The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Which Kingdom Stands Firm?

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: 1/31/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 206 times Debate No: 85804
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




If the Kingdom of Heaven was set up against the Kingdom of Sinners, which Kingdom would rise above and leave the other in ashes.

Kingdom of Heaven, which we are to prepare for and anticipate (Utopia): void of social enmity, neglect, environmental concerns, perversion of moral perspectives and behavioural preferences.


The Kingdom of Sinners: filled with capitalism, privatized information, perverse social status quo's regarding sexual equalities + norms and conduct, and selfish indulgence.

Of course both side are much more diverse and elaborate. However, in the end Does the Kingdom of Heaven stand or does the Kingdom of Atheism?

There is no disputing the compared sides of this war.
Atheists who advocate sin as being supportable, defendable and acceptable conduct
the Theist population defending a higher ideology of universal one-ness

Accepting as Pro means you are pro sin, and MUST be able to make a case suggesting a sinner's empire is sustainable without or even in opposition to theism .


First, an athiest.

Second, an athiestic empire would win because of competition and more opportunity.

In round 2, I will attempt to disprove what ever arguement you would put forth and then proceed to show how my 2 previous points are correct.

Round 3 will be another displayed ng round and end with a closing argument.

If you have a different plan please do a private message or comment one so we can clear up the rounds.

Finally, I would like God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit not to be used as a trump card for fairness unless I can use Satan and the anti-Christ.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you For offering to Explain how an Atheistic Empire would win via Competition and Opportunity. This will indeed be the discussion I opened up for.

God: is Omnipresent, meaning he is all encompassing of all aspects of physics, delusion and imagination, and all aspects of reality ; He is omnipotent, meaning he is the actual substance and results of all manifested works, and to any end the resolution is found to be predetermined mathematically through solutions; He is All knowing, meaning all results of choices and actions are predetermined. ~ and therefor God is a Trump card. However without a scientific explanation of how, a mere Allusion is not acceptable from either of us in a debate.
Jesus: The Word of God, is the manifested truths of all aspects of reality; He is the moral code, and the laws of physics themselves; He is entirely biased towards his father, and is without flaw or error, and is accommodating of no fallacies; the Word of God, God's first act of long ago, is the source of all things and is the place where they return.
The Holy Spirit: IS the manifested actions, intentions and dreams of The Moral Code & the rather awesome, spontaneous, coincidental and fabulous interactions with our Reality.

In effect these are always Trump cards. But If I said, the Sky is in fact not blue, but is a shade of Green, and I was right. I can still not stake that claim as an argument without proving it. UNLESS it is obvious knowledge that my opponent is merely neglecting to acknowledge.

IN additions. The anti-Christ is arrogant defiance of common sense, environmental and social concerns and disillusionment to conflicts and their causes in Nature and all of reality. And Satan is the selfish, insolent, slothenly, indulgent and overbearingly-opposition of good intentions and wisdom.

So now that we have that addressed. To commemorate the Trump cards that can be played, and the ones which are detrimental to any debate argument let us address the topic of debate ~

The Kingdom of Heaven is the only one which can stand, because an Atheistic Empire would collapse and would succumb to the wrath of the patience of the Faithful ~ in retaliation for the calamity and atrocity of the following things:

1.) Atheistic political representatives, and this includes the blasphemers and false worshippers who "associate with" but are not members of religions, Miss-use, Steal, embezzle, corruptly invest, accept corrupt proposals, are self-preserving and thus traitorous, and have an agenda contrary to the concerns of the people in order to address their "higher society" agenda.
2.) the environment would not be a primary concern prior to development but instead after, because this is factually how it is happening. The develop and syphon of resources to sell them at low prices to consumer markets to get an upper hand quickly for personal gain in a market.
~ This debate is not a theological or idealistic topic of discussion. We are talking about Today, in this world, moving into tomorrow with the same population. ~
The environment becomes nothing but resources, possessions and territories that are used as personal equities INSTEAD OF Globally (social + communally) owned enterprise.
3.) Women enable womanizers, immature people, unfaithful people, criminals, Capitalists, slothenly people, inconsiderate people, and the like of arrogant/insolent people (regarding social behaviour + personal self reflection).
This causes depression, social inequality, glorification of criminal and meninist ideology, glorification of capitalist consumerism, neglect of poverty and social responsibilities, Abandonment of family And even friends, as well as other things like Corruption of children's(as well as all other impressionable people(people with out faith)) ambitions, imaginations and moral bearings {He has I have is fair enough}.
It suggests that all men deserve more women, and lazy people and inconsiderate people use it as an excuse to pardon their lack of ambition, Only to prove that it only advocated their lack of devotion, contribution and faith tot heir partners. Leading to complete desolation.
4.) Privatized education. Atheists use knowledge as power - that includes atheists who infiltrated the church and blasphemy the name of God by telling people, that despite their clear lack of faith they represent a church ~ where only an atheist would mistaken those actions as being true faith out of enmity and spite for the Righteous, by using the churches lack of influence as an opportunity to revoke the Upright.
Privatizing education is manifested in Patents, which are needed in an atheist world to prevent war machines form being build, and communication devices from being used to infiltrate societies national defenses and media. * as well as medical ingredients which can be turned into very potent toxins etc..
This privatized education system forces people to fall in line, because while we are currently surrounded by atheist criminals, perverts, capitalists and insolence we need a new form of security that can address our food concerns etc... and the system is working, through Theocratic Model used by Religions around the globe.
5.) Inspiration to be an upstanding person is viewed as stipulably not ideal. That is clearly detrimental to each individuals prosperous contributions to Humanities reach for Utopia.
6.) Sharing is NOt viewed as the utmost importance but instead a SATISFACTORY indulgence. Religions preach the necessary indulgence is satisfactory and a potential one is a blessing while necessary indulgence is a honorable duty. Atheism teaches nothing at all, except that all are damned and fairness is irrelevant to personal gain.
7.) the Kingdom of Heaven is determined to accommodate all growth and opportunity, while the Kingdom of Sinners Admonishes devotion, selflessness and ethics by accommodating, supporting, defending and glorifying the Unrighteous, such as through idolizing homosexual rights.

I will address the validity of what you consider to be Opportunities and Competition in An Atheist Empire, and Finish my Argument by Stating that the Kingdom of Heaven Holds a much more Prosperous, Luxurious, Spontaneous As well as Effortful, Ponderous and toilsome Nature.


This seems similar to a pure communist government, where everyone is equal and has protection, and a pure capitalist government, where survival of the fittest, also known as Social Darwinism. My debate will focus on the fact that people our better off when they have a chance to rise above others. This is seen how in countries where people are wanted to be equal are less likely to help others succeed, as seen in a study by Ori and Rom Brafman where French audiences are less likely to answer simple questions correctly for a contestant than Americans were. This can be a correlation related to the fact that the French income inequality is smaller than America's and as such, don't want to see others go above them for they see economic equality as societal perfection.

Scandinavian countries are seen as the most equal countries in the world. This is a perfect place to observe why your belief is wrong. Scandinavia is perfect because America's capitalism drives the worlds economy through new technological developments. This is seen as the number of patents in America is enormously more than those of Scandinavia.

You talk about how the economy would take priority over the environment. This would be true for a short time as people would want to increase their personal gain. This would not go on forever as people would have reasons from jobs in the forestry industry would want to protect areas for their gain, and would be able to pay off those who make the laws.
Debate Round No. 2


We are discussing a conflict, and my opponent wants to discuss politics.

A true communism, a true spcialism, is not an obstruction o allowing people to excel above the common standard.
Musical talent, reserving income, investing income appropriately, learning, taking care of oneself physically and socially, becoming prominent in something ; none of these things are impaired by social equality.

The Kingdom of heaven stands for no bullying = social equality. No belittling people who stand for higher morals. No taking it upon oneself to diminish the well beings of others for selfish gains. And not glorifying the perverse objectives and immoral goals of comrades and benefactors.

Scandinavia is not an example of the Kingdom of Heaven.

The principals my opponent is tasked to defend is a nation which admonishes faithful living through media, culture and business as the American's do, and that also stands for perversion, selfishness and indulgence. Once which defends, supports and reinforces the behaviours and perspectives of ones such as womanizers and capitalists who think of their personal social groups as person assets. A very common perspective.

The Kingdom of Heaven is sustainable, where as a Kingdom of Sinners is not; By removing the aspects of spirituality.


So I will conclude with an attempt to appeal to the atheistic voters and the capitalistic ones. My opponent doesn't seem to get the idea that if someone knows that their needs will always be taken care of, they will not attempt to work more as they know that whether or not they do their best or not they will be kept at a steady level of living, which is seen to fail in many cases because a majority of good will will always be spoiled by the minority of people who take the majorities kindness and use it as weakness.

I would also like to point out that what I am defending is a realistic one because there always will be inequality and nothing can change that, while your attempt at a utopia means that it would be impossible for me to win if your society is all good and is not full of anything that is sinful as your religion would call it.

I have a disadvantage and have still debated well because you are attempting to put an unrealistic, perfect society against one that is ultimately a reality because it has what every society has, crime, people of power, the poor, and the greed that is native to our species and has always been apart of us.

This debate for me was to show that in a society that will always be at a disadvantage, there can still be the upsides that make it a place that thrives. America has lifelong politicians that are greedy, and we have many who abuse social programs, yet we still thrive because we he the chance to better our selves.

Just because you are equal doesn't mean that you will want to be just as productive as the rest to make sure you do your fair share, in a utopia yes, but in reality no because a shortcut is nearly always chosen because of a lack of effort needed.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by GoOrDin 8 months ago
If any voters feel compelled to vote for my opponent I encourage you to debate me first prior tot he end of the voting period.
Posted by GoOrDin 9 months ago
~ This debate is not a theological or idealistic topic of discussion. We are talking about Today, in this world, moving into tomorrow with the same population. ~ THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. ;) NOt A
Posted by ViceRegent 9 months ago
Did we not have atheist empires? The one in the USSR comes to mind. It lasted neither very long and murder tens of millions of competitors. No, thanks. Atheism = Lord of the Flies.
Posted by traylzac 9 months ago
I am not a troll. If you look through my debate history you will see that. I am a very active member in this community, and religion is one of my main debate topics. I am in this debate to show you that a sinner kingdom is a better and stronger one with more freedoms than a kingdom of 100% faith followers.
Posted by GoOrDin 9 months ago
duly note if my opponent trolls.
No votes have been placed for this debate.