The Instigator
124275
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ssadi
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Muhammed was a false prophet.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 1 vote the winner is...
ssadi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/31/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 544 times Debate No: 92119
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

124275

Pro

Muhammed was a false prophet who misguided billions of people.
ssadi

Con

I accept and thank @124275 for instigating this interesting debate.


RESOLUTION


Pro makes two claims which make up the resolution of this debate:

1. Muhammad (i.e., the prophet of Islam, peace be upon him) is a false prophet, and

2. He has misguided billions of people..


BURDEN OF PROOF


BOP is fully on Pro to prove these two claims.

My only BOP is to show that Pro's arguments don't affirm the resolution.. In other words, I don't have any BOP to negate the resolution, but only to negate Pro's arguments.


I wish my opponent best of luck and look forward to a fruitful and friendly debate.
Debate Round No. 1
124275

Pro

My first point is that people can be misguided by Islam and Muhammad. For example, people say it is a religion of peace but in reality Islam is a war promoting religion with medieval Sharia law. Islam don't help people. This I believe is a main reason why Muhammed was a false prophet. Muhammad was a successful warlord but taught that Muslims are to dominate and not to be dominated. If Islam is a religion of peace, this cannot be the case a's it teaches that mu slims shold rule and not tollerate others.
ssadi

Con

Pro: "My first point is that people can be misguided by Islam and Muhammad."

Bare assertion!

Pro: "For example, people say it is a religion of peace but in reality Islam is a war promoting religion with medieval Sharia law."

Bare assertion!

Islam never promotes war, but it commands Muslims to fight for their safety if they are under attack.. In addition "Sharia law" literally is "Islamic Law".

Pro: "Islam don't help people. This I believe is a main reason why Muhammed was a false prophet."

Bare assertion!

Pro: "Muhammad was a successful warlord but taught that Muslims are to dominate and not to be dominated."

Bare assertion!

Pro: "If Islam is a religion of peace, this cannot be the case a's it teaches that mu slims shold rule and not tollerate others."

Bare assertion and non-sequitur!
Debate Round No. 2
124275

Pro

Places where the Quran advocates violence:
Quran 2 - 244
Quran 3 - 151
Quran 4 - 76
Quran 8 - 57
And many more.
ssadi

Con

A RHETORICAL REBUTTAL


Sources [1] & [2] refute all the claims about verses of violence in the Qur'an, including the ones Pro provided.



REBUTTALS




2:244


The context talks about Israelites not fighting against Pharaoh, as a lesson to Muslims.[1][2]


3:151

It is about God's help, casting terror in enemies hearts, to Muslims in battlefield.[1]


4:76

It is about fighting in God's cause in defending those who are oppressed.[1][2]


8:57

It is about those who broke their covenant with Muslims multiple times, the last ones being attacking Muslim families (women and children) and attempting to kill them while Muslims were not in the city.[1]




1. Sources cannot do the job of arguing for you, you have to provide arguments, not just sources.

2. You have to avoid misquoting and taking verses out of context.

3.
Even if your claims were right, you still have to explain how that affirms the resolution.



None of these are done yet.



SOURCES


[1] Choose link of related verses: http://ow.ly...

[2]
http://ow.ly...

Debate Round No. 3
124275

Pro

124275 forfeited this round.
ssadi

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent forfeited this round.

Extend!
Debate Round No. 4
124275

Pro

124275 forfeited this round.
ssadi

Con

Unfortunately my opponent forfeited this round as well..


Extand!



Pro had full BOP to affirm the resolution. However, they haven't provide any so far. All what they provided were either refuted or shown that they don't affirm the resolution.



Vote Con, please!
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by lightseeker 1 year ago
lightseeker
actually, Muhammad was a true prophet of God who promoted peace and security. if someone doubts it, i can easily debate and break your logic, as I've done before. people who pick one verse of Quran and declare that Quran is promoting violence, are just ignoring the verses that come before and after and the context for which that verse was sent.
Posted by Vict0rian 1 year ago
Vict0rian
Yes totally, and Donald Trump is Gods real son.
Posted by ballpit 1 year ago
ballpit
Who would that be?
Posted by ConeScone 1 year ago
ConeScone
all other prophets were false too

except for 1 :)
Posted by ballpit 1 year ago
ballpit
And the other profits of the major religions weren't?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jerry947 1 year ago
Jerry947
124275ssadiTied
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: Pro forfeited multiple times so conduct goes to Con. Pro also makes several bare assertions and then uses a couple verses to support them in round three. Con however showed that the verses actually do not show that the Qur'an advocates violence. For example, he used 3:151 to show that God merely helps his followers in battle. The verse does not say anything about advocating violence though. So Pro should have used verses that proved his point and Con refuted the out of context verses he did use. And besides, showing that the Qur'an promotes violence wouldn't have necessarily proved that Muhammad was a false prophet. That said, Con should have also gave arguments for Muhammad being a true prophet, though since Pro accepted the burden of proof, I have no choice but to penalize Pro and to give the arguments points to Con.