will admit that I am smarter than your God as soon as pigs fly. Therefore, you cannot and will not answer the question. You lost.


"You cannot look on the other side of that wall because you know that would be the same as questioning what is on your side of the wall and your brain cannot let that happen."

I've read "The Extended Phenotype", God is not Great", "The selfish Gene", "The God Delusion", and "The Blind Watchmaker", and "The end of Faith". Why? I was an Atheist. Why did I change? Because I can see something that is blatantly obvious, a pattern. This pattern is what is on the other side of the Atheists' wall. You cannot look on the other side of that wall because you know that would be the same as questioning what is on your side of the wall and your brain cannot let that happen. Con himself told us he chose not to read my round 1 argument once he realized what it was. Atheists "want proof". They don't want proof...

I was an Atheist at one time. That's why I am well too established in how to stand against it, and I stand against it because it will destroy you before the end. This is why militant atheists are affixed on religion. It's always on their minds, haunting them like a dirty secret.


My past threads consist of:

"Atheism and Rumination Loops"


"Atheism the Rage Against God"

Of which I posed the question:

"Believers are entitled to speculate on why someone would not wish to be bound by an unalterable moral law. And they are justified in asking why this wish should be so profound that such persons actively desire that the universe should be a pointless and meaningless chaos, without design or purpose."


Atheism forsakes You in your Darkest Hour"

"Atheism is what Happens when you Give up"

Ask me how I know that?


"Many false prophets have arisen through many religions using the same "God told me to tell you" lines. They also wrote books that God "told" them to write. Confusion..."

You say "confusing". Is it really?

No, not really, but Atheists don't study anything beyond what atheist apologetics sites blindly spew out against Christianity. It takes a 10 minute study to see the difference, but that's 10 minutes to long for rabid Atheists foaming at the mouth to commit theological suicide.

According to Islam itself, Muhammed's wet nurse accused him of demon posession as a child, he was "tricked by Satan" to write false suras, and he initially claimed his revelation(The Quran) came from the devil. That's a clue...Hinduism worships demon gods like Kaali ma. Buhhdism is nontheistic. Anyone else we need to cover concerning their "revelations"?


" can choose to believe that my way is a better way."

And it's not. It tests, proves, and refines no one to show their metal. It coddles, and creates mindless, unproven slaves who have "witnessed thine omnipotent power," thus serve out of fear rather than from a desire to know you freely.


"What will you do with that truth?"

Oppose those hellbent on destroying hope. You have held the mirror up, but are unable to turn it upon yourself.


"If you were God, would you want the human race to not know who you are or to quickly get past that point and get to the worshipping and obedience and guidance parts?"

If individuals in their true, tested, proven form aimed to snuff out hope, meaning, and purpose, perhaps not. What are they good for? Obviously, killing hope, meaning, and purpose, thus in temporary fashion, they would accomplish their purpose. Seeing theywanted me absent from their life, I wouldn't force my way in. Maybe I'd test my own self to empathize with humanity. Maybe I'd want something that cannot be faked in an imperfect, challenging world. Something like this:

John 15:15
"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends."


"That is what you have no choice but to believe."

Not so much. I chose Con's way for the better part of a decade. The real reason Atheists take this hard stance is they don't actually know what they are talking about. I've seen argument after argument, and saw a blatant disregard for "proof" or the actual theologies of religion. They point out what the seriously believe is the truth about religion. I usually get a good laugh. The best way to tell an Atheist fits this category is when they make the ignorant implication that religions are all pretty much alike. The only way to think that is to know nothing about religion. The reason Christopher Hitchens was so affixed with religion and debate was he was actually educated on different religions. This haunted him thusly.


"how else could you admit to yourself that my way is better than the way of the current God you believe in?"

It isn't better. If Con as God wanted true, proven love, his way would fail, prove nothing, and crash into the ocean of b.s. manmade concepts formulated by imperfect human minds limited to nonomniscient dichotomies and assumptions and ignorant perceptions.

If out of the infinite possibilities available in reality, if this yields the best result to fulfill the desired outcome, a creator is obligated to this one and only version logically. Maybe there is only one way that leads to the love desired by a creator, and this is it.

Perhaps the only way to obtain His masterpiece is with dark colors. Con wants a masterpiece without enduring the artistry and work that must be endured to ever arrive at that masterpiece. Con demands the easy way out, but there is no easy, nice, pretty way to prove your love to someone or their love to you. Love only shines within the darkness.

Here is a video depicting this very concept for those interested.

"Let there be Light"


Debate Round No. 3


Again, your reading comprehension skills are lacking. In my initial argument before you even accepted, it says that this debate is not about whether or not there is a God and what do you rant about? Atheism. SMH. It says you have to answer yes or no to the question which you finally did and lied to yourself by saying no. You know you are lying to me and you. Again, you posted a lot of copy and paste stuff that I did not read and did not click on. Next time you accept someone's debate, read the %$#@ criteria, idiot.


"Atheism. SMH. It says you have to answer yes or no to the question which you finally did and lied to yourself by saying no. You know you are lying to me and you. Again, you posted a lot of copy and paste stuff that I did not read and did not click on. Next time you accept someone's debate, read the %$#@ criteria, idiot."

Con knows he made a trash religion debate and was called on it.

There is not one single argument in round 3 about "whether a god exists or not", only rebuttals to Con's round 3 assessments about religious types "building a wall" of which I stated was the same wall that Atheists have, of which Con does not rebuttle, but seeing the illogical construct of his argument, and my solid rebuttle, Con retreated back into a diatribe about me "not obeying his rules" after making an argument in round 3 of which I argued against.

Con is playing a game that children play where you scream when you don't get your way. Then after a bit more you begin being rational. Then seeing you still aren't getting your way you go back to a tantrum on the floor kicking, screaming, squealing, and carrying on in embarrassing fashion.

Let's see if Con makes any final round argument to support his case or if he reverts back into his round 4 retreat.
Debate Round No. 4


Sorry, but I prefer to have a debate with someone who has a hint of class and can follow the rules. You are more of simply an a-hole.


Con is Con on a debate so named:
"God inspired prophets and a book". That makes me Pro on a debate so called "God inspired prophets and a book".

In round 1 I made an argument that God DID inspire prophets and a book being Pro in the argument. Instead of politely or neutrally attacking my argument or pointing out any perceived "rules infractions", Con went on a diatribe of insults and putdowns.

Then, randomly, Con began debating again. I reingaged and rebuttled Con's argument. Con chose by his own discretion to then revert back to name calling, insults, and put downs once it was established that I wasn't somehow trapped in his web of semantical argumentation in round 3.

And Con, after going on a mindless, negative psychological looped rant, seems bewildered that we don't want what he has going on in his mind...
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by brontoraptor 2 months ago
Con quote round 2:
"Is there something wrong with your reading comprehension skills because there was not one word of your argument that complied with the topic and criteria of this debate?"

Con quote round 1:
"I am arguing against the idea that God inspired prophets and a book like the Bible, Koran, etc"
Posted by brontoraptor 2 months ago
He was strawmanning. The door swings both ways.
Posted by quertyfoo 2 months ago
What. The. Hell, Brontoraptor?

You are being a piece of raptor feces to Brett! Accusing him of strawmanning _while you proceed to strawman him_, and then demeaning him and insulting him.

If I were Brett, I'd have left when you made that first angry post. Posts like yours don't deserve a response.
Posted by brontoraptor 2 months ago
Besides. I get bombarded with Atheist and Agnostic hate like a drumbeat on here. If I can take the heat, you'll be okay.
Posted by brontoraptor 2 months ago
Handing it to people in utopian fashion doesn't test the soul. It creates mindless slaves.
Posted by brett.winstead 2 months ago
YOu are the type that drove me away from this site years ago. Just got too annoyed with people who would not debate but just wanted to preach their garbage.
Posted by brontoraptor 2 months ago
Bronto attached a new string.
No votes have been placed for this debate.