The Instigator
Fox32
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
gordonjames
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Religion of Christianity is an misused propaganda tool?

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
gordonjames
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/15/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,465 times Debate No: 40632
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (5)

 

Fox32

Pro

Hey there readers,

I would like to start a debate to state the following:
Religion of Christianity is an misused propaganda tool?

Yes, i believe so! Before the debate begins, i would like you to have read my profile. It states the following:

- I have a form of dyslexia which give difficulties on spelling and grammar for me. To practice and improve myself I want to anticipate on debate's. -

Keep in mind that I would make some grammar and spelling errors, I shall do my best to use the spelling check and review my posts.

##################################################################

In my start of my debate i would like to appoint the following:

1. History of the Christianity bible indoctrination
1.1 The Sabbath
1.2 Babylon and Sunday worship
1.3 The objective of the Papacy

2. The objective of the Papacy
2.1 Perspective as a believer.
2.2 Perspective as a atheist

4. Conclusion

##################################################################

1. History of the Christianity bible indoctrination.

##################################################################

What if I told you that religion of Christianity is an misused propaganda tool? Lets start with the beginning:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

The so called Church Fathers created there churches. They made adjustments to there believes (adjustments to the Hebrew old testament). These gentleman did not write the bible but were able to adjust the bible and spread word across the world.

Then the Catholic church made an huge impact on the world, and started promoting the Sunday Church rituals.

This Sunday worship is not created by the bible. But was an invention of the Catholic Church. This 'framework' was spread in the start of the 12 century during the Inquisition, in this horrified time of hour history for many true believers of the bible, many were slain in order of the Catholic Church for they had not chosen the Pope as there 'spiritual leader' but stay true to the bible.

Then in the first Crusade (1096-1099) Pope Urban II declared the following:
'God has conferred upon you above all nations great glory in arms. Accordingly undertake this journey for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the Kingdom of Heaven.'
The Catholic Church can be viewed in my eyes as one of the greatest propaganda users ever in war and in politics to control masses of population. Not only did they made huge interventions but also control the education levels and mentalities around the globe. So with these powers, the made there own version of the bible to there benefits. And then spread them around Europe and the globe. There are many version of the bible, however the original manuscripts of the bible have been lost.

So all we have is copies of copies, there are 3 base manuscript streams which the modern day copies are based of:

1. Lost manuscripts of the traditional text.
2. Ancestor of the western family (lost)
3. Ancestor of the Alexiandrian Family (lost)

The first stream created the King James version, the second the Douay version, the third the new English bible. The New English bible is the common bible around the globe that you can find.

Now the New English was created by the Catholic Church, and the Douay version was made by the jesuit to counterfeit the reformation.

As a reader of the King james version, I tend to see many big differences between the New English version and the King james. So big, that the wrong idea's could be made by reading its context.

##################################################################

1.1 The Sabbath

##################################################################

So, where are we going next? The Sabbath, does a Catholic know or do a Sabbath day is?
You may ask a few Christians and I doubt they even know what it is.

So what is the Sabbath?
In the 10 commandments:
http://richardwiseman.files.wordpres...mmandments.jpg...
It explains that you should keep the Sabbath day Holy.

In the time of Moses (in the book of Exodus) it explains to keep it holy, and it began so far that persons where persecuted if they kept the Sabbath day. The Sabbath day is on Saturday.

So why does the Catholic church keep their faith on Sunday and not on Saturday?
The papacy is very aware of this manner, they know exactly what they are doing.

##################################################################

1.2 Sunday worship and Babylon

##################################################################

Sunday worship is common by many religions or believes (such as Pegan, astrology etc). However the Catholic church follows the occult rituals of the ancient Babylon.

One simple example:
http://www.sabbathcovenant.com...
(the below left character is the so called god Dagon of the old Babylon believes. More information you can find on http://www.sabbathcovenant.com... ).

So what is the reason of the Sunday worship? Simple:

SUN day, the day explains it. Day of the sun. You actually worship the Sun if you commit yourself to the Catholic way. Did you ever notice how much Sun symbol the Catholic church uses?
It promotes pagan worship, not Biblical believes.

Deuteronomy 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;

##################################################################

2. The objective of the Papacy

##################################################################

So why would Catholic church go with this rituals and mentality?

I believe that the Catholic church uses its power to control many things in the world, not act as a servant for the holy father. But as an business to gain power, money and control over many people.

##################################################################

2.1 Perspective as a believer.

##################################################################

From a believers perspective:

I see the Catholic church as devil worshipers. They control the massive (not so clear thinkers) and indoctrinate them with Babylonian believes. In the time of the inquisition they have killed believers that wouldn"t bow down to the Catholic church (even if they believed in the bible!).

The teach people that hell exists, and if you don't act as they wish. You will go to hell, which leads control be fear. Not only do they spread false indoctrinations but also represent themselves as THE Christianity.

##################################################################

2.2 Perspective as an atheist

##################################################################

From a atheist perspective:

The Catholic papacy is a fraud. It does not stand near any of the original bible believes. And controls the masses by using false methods such as hell and other terms.

So lets even add a word of the Pope with it shall we?

Pope John Paul II, on the 23rd of October, 1996, while speaking to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences plenary session at the Vatican, declared the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin to be fact, tacitly acknowledging that man evolved from the apes, and reducing the biblical account of Genesis to that of mere fable! So, there actually standing with the atheist?

I hope that the atheist readers now understand why there are so many 'less...educated' believers in the world of Christianity. And as a believer I can understand why atheist get frustrated by many Christians.

##################################################################

4. Conclusion

##################################################################

The Catholic Church is a fraud and has a very clear 2 sided coin with its propaganda. And I believe that the Catholic Church is misused propaganda organization that really puts the real believers in bad daylight. They created hate from atheists and to make believers a pack of sheep that do the most idiotic things.

So which side am I on?

I am a believer in the bible, I don't believe in hell. And I believe that everyone would be forgiven for their sins. I don't believe in evolution but in creationism which I have followed in the lecture of Professor Walter J. Veith.

However, I believe that everyone has its freedom to believe what they want. For both perspectives of evolution and creationism have given us the freedom to do so.

Resources:

1.1
Qoute from Pope Urban
Resource: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Information about the bible versions:
www (d0t)youtube (d0t) com/watch?v=tNv-zzpIwBs

2.2
Pope and Evolution
Resource: http://www.ewtn.com...
gordonjames

Con

Pro states that "Christianity is an misused propaganda tool"
This is incorrect.
It is true that people in power have tried to use anything they can as a propaganda tool, but that is not the core of Christianity.

My position is this:
Christian is a name given to people who try to live their life based on their faith / belief in Jesus. [1] [2]
Christianity flows from this as the teachings, beliefs and actions of those called Christian. Many would define Christianity even more narrowly as a religion based on the teachings of Jesus as presented in the New Testament[3]

Pro has made many further claims which I may consider in later rounds.
I want to have a clear topic to debate so my round 1 will be concise.

I want to strongly refute PRO's claim that "the Religion of Christianity is an misused propaganda tool"
I want to stick to the main point of this debate.

Christianity is a way of living based on the teaching of Jesus, not a propaganda tool.

[1] -Acts 11:26 http://www.biblegateway.com...
[2] Wikipedia defines it this way "A Christian is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. "Christian" derives from the Koine Greek word Christ, a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term Messiah." - http://en.wikipedia.org...

[3] Wikipedia defines Christianity as "a monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ as presented in the New Testament. Christianity is the world's largest religion, with approximately 2.2 billion adherents, known as Christians."
Debate Round No. 1
Fox32

Pro

Hey gordonjames 1,

Thank you for reply and the challenge!

I shall continue this debate on the following:

1: Quote 1 from gordonjames1
2: Fox32 Argument
3: Fox32 Counter Argument and question
3.1 Conclusion
3.2 Question
4: Sources
######################
1
Quote 1 from gordonjames1

######################
My position is this:
Christian is a name given to people who try to live their life based on their faith / belief in Jesus.
Christianity flows from this as the teachings, beliefs and actions of those called Christian. Many would define Christianity even more narrowly as a religion based on the teachings of Jesus as presented in the New Testament

#########################
2

Fox32 Argument

#########################

First of all, the term '"Christian" derives from the Kline Greek word Christ, a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term Messiah. [1]

it"s a Greek translation, the real name of Jesus is Yashayah/Yeshua.

Christ's name could not have been Jesus, as the letter "J" did not exist until about 1500 years after His resurrection. It is YASHAYAH, Hebrew for "savior" (Hos 2:16, Act 26:14, Luk 1:47, Mat 21:9). The name YASHAYAH was translated into Greek as "Iesaias" and then to "Iesus" by the
[2]

so, why does the common bible believer use the name Jesus? It makes no sense, because Christ was no Greek, and Yashayah didn"t ask his followers to commit sun worship or other pagan believe ([3] please watch from 13:00 till 38:00 )

#########################
3

Fox32 Counter Argument and question

#########################

The Current Theology of Christianity:

Christian theology is the enterprise which seeks to construct a coherent system of Christian belief and practice. This is based primarily upon the texts of the Old Testament and the New Testament as well as the historic traditions of Christians. [4]

Jesus/Yashayah/Yeshua was born two years before the death of Herod the Great, so the most commonly accepted year with the greatest supporting evidence is 4 BC. [5]

However in -400 AD, the first Hebrew Scriptures came around, and the translation began. This means that the Current theology of Christianity was formed by the holders who made the translation from Hebrew to Latin, Greek and English.

As I told in my first debate part:

So all we have is copies of copies, there are 3 base manuscript streams which the modern day copies are based on:
1. Lost manuscripts of the traditional text.
2. Ancestor of the western family (lost)
3. Ancestor of the Alexiandrian Family (lost)

The first stream created the King James version, the second the Douay version, the third the new English bible. The New English Bible is the common bible around the globe that you can find. Now the New English was created by the Catholic Church, and the Douay Version was made by the Jesuit to counterfeit the reformation.

All 3 streams have grammar, spelling and incorrect translation of the original Hebrew Scriptures, therefore also the by creating the theology based on the translation and controlling the teaching. The ability of manipulating is created, and was used in the history!

Pope Urban II stated that all sins would be forgiven in the first Crusade. Hereby he manipulated the armies of the Catholic Church that there actions would go be unpunished!

"God has conferred upon you above all nations" great glory in arms. Accordingly undertake this journey for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the Kingdom of Heaven.' [7]

###########
3.1
Conclusion:
###########

The Catholic church who commits sun worship, and uses the wrong translations of the original Hebrew scriptures and also uses the wrong name of the son of the holy father. There capable of using propaganda to motivate there army to go to war against the Muslims during the crusades.

This is being used still today, because the Church sun worship on Sunday and therefore canceling the Sabbath day! This is against the 10 commandments [8], and is clearly not the way to follow salvation of Jesus/Yashayah/Yeshua!

#######
3.2
Question
#######

If Christianity is a way of living based on the teaching of Jesus, not a propaganda tool. Why does it teach against the 10 10 commandments?

#########################
4
Sources

#########################

Sources:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...(name)
[2] http://www.henrymakow.com...
[3] http://www(d0t)youtube(d0t)com/watch?v=OrHeg77LF4Y
[4] http://bibletimeline.net...
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[6] http://satellitesaint.files.wordpress.com...
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[8] http://www.westernjournalism.com...
gordonjames

Con

gordonjames forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Fox32

Pro

Hey gordonjames,

My last question was:

######
3.2
Question
#######

If Christianity is a way of living based on the teaching of Jesus, not a propaganda tool. Why does it teach against the 10 commandments?
gordonjames

Con



First off, apologies for missing round two.



Second note: I’m not sure where to take this debate as I am having trouble understanding your basic argument. Are you saying that Christianity is, and always has been, a tool of propaganda? This is what I believed the debate to be about based on the wording of the challenge.



Third note: As I read your round one I realized we are working from very different definitions. This makes debate impossible as we are not speaking about the same thing. In my round one attempt to find a definition of Christianity that we could agree on I have failed. We are still questioning the definition of Christianity in round three.


QUOTE from FOX32 round 3 “My last question was:


If Christianity is a way of living based on the teaching of Jesus, not a propaganda tool. Why does it teach against the 10 commandments?”



There is little point in proceeding with debate as we have not agreed on basic definitions by round 3.


I restate my position


Christian is a name given to people who try to live their life based on their faith / belief in Jesus.


Christianity flows from this as the teachings, beliefs and actions of those called Christian. Many would define Christianity even more narrowly as a religion based on the teachings of Jesus as presented in the New Testament.


Regarding propaganda, people in power will try to use or misuse whatever they can to achieve or maintain power. Although many have tried to use Christianity, there are also examples where Christians have opposed the ruling powers. This alone shows that Christianity is much more than a tool for propaganda.




With all that said, let me respond to a few statements by Fox32


In round 1 a number of unsubstantiated and false claims were made about the history of the Christian scriptures. The claim that the “so called Church Fathers” created the churches and changed the Old Testament is false. The church (believers) began to grow [1], and as they needed leaders and workers they appointed people from within the church to positions of service and leadership.[2] The church leaders were believers chosen to positions in the growing church. Those who became famous for their writing, martyrdom or exceptional life were lather given the name “Church Fathers”[3]


The Jewish people already had a highly organized and regulated process for copying the scriptures.[4] This makes it unlikely that any person could corrupt the Old Testament manuscripts. These teachers and church leaders were just as human and fallible as us. They were used by God in their time, and some have had influence (hopefully good) through the centuries.



The comment that “Sunday worship is not created by the bible. But was an invention of the Catholic Church. This 'framework' was spread in the start of the 12 century during the Inquisition” ignores the Biblical evidence that early believers met often, including on “The Lord’s Day” also called “the first day of the week” and most scholarship agrees that this was the trend by the second century.[5]



There are many other statements presented by Fox32 in round one that are incorrect. Let me skip those and move to his conclusion [copied below]


“The Catholic church who commits sun worship, and uses the wrong translations of the original Hebrew scriptures and also uses the wrong name of the son of the holy father. There capable of using propaganda to motivate there army to go to war against the Muslims during the crusades.


This is being used still today, because the Church sun worship on Sunday and therefore canceling the Sabbath day! This is against the 10 commandments, and is clearly not the way to follow salvation of Jesus/Yashayah/Yeshua!”


This is not a debate about the Roman Catholic church. They are not “sun worshippers”


This is not a translation debate.


This is not a debate about the names of Jesus.


This is not a debate about Sabbath.



Remember that the challenge was to debate “Religion of Christianity is an misused propaganda tool?”


Christianity is clearly so much more than a simple tool of propaganda. It includes 33% of the world population,[6] and is bigger than any one government or nation.


Vote CON







[1] Acts 2


[2] Acts 6


[3] The Church Fathers, are ancient and generally influential Christian theologians, some of whom were eminent teachers and great bishops. The term is used of writers or teachers of the Church not necessarily ordained and not necessarily "saints”. . . . While western churches regard only early teachers of Christianity as Fathers, the Orthodox Church honors as "Fathers" many saints far beyond the early centuries of church history, even to the present day. - http://en.wikipedia.org...


[4] Here is an intro to Jewish scribal customs. http://helpmewithbiblestudy.org...



[5] – from http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_Day


“Origins of Sunday worship


Though Sunday was widely observed as a day of Christian worship by the 2nd century, the origin of Sunday worship remains a debated point, with at least three scholarly positions being taken.


Bauckham has argued that Sunday worship must have originated in Palestine in the mid-1st century, in the period of the Acts of the Apostles, no later than the Gentile mission, regarding the practice as universal by the early 2nd century with no hint of controversy. . . .


Some Protestant scholars have argued that Christian Sunday worship traces back even further, to the resurrection appearances of Jesus recorded in the Gospel narratives where Jesus would appear to his disciples on the first day of the week.


Seventh-day Adventist scholar Samuele Bacchiocchi has argued that Sunday worship unconnected to Sabbath was introduced in Rome in the 2nd century, and was later enforced throughout the Christian church as a substitution for Sabbath worship. . . .


[6] http://www.adherents.com...


Debate Round No. 3
Fox32

Pro

Fox32 forfeited this round.
gordonjames

Con

Just a few quick notes since FOX32 missed round 4

in round 3 Fox32 asked

>> "If Christianity is a way of living based on the teaching of Jesus, not a propaganda tool.
>> Why does it teach against the 10 commandments?"

Here are the 10 commandments from Ex 20. [1]
There is a similar list in Deut 5 [2]

1.You shall have no other gods before me.
2. You shall not make for yourself . . . idols
3. You shall not take the name of the LORDyour God in vain
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORDyour God
5. Honor your father and your mother
6. You shall not murder
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness
10.You shall not covet

I assume you are referring to number 4. (Sabbath)
I can think of several reasons why people devoted to a Saturday sabbath might think those who worship on Sunday are ignoring the commandment. In my understanding they are not as big a problem as my Adventist friends seem to think.

Look at verses 8-11 here [Hebrew interlinear text] to remove version debate [3]

There are two possible areas of focus
1. Sabbath is the day (Friday sunset to Saturday sunset)
2. Sabbath is about rest - No work for your sons, daughters, foreigners, livestock, manservant, maidservant etc.

We sometimes focuse on meaning 1 while going to a resteraunt and making others work.
If we want a legalistic version of sabbath we cant watch live TV news or sports (we are making them work), we can't listen to radio, we probably should not even drive further than "a sabbath days journey" or 1/2 mile [4]

People who want a Saturday sabbath have these arguments [5]
while people opposed to a legalistic sabbath sound like this [6].

Avoiding the anxiety and stress these people cause when they are in the same room, I focus on Romans 14:5-6
"One personregards one day above another, another regards every dayalike. Each person must befully convinced in his own mind.He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord"


The main message of this section of scripture is that we need to stop judging our brother over "special days"


In case you are judging our Catholic brothers for their icons and images I suggest you google "iconoclastic controversy "
The online Britanica encyclopedia gives a good definition [7]

"a dispute over the use of religious images (icons) in the Byzantine Empire in the 8th and 9th centuries. The Iconoclasts (those who rejected images) objected to icon worship for several reasons, including the Old Testament prohibition against images in the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:4) and the possibility of idolatry. The defenders of icon worship insisted on the symbolic nature of images and on the dignity of created matter."




[1]http://www.biblegateway.com...
[2]http://www.biblegateway.com...
[3]http://biblehub.com...
[4]http://www.biblegateway.com...
[5]http://www.yrm.org...
[6]http://www.bible.ca...

[7] http://www.britannica.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Fox32

Pro

Fox32 forfeited this round.
gordonjames

Con

In light of Fox32's forfeit I'll post a few closing thoughts.

1. I am learning more and more how people want power and authority.
I am sure that people in power have tried to use anything they can as a toll for their position.
History is full of people have tried to misuse Christianity for their own agenda.
History is also full of the stories of Christianity outliving those who thought they were more important.

2. Many want to reduce Christianity to something less than it really is.
It is not a philosophical or moral position.
It is not a set of rules to live by.
It cannot be defined as a theology.
It is about what Jesus did and taught.
It is about God sending Jesus so we can have eternal life.
It is about God's continued presence in His world.
It is about being filled with the Holy Spirit so we have God with us daily.

Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
Hello Fox32

I'm curious.
What country do you live in, and what is your ethnic background?

The reason I ask is that I could be presuming that the Catholic church I am familiar with (English speaking Eastern Canada and French speaking Montreal, Canada) may be much different than your experience.

About 1/4 of the church I attend (English, Baptist in Moncton, Canada) are former Catholics or have ties to the Roman Catholic church.
Posted by Fox32 3 years ago
Fox32
Hey GordonJames,

Thank you for your advice, i shall try to use more grammar and spelling checking programs!

@2-D

I do not hate on Catholics. I have another view on bible and the Christian theology.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
Just a thought for Fox31
- If you use word or some other editor to type your info you can use the grammar and spell check before you post your argument. See sample - http://i.imgur.com...

If you faithfully / carefully use the spelling and grammar check it will help you overcome spelling/grammar errors.

As a side note, I have been using WordPerfect's grammar check for years, and I have it check the reading level of my writing so i can communicate clearly at a grade 6 level. This check helps me use active voice, smaller sentences and avoid big words.
Posted by 2-D 3 years ago
2-D
Damnit Gordon I was just about to accept this! I don't see how Pro could meet his BoP but He makes an interesting case. I'll follow this one and betting on Con.
Posted by 2-D 3 years ago
2-D
I'm tempted to accept since Christianity is also arguably just a random pervasive meme that provides inspiration and spreads rapidly. Why hate on Catholics tho? U guys are like cousins :)
Posted by Fox32 3 years ago
Fox32
Hey there!

@Chengste
Yes, thats right. My motive is a thought that the Catholic church gives the world the wrong idea's about the bible...and in the worst case makes atheist believe even stronger!

@Mikal,
Well, as i explain that the bible was created from 3 basic menuscript, so was the Catholic Church. Created by men, just like the protestants are. If your holy to the bible, you must participate on the Sabbath.

So Yeah, separating Christianity from Catholicism makes sens!

@Chengste,

I agree, however not all people see it that way.
Posted by chengste 3 years ago
chengste
Yes the reformation was very important, however the term Christian means little Christ it was meant as an insult.
Catholicism is a religion with its own set of rules and regs, which pro wants to use as a basis of Christianity and it is not. I don't really care what the pope has to say, means nothing he is just a man nothing more, to a Catholic that is a heretical statement.
The idea that the two are the same is like saying oxygen (O2) is the same as water (H2O) they both have O in it after all.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
You can not separate Christianity from Catholicism, that makes 0 sense. Just because you think they operate differently than most Christians, it is a sect of Christianity. Actually without Catholicism, the reformation would not have been as fluent as it was. We probably would not even be the same type of protestants without it.
Posted by chengste 3 years ago
chengste
The Pope is only part of the Catholic church, not Christianity.

So is your debate about Chistianity or Catholicisim? As an ex Catholic I have no intrest in debating Catholicism.

Very cool idea to improve your skills in reading by debating great idea.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Juan_Pablo 3 years ago
Juan_Pablo
Fox32gordonjamesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters used sources. Both debaters missed at least one round of debate. Though I did agree with some of Pro's arguments and do believe Christianity has a strong element of tribal propaganda attached to it, I also felt that as a religion it does offer humankind important values to live by; oddly this would make me disagree with some of con's assertions in the debate, that christianity isn't a belief system that attempts to establish moral message. Well, I think it does and I do believe this is important. I understand that Christians believe Jesus died for sins, but he also taught people how to live on Earth. That would be wrong to dismiss about the Christian way of life. Anyway, I mostly agreed with gordonjames' arguments.
Vote Placed by janetsanders733 3 years ago
janetsanders733
Fox32gordonjamesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con focused on the topic, and showed what the term "Christian" actually means. Pro on the other hand kept going off topic and debating differences within Christianity. Con stayed on topic and used more resources. Good job to both debaters.
Vote Placed by TheHitchslap 3 years ago
TheHitchslap
Fox32gordonjamesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: args due to ff
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
Fox32gordonjamesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Fox32gordonjamesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's case was based upon a fallacy of composition. He rgued that if any part of Christianity is wrong, then all of it is wrong. He used the day of worship and the name of the Deity as things claimed to be wrong, but even if true, he never tied those notions to the broad beliefs of Christianity. The idea that worshiping on Sunday amounts to worshiping the Sun makes no more sense than supposing that worshiping on Saturday is worship of Saturn. Pro did not make a logical case. Conduct penalties for forfeiting offset. When someone forfeits, it's good debate strategy to continue laying on arguments -- if there is anything more to be said. Pro's S&G was okay.