The Instigator
radz
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
tahir.imanov
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

Mary inherited the Original Sin

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 2 votes the winner is...
radz
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/20/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 955 times Debate No: 42696
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (2)

 

radz

Pro

HOLY SCRIPTURES

The Scriptures never recorded anything about Mary's supposed one-of-a-kind salvation. The Bible does not speak of Mary immune from inheriting the original sin.

PATRISTICS

There is no teaching about the Immaculate Conception before Nicene council.
tahir.imanov

Con

I will debate this topic on the basis there is no such a thing as "Original Sin". It is just fantasy+science_fiction.
First question should be asked is, what is the sin.
Sin is, basically, having the knowledge of what God ordered to do and ordered not to do, and at the same time refusing to follow this orders.
So for sin to be sin the person is required of having knowledge of the sin.
If two year old child enters to mall and takes chocolate and goes out, is it considired to be sin. Rational people will say no, for obvious reasons, which I do not need to write, but if my opponent have an objection I can discuss them in further rounds.
So, let's return to Genesis. Did Adam and Eve had a knowledge of good and bad, before they ate fruit of forrbidden tree. Answer is no, therefore they did not have the necessary knowledge, therefore what they did is not a sin, therefore there is no such a thing as "Original Sin".
And this proves two points, "Original Sin" does not exist and .....
Debate Round No. 1
radz

Pro

My debate is specifically about Mary's immaculateness as Roman Catholicism teaches and not about the original sin per se. If My opponent wish so we can debate about the original sin in another debate challenge.
tahir.imanov

Con

It does not matter what debate was about. In order to say Mary (a.) inhereted original sin, you have to prove the concept of original sin, first. Then talk about Mary (a.). I gave the reason why Original Sin is non-sense. So burden of proof on you. And......
Debate Round No. 2
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
tahir.imanov

Con

I will post my argument after Pro posts his. I hope.
Debate Round No. 3
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
tahir.imanov

Con

tahir.imanov forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
tahir.imanov

Con

tahir.imanov forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
You cannot debate using non-sensical presuppositions.
My presupposition is: our universe is 2dimentional.
Therefor space does not exist.
Therefor I proved space does not exist.
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
*based
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
@tahir It is perfectly legitimate to debate beased on set presuppositions. Pro's opening statements clearly defined those as including the existence of original sin.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
@otakujordan, yes I know that. I just ga"e example how absurd that is.
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
@Putakujordan before arguing original sin is "genetically" passed to anybode, one requires to prove O.S. exists, and it is real, and in fact it is "genetically" inhereted.
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
@Artur He is not arguing that original sin does not exist, but rather that it was not passed on to Mary.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
and not all, imagine:

whole humankind is sinner, and anybody believes in the crucifixion of Jesus, death of Jesus as a payment for sins, then that person's sin is deleted. it is like this:

100 crimers commit crime and then one person who didnot commit crime gets sentenced, then that 100 is free.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
I did not know exactly what chapter was this and what verse was this, but one verse was like original sin, like saying:

{{{a man entered the world with sin hence it spreaded to the human kind. like that}}}

and then I googled it and found it: http://carm.org...

in this link Ifound concept of original sin and the verse, it is romans 5:12.

this link explains it in this way:

{{{the Fall of Adam as the "original" sin and the hereditary fallen nature and moral corruption that is passed down from Adam to his descendents.}}}

how absurd this is? imagine, I commit a crime, e.g: stole something and then I sentenced to jail for 3 years and then I got freedom and then married and then I had a son.

then, the crime I committed makes my son crimer, not just my son, whole descendants of mine, whole generations of mine is sentenced to the 3 year jail for the crime I committed.

@Tahir, in your arguement, please give an example like this and then let the readers see how absurd original sin is.
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
@delgado Is it necessary to believe in original sin in order to be a Christian?
Posted by tahir.imanov 3 years ago
tahir.imanov
@PutakuJordan, The truth is truth, whether I tell, or not tell.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by PiercedPanda 3 years ago
PiercedPanda
radztahir.imanovTied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I gave points to pro, because Con did not properly debate for the side he was on. Pro also had better conduct, because of such. Lastly, I believe he had more convincing arguments. Oh, and also superior grammar. For example, he wrote: "but if my opponent have an objection I can discuss them in further rounds." He should of wrote "has" instead of "have"
Vote Placed by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
radztahir.imanovTied
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: unreplied arguements+forfeits.