The Instigator
TheSkeptic
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
puppyluvz
Con (against)
Losing
21 Points

These Arguments Against the God of Christianity Are Valid - 1B.

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  
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: 2/13/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,014 times Debate No: 6849
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (7)

 

TheSkeptic

Pro

*NOTE* - The "1B" notation is for searching/browsing purposes. I hope to have more of these debates.

The resolution is simple and brief: I am here to argue that the God of the Bible and thus the teaching of Christianity does not exist, i.e. has no solid evidence for it's existence.

Common attributes given to this God is omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence , omnipresence, and many others. These 4 "omni-attributes", however, is what I will be focusing upon.

=====Arguments=====

For this debate I will be utilizing two popular arguments: the Argument from Evil and the Argument from Non-Belief.

1. Argument from Evil

If an all-loving God exists, then why does evil and suffering exist in the world? Christians commonly use free will as an excuse for the evil in the world. But then, the burden is placed on my opponent to show why God would prefer us having free will rather than us not having free will, or having free will with moral perfection.

Secondly, the Christian has to somehow account for natural disasters that cause millions of deaths, tons of parasites that feed on humans, and of course bacteria and viruses. While some bacterias and viruses are human-made or proliferated, it's foolish to say every virus and bacteria does. So what of the virus that kills an infant in 4 months?

2. Argument from Non-Belief

I will paste the syllogism that Theodore Drange[1] formulated, based on J.L. Schellenberg's original formation of this argument:

1. If God exists, God:
1. wants all humans to believe God exists before they die;
2. can bring about a situation in which all humans believe God exists before they die;
3. does not want anything that would conflict with and be at least as important as its desire for all humans to believe God exists before they die; and
4. always acts in accordance with what it most wants.
2. If God exists, all humans would believe so before they die (from 1).
3. But not all humans believe God exists before they die.
4. Therefore, God does not exist (from 2 and 3).

=====Conclusion=====

With both my arguments laid out, I await my opponent's rebuttal.

---References---
1. http://www.infidels.org...
puppyluvz

Con

I thank my opponent for giving me the opportunity to debate against him. As this is my first debate, I will try my best.

1) My opponent stated, "I am here to argue that the God of the Bible and thus the teaching of Christianity does not exist, i.e. has no solid evidence for it's existence."

My answer to that is we believe in many things that we can't see. Have you ever seen the wind? Has you seen history? Have you ever seen your brain? We see the effects of the wind, but the wind is invisible. We have records of history, but it is by "faith" that we believe certain historical events happened.

2) "If an all-loving God exists, then why does evil and suffering exist in the world? Christians commonly use free will as an excuse for the evil in the world. But then, the burden is placed on my opponent to show why God would prefer us having free will rather than us not having free will, or having free will with moral perfection."

Many assume that because evil still exists today, God has not dealt with it. How can atheists assume that God has not already solved the problem of evil in such a way that neither His goodness nor omnipotence is limited? On what grounds do they limit what God can and cannot do to solve the problem? God has already solved the problem of evil. And He did it in a way in which He did not contradict His nature or the nature of man. We assume God will solve the problem of evil in one single act. But why can't He deal with evil in a progressive way? Can't He deal with it throughout time as we know it, and then bring it to the climax on the Day of Judgment?

God sent His Son to die on the cross in order to solve the problem of evil. Christ atoned for evil and secured the eventual removal of all evil from the earth. One day evil will be quarantined in one spot called "hell." Then there will be a perfect world devoid of all evil. If God declared that all evil would, at this moment, cease to exist, you and I and all of humanity would go up in a puff of smoke. Divine judgment demands that sin be punished.

If God judged evil today, all unconverted men and women would perish under His wrath. Thank God that He is patiently waiting for them to turn to the Savior and be saved from His terrible wrath.

2.) Yes, you are correct, God does want all humans to believe God exists before they die. But God has to give every human a choice. Just like how he gave Adam and Eve a choice to eat from the tree. They did, and choose to sin. Every human has a choice. Forgiveness is a gift that God offers to everyone, but individuals must receive it by repenting and trusting in Christ, or they will remain dead in their sins. No one has biblical grounds to continue in sin, assuming that they are safe just because Jesus died on the cross.

----Conclusion----

I thank my opponent for a great challenge, and I await my opponent's rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
TheSkeptic

Pro

My first response to these series - I thank my opponent for accepting this debate :)

=====Conclusion=====

>>>My answer to that is we believe in many things that we can't see. Have you ever seen the wind? Has you seen history? Have you ever seen your brain? We see the effects of the wind, but the wind is invisible. We have records of history, but it is by "faith" that we believe certain historical events happened.<<<

----> Yes, I have seen the wind. I have learned about past occurences in history. And I've seen what a human brain has looked like - OUTSIDE the head (so I doubt this part of the analogy works ;D). This nice little intro is irrelevant, since I have solid evidence for the existence of all these 3 things. God, on the other hand...

1. Argument from Evil

My opponent uses quite a peculiar argument. He argues that since Jesus Christ came down and got crucified, he has somehow solved this problem. His death was, in fact, the allowance of man to be saved - it did not wipe out evil from the world.

He has not answered my question yet. He does not explain why there are still hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, viruses, and disease that kill innocent people everywhere. If this isn't unnecessary suffering, then I don't know what is.

2. Argument from Non-belief

>>>Just like how he gave Adam and Eve a choice to eat from the tree.<<<

This is actually another plight that needs to be answered. If Adam and Eve never knew about the concept of morality before eating of the tree, then how can they be blamed for what they did? They didn't know what "good" or "bad" was, somewhat like a newborn baby.

Secondly, why punish the son for the sins of the father? If my dad punched someone I wouldn't expect ME to get imprisoned for physical assault.

>>>Every human has a choice. Forgiveness is a gift that God offers to everyone, but individuals must receive it by repenting and trusting in Christ, or they will remain dead in their sins.<<<

If you read the argument, then you will see that one of the points was that reasonable non-belief occurs. I'm sure that even you think that some, or most, atheists don't believe in God SINCERELY. This means we really believe he doesn't exist because of a lack of evidence, not because we secretly hate him and want to reject him. If you can accept this fact, then you will see that there is a problem: why doesn't God prove his existence?

Of course, you argue that he wants for us to have free will. This attacks my 3rd premise: that God has no greater desire than the one to have everyone believe God exists before they die. However, it is now YOUR burden to show why God would prefer for us to have free will (thus some saved some not) over his desire for all humans to go to heaven. Go on, I'll wait.

=====Conclusion=====

Unfortunately, my opponent's argument are more a sermon than a theological attack. I shall await for the next round then.
puppyluvz

Con

---"Yes, I have seen the wind. I have learned about past occurences in history. And I've seen what a human brain has looked like - OUTSIDE the head (so I doubt this part of the analogy works ;D). This nice little intro is irrelevant, since I have solid evidence for the existence of all these 3 things. God, on the other hand..."---

Okay, so you have "learned" about past occurrences in history. But it is still by "faith" that you belive certain historical events happened.

1. ---"My opponent uses quite a peculiar argument. He argues that since Jesus Christ came down and got crucified, he has somehow solved this problem. His death was, in fact, the allowance of man to be saved - it did not wipe out evil from the world."---

The Bible tells us that God cursed the earth because of Adam's transgression. Weeds are a curse. So is disease. Sin and suffering cannot be separated. The Scriptures inform us that we live in a fallen creation. In the beginning, God created man perfect, and he lived in a perfect world without suffering. It was heaven on earth. When sin came into the world, death and misery came with it. Those who understand the message of Holy Scripture eagerly await a new heaven and a new earth "wherein dwells righteous-ness." In that coming Kingdom there will be no more pain, suffering, disease, or death. We are told that no eye has ever seen, nor has any ear heard, neither has any man's mind ever imagined the wonderful things that God has in store for those who love Him (1 Corinthians 2:9).

Think for a moment what it would be like if food grew with the fervor of weeds. Consider how wonderful it would be if the deserts became incredibly fertile, if creation stopped devouring humanity. Imagine if the weather worked for us instead of against us, if disease completely disappeared, if pain was a thing of the past, if death was no more.

The dilemma is that we are like a child whose insatiable appetite for chocolate has caused his face to break out with ugly sores. He looks in the mirror and sees a sight that makes him depressed. But instead of giving up his beloved chocolate, he consoles himself by stuffing more into his mouth. Yet, the source of his pleasure is actually the cause of his suffering. The whole face of the earth is nothing but ugly sores of suffering. Everywhere we look we see unspeakable pain. But instead of believing God's explanation and asking Him to forgive us and change our appetite, we run deeper into sin's sweet embrace. There we find solace in its temporal pleasures, thus intensifying our pain, both in this life and in the life to come.

It is because of our sinning, that causes suffering.

2. ---"This is actually another plight that needs to be answered. If Adam and Eve never knew about the concept of morality before eating of the tree, then how can they be blamed for what they did? They didn't know what "good" or "bad" was, somewhat like a newborn baby."---

God specifically told them NOT to eat from the tree. They choose to and this is how sin started. They did know what "good" and "bad" was. They knew they were not supposed to eat from the tree.

My opponent stated, ---"Secondly, why punish the son for the sins of the father? If my dad punched someone I wouldn't expect ME to get imprisoned for physical assault."---

I do not know where my opponent got this from. It appears to be a random statement. If you are talking about Jesus as the son then there was no sins of the father since both God and Jesus are perfect. A son wouldn't be punished for the sins of the father if the son repented and believed in God.

---"If you read the argument, then you will see that one of the points was that reasonable non-belief occurs. I'm sure that even you think that some, or most, atheists don't believe in God SINCERELY. This means we really believe he doesn't exist because of a lack of evidence, not because we secretly hate him and want to reject him. If you can accept this fact, then you will see that there is a problem: why doesn't God prove his existence?"---

No man has ever seen the essence of God. (When God "appeared" to certain men in the Old Testament, He manifested Himself in other forms, such as a burning bush or "the Angel of the Lord.") When Moses asked to see God's glory, God told him, "I will make all my goodness pass before you,...[but] you cannot see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live" (Exodus 33:18–23). If all of God's "goodness" were shown to a sinner, he would instantly die. God's "goodness" would just spill wrath upon evil man. However, the Lord told Moses, "It shall come to pass, while my glory passes by, that I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My hand while I pass by." The only way a sinner can live in the presence of a holy God is to be hidden in the Rock of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4).
People see God every day in many ways, they just don't recognize him. God is trying, trying hard to help you believe, but atheists just keep ignoring these signs. If you do believe in God sincerely, God will send the Holy Spirit to live within you, and you know everything in the bible is true. I have seen these signs, and so has every other christian.

3. ---"Of course, you argue that he wants for us to have free will. This attacks my 3rd premise: that God has no greater desire than the one to have everyone believe God exists before they die. However, it is now YOUR burden to show why God would prefer for us to have free will (thus some saved some not) over his desire for all humans to go to heaven. Go on, I'll wait."---

God has to let you have free will. God is a god of love, and he does not rule by force, but purely by love. So, God does very much want you to believe, but he cannot rule by force, so he is patiently waiting for you to believe.

---Conclusion---

Unfortunately, there really cannot be a true winner on this debate since judges will want to vote for the person that is debating for their religion. But, I thank my opponent for a great debate so far.
Debate Round No. 2
TheSkeptic

Pro

>>>Okay, so you have "learned" about past occurrences in history. But it is still by "faith" that you belive certain historical events happened.<<<

----> NO, it's by evidence.

=====Counterarguments=====

1. Argument from Evil

~A. Free Will
Well, my opponent's interestingly long and metaphoric argument boils down to one thing: our free will. Jeez, couldn't you have said it in a more terse manner haha? Anyway, onto my rebuttal:

This does not explain why there are "natural evils", such as tornadoes and earthquakes. These are not caused by free will, and cause millions of deaths and agony. How does my opponent attempt to reconcile these phenomena?

Secondly, there are many repeated acts in the Bible where God disregards the supposed importance of free will, such as killing millions of people or performing miracles (Jesus). If free will isn't a huge priority here, why is it in our case now?

~B. Adam and Eve

>>>God specifically told them NOT to eat from the tree. <<<

Yes, like telling a newborn baby or a new pet something is "bad". THEY WON'T GET IT. Adam and Eve do not understand the moral implications of commands such as "yes" or "no". When you tell someone a command, and they don't follow it, then there are only a few explanations:

-They don't understand the concept of morality (practically every human does)
-They broke your command purposely(that is either a right thing or a wrong thing)
-They broke your command by accident (doesn't apply to Adam and Eve)
-They did not understand the command (assume to be false in the case of Adam and Eve)
-There was a defect or a blockage (they couldn't carry out the task, something/one was stopping them, etc.)

As we can see, only the first option applies - they simply didn't know what RIGHT and WRONG meant.

Pertaining to my other statement, I was referring to why every generations of people after Adam and Eve have to suffer and feel pain also. This is called punishing the son for the wages of the father - Adam and Eve should have bore their punishment, not their sons also.

2. Argument from Non-Belief

>>>"God is trying, trying hard to help you believe, but atheists just keep ignoring these signs."<<<
----> This is AMAZING. My opponent has actually stated that every atheist have irrational disbelief in God. Can you really uphold such a bold claim? Are you really saying that NO atheist thinks he has good reasons and argument to not believe in God? Are you really saying that EVERY atheist secretly hate and ignore God?

>>>"God has to let you have free will. God is a god of love, and he does not rule by force, but purely by love. So, God does very much want you to believe, but he cannot rule by force, so he is patiently waiting for you to believe."<<<

If God was "purely love", then he wouldn't let so many people burn to hell because he is "hiding" (he hasn't sufficient evidence for his existence in the perspective of many people). He doesn't have to rule us by force or brutalize us into believing him - as a God he bring this upon us in many ways. For example, he can some belief-implantation thing, such as was the case for Adam and Eve. Or he can make fancy symbols and writing in the sky. Or he can be more subtle, and have thousands of angels preach everywhere in such a convincing manner that we are all saved. Or, he can make the Bible claim startling accurate and detailed prophecies of the future that the evidence becomes too overbearing and any rational person will believe in Him.

This Free Will Defense also pertains to my previous argument when talking about the argument from evil (you basically use the same defense): how come in the Bible God violates the free will of so many people (like killing them)? It seems here that free will 'aint so much of a priority any more.

=====Conclusion=====

>>>"Unfortunately, there really cannot be a true winner on this debate since judges will want to vote for the person that is debating for their religion. But, I thank my opponent for a great debate so far."<<<

----> I would like to say that some do vote as objectively as they can - and sometimes they leave good reasons-for-voting in the comment sections. I hope this comes to fruit :) It's been nice debating.

I have refuted my opponent's main argument: the free will defense. He uses this for both argument so I have refuted it twice. With so many holes in the argument, vote for PRO.
puppyluvz

Con

---I thank my opponent for a great debate, and I do hope to have more of these in the future.
"----> NO, it's by evidence."

You may think it's by evidence, but it is not. Say you believe that the revolutionary war happened. You have faith that it happened. Sure, there are journals written during the revolutionary war, and different forms of writing, but who says they are all true? The revolutionary war could have never happened, and all the evidence could be fakes. It is by faith you believe it happened.

1) "This does not explain why there are "natural evils", such as tornadoes and earthquakes. These are not caused by free will, and cause millions of deaths and agony. How does my opponent attempt to reconcile these phenomena?"

I have already answered this, but I will do so again. It is because of our sinning that there is "natural evils" in the world. The Bible tells us that God cursed the earth because of Adam's transgression. Weeds are a curse. So is disease. Sin and suffering cannot be separated. The Scriptures inform us that we live in a fallen creation. In the beginning, God created man perfect, and he lived in a perfect world without suffering. It was heaven on earth. When sin came into the world, death and misery came with it. Those who understand the message of Holy Scripture eagerly await a new heaven and a new earth "wherein dwells righteous-ness." In that coming Kingdom there will be no more pain, suffering, disease, or death. We are told that no eye has ever seen, nor has any ear heard, neither has any man's mind ever imagined the wonderful things that God has in store for those who love Him.

2) "Secondly, there are many repeated acts in the Bible where God disregards the supposed importance of free will, such as killing millions of people or performing miracles (Jesus). If free will isn't a huge priority here, why is it in our case now?"

All the people that were performed miracles on begged Jesus to do so. It's what they, or their loved ones wanted, so it is still free will. Killing millions (it wasn't actually millions) of people is also part of free will. All those people had a multitude of sins and so their punishment for breaking God's law was to be taken off this earth and judged.

3) "Yes, like telling a newborn baby or a new pet something is "bad". THEY WON'T GET IT."

God had to give Adam and Eve the ability to sin, or he wouldn't be giving them free will. Adam and Eve had been with God for a while before being told not to eat from the tree. They knew full well not to, because they were not newborns, or people that didn't know what to do, THEY WERE ADULTS that knew fully well what right and wrong was. They choose to sin against God, knowing fully well that it was wrong. They knew what "good" and "bad" was.

4) "Pertaining to my other statement, I was referring to why every generations of people after Adam and Eve have to suffer and feel pain also. This is called punishing the son for the wages of the father - Adam and Eve should have bore their punishment, not their sons also."

We are not being penalized for Adam and Eve's sins, we are being penalized for OUR sins! We sin many many times, and we know it is wrong. People know you shouldn't steal, or lie, but people constantly do so. The pain and suffering is a product of OUR sins, NOT Adam and Eve!

5) "This is AMAZING. My opponent has actually stated that every atheist have irrational disbelief in God. Can you really uphold such a bold claim? Are you really saying that NO atheist thinks he has good reasons and argument to not believe in God? Are you really saying that EVERY atheist secretly hate and ignore God?"

NO, of course I am not saying that NO atheist thinks he has good reasons and argument to not believe in God! I am sorry for that misunderstanding, I should have said that SOME atheists just kept ignoring these signs. Many atheists do have good reasons, but many atheists also ignore the signs that God gives them to prove himself real. Also, I NEVER said that every atheist secretly hates and ignores God! I don't know where my opponent got this from, but I definitely would NOT say that!

6) "If God was "purely love", then he wouldn't let so many people burn to hell because he is "hiding" (he hasn't sufficient evidence for his existence in the perspective of many people). He doesn't have to rule us by force or brutalize us into believing him - as a God he bring this upon us in many ways. For example, he can some belief-implantation thing, such as was the case for Adam and Eve. Or he can make fancy symbols and writing in the sky. Or he can be more subtle, and have thousands of angels preach everywhere in such a convincing manner that we are all saved. Or, he can make the Bible claim startling accurate and detailed prophecies of the future that the evidence becomes too overbearing and any rational person will believe in Him.

This Free Will Defense also pertains to my previous argument when talking about the argument from evil (you basically use the same defense): how come in the Bible God violates the free will of so many people (like killing them)? It seems here that free will 'aint so much of a priority any more."

First of all, God is NOT hiding. God has given us creation, and he is the creator. The nature of God is to show himself to you in unusual ways. People cannot see God and still live. God is completely perfect, therefore he cannot look into the eyes of sin, so he cannot look at you. You have to try to completely trust in God before you can get a "sign". God will send his holy spirit to live within you when you repent and trust in him. God has given many signs, but people who don't believe blow them off as something scientific.

Secondly, I have already answered this question about free will twice, so you can just scroll up and look at the times I've already answered it.

----Conclusion----

As a matter of fact, it was my opponent who originally stated about free will, not me. God has spoken through me in this debate so I pray everyone can repent their sins and believe in God and Jesus Christ.
It's been fun debating.
Please Vote for Con.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
Con was basically non-responsive. The Argument from Evil is mainly about bad things that happen in which free will plays no role, like tornadoes as Pro argued. Con was arguing that God can resolve a logical contradiction, along the lines of supposing God can make a rock so big he can't lift it. Logical contradictions cannot be resolved by any means.
Posted by TFranklin62 8 years ago
TFranklin62
"Or he can be more subtle, and have thousands of angels preach everywhere in such a convincing manner that we are all saved. Or, he can make the Bible claim startling accurate and detailed prophecies of the future that the evidence becomes too overbearing and any rational person will believe in Him." he does Mr. skeptic, God daily speaks through people, they are called pastors and even NORMAL PEOPLE like ME. he used the Bible to prophesized SO SO SO much in there, if you have a Bible, read Isiah, then read Luke, and you will see how much God put into those 2 books! JUST 2 BOOKS! read the whole Bible and you WILL be overwhelmed by how much truth you find in it
Posted by TFranklin62 8 years ago
TFranklin62
OK, first of all, the bible says that even the demons believe that God exists, just doing that doesn't get them to hevean, second of all, Mr. skeptic, you seem to know quite a lot about this topic as far as knowledge, i encourage you to read more and eventually ALL of the Bible, thank you for pointing out that Jesu's dying on the cross didn't eliminate sin, but provided a scape goat for all of us AKA sinners. Also, Adam and Eve DID know not to eat from the tree, God specifically told them not too. I would also like Mr. skeptic to realize that the Father didn't PUNISH the Son, Jesus went willingly to the cross being totally reliant on the Father. Jesus said that he could have called down legions of angels from hevean, but he didn't because he knew that in order for us sinners to be with him for eternity, he needed to DIE, hey Mr. puppyluvz, u overlooked a huge part, believing in God doesn't get u to hevean
Posted by Peleus 8 years ago
Peleus
I'll post one comment for con here re: evidence of history.

I understand what you are getting at in regards to taking it on faith that things happened. I think the difference is we have a multitude of physical, written and oral evidence for these events occurring. This production of evidence is what can convince someone of a reasonable mind to believe or not believe that an event occurred.

In terms of god however I don't believe the same level of physical, written and oral evidence exists, to convince me, a non-believer, at least. All we have is the bible, which in my mind is a largely contradictory piece of work, full of inaccuracies that doesn't really convince me of much. This is also a single source, unlike the multitude of independent sources we can have on other events. It's not through faith we believe things, it's through evidence and reasoning. Faith is actually the belief of something without proof, not what we have for historical events.
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
'Ever read the Bible?'

Haha, my point exactly. If God had a hand in writing that thing, he's at the very least inconsistent and illogical, if not a downright liar. Same goes for Con's arguments in this debate.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
>I would think that if the supreme deity and creator of the Universe was speaking through you, your arguments would have been more compelling.
Ever read the bible?
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
"God has spoken through me in this debate so I pray everyone can repent their sins and believe in God and Jesus Christ."

Whew, Con really laid it on thick there. I would think that if the supreme deity and creator of the Universe was speaking through you, your arguments would have been more compelling.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
Oops, I meant counterargument. You know what I mean heh.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
TheSkeptic, you're going from the conclusion to another conclusion in your second round?
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by zach12 8 years ago
zach12
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 Alex 8 years ago
Alex
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 TFranklin62 8 years ago
TFranklin62
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 PieofLife 8 years ago
PieofLife
TheSkepticpuppyluvzTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30