The Instigator
TheContendr
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Mini-guy
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

There is one God. (Christianity)

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 1 vote the winner is...
TheContendr
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 828 times Debate No: 46755
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

TheContendr

Pro

There is only one indivisible God. The Bible says this over and over again. Deuteronomy 6:4 to just name one time it says this. We will use the KJV Bible ONLY to prove our points. You may be of any denomination. I would prefer a Christian, but you may be otherwise. Burden of Proof is shared equally. Good Luck!
Mini-guy

Con

I accept. Pro did not define GOD, but we all know he is obviously talking about Glorious Ox Demons...... He also did not define bible. But, we can easily tell what means by KJV bible. KJV means kool John version. My name is John. Bible is the name of the story I have written.
I await the Pro's argument about why he thinks that there is only one Glorious Ox Demon exists. Because there is more than one Glorious Ox Demons exist in my story.
Debate Round No. 1
TheContendr

Pro

Mr. Mini, I believe you may have gotten in the wrong debate. This debate was clearly about Christianity's God as stated in the title. I am sorry for any confusion that has crossed your mind. Please forfeit from the debate so I may start a new one with clearer guidelines. In other words, stop trolling!
Mini-guy

Con

"I am sorry for any confusion that has crossed your mind." Pro conceded that it was his fault. "Mr. Mini, I believe you may have gotten in the wrong debate." How am I suppose to know? Since the instigator provided no guidelines or definitions, I thought it was open to interpretation. "This debate was clearly about Christianity's God as stated in the title." No, it was not! You put the word "Christianity" in bracket. I thought you did that because you are a Christian. "stop trolling!" Pro is accusing me of trolling, but the truth is that he was the one who was trolling. This debate was designed for a easy win. If he was referring to Christian God and bible, then he was telling us to disprove that there is only one God for christians, and he was telling us to dispute this claim basing on the bible! This claim is a christian fact. Ofcourse, the bible says there is only one God. What's more? He also said the burden of proof is shared !! It is explicitely clear that he was trolling. He just wanted an easy win. Now he is telling me to forfeit! It also contradicts the site recommendation. " it is usually seen as poor conduct to forfeit a round." source: http://www.debate.org... This is a very very poor conduct, Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
TheContendr

Pro

I quoted a verse of the Bible I was referencing. Since I did this, it is obvious to which "Bible" I was referencing. Also, I did set guidelines. The guidelines were broken by mini-guy since he used a book he conjured up and not the KJV Bible that is of Christianity origins. Then, I was being sarcastic when I said, "I'm sorry any confusion crossed your mind". Also, anyone seeing KJV Bible worldwide, would not easily see that is a "kool John Version", but that in fact it is the King James Version. Lastly, since I referenced a verse from the Bible, we know which one it actually is. Now, since we do, we should look into the Bible to see what God actually is. The King James Version Bible clearly says who God is. Nowhere does it say "Glorious Ox Demon" at all. In fact, since this is a debate under the religion category, this must be about religion and not a book that you just made up. Mine is a religion. http://en.wikipedia.org... Prove that yours is also.
Mini-guy

Con

Pro concedes that he was trolling because he did not give any objection to that.
.

.
.
.
.
"I quoted a verse of the Bible I was referencing."- Rebuttal1)No, you didn't. This is false. You just said "Deuteronomy 6:4". It means the sixth version of my story, Bible. Rebuttal 2)Pro had the chance to clarify this in the second round. He failed to do it. But, now he is claiming that. I think Pro himself is confused.
.
.
.
"Also, I did set guidelines."- Rebuttal: a.Pro apologyzed in round 2 for not setting up the guidelines properly. He completely accepted my accusation of him. But, now he is trying to confuse the voters with his cheap tricks and tactics. Shame on you, Pro. Go to your room...

b.That is some really bad conduct to change the guideline of a debate at the end of the debate...

After saying all that in round 2, now Pro is saying that he was being sarcastic. a)This proves that he was trolling b)This also proves how bad he is at being sarcastic because nobody understood his sarcasm.

"Also, anyone seeing KJV Bible worldwide, would not easily see that is a "kool John Version", but that in fact it is the King James Version."- I TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT, kool John Version does exist.
.
.
.
Pro cited wikipedia to justify Christianity a religion and he didn't even presented what was said inside the link. Nobody has the time to read an entire article just to see whether Christianity is a religion or not. So just because its not there it means it doesnt exist? by that logic everything that IS NOT on the link DOES NOT exist! Writing story is a religion and it exists. Pro told me to prove it. But, I must present new arguments to prove it. Presenting new arguments in the last round is wrong.
.
.
.
I would also like to point out that Pro presented new arguments in the last round . Voters should penalize this.
.
.
Summary:
1) Pro forfeits that there are more than one Glorious Demon ox
2) Pro forfetis that Glorious Demon Ox can be represented as God.
3) Pro believes that everything on the wikipedia is real
4) Pro forfeits that he did not define God in the first round
6) Pro forfeits that he did not specify that we had to wait to last round and wait for him to define everything
7) Pro forfeits there is both Christian God and Glorious Demon Ox are more than one
8) Pro forfeits that he did not lay the ground rules for the debate in round 1, leaving it open to interpretation, definitions, etc
That is a total forfeit. Points for argument go to me. He was trolling. He said that my religion is fake which I find offensive (conduct goes to me) Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TryingAtLogic 2 years ago
TryingAtLogic
@TheContendr

A fair opinion. Would you like to formally debate the legitimacy of my assertion?
Posted by CrazyCowMan 2 years ago
CrazyCowMan
LOL everybody knows there are many Glorious Ox Demons!
Posted by Maximus_Wamson_IV 2 years ago
Maximus_Wamson_IV
The parameters of your debate aren't well defined, but nonetheless I agree with having just one GOD. Atheist would say monotheism. It's just I don't know what your trying to get us to debate. My point is that Jesus is the son of God the part of him that sacrificed for humanity and the Holy Spirit is the part of him that is with us always, we accept the three as the holy trinity but they all make up who GOD is. If your expecting atheist not to encroach into this one we are in for a really long debate. Yes GOD is one but the true form of him can't be beheld by us, so he sent the part of him that could his son Jesus. Ill drop references and sources in later comments I feel this is going to be interesting.
Posted by Taylur 2 years ago
Taylur
dukej11, atheism has been around for thousands of years; evolution was just an extra nail in the coffin for religion. Christianity has not been around forever; other religions predate -- do some research.

I find it funny that you beg us to just break down our walls and accept God, when it is in fact you who needs to break down your own walls and read into Science. Make an informed decision, solely on fact, whether God is likely to exist. You must remember that, if you were born into a different family with a different religious background, you would have been brainwashed into believing their beliefs too. You are only Christian because you grew up in a Christian environment that forced you to throw away individual thinking and shrink away into 'faith'.
Posted by TheContendr 2 years ago
TheContendr
BTW, if someone accepts, I will most likely be posting my part tomorrow. Time to gather thoughts and sleep..
Posted by dukej11 2 years ago
dukej11
Atheism is all based on a simple computer analysis on the standpoint of evolution. And the idea of evolution was only proposed since 120 years ago. Christianity is based on evidence brought from the beginning. Jesus is the savior of all. If you're reading this now please know that God is desiring a relationship with you and all you have to do is believe and repent. It is so simple all you have to do is break down the walls you have built over time and repent. God Bless!
Posted by TheContendr 2 years ago
TheContendr
Wow... I made a debate where the burden of proof is shared. Many debates on this website do this. Once again, I will debate my beliefs in the debate, not in the comments.
Posted by TryingAtLogic 2 years ago
TryingAtLogic
As @Taylur said, you've perpetuated a fallacy. And another one, for the burden of proof is *not* equally shared, even if you declare it to be thus. You are making a claim; I am saying I do not believe in your claim. That is not a counter-claim. That is simply abstinence from believing what you say until you can offer up some proof.

However . . .

For a deity to be a deity, they must be either constantly omnipotent or constantly omniscient, for if they are neither then there is a time when a mortal being could have held a higher degree than them, thus defeating the purpose of them being a deity. (It is essentially equivalent to Zeus being a god and I a mortal, but I being stronger than Zeus.)

One: Omnipotence in general is an absurdity. If a being is omnipotent, it can create a rock it cannot lift, thus making them less than omnipotent. If this being cannot create a rock they cannot lift, they cannot be omnipotent.

Two: Constant omniscience is impossible because if one knows everything for ever then one cannot know the feeling of ignorance.

There. One does not even have the burden of proof under my position in the matter and I have still deigned to give evidence, which I have yet to see penetrated.

-regards,
TryingAtLogic
Posted by TheContendr 2 years ago
TheContendr
The comments is not where I will debate. The debate is where I will debate. @DebateForDayz
Posted by TheContendr 2 years ago
TheContendr
This, as shown in the title, is a debate between Christians. We are not debating Atheism at all. Also, as Christians, we should know how to use the Bible to prove our God. Some Christians believe in 3 seperate gods and/or one triune (3-in-1) god. This is a CHRISTIAN debate amongst CHRISTIANS. Not a debate among just any faith you choose.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Josh_b 2 years ago
Josh_b
TheContendrMini-guyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is trolling. However, Definitions and purpose are helpful for the first round.