The Instigator
Nexistential
Pro (for)
The Contender
RonPaulConservative
Con (against)

Most religions refer to the same God

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Nexistential has forfeited round #5.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 408 times Debate No: 99661
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Nexistential

Pro

Sup

Here I propose that the God of Hinduism (Brahma), Judaism (Yahweh/Elohim), Christianity (Alaha), Islam (Allah) and Sikhism (Waheguru) are one and the same being/existence.
RonPaulConservative

Con

No, they'te all phoney human inventions inytended to manipulate and control mankind.
Debate Round No. 1
Nexistential

Pro

I agree so far as religions have been USED to manipulate mankind, but to dismiss them completely is a biased argument.

Not only have you completely evaded my main point, you have made the clear implication that you are enlightened and everyone with a different opinion than yours is fundamentally brainwashed.

Dogmatic religion has no place in modern society, but the essence of religion itself is non-dogmatic.
This is because dogma, by definition, is man-made.

To quote the Scripture of one of the most dogmatic religions.

Quran 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion"

I will summarize in two points why you will lose this argument.

- The question was not whether or not God exists. That is completely irrelevant, and whether God does exist or not will not change the validity of my original argument.

- I predict you have close to no knowledge of any Scripture of any religion, and therefore you will find it hard to argue with someone that does.
RonPaulConservative

Con

First of all, anyone from a revealed religion has been brainwashed- what do you call it when you take someone and indoctrinate them as a little aby into a belief that he would never have otherwise accepted?

Second of all, "God" was originally used as essentially a Big Borther figure who doesn't really exist but is used as a fear mongering propaganda tool to keep everyone in submission. However, the universe was obviously designed, and so deists refer to this "intelligent design," as "God."

Third of all, I have extensive knowledge of scripture- I used to be a Christian and I even studied Talmudic/Rabbinic scriptures, the Qur'an, and the Guru Granth.

Now in regards to my opponent claiming that religion has been sed to control mankind but wasn't invented for that purpose- this is false. Muhammad invented Islam to gain power an control, Constantine invented Christianity to gain power and control, and the Levi Priests invented Judaism to get power and control- this is universal in almost every sect.
Debate Round No. 2
Nexistential

Pro

"First of all, anyone from a revealed religion has been brainwashed"

I believe you are mistaking acceptance of dogma for appreciation. I certainly do not believe in dogma, in fact I believe religion is something that we can take valuable information from - not base our lives on.

To the extent that people will sacrifice their critical thinking for the sake of dogma, i agree with you - they are brainwashed.
To call someone who simply believes in the underlying truth BENEATH institutionalized religion brainwashed is purely based on opinion.

"Second of all, "God" was originally used as essentially a Big Borther figure who doesn't really exist but is used as a fear mongering propaganda tool to keep everyone in submission. However, the universe was obviously designed, and so deists refer to this "intelligent design," as "God."

Here you make vastly contradicting statements - something that is intelligent that designed this world CLEARLY came BEFORE the "God" that was originally used as a Big Brother figure.
My understanding of God is much closer to yours than that of mainstream religion - but that doesn't take away the truth in all religion - that there is a Creative Force, that happens to either have sentience and/or intelligence.

"Third of all, I have extensive knowledge of scripture"
Fair enough, I underestimated you then.

"Now in regards to my opponent claiming that religion has been sed to control mankind but wasn't invented for that purpose- this is false. Muhammad invented Islam to gain power an control, Constantine invented Christianity to gain power and control, and the Levi Priests invented Judaism to get power and control- this is universal in almost every sect."

"Muhammad invented Islam to gain power and control"
How did you arrive at this conclusion? Is this a belief or do you have proof to back it up? Or are you simply appealing to the majority - that bears aversion towards Islam.

Don't get me wrong - Islam has CERTAINLY been corrupted through culture, but to assume that it was created in the first place as a form of manipulation - well, that is a leap. Basically - citation required.

"Constantine invented Christianity to gain power and control"
Christianity has been around since the actual days of Jesus - there have been various forms of it.
To say Constantine CORRUPTED Christianity would be something I agree with, but invented it? Serious mistake.

"the Levi Priests invented Judaism"? Judaism was built from Abraham to Moses, and only after was it corrupted.

In all these cases you are mistaking the currently most widely accepted form of religions for their original forms.

All in all, I stress that I GREATLY agree with you in that religion has been used for control and power, but the essence on which corrupted religion was built was a common, universal truth that all religions share.

The truth of the Creative Force that we like to call "God", for which the definition implies non-definition. Which brings us back to the argument in question; if we could please not go off on a tangent again, I would appreciate it.
RonPaulConservative

Con

My opponent is yet to prove the resolution, insted he has argued against a statement that I made.
Debate Round No. 3
Nexistential

Pro

My opponent can't even be bothered to write something against my original statement. I have refuted not one, but every single one of his false and teenage angst riddled statements, and concluded this rebuttal with an expansion of my original statement, which he has yet to even argue against.

"All in all, I stress that I GREATLY agree with you in that religion has been used for control and power, but the essence on which corrupted religion was built was a common, universal truth that all religions share."

This isn't a debate, it's babysitting, and I want money
RonPaulConservative

Con

"Sup
Here I propose that the God of Hinduism (Brahma), Judaism (Yahweh/Elohim), Christianity (Alaha), Islam (Allah) and Sikhism (Waheguru) are one and the same being/existence." - Round 1.

OK, how do you intend to prove this?

"I agree so far as religions have been USED to manipulate mankind, but to dismiss them completely is a biased argument.
Not only have you completely evaded my main point, you have made the clear implication that you are enlightened and everyone with a different opinion than yours is fundamentally brainwashed.
Dogmatic religion has no place in modern society, but the essence of religion itself is non-dogmatic.
This is because dogma, by definition, is man-made.
To quote the Scripture of one of the most dogmatic religions.
Quran 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion"
I will summarize in two points why you will lose this argument.
- The question was not whether or not God exists. That is completely irrelevant, and whether God does exist or not will not change the validity of my original argument.
- I predict you have close to no knowledge of any Scripture of any religion, and therefore you will find it hard to argue with someone that does." - Round 2

I don't see any proofs there-
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by LuciferWept 1 year ago
LuciferWept
Does Pro know that Hinduism is polytheistic? And why no mention of Zoroastrianism, Indiginous Folk Religions, or Shinto?
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.