The Instigator
backwardseden
Pro (for)
The Contender
ViceRegent
Con (against)

No god would use text as a form of communication

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
ViceRegent has forfeited round #3.
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: 9/9/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 564 times Debate No: 103876
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (22)
Votes (0)

 

backwardseden

Pro

No god would use text as a form of communication, the worst possible form of communication to any god.

For this debate, the christian god will be the focus and it will be up to you as Con to prove that god according to the bible would use text, namely the bible, as a form of communication. You must also give the "why" this god would choose text as a form of communication.

ViceRegent

Con

Instead, prove this claim "No god would use text as a form of communication, the worst possible form of communication to any god. "
Debate Round No. 1
backwardseden

Pro

No. Sorry deareth lung rot. You stick to the debate parameters, in which you cannot and you know it, otherwise bow out and leave like the miserable sour milk scab that you are as you tried and interrupt this debate. Its my debate, its not yours. Oh and btw, to add further insult to YOUR injury, there’s no proof for ANY god(s) ever existing. Golly gosh gee golly gosh darned it all.
ViceRegent

Con

Oh, so you are another cowardly, irrational atheist that cannot prove their claims. Typical. Moving on.
Debate Round No. 2
backwardseden

Pro

Awe gosh golly gee gosh darned it all, unlike the miserable cow dung larvae that you are, I can prove EVERYTHING I state whereas you can prove nothing. That's why you tried to invert the conversation to tip it towards you and you being the He-Man that you think you are, are but only She-Ra wiping his reareth endeth with battery acid and a fire ants nest. Oh you are the power all right. Bye.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MakeDebatingGreatAgain 10 months ago
MakeDebatingGreatAgain
Fine I guess you concede to the fact that you have no legitimate debating skills. Even if you lost the debate, it would at least have been honorable. Now you have simply chickened out on this debate because you know you cannot win, and that you will NEVER win a debate ever. You can be on this site for a hundred years and you still wouldn't win a debate. I will leave the debate open in case you change your mind, but I doubt that.
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
@MakeDebatingGreatAgain - OK I only read your first sentence. Then debate with yourself. I guess that's what's you're best at. You want to make the issue about me thus proving that YOU are a self righteous egotistical prick rather than the issues at hand which are guns. I am now blocking you. Bye.
Posted by MakeDebatingGreatAgain 10 months ago
MakeDebatingGreatAgain
I'm not removing the preamble to my debate, because that is the ACTUAL reason why I want to debate you on this topic. Just because I added that statement doesn't mean that the debate won't be on gun ownership. The ultimate purpose of the debate IS to show that you are incapable of having a proper debate on anything. I don't want to debate YOU of all people just for the sake of debating. If I wanted a real debate for just the sake of debating, I would never challenge you, the only reason I'm even challenging you on gun rights is because you requested it. Stop trying to manipulate this debate like you always do, because I won't stand for it. We haven't even started the debate and already you want to manipulate it, for that alone should show how poor you are at debating. I will make it 5 rounds and 10,000 characters, but that's where I draw the line. It's my debate, not yours. You've had your chance to manipulate and bend all the rules in your other debates on Christianity, but not this one. Accept, or don't accept, the challenge, because I'm NOT changing it.
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
I will accept your gun rights debate if you take off the ridiculous snot meat sow attempts at "The purpose of this debate is to formally asses weather or not Backwards Eden, a controversial user on DDO, is an educated, logical, and reasonable debater. Although the answer may seem obvious to many, the primary goal of this debate is to set in stone once and for all that Backwards Eden is an illogical, uncompassionate, and rude debater, who no one should debate with from now on." That's not the purpose of the debate as you are in such need to desperately humiliate, degrade, and defrost someone who is better than you as you just can't stand to lose. So take that off and make it about GUNS moron. Then make it 5 rounds. Then I do not know how many characters there are in each round and that would have to be a requirement of 10,000 so I can neatly post roughly 50 or more at least articles from various websites, TV episodes, etc etc etc dating back to 2013 showing gun violence. Of course I would be putting in my own input. As usual if you screw up and thus invent your own excuses, lies, and oh boy I WILL KNOW, and you try to muck a deck of cards and thus invent your own pretend playground in a measly attempt to gain the upper hand, then forget it, chances are very good oh great god snookums I will insult you OR I will simply walk away and POOF end the debate and I will become the instant winner. So hopefully you won't do it. Now in me posting the information of gun violence thus proving that nobody needs a gun, not for any reason, not ever, from at least 50 websites and TV episodes etc 5 rounds is probably not going to be enough with the information that is there with the mere copy and paste. Also, with most I do not have the links. But don't fear, you can on your own copy and paste the link titles into your yahoo search engine and POOF it should come right up. Let me know if it doesn't. And 1 round for acceptance? Nope. Dig right in. Then I will accept. Easy enough.
Posted by MakeDebatingGreatAgain 10 months ago
MakeDebatingGreatAgain
You say you are educated on gun rights and restrictions? Than I guess I will challenge you to that debate, but I still think the evidence you provided below stating that the U.S. isn't founded on Christian principles was not sufficient or reasonable. And don't think your "wall of text" strategy will intimidate me. A wall of text means nothing if 90% of it is just ad-hominens.
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
Well you calmed down and decided to not push my buttons for your last statements. What"s the occasion? Nope. I will not debate you on those subjects because I know nothing of them. They are not my areas of care. So I have not studied them. But I will debate you on guns. I will take the con and why absolutely nobody should own a gun for any reason, not ever. No one needs a gun, not ever. Or we can debate music and film. And if you think I know nothing about religion, then wow, I have 100x the information on guns, music and film and you will get slaughtered.
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
"Let us be perfectly clear: We are not now, nor have we ever been, a Christian nation. Our founding fathers explicitly and clearly excluded any reference to "God" or "the Almighty" or any euphemism for a higher power in the Constitution. Not one time is the word "god" mentioned in our founding document. Not one time."
Declaration of Independence (1776)
The most important assertion in this document is that "to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
Note that the power of government is derived not from any god but from the people. No appeal is made in this document to a god for authority of any kind. In no case are any powers given to religion in the affairs of man.
Remember, too, that this document was not written to form or found a government but was stating intent in a way that was meant to appeal to an audience with European sensibilities. Only four times is there any reference at all to higher powers " "Laws of Nature and of Nature"s God," "Supreme Judge of the world," "their Creator," and "divine Providence" " and in all four cases the references to a higher power appeal to the idea of inherent human dignity, never implying a role for a god in government.
Just because you are more ignorant that a fluffy piece of moldy wood that somehow got stuck in your brain as a splinter that you use as an excuse for living it doesn"t mean that the universe lags behind your Daffy Duck barfly antics.

"Also, how can you tell if the people you have debated on this site have no genuine friends?" Oh when you"ve done this for 42+ years and have talked with roughly 25,000 or so you get to know people like the back of your hand. Its simple educated and intelligent psychology. And remember, keep in mind that ever presence of a word "genuine". Well I don"t care if you think if I have no genuine friends or not. If you think I do, great, if not, that"s entirely, yep you guessed it, YOUR PROBLEM.
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
tame in comparison. If you do not know that then wow you know nothing about debating. Your insults cannot possibly be taken seriously. Nazism? Do you even know what a Nazi is? Apparently not. Oh I get it, you think you have the right to insult me, but not me spitfire a couple back at your dignified royal pink pearl pearlies?

OK you really want to get into it? Lets. This country was in no way founded on christianity. The US constitution has no mentioning of the word god in it. 9 of the 10 commandments this country breaks and doesn"t follow them. Do you want me to list for you which ones?
The Treaty of Tripoli (Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary) was the first treaty concluded between the United States and Tripolitania, signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796, and at Algiers (for a third-party witness) on January 3, 1797. It was submitted to the Senate by President John Adams, receivingratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797, and signed by Adams, taking effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797
Article 11 reads:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
And to even further slaughter you and make you look like a complete jacka$$ and you thoroughly deserve it because you think you are god everything, so have fun with this"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
Moron. I mean where do they dig mud relics like you up from to be starved of knowledge from?
Posted by backwardseden 10 months ago
backwardseden
MakeDebatingGreatAgain - "Just because your an anti-religious, commie lib"" Whoa there Splat the snookums dog disguised a chamber maid, I don"t ask you commie little brats to come on in and visit my debates now do I? Nope. That"s the risk you take. I"m not here to please your wittle wost wosey bottom as it churns butter on the way to the wet end of a dry lake. I happen to outgun the intelligence and edumacation ratio of the teeny boppers here who visit MY DEBATES WHO PRETEND THAT THEY KNOW WHAT IN THE FLYING PREGNANT BARBIE dd with fake rubbers DOLL who insist on invent excuses and flat out lying in order form them to gain the upper hand which NEVER WORKS and is a typical S--T CHRISTIAN way to debate for the final fricken time and I am really tired of explaining this to you. This is something that you will learn in college. This is something that if performed in front of any so-called friends or loved ones, they will soon have no friends or loved ones. Do you have any friends or loved ones? If not, gee I can"t imagine why. I 100% know they don"t. I also know that if they pull that crap on their teachers its an instant F. And it is taught that who--is--going--to--want--to--hang--around--with--them? NO ONE. They do not present any valid evidence that will hold up in any kind of court in any land in this country. I"m not their mommy"s or daddy"s that will show them the route to their intelligence with a dunce cap attached to their little noggins. Now I am NOT mad at them. But I am MAD at you because YOU are being a total don"t squeeze the charmin form the brain about this and you know it. And I"m not going to explain it again. If you don"t get it, that"s YOUR problem. YOU deal with it. And you know what? If the hammer comes down and I get booted from here, big deal. There"s far worse debaters than me and you know it that are on here. There are far worse debaters out there in real life out there, like namely ALL live debaters out there. I"m rather fricken
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
MAGA, you have to understand, atheists think arrogance is a fine substitute for knowledge and that their worthless opinion is superior to your facts.
This debate has 2 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.