The Instigator
creedhunt
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Semantics should be debated in theological disagreements

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 514 times Debate No: 53123
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

creedhunt

Pro

Hello everybody.

I am putting forth the idea that semantics should be debated during theological debates.

First round: Acceptance only.
Second: Main points and rebuttal
Third: Additional points and rebuttals
Fourth: Final rebuttals and conclusions

I look forward to debating with you.
9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb

Con

First round: Acceptance only.
Debate Round No. 1
creedhunt

Pro

Thank you, con, for conceding.

Theology is defined as the study of religious faith, practice, and experience ; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world [1].
This is a topic on which there are several disagreements, and I believe that too many of them rely on semantic points to be ignored in the case of a debate.

We can start off with the definition of god. There are several contributing factors surrounding god's capabilities, existence, or lack thereof. The most influential factor, is the denotative structure that can make god a deductively valid or invalid notion, as I will demonstrate here.

God is defined as follows:

1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind 2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship ; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality 3 : a person or thing of supreme value 4 : a powerful ruler [2]

As we can see, there are descriptions that very completely. If we define natural as having or constituting a classification based on features existing in nature [3], and nature as the inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing [4], then god cannot possibly exist with one definition. A being cannot have aspects that extend past it's own constitutions. By another definition, god has to exist, because it's nearly impossible to argue the fact that there have been powerful rulers.

The point is, one's position on the topic of theology is influenced by the various definitions to a point where not accepting any discussion and debate on them is a direct obstacle to finding insight to the topic.

I await your response.

[1]http://i.word.com...
[2]http://i.word.com...
[3]http://i.word.com...
[4]http://i.word.com...
9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb

Con

9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
creedhunt

Pro

This far, my contentions remain uncontested, and I have nothing to refute.

I await my opponent's response.
9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb

Con

9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
creedhunt

Pro

My opponent has failed to debate.

Vote pro.
9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb

Con

9lsyh2rDaeXXYpeGCOlb forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.