The Instigator
SavedByChrist94
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
Diirez
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points

The Mind is Immaterial, Spirit exists

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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,847 times Debate No: 31943
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

SavedByChrist94

Pro

1, Free Will, matter has no will, and if will depended on random atomic fluctuatations of the matter(brain, not different than a steak) then we would have, no free will, and free will is a fact, otherwise we would not be Conscious, we are Conscious therefore mind being brain is refuted as faries.

2, every single cell in the body dies and regenerates that by every 7(approx) years we are completely new material bodies, now we are brand new and different materially, the past matter has died and has been replaced Scientifically and Factually, how then are we the same exact person(I'm the same guy I was in '99 for example) if we are material and our material has died? we cannot be, therefore Scientifically and Factually we are not material.

3, Color is immaterial(can you taste, feel, hear, or smell color? no, you could only see it, as you see your thoughts)

4, thoughts are immaterial as they cannot be found anywhere in the brain, and if they are material then they are formed by immaterial, which leaves the materialist stuck

5, when we see someones face, we look at them as if THAT is the person, despite the Absolute fact that they are not their material lips, cheeks, eyeballs, gums, teeth, hair, skin, etc likewise the brain, is just millions of Quantum mindless matter.

6, Mind has immaterial properties, for example the text you are reading, what is material about it? it's just energy hitting your glass screen, where's the information you get off this text? the information isn't material.

7, The best fact is this, if the mind is the brain, how do you feel your hand? if you are your brain, which is Scientifically and Factually a distinct material from your material hand(just like the wall is a distinct material from your material brain and that's why you cannot feel how it is to be a wall), how then do you feel your hand?

We could cut off your hand and you wouldn't feel it anymore.

Keep in mind the argument isn't that the brain moves the hand, obviously energy signals from brain to hand cause the hand to move, the argument is that the brain cannot feel what the hand is like, just like the brain cannot feel what the wall is like.

I feel my hand, yet I am not my hand, if I am not my hand how do I feel it, you cannot say because it's connected, heck I can touch the wall( a connection) and never feel what a wall is like.

if you were your brain all you'd feel is your brain and the chemicals surrounding our brain, yet you feel your hand.

Therefore Scientifically there is a part of you in your hand(the feeling which is scientifically distinct, from the brain) despite the fact that you aren't your hand or any nerve in it(even if you are your brain), therefore you are not material as other than the hand and what is in it, there is no other material, you aren't any material of your hand yet you feel it, therefore Factually immaterial.

Scientifically we must now use the video game demonstration, which is this, Player(Spirit) -Controls-> Video Game Controller(Brain) -Controls-> Video Game Console

if you argue it isn't a piece of mindless matter then you scientifically argue that it's a supernatural piece of matter with free will(which is crazy) or argue that free will doesn't exist which is refuted by the fact that, free will exist.

Scientifically The Mind is Immaterial, whether you believe God exists or not.

Obviously we further add the fact that since we are immaterial, why can't we exist outside our bodies, what is sustaining us? can what is sustaining our Spirits in our bodies be mindless? no as it would 1, be all over the place, 2, cannot sustain, something being sustained must be intentional.

Therefore an Immaterial Mind is sustaining us.

2, can material cause immaterial? No, 1, Material is mindless, Spirits are Mind, therefore impossible due to law of Cause and Effect and Fact that lesser doesn't produce greater(Cause must have equal or more properties in order to cause an effect, otherwise it isn't the cause) 2, Material has never been observed scientifically to cause Immaterial.

Therefore Immaterial Mind created us, law of Occams Razor brings this to 1 mind.

Jesus Christ Resurrected from the dead(Shroud and Historical Fact anyone who denies crucifixion even go against "atheist" Scholars who know Jesus Christ was Crucified, and since He was Crucified there was an Empty Tomb and He was Resurrected for a Fact)

Therefore Jesus Christ is YHWH, YHWH(The Father, and The Son(Jesus Christ) and The Holy Spirit) exists therefore since YHWH is God, God(YHWH) exists.

If you object, you must refute, no assertions, opinions, or nonsense, only proof and evidence.
Diirez

Con

1. We don't have free will. But the whole conscious thing and all of that, we have genes and a central powerhouse designing all movement (the brain) in which inanimate objects do not have. If you study evolution you can find that we are merely survival machines for genes.
2. Have you studied biology? Not every cell in the body dies and regenerates, this process is known as mitosis. Not every cell dies and "regenerates" in the body. There is no regeneration involved. What happens is a cell goes through mitosis, make an identical copy of itself, goes through apoptosis and so on and so forth. There are specialized cells in your body that do not die, blood cells, muscle cells, neurons. So we can conclude that A) your body is not made of completely new material every 7 years, it's made of new material that is identical to the previous material and B) the cells in your brain, the central control point of the body, do not replicate and therefore are not affected. Even if every cells in your body were made of new material except for neurons, our personality and everything rests in the brain. So skin cells do not effect your personality. We are entirely made up of material.
3. Color is not material? I know no respected scientists would ever teach this, so I can only conclude you are making this up. Color is visible light. Light is made of electromagnetic waves and photons, all of which are in fact, material. That is physics.
4. There is not much known scientifically about thoughts, however thoughts being immaterial theory begins to break down at the slightest use of logic. How can a completely immaterial thing interact with a completely material object in the exact same context as physical reality? or Why does a completely immaterial thing confide solely in a completely material skull?
5. Study the brain. The Brain is not quantum mindless matter, it a complex system of memories in which visual and auditory cues set of memories in which we recognize a person through the memories. Study neuroscience.
6. the language side of your brain, in we have learned to read and interpret the structures of letters formed into words and grammatically placed together in which we imply a meaning behind every word therefore we put the words together and get the information.
7. First off, do not say "scientifically and factually" without having your hypothesis and theory being tested and peer reviewed, I already disproved your argument implying this statement is true. Secondly, have you EVER studied biology or the nervous system, EVER? I can feel my hand because the neurons sense I'm touching my hand and sends the information to my brain through other neurons. You are your hand, because your hand is part of your body connected to your brain.

I like how you jump from deism to theism immediately.
1. Jesus is not historical, most people accept a prophet named Jesus lived, but it is not historical because there is not historical evidence. History uses evidence too, much to your disliking.
2. Many people were crucified, how does a crucifixion automatically lead to resurrection? The resurrection is BEYOND a fact.

You haven't used a SINGLE shred of proof and yet you're requesting your opponent to use proof?
Debate Round No. 1
SavedByChrist94

Pro

"1. We don't have free will."

Prove it.

2, I'm going to will that I press the letter G, G, therefore Free Will exists.

"But the whole conscious thing and all of that,"

Consciousness is free will, if one is conscious they can observe, making an observation and what you think of it(what's going on, where am I? etc) is a matter of will, free will.

"we have genes and a central powerhouse designing all movement (the brain)"

The brain is a piece of meat that is controlled, the brain is matter, matter is Mindless, therefore you are arguing that everyone one does is based on random fluctuations of atoms/matter, which would make one eplielptic. I have control and can do as I please and preplan it as I have free will, therefore genes and the brain are not the will.

"in which inanimate objects do not have. If you study evolution you can find that we are merely survival machines for genes."

Rape would be advantageous to the species under "macro-evolution", as it would advance the species and cause the most procreation, If we are merely survival machines for genes, then Rape would not only be ok and not immoral, but Moral.

Rape in Reality is Immoral no matter what, therefore "macro-evolution" is Scientifically False and we are not "merely survival machines for genes"

"2. Have you studied biology? Not every cell in the body dies and regenerates, this process is known as mitosis. Not every cell dies and "regenerates" in the body."

http://biology.about.com...

""Think of an experience from your childhood. Something you remember clearly, something you can see, feel, maybe even smell, as if you were really there. After all you really were there at the time, weren"t you?
How else could you remember it? But here is the bombshell: you weren"t there. Not a single atom that is in your body today was there when that event took place .... Matter flows from place to place and momentarily comes together to be you. Whatever you are, therefore, you are not the stuff of which you are made. If that does not make the hair stand up on the back of your neck, read it again until it does, because it is important." - "atheist" richard dawkins.

"There is no regeneration involved. What happens is a cell goes through mitosis, make an identical copy of itself, goes through apoptosis and so on and so forth."

"Identical copy" is basically another cell, I ask you, if I have a boat and replaced it with different and new identical parts, is it the same boat?

No.

"There are specialized cells in your body that do not die, blood cells, muscle cells, neurons. "

Neurons - http://www.princeton.edu...

"So we can conclude that A) your body is not made of completely new material every 7 years, it's made of new material that is identical to the previous material"

Identical matter... is still new matter, people have the same type of parts I have, for example most humans have a hand, is your hand my hand because they are Identical? No, likewise identical cells, are still different cells.

"3. Color is not material? I know no respected scientists would ever teach this, so I can only conclude you are making this up. Color is visible light. Light is made of electromagnetic waves and photons, all of which are in fact, material. That is physics."

Light causes us to SEE color, for example, when someone is blind what do they see? Black. that's all they see, is black physical? No so even when someone is blind they can "see" refuting the claim of

Also no color is not material, you cannot smell, hear, taste, or feel it, what one sees as blue another can see as green, it therefore isn't an objective in the physical world.

"4. There is not much known scientifically about thoughts, however thoughts being immaterial theory begins to break down at the slightest use of logic. How can a completely immaterial thing interact with a completely material object in the exact same context as physical reality? or Why does a completely immaterial thing confide solely in a completely material skull?"

The question is illogical, we do not know nor does it matter How it works, all we need to know is that it does work, since Thoughts are not Material, the argument is refuted.

Thoughts are Immaterial.

"5. Study the brain. The Brain is not quantum mindless matter, it a complex system of memories in which visual and auditory cues set of memories in which we recognize a person through the memories. Study neuroscience."

Yes it is, Quantum Physics is a Fact, every cell is individual, I ask you where is The Memory if memories are based on physical cells?

"6. the language side of your brain, in we have learned to read and interpret the structures of letters formed into words and grammatically placed together in which we imply a meaning behind every word therefore we put the words together and get the information."

The brain interprets things? How does mindless matter know anything?

"7. First off, do not say "scientifically and factually" without having your hypothesis and theory being tested and peer reviewed, I already disproved your argument implying this statement is true. "

Where? don't see it.

" I can feel my hand because the neurons sense I'm touching my hand and sends the information to my brain through other neurons. You are your hand, because your hand is part of your body connected to your brain."

Your brain is NOT your hand, HOW do you feel your hand? someone can easily cut your hand and all the nerves in them off, your nerves aren't one thing, they are quantum particles.

Argument refuted, if we were our brains we'd be multi-personal(as a brain is made up of millions of cells) and we wouldn't be able to feel anything other than our brains and the matter surrounding it.

"I like how you jump from deism to theism immediately.
1. Jesus is not historical, most people accept a prophet named Jesus lived, but it is not historical because there is not historical evidence. History uses evidence too, much to your disliking."

Lie,

Josephus(Verified Authentic)
Tacitus (Verified Authentic)
Pliny the Younger(Verified Authentic)
Talmud
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas

All prove Jesus Christ existed and was crucified, and that's History. Another proof is that Gospels are all before 70AD which means it was during the time of The Apostles and near Jesus Christ crucifixion.

Also Matthew 28:11-17 - 11 Now while they were on their way, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened. 12 And when they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, 13 and said, "You are to say, "His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep." 14 And if this should come to the governor"s ears, we will win him over and [a]keep you out of trouble." 15 And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day.

That was written as Rebuttal to the "stolen tomb" myth, there is no other reason for this to be written other than Matthew Refuting The Jews claim of a "stolen tomb", Christians said Resurrection, Jews said "stolen", no one denied The Empty Tomb, therefore it's a Fact, Women also found the tomb which by Criteria of Embarrassment makes it Authentic and Fact, since Empty Tomb is a Fact the Crucifixion is a Fact, we now have 2 Historical Facts.

"2. Many people were crucified, how does a crucifixion automatically lead to resurrection? The resurrection is BEYOND a fact."

Before I answer that, you do agree with The Majority of Scholars that Jesus Christ was crucified right?

"You haven't used a SINGLE shred of proof and yet you're requesting your opponent to use proof?"

I haven't used a single shred of proof? Demonstrate this.
Diirez

Con

1. German scientists Hans Helmut Kornhuber and L"der Deecke discovered a phenomenon they called "bereitschaftspotential", German for "readiness potential." Their discovery, that the brain enters into a special state immediately prior to conscious awareness, set off an entirely new subfield. They asked their subjects to move their fingers, Kornhuber and Deecke's electroencephalogram (EEG) scans showed a slow negative potential shift in the activity of the motor cortex just slightly prior to the voluntary movement. They had no choice but to conclude that the unconscious mind was initiating a freely voluntary act. Benjamin Libet in the 1980s reinforced this. Libet had his participants move their fingers, but this time while watching a clock with a dot circling around it. His data showed that the readiness potential started about 0.35 seconds earlier than participants' reported conscious awareness.
Modern Scientists have figured this out too:
John-Dylan Haynes in 2008 showed a similar effect to the one revealed by Libet. After putting participants into an fMRI scanner, he told them to press a button with either their right or left index fingers at their leisure, but that they had to remember the letter that was showing on the screen at the precise moment they were committed to their movement. Haynes's data showed that the BP occurred one entire second prior to conscious awareness and at other times as much as ten seconds. He said the delay was due to the operation of a network of high-level control areas that were preparing for an upcoming decision long before it entered into conscious awareness. Basically, the brain starts to unconsciously churn in preparation of a decision, and once a set of conditions are met, awareness kicks in, and the movement is made.
Conciousness is the ability to be aware of your surrondings, not the ability to decided what to do freely. You can be controlled but still aware of your surrondings.

2. The brain is not just a piece of meat, it is a complex system of storage units and neurons able to store and collect date, inerpret data and respond throughout the body.

3. Rape is NOT advantageous to the species. In humans, altruism and intelligence prevail and thats what natural selection promotes. However, for reproduction, rape has too many risk factors. The rapist would have to choose someone of reproduction age, a woman who will raise the child even after the rape and would not put the rapist in dange of attack. Obviously the risk factors are much higher and less altruistic than to find a consenting mate who will not increase risk of attack to the person and will most likely, take care of the child.

4. They are regenerating not dying and regenerating at a rapid pace. Thats the regeneration of brain cells and new brain cells through age. They do not undergo regular, normal, rapid death and seperation.

5. It is a different boat that runs the same, operates the same and feels the same. The cell will operate in the exact same way because it is an exact copy.

My hand and your hand are not identical, you have different skin, different cells, different pigmentation, different sweat glands, different oil glands etc.

Black is the absence of color, Black is whatever you see when there is no light or no color. No one sees blue and another green, unless one has a defect causing them to see that.

"the question is illogical, we do not know nor does it matter how it works, all we need to know is that it does not work." Doesn't work like that bud. We can conclude that thoughts are material considering they are restricted by material objects and rest in a material object.

6. It is not mindless matter, it is the mind of the matter. It's made up of memories stored and saved that produce chemical cues. Study the brain.

7. MY argument is not refuted. Your complete lack of biology and nerves do not refute my argument. I already explained how you can feel your hand.

8. Josephus: Wrote about Jesus in 93-94 AD. Jesus died in 30AD. This passage is also been shown to conclusively to have been tampered with.
Tacitus: second-century Roman writer who alleged that Christ had been executed by sentence of Pontius Pilate, is likewise cited by Righi. Written some time after 117 C.E., Tacitus' claim is more of the same late, second-hand "history." There is no mention of "Jesus," only "the sect known as Christians" living in Rome being persecuted, and "their founder, one Christus." Tacitus claims no first-hand knowledge of Christianity. No historical evidence exists that Nero persecuted Christians--Nero did persecute Jews, so perhaps Tacitus was confused. There was certainly not a "great crowd" of Christians in Rome around 60 C.E., as Tacitus put it, and, most damning, the term "Christian" was not even in use in the first century. No one in the second century ever quoted this passage of Tacitus. In fact, it appears almost word-for-word in the fourth-century writings of Sulpicius Severus, where it is mixed with other obvious myths. Citing Tacitus, therefore, is highly suspect and adds virtually nothing to the evidence for a historical Jesus.

Pliny: there is no mention jesus and only relies on what other people believe, not historical.

The Talmus was a result of oral tradition, overruled.

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas:
English Version: As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.
Pre-ferred Latin Sentence: Iudaeos impulsore Christo assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit.
The Original Latin: Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit.
Chresto means good and righteous. This is important because Chresto was used to describe pagan people, deities, oracles and philosophers. Socrates got this title: Socrates the Chrestos. Is Socrates a god? No. So Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas most likely meant good figure not messiah.

Ahh..The Gospels!
Mathew, Mark and Luke were not written by apostles, they didn't directly observe Jesus. The earliest gospel was Mark's which was written in 70AD, fourty years after Jesus' death. Karen Armstrong writes in her book 'The History of God': "We know very little about Jesus. The first full-length account of his life was St.Mark's gospel, which was not written until the year 70, some forty years after his death. By that time, historical facts had been overlaid with mythical elements, which expresssed the meaning Jesus had acquired for his followers. It is this meaning that St.Mark primarily conveys rather than a reliable straightforward portrayal."
Mark's Gospel: 70
Luke's Gospel: 80
John's Gospel 90
Gospels written 40-60 years after Jesus' death. They don't agree and often contradict each other. They just aren't a reliable source of information. Besides, Mathew doesn't even count because Matthew DIRECTLY copied Mark's gospel.

Yes, if Jesus existed, it would be very resonable to assume he was crucified considering it was the form of punnishment back then.
Debate Round No. 2
SavedByChrist94

Pro

"1. German scientists Hans Helmut Kornhuber and L"der Deecke discovered a phenomenon they called "bereitschaftspotential", German for "readiness potential." Their discovery, that the brain enters into a special state immediately prior to conscious awareness, set off an entirely new subfield. They asked their subjects to move their fingers, Kornhuber and Deecke's electroencephalogram (EEG) scans showed a slow negative potential shift in the activity of the motor cortex just slightly prior to the voluntary movement. They had no choice but to conclude that the unconscious mind was initiating a freely voluntary act."

Who denies that when one is unconscious and that the brain can't do anything? Not me, I don't deny that at night when I'm unconscious I'm moving all already etc, but the fact is, Will is not the brain, it is immaterial, therefore the mind is immaterial.

"They asked their subjects to move their fingers, Kornhuber and Deecke's electroencephalogram (EEG) scans showed a slow negative potential shift in the activity of the motor cortex just slightly prior to the voluntary movement."

Exactly my point, one decides to do something and then the brain does it, something causes the brain to do it, for example right before I move my hand, I can just think of my hand an Immediately I feel a reaction in my hand before I even move it, this proves my point, The Mind is Immaterial.

Refuted.

"2. The brain is not just a piece of meat, it is a complex system of storage units and neurons able to store and collect date, inerpret data and respond throughout the body."

Complexity is an Idea/Subject of The Mind, Complexity isn't a thing, it is an abstract object such as numbers and shapes, they have no physical objectivity and only exist in ones mind, so the brain being complex cannot be the reason why, as Complexity, Numbers, and Shapes(Abstract Objects) are purely from the mind and do not exist in physical reality.

The Brain is mindless cells, if you claim that these cells have any kind of intelligence, then they have a mind, if each brain cell was personal we'd be Multipersonal, this is not the case, as 1, we are not multipersonal and 2, Matter is Mindless

Refuted.

"3. Rape is NOT advantageous to the species. In humans, altruism and intelligence prevail and thats what natural selection promotes. "

If you accept this as true, then you accept that Natural Selection didn't cause Altruism and Intelligence, in which you have to reject "atheistic" evolution, if you agree with "atheistic" "macro-evolution" you have to agree that Natural Selection caused this to exist, thus Altruism and Intelligence would be based o Survival, which means Factually rape would be advantageous to the Species.

" The rapist would have to choose someone of reproduction age, a woman who will raise the child even after the rape and would not put the rapist in dange of attack. Obviously the risk factors are much higher and less altruistic than to find a consenting mate who will not increase risk of attack to the person and will most likely, take care of the child."

Nope, Natural Selection still would've chosen it, even with all the setbacks listed, so on the least level rape would be going no problem, which is not the case in Reality.

Refuted.

"4. They are regenerating not dying and regenerating at a rapid pace. Thats the regeneration of brain cells and new brain cells through age. They do not undergo regular, normal, rapid death and seperation."

Nope, Regeneration is cells dying and being replaced by completely new cells, Argument Refuted.

"My hand and your hand are not identical, you have different skin, different cells, different pigmentation, different sweat glands, different oil glands etc."

Exactly, same with the hand I had in 2002, it ain't the same as the one I have now.

"Black is the absence of color, Black is whatever you see when there is no light or no color. No one sees blue and another green, unless one has a defect causing them to see that."

"Black is the absence of color", but black is still Something that objectively exists and has no Physical(Hear, Taste, Touch, Feel), properties, which even blind people see, which means they aren't really blind despite their eyes not working, which proves that The Eyes are really the window of the soul.

"6. It is not mindless matter, it is the mind of the matter. It's made up of memories stored and saved that produce chemical cues. Study the brain."

A cue? To what? The Spirit.

2, I have studied the brain, at least more than you apparently in this debate.

"7. MY argument is not refuted. Your complete lack of biology and nerves do not refute my argument. I already explained how you can feel your hand."

In order for my opponent to be valid here, he must,

1, Demonstrate why his argument hasn't been refuted point by point

2, Prove that I lack knowledge in biology and neurology,

3, show how despite the fact that The Brain and The Hand are completely different pieces of Quantum matter, analogous to the wall being distinct from my and me not being able to feel how the wall is, that the brain knows how the hand feels, which is insane in my eyes, the brain is just as separate to the hand like the hand is to the wall, matter is individual, If I touched the wall, would I be able to feel how the wall is? No, likewise my brain being connected to my hand in no way can make my brain know how my hand feels.

"8. Josephus: Wrote about Jesus in 93-94 AD. Jesus died in 30AD. This passage is also been shown to conclusively to have been tampered with."

Which I do not contend, it was tampered with, but only marginally, it still mentions Jesus Christ Crucifixion, when we saw the Greek and Arabic versions I proved that the tampering was no big deal, Josephus is Factually Valid.

" Tacitus' claim is more of the same late, second-hand "history." There is no mention of "Jesus," only "the sect known as Christians" living in Rome being persecuted, and "their founder, one Christus." Tacitus claims no first-hand knowledge of Christianity. No historical evidence exists that Nero persecuted Christians--Nero did persecute Jews, so perhaps Tacitus was confused. There was certainly not a "great crowd" of Christians in Rome around 60 C.E., as Tacitus put it, "

Most modern scholars consider the passage to be authentic - http://en.wikipedia.org...

Talmud is valid as they did not claim Jesus Christ to be The Messiah and got this oral tradition from prior Jews, which prove the point, Jesus Christ was crucified.

"Mark's Gospel: 70
Luke's Gospel: 80
John's Gospel 90"

Every date you have is invalid as None mention a Castrofice event of The Destruction of The Temple or mention that The Prophecy was Fulfilled. so all are before 70AD, unless you can prove that The Gospels mention this event. if Gospels were after 70AD they would mention when Jesus Christ said The Temple would be destroyed that The Prophecy was fulfilled, None of them do, they are all before the Destruction of Temple,

You could only put John, Mark, and Luke's Gospel in 70AD or before, in order to prove otherwise you'd have to prove that The Temple's Destruction(Such an Important Event Predicted by Jesus Christ) is mentioned in The Gospels, if not they are all Pre 70AD.

Refuted

"They don't agree and often contradict each other. "

Assertion not proof.

"Yes, if Jesus existed, it would be very resonable to assume he was crucified considering it was the form of punnishment back then."

And He was crucified, by agreeing to this you agree There was an empty tomb, as No way would they preach a Resurrection with the body in the tomb, by admitting those 2 Facts, and teh fact that all The Apostles except John died for their beliefs, if it was a lie they knew and could've prevented their deaths, they didn't therefore they weren't lying

Gospels are Reliable, my opponent has been making illogical emotional based assertions with no logic or evidence.

Vote Pro.
Diirez

Con

1. "Who denies that when one is unconscious and that the brain can't do anything? Not me, I don't deny that at night when I'm unconscious I'm moving all already etc, but the fact is, Will is not the brain, it is immaterial, therefore the mind is immaterial."
You have to prove will is immaterial. Invalid.

2. "Exactly my point, one decides to do something and then the brain does it, something causes the brain to do it, for example right before I move my hand, I can just think of my hand an Immediately I feel a reaction in my hand before I even move it, this proves my point, The Mind is Immaterial."
What? You think to move your hand and the brain sends this information through your motor neurons to your hand and tells the muscles to contract or expand to make this movement.

3. "Complexity is an Idea/Subject of The Mind, Complexity isn't a thing, it is an abstract object such as numbers and shapes, they have no physical objectivity and only exist in ones mind, so the brain being complex cannot be the reason why, as Complexity, Numbers, and Shapes(Abstract Objects) are purely from the mind and do not exist in physical reality."
Number and shapes exist as concrete things. You're computer is most likely a square or rectangle. Every solid consists of shapes.

4. "The Brain is mindless cells, if you claim that these cells have any kind of intelligence, then they have a mind, if each brain cell was personal we'd be Multipersonal, this is not the case, as 1, we are not multipersonal and 2, Matter is Mindless"
If the brain does not cause personality than how come there are personality disorders in the brain and it affects the person? How come Phineas Gage got impaled and the steel pipe went through the personality controlled part of his brain and he stopped being a model employee and no longer acted the same and had no personality? How come Alzheimer's makes us lose our memories if that's stored in our soul? It just seems material diseased seem to effect the mind and the person changes. How does a material thing effect an immaterial thing?

5. If you accept this as true, then you accept that Natural Selection didn't cause Altruism and Intelligence, in which you have to reject "atheistic" evolution, if you agree with "atheistic" "macro-evolution" you have to agree that Natural Selection caused this to exist, thus Altruism and Intelligence would be based o Survival, which means Factually rape would be advantageous to the Species.
Natural Selection didn't cause altruism and intelligence, it just passed on altruistic and intelligent genes because they are beneficial to our survival. Like I explained, the rape gene would be weeded out because of the fact it puts the attacker in more risks than advantages. The rapist needs someone of a reproductive age, that will raise the child and not put the attacked at risk of harm. Plus rape is a SELFISH act solely done for the males and contradicts the altruistic genes that the majority of humans have. Therefore, because it's not as beneficial as find a mate who would consent, it was weeded out.

6. "Nope, Regeneration is cells dying and being replaced by completely new cells, Argument Refuted."
Neurons do not undergo regular mitosis therefore my argument is not refuted.
7. "Exactly, same with the hand I had in 2002, it ain't the same as the one I have now."
You don't have the same skin cells in your hand from 2002 but you do have the same muscle cells and neurons there and so therefore you will continue to feel your hand and will continue to be your hand.

8. "but black is still Something that objectively exists and has no Physical(Hear, Taste, Touch, Feel), properties, which even blind people see, which means they aren't really blind despite their eyes not working, which proves that The Eyes are really the window of the soul."
Did you not pay attention to my argument? Black is the ABSENCE of color and light. A blind person sees black because they're eyes lack the ability to perceive light and color and therefore because there is no light or color, black is what you see. Also if eyes are the window of the soul how come our inverted retinas give us visual distortion and problems? How come schizophrenia, a mental disorder, effects how our eyes see?

9. "A cue? To what? The Spirit."
Chemical cues to release certain chemicals to react and produce effects. Not to the spirit.

10.
A. "1, Demonstrate why his argument hasn't been refuted point by point"
My argument hasn't been refuted because you cannot refute the fact I presented. It is a scientific fact the process of motor neurons delivering the sensation to the brain and the brain interpreting it.
B. "2, Prove that I lack knowledge in biology and neurology,"
You lack the knowledge in biology and neurology because you did not understand how the process of touch and sensation works.
C. "3, show how despite the fact that The Brain and The Hand are completely different pieces of Quantum matter, analogous to the wall being distinct from my and me not being able to feel how the wall is, that the brain knows how the hand feels, which is insane in my eyes, the brain is just as separate to the hand like the hand is to the wall, matter is individual, If I touched the wall, would I be able to feel how the wall is? No, likewise my brain being connected to my hand in no way can make my brain know how my hand feels."
Your hand and the wall are not connected, in any shape or form. The brain is connected to your hand, like I said, with neurons. The neurons all connect all the way up to the brain and the brain interprets it. Outline: You have nerves. When you touch something, the nerves pass along this feeling nerve to never until it reaches the brain (unless it's a sudden reaction in which it goes to the spine). The Brain interprets this and you feel the sensation.

11. "Which I do not contend, it was tampered with, but only marginally, it still mentions Jesus Christ Crucifixion, when we saw the Greek and Arabic versions I proved that the tampering was no big deal, Josephus is Factually Valid."
Joesphus' things were tampered and shouldn't be considered a historical reliance. He writes this 60 years after Jesus' death and refers to Jesus as "the Christ." Which proves this portion of his writings was tampered with. Josephus was a staunch Jew and therefore would NEVER call Jesus "the Christ".

12. "Most modern scholars consider the passage to be authentic - http://en.wikipedia.org...;
Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Invalid.
"Talmud is valid as they did not claim Jesus Christ to be The Messiah and got this oral tradition from prior Jews, which prove the point, Jesus Christ was crucified."
"...got this ORAL TRADITION..." Do I need to say more? Play the game Telephone game for 10mins and you'll see how reliable oral tradition is. Better yet, play it for 1 week and see what happens, let alone years.

13. "You could only put John, Mark, and Luke's Gospel in 70AD or before, in order to prove otherwise you'd have to prove that The Temple's Destruction(Such an Important Event Predicted by Jesus Christ) is mentioned in The Gospels, if not they are all Pre 70AD."
Obviously the religious do not accept this, I've taken theology classes and taught the gospels were dated around 65AD-95AD.

14. "Assertion not proof."
http://www.infidels.org... http://www.evilbible.com...
http://www.philvaz.com...

15.
I said if Jesus existed, which I don't believe he did. Besides, it does not automatically lead to an empty tomb and so Jesus resurrected, the apostles could've moved the body. People died for Hitler and the Nazi's, does that mean they taught the right truths? No.
Arguments Debunked.

Con has failed to provide anything I could not refute. His arguments are due to his lack of knowledge in biology, neuroscience and history.
Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Daktoria 4 years ago
Daktoria
SavedByChrist94DiirezTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never claims that free will and unconscious attitudes are mutually exclusive, yet Con's rebuttal depends on acknowledging unconscious attitudes in advance of awareness such as Kornhuber's and Libet's experiments. If anything, free will resides in the unconscious because we're talking about how material action is catalyzed.
Vote Placed by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
SavedByChrist94DiirezTied
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 made a lot of claims and suggestions that did make sense but did nothing to actually prove them valid. Con on the other hand showed many of the points made by Pro to be either invalid or unsupported. Pro had to prove his case and not just make a case. I give arguments to Con. I think both had even sources and spelling. Both had good conduct.