The Instigator
Renzzy
Pro (for)
Losing
19 Points
The Contender
SchinkBR
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

Predestination Unto Salvation

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/26/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,013 times Debate No: 2941
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (25)
Votes (10)

 

Renzzy

Pro

I would like a fellow Christian to accept this debate, but if not, you must assume there is a God, and that the Bible is the true, infallible word of God for this debate.

I believe that predestination is taught throughout the Bible, and would like my opponent to state their reasons for believing otherwise. With that, I will await an opponent.

Thanks,

Renzzy
SchinkBR

Con

To me it's clear the predestination is not taught in the Bible. For instance, why would the devil had tempted if he had already known what was going to happen. Why would God be mad at adam for taking the apple if he knew it would happen. I believe that the Bible teaches the concept of free will, we decide our own fate, it is not already set in stone. If it were, what would be the point of life?
Debate Round No. 1
Renzzy

Pro

Hello SchinkBR, and thank you for accepting my debate! I trust this will be a valuble exchange of ideas.

"To me it's clear the predestination is not taught in the Bible. For instance, why would the devil had tempted if he had already known what was going to happen."

The devil is not omniscient, as God is. He does not know who will believe in God and who will not, and so he is always present on earth trying to cause people to stumble by tempting them. He will attack Christian and non-christian alike, because his goal is to cause us to sin, and displease God. It must not be said, however, that the devil caused you to sin, because sin is the result of your sinful nature. The devil only plants seeds of rebelion, and tries to make it look more pleasing.

"Why would God be mad at adam for taking the apple if he knew it would happen."

God did not originate sin. Sin can bo looked at as the absence of God, just as darkness is nothing in and of itself. Light is an energy, and darkness is the absence of that energy. God is righteousness, and sin is the absence or denial of that righteousness. When Adam ate the fruit, God knew he would, but God did not stop him. Why? because we have free will. I am not denying that man has free will in claiming predestination. I am saying we are predestined unto SALVATION. The belief that God predestines everything is HYPER Calvinism. If God dictataed that Adam would not take the fruit, then He would have created us as puppets doing His will. There would be no point in creating us. Adam chose to eat the fruit and God allowed it. God did not dictate Adam eating the fruit, but rather ALLOWED it.

Therefore God had the right to be angry with Adam, because he chose his own selfish desires rather than God. Choosing unrighteousness was the first sin, and God allowed sin to enter as a concequence for our disobedience. We were at that piont dead in our transgressions. That is why God was mad at Adam. He chose to "glorify" himself rather than God.

Why, though, can we choose sin, and not choose God? It is quite simple. After the fall we were (and are) completely and utterly dead in our transgressions this is made clear in Genesis 6:5, where God says that every intent of the thoughts of mans heart was only evil continually. It can be argued that this verse discribes only the men on earth before the flood, but it would be folly to claim moral superiority over those people, so I believe this is a valid argument. This verse is reinforced in Jeremiah.

Jeremiah 13:23---
"Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to doing evil."

It is made plain, then, that after the fall we are utterly useless without God. It says that we are only evil continually. Our utter helplessness is also made clear in the new testament. Paul writes in Romans that there is none who seeks after God; which is what you calim man CAN do.

Romans 3:10-12---
"As it is writen:
There is no one righteous, no, not one;
There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable;
There is none who does good, no, not one."

This makes it quite clear that even if we were able (I believe we are NOT able) to accept Christ on our own accord, we would not, because we are accustomed to doing evil. Our sinful nature makes any connection with God COMPLETELY impossible without Gods intervention.

A question would arise, then, as to whether or not accepting Gods gift of salvation is a good work. The Bibe makes it clear that "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", would accepting His gift be a good work? I think it would. Is it good to believe in God? Yes, of course. Is it good seek after and follow his ways? Yes, of course. Is it good to entrust God with your life, and give Him control of every aspect of it? Of course it is. It is, then, a good work to choose to do all of the above, and therefore it would be a good work to acceot God on your own accord. The Bibe makes it clear, though, that WE CAN DO NO GOOD WORKS WITHOUT THE HELP OF GOD. This would make accepting God on our own accord utterly impossible.

You would aslo believe that Jesus died for all sins, and thus all of our sins would be forgiven and we could therefore approach God in our totally depraved state. Well, I don't believe Jesus died for all sins, but only for the sins of those He chose to save. How can I believe this? It is obvious. Unbelief is a sin. Denial of God is a sin. Romans 3:18 say that NOBODY fears God, and in not fearing Him, we have denied Him. This would make unbelief a sin. If God did infact die for the sins of all people, then He wuld have died for their unbelief, and everyone would go to heaven. Everyone will NOT go to heaven, so saying that Jesus did not die for all sins is the only logical conclusion.

If Jesus did not die for the sins of all man, then who did He die for? He died for the elect. He died for all those THE FATHER GAVE HIM. In Mark Jesus Himself says that He did not come to forgive the sins of all men.

Mark 4:10-12---
"But when He was alone, those around Him with the Twelve asked Him about the parable. And he said to them, 'To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, so that

'Seeing they may see andnot perceive,
And hearing they may hear and not understand;
Lest they should turn, and their sins be forgiven them.'"

Here it is coming from the mouth of Jesus that He did not come to save all men. Who then did He come to save? He came to save the elect.

The Bible makes it clear that God CHOSE some people rather than others. John makes it clear that no one comes unless the Father draws him.

John 6:44---
"No one can come to the Me unless the Father who sent draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day."

God must draw us to Himself in order for us to be saved, and we are helpless until He does so.

I will expound more in later arguments. Until then, I eagerly await my opponents reply.

Thanks,

Renzzy
SchinkBR

Con

SchinkBR forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Renzzy

Pro

"You quotes about how humans in general are evil are really irrelevant since all humans have those flaws."

Yes, thats exactly my point. ALL HUMANS HAVE THOSE FLAWS. There is NO ONE who seeks after God. If the Bible is clear on the fact that NO ONE seeks after God, the it is ludicrous to say that you are accepting God on your own accord in your totally depraved state. "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? then may he do good who is accustomed to doing evil.". The fact of the matter is this: ALL humans are accustomed to doing evil. Since we are all accustomed to doing evil, it would take an act of God to save us. You just emphasized my point.

"Yes he chose to who to save. But the people he chose to save were those who chose to follow him."

Not true. The people He chose to save were the people who chose to follow Him. The Bible makes it clear that "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him."

"He didn't force King Harrid to keep and abuse his power rather than worship him,"

Jude 1:4---
"For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God[a] and our Lord Jesus Christ."

"just like God didn't force Peter to follow Jesus either."

Ephesians 1:4---
"For He chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in is sight..."

They chose their actions and will/were judged accordingly.

The Bible makes it quite clear that when it comes to salvation, GOD chose who He would save and who He would not save.

Romans 9:20-21---
"But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?"

Thanks,

Renzzy
SchinkBR

Con

Much of the Bible is based on how you interpret it. For instance "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him." I still interpret that as free will, because you can be drawn to something and still not do it. Again, it's free will, in the end you choose to do it.

"…ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God[a] and our Lord Jesus Christ." Again, free will. They choose their own path when they themselves turn away from God and ignore him. God does not force them to do this, all the Bible is saying is that as long as they do this, they will not be accepted into heaven.

As for you last verse, the difference between pottery and humans is that humans are an intelligent life form who are capable of making their own choices and are held responsible for those choices.1
Debate Round No. 3
Renzzy

Pro

"Much of the Bible is based on how you interpret it."

Yes, people interprate the Bible differantly, but the bibl is certainly not left open to interprate how you want it. If it was, then God would be partial, taking away His unchanging nature. Sinc this is the case, There MUST be a definate way to interprate the Bible, meaning that one of us is wrong.

"'No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him.' I still interpret that as free will, because you can be drawn to something and still not do it. Again, it's free will, in the end you choose to do it."

Can one resist being drawn? No. If resistance were possible, one could only resist AFTER he was drawn. If the someone, then He has begun a good work in them according to the Bible, and in Philippians Paul makes it claer that God will complete every goos work He starts.

Philippians 1:6---
"bieng confident of this very thing, the He who has begun a good work in you WILL COMPLETE IT until the day of Jesus Christ."

What is completion? Completion is salvation. What else could it be? He will comlete it until the day of Jesus Christ, which is the day we go to be with God forever. It is clear, then, that refusing Godafter He starts drawing you is also not possible, because in drawing you, he has started a good work; a good work which He promised He would complete.

"As for you last verse [Jude], the difference between pottery and humans is that humans are an intelligent life form who are capable of making their own choices and are held responsible for those choices.1"

The differance between potery and humans is that one is clay and one is flesh. It's a metaphor. The point is not the clay being formed, but the potter forming the clay. Can a lump of clay refuse to be made into a vase? Obviously not. Can a finite human refuse to be called by an omnipotent, omniscient God? Obviously not. Yes, God gave us free will, but not free will unto salvation. Think of it as God drafting people. Is he going to dictate how they fight while they are on the battlefield? He will give them a set of morals to follow, but will not dictate exactly how they fight. Can the soldiers resist the draft? Nope. God calls who He wants to call, and all those He does not call don't deserve to be called.

The fact of the matter is, NO ONE deserves to be called. Why does he call some and not others? Because if He saved everyong he would not be just. Why does He not damn everyone? Because He is a merciful God. If God gave everyone the chance to be saved equally, then potentially everyone on earth could be saved. Would this be fair? Yes, it would, but God is not fair, He is JUST, and justice requires that some be condemned to die for their denial of God.

In your next round please present verses that you believe support your side of the argument. As of right now you have only rebuttled my arguments, and have not made any of your own.

Thanks!

Renzzy
SchinkBR

Con

Yes one can resist being drawn to something. An example would be a night before a test. I might be drawn to hang out with my friends and play xbox but instead I resist and study.

"bieng confident of this very thing, the He who has begun a good work in you WILL COMPLETE IT until the day of Jesus Christ."

You still have to chose to begin God's work though. Personaly I think it ridiculous to say that something that is just is not also fair. How is it either just or fair to condem or save someone he instant they are born, without them having done anything to deserve their judgement.
Debate Round No. 4
Renzzy

Pro

"Yes one can resist being drawn to something."

Not when it comes to man and God. I have showed you already that the Bible makes it plain to us that nobody seeks after God. We therefore, in our sinful nature always RESIST God. Now if we are in a constant state of resistance to God, then it logically follows that the grace necessary for salvation MUST be irresistible. If it were not irresistible, nobody would ever be saved because they would be in constant rebellion. We know for a fact that some people will be saved, so the grace must be irresistible.

1 Corinthians 2:14---
"the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him; neither indeed can he know them because they are spiritually discerned"

"You still have to chose to begin God's work though."

We CANNOT choose God on our own accord. We are UTTERLY DEAD in our sins, and ONLY RESIST GOD. The Bible cannot make this more clear. Look at all of these scriptures and you cannot tell me that there is even a trace if good in man.

Tit. 1:15, Gen. 6:5, Jer. 17:9, Rom. 3:10-18.

"Personaly I think it ridiculous to say that something that is just is not also fair."

Is it 'just' to damn all men in rebellion of God? Absolutely. Are all men in rebellion of God? Yes, the Bible makes that quite clear. Is it 'fair' for God to save some of the people in rebellion and not others? Nope. Does God save some in rebellion and not others? Yes, He does. We can conclude from this that God is just in damning those in rebellion, and we can also conclude that God is MERCIFUL in not damning some of us that are (or were) in rebellion. We cannot conclude that God is fair, because He is not. Fairness requires absolute equality, in which case all men would go to heaven. All men are not going to heaven, so we can conclude that God is just, but is not fair.

"How is it either just or fair to condemn or save someone he instant they are born, without them having done anything to deserve their judgement."

First off, I believe that we were all predestined unto either salvation or damnation before the creation of the world.

You believe all men are innocent at birth? I am afraid you are mistaken. The fact of the matter is this: At the moment of conception, WE AS MEN ARE DAMNABLE. We, descendants of Adam and therefore we inherit his sin. Because of this, we deserve death from the very moment we exist. The Bible tells us that we are guilty of Adams sin in Romans 5:12,15-19. I believe that the gift of salvation is a free gift (fee meaning no cost), but a gift only given to specific few, and an irresistible gift to those few.

Allow me to reiterate on what I have argued concerning my side of the debate.

1. Man is totally depraved and cannot accept God on his own accord.
(Tit. 1:15, Gen. 6:5, Jer. 17:9, Rom. 3:10-18.)

2. God draws people to Himself with an irresistible grace, becaue if His grace were resistible then nobody would be saved.
(1 Corinthians 2:14)

3. God chooses who to save and who to damn without human intervention. God appoints some people to salvation, and some to condemnation.
(Acts 13:48, Jude 1:4, Romans 9 >The whole chapter, but mainly verses like 18<, Psalms 65:4, Etc.)

I would like to close with some questions that I would like you to answer in your final argument.

As a believer in free will, why do you pray for the salvation of unbelievers? Are you not asking God to meddle in their free will?

and

As a believer in free will, it follows that you believe God died for all the sins of every man in order that all men might be saved. However, is unbelief a sin? If it is, then all men WILL go to heaven, because God, as you say, died for all sins. Unbelief is resisting God, resisting God is a sin, therefore unbelief is a sin. So, if God did in fact die for all sins, how do you explain people going to hell?

Please answer these questions, and please make some atempt to support your side of the debate scripturally.

Thanks,

Renzzy
SchinkBR

Con

Christ died so that everyone could go to heaven, and by doing so took upon himself all of our sins.

To reinforce my point that we do have free will and the ability to chose our own fate, I looked up some Bible quotes of my own.

"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, (Deuteronomy 30:19)

"And if it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15)

Who is the man who fears the LORD? He will instruct him in the way he should choose. (Psalms 25:12)
Because they hated knowledge, And did not choose the fear of the LORD. (Proverbs 1:29)

Do not envy a man of violence, And do not choose any of his ways. (Proverbs 3:31)

"He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. (Isaiah 7:15)

For thus says the LORD, "To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths, And choose what pleases Me, And hold fast My covenant, (Isaiah 56:4)

I will destine you for the sword, And all of you shall bow down to the slaughter. Because I called, but you did not answer; I spoke, but you did not hear. And you did evil in My sight, And chose that in which I did not delight." (Isaiah 65:12)

So I will choose their punishments, And I will bring on them what they dread. Because I called, but no one answered; I spoke, but they did not listen. And they did evil in My sight, And chose that in which I did not delight." (Isaiah 66:4)

For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; and He died for all, that they who live should no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf. (2 Corinthians 5:15)
For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. (1 Timothy 4:10)

And finally, as far as God choosing who gets into heaven, I again say that he is fair and just, as Peter says in Bible:

For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; (1 Peter 3:18)
Debate Round No. 5
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Odd that that is the impression I give. I was responding to being personally insulted in debates about beliefs and not people. Now I'm a ghoul with a world-size chip on my shoulder? Previously a fool, a mocker of believers...

I don't mind people saying mean things about me, I'm quick to forgive such insults. However, I am rather confused about what I did to give that impression. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised about being insulted after questioning people's beliefs, though I still wonder if there is something specific I do which plays a part in the need to insult.

Though, the said dichotomy plays out again, I question beliefs and ask pointed questions and get insulted in response. It's almost like there's no answer to said questions.
Posted by SolaGratia 8 years ago
SolaGratia
The Con in this debate, I notice, is far more gracious and polite than the ghoul in the comments--namely, Tatarize. But then again, that's hardly surprising. Tatarize has a world-sized chip in his shoulder, and he doesn't let anyone forget it!
Posted by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
ShinkBR,

Thats fine, I know how busy life can get. Mid terms are quite possibly the most aweful thing ever invented (besides maybe finals). Don't stess about it.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
You can't tell sarcasm?

In context, you had just spent a good section of your posts calling me a fool. I felt was a rude and yet typical reply.

I was, in jest, summarizing what you said. You basically said I was a fool for not believing in God, with some rather pathetic Biblical references (those were real convincing). I felt it was silly and childish.

I have not insulted you. I mocked your insults of me. Such should be obvious from the context and the "sticks tongue out" action. I can think of no other way of pointing out that such comments are childish as aptly as that.
http://www.debate.org...

I do not believe people are stupid for believing in God.

Rereading the thread you linked, I see the same activity here. I asked a number of very pointy questions and you replied by calling me a fool, or rather by saying you weren't going to respond because the Bible says don't reply to fools (same difference, I would argue). I suppose lie is a strong term; you are being dishonest. You may actually be unable to determine that that comment was a reply to your insults and your rudeness. Thus, I cannot be sure you are knowingly dishonest (as required by the definition of lie). However, I do find it remarkably telling that the worst you have is a response to your insults of me.

In mocking the Bible, I mock the Bible. There is no God to mock. We should be glad that the Bible is fiction or else it should be incumbent to believe that the genocides and atrocities committed in the name of God actually happened.
Posted by SchinkBR 8 years ago
SchinkBR
Sorry, I missed the last round, I had midterms

You can use this next part to debate if you want renzzy. I'll keep it short since i was late

You quotes about how humans in general are evil are really irrelevant since all humans have those flaws. Yes he chose to who to save. But the people he chose to save were those who chose to follow him. He didn't force King Harrid to keep and abuse his power rather than worship him, just like God didn't force Peter to follow Jesus either. They chose their actions and will/were judged accordingly.
Posted by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
I did not lie. See for yourself what you said.

(http://www.debate.org...)

"Also you're stupid for believing in God.
*sticks tongue out*"

"And the only think you can do is come back and lie about me saying that I have done things I have not done or said things I do not say."

You HAVE openly insulted me.

"God loving you doesn't negate the obvious implication of the Bible... God created you knowing you'd fall short and burn forever and ever in hell.

Any questions?
--- Don't ask them! Doing so will get you sent to hell! Don't question anything! Doubt is the enemy!"

In mocking the Bible you mock my God. Do not be so quick to call people liers in the future.

Nuff said. You will hear no more from me.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
I mock some small subset of your beliefs, not you. Be clear about that. I have never once called you a name or directly insulted you. I mock your beliefs because they are silly and insulting. I raise objection after objection as to why they are silly and why they should be mocked. And the only think you can do is come back and lie about me saying that I have done things I have not done or said things I do not say.

I mock your religion, not your God. Your religion exists, your God does not.
Posted by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
I have defended my faith, and all you do is mock it. I can quote you saying "oh, and you're stupid for believing in God.". I have nothing to say to you, because you do nothing but mock my God. You will belive what you will believe. There is nothing I can do about that. I will believe what I know to be true, and you have a lot to say in mockery of me and God. I am sorry, but there comes a point where I am Biblically commanded to stop, and I have reachesd that point.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Here, I thought you should stand ready to defend the faith. I can assure you that conversations with me aren't useless as I am trivially convinced by evidence. The real problem is you have no pearls or slightly compelling reasons to believe. If I were lost, I should have no idea where I am. Rather I'm extremely well versed on the topic. My eyes are wide open, I simply do not accept that I should close them and accept things on the same amount of evidence as I have for invisible dragons in my garage.

One does not need to have evidence for the non-existence of God to be an atheist, one only needs to find the evidence for God question to be on par with the evidence for werewolf question.

I always thought that Jude's letter shouldn't have been in the Bible canon. In 1:14 he clearly cites the book of Enoch which aren't part of the canon, calls Enoch the seventh from Adam, notes that he's writing in the end times. It's a pretty late letter filled with things later rejected by the religion.
Posted by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
Tatarize, you must realize that I CANNOT CONVERSE WITH YOU. IT IS USELESS. In presenting my beliefs to you, I am casting my pearls before swine, and I will do it no longer. You are lost, and I pray that someday God will open your eyes and you will see the foolishness of your ways. Until then, take your rantings elsewhere, because obviously I can do nothing for you.

Jude 1:4
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Supernova 8 years ago
Supernova
RenzzySchinkBRTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
RenzzySchinkBRTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by SchinkBR 8 years ago
SchinkBR
RenzzySchinkBRTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by midgetman2 8 years ago
midgetman2
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by theunknownwisedude 8 years ago
theunknownwisedude
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by SolaGratia 8 years ago
SolaGratia
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Gear 8 years ago
Gear
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by dls771737 8 years ago
dls771737
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
RenzzySchinkBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03