The Instigator
yasin1thomas2
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
whooplaah
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Why Islam is truth not Christianity

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 3 votes the winner is...
whooplaah
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 485 times Debate No: 87029
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (3)

 

yasin1thomas2

Pro

As a Muslim my job here is to teach truth and I am a convert from quite a different denominations of Christianity to islam I want to express a truth here. In Deuteronomy 18:18-God tells moses that he (god) will send a prophet like moses.
Lets look at some facts here. Christianity says this prophet to come was jesus, but in reality jesus and moses were nothing alike. But lets see about Muhammad
Moses and Muhammad were both accepted by there people as prophets, they both had parents, they both gave laws, they both had children, they both died natural deaths, they bother were like rulers or judges and so on. As I said before Deuteronomy 18:18 says a prophet like moses will come after him. jesus was nothing like moses but Muhammad was a lot probably completely like moses. Also lets look at another fact here Deuteronomy 18:18 also says the prophet like moses will be of the brethren of the children of Israel jesus was not there brethren he was of their people tribe. The brethren of the children of Israel where the Ishmaelites which Muhammad was a descendant of Ishmaelites.
whooplaah

Con

To determine whether Islam or Christianity is true we must focus upon the divergence in beliefs held by the religions.

Both Islam and Christianity believe in the same messiah. Both religions believe in the immaculate conception of Jesus of Nazareth, that he lived a perfect and sinless life, and that through him the covenant between God and Abraham was fulfilled as laid out in the Torah (Old Testament), the holy word of God

[And mention] when the angels said, "O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah ]."
Quran 3:45

"...for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."
(bible) Matthew 1:21

The point of contention between the religions is not the role that Jesus played in the fulfillment religious texts, nor the miracles he performed, but in his divinity. While Muslims believe Jesus the Messiah was merely a prophet, Christianity claims that he was the physical avatar of God and was thus divine. To Christians, God is Triune - he exists in three states as needed but is always one creature. In the same way that mist, water, and ice are all still the same chemical but merely different states of matter, God can be Father, Son, and Holy Spirit while still being the same entity at its core. Each state merely emphasizes a different set of characteristics. Because of this, Christians worship and pray to Jesus/God while Muslims see this as blasphemous. Both religions hold to the Torah, the law of God as laid out in the Old Testament. In the Ten Commandment God forbade the worship of graven images - and to a Muslim who thinks Jesus son of Mary is a man, praying to him is sacrilegious.

An interesting point can be made, however, in that the Quran implies that Jesus son of Mary was an extension of God, the same as Christians believe. Though Christ never directly said he was God (as was forbidden by Jewish law to which Jesus was held) his divinity is encapsulated in holy text shared by the Quran and Bible. The Quran routinely addresses Jesus as Kalimat Allah which translates as "a Word of God." This can be seen in the following verses of the Quran: 19:34, 4:171, 3:45, 9:40.

This title, Word of God, is only ever used in the Quran in regard to Jesus son of Mary. Of all the prophets who spoke the truth of God, only Jesus is the Word of God (Kalimat Allah). The reason this is important is because as said earlier, both Islam and Christianity hold to the Torah, which is the Old Testament, and believe the work to be holy scripture. The first verse of the holy Torah is:

Genesis 1:1 " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

The phrase "the Word was God" in Arabic is "w kan al'Kalimat Allah" which is the title reserved for Jesus son of Mary.

And yet it is only the Christian faith which openly professes and practices that Jesus son of Mary was divine and should be recognized as an extension of God (Allah), the Creator. Most Muslims say that Jesus was not divine, but the Quran says otherwise.
Debate Round No. 1
yasin1thomas2

Pro

You have made a lot of errors about what the Quran says about jesus being the word. First of all all prophets are the word of god. Yes for proof ask a scholar in Judaism about what I'm saying too because both Judaism and islam will tell you that words such as word of god or god with us does not mean in any way that person being god. In fact when jesus being called the word of god or god with us even the title son of god it basically means a prophet that is all it means. Also to mention jesus never called himself divine you will never find that in the gospels jesus called himself divine. Also not one prophet before jesus ever believed or acceptedthat god had a son or any partner not one prophet of old ever accepted god being a triune god. This was all a paul teaching. But also to mention I believe in Philipians paul says jesus being god but yet he never claimed to be god something to think about. Here in this verse of paul paul admits that first he believes jesus is god second he is aware that jesus never claimed god and third he is trying to figure out why jesus doesn't claim divinity. And again do not translate the Quran unless you understand arabic because what your saying is false. The Quran in Arabic calls jesus a prophet one speaking for god not a god
whooplaah

Con

First:
I will admit that I should have phrased my last sentence better. The Quran does not expressly say that Jesus is divine. What I should have said is this:
Muslims believe in the Quran and the Torah. The Torah (which came first) says that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." This is the same phrase that the Quran chooses to name Jesus - The Word of God. This is a phrase reserved especially for Jesus an not for any other prophet or character in the Quran.

Second:
Jesus son of Mary is the only prophet referred to as the Word of God in the Quran. All other prophets are referred to as teaching the word of God, teaching the truth of god, or being a messenger of God. All prophets have the word, and know the word, and teach the word, but only Jesus is referred to as being the word. If you know of a verse that specifically calls a prophet the word of god, please quote a verse for me so that I will know.

If these phrases merely mean Jesus the Prophet, as you claim, then why are they used exclusively for Jesus and not for any other prophet mentioned in the Quran? Only Jesus son of Mary is "kalimat allah," the word of God, the phrase from the Torah, first holy book of Islam.

Quran 3:55 "Behold! Allah said: O Jesus! I will take thee And raise thee to Myself And clear thee (of the falsehoods) Of those who blaspheme; I will make those Who follow thee superior To those who reject faith, To the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, And I will judge Between you of the matters wherein ye dispute."

Third:
God as Triune is merely a mechanism for better understanding what God is.

What are all the properties of H2O? We could look at water all day long, and study it all we want, but until we understand H2O as vapor and as ice we won't fully appreciate everything that H2O can do. Water can smooth out a stone, but ice can expand cracks and carve out the Grand Canyon. Water can reshape itself to fit into the bottom of a vase, but mist can expand to fill the entire container. We can have a sealed container with H2O inside and convert it from one state to another without ever changing the core principle of H2O-ness, we merely change the manifestation of it and what properties are overtly demonstrated.

God as Triune is the same way. One can have a more full understanding of God by thinking about the three different forms in which the religious texts say God manifests and operates. Triune-ness is not a required belief to be Christian; it is taught in churches to further our understanding of God.

This is comparable to the Quran which often has God refer to itself as "We" and "Us" rather than "I."

Fourth:
Moving on, the Quran and Bible differ in tone when it comes to peace and violence. Both religions stem from the Torah which depicts the fury of God against those that would oppose him. Both religions believe in the Gospels (the biblical books Matthew, Mark, Luke, John). With the coming of the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the tone of God is changed to one of peace. In both the Quran and the Bible, Jesus teaches patience, kindness, love, mercy, and tolerance. His only 'violent' act, in either book, is to chase vandals, livestock and secularists out of a holy temple. Jesus, when accosted by the Pharasees and their guards, consistently refuses to escalate confrontations and even goes so far as to admonish his own disciples for defending Jesus with violence.

And yet in the Quran, particularly after Mohammed returns to Mecca, we see violence as a dogmatic decree and a return to the violence of the Old Testament God rather than adherence to the Messaiah and the newly established covenant.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that he gave his only son.
Quran 30:45 - God does not love the non-believers.

Matthew 5:44 - Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
Quran 8:39 - And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah.

John 8:7 Let him who is without sin cast the first stone (against this adulteress).
Sahih Muslim 4206 - A woman who became pregnant confesses to Muhammad that she is guilty of adultery. Muhammad allows her to have the child, then has her stoned.

Matthew 5:39 - If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Quran 2:194 - If anyone transgresses a prohibition against you, do you likewise against him.

And so a fundamental conundrum is revealed between the faiths. Islam believes that Christianity is a corrupted version of the truth of god - but the corruption preaches peace and tolerance. In trying to correct that corruption, Muhammad preached acts of assassination, war, vengeance, and intolerance. If Islam is truth and Christianity is false, then should all of humanity resort to violence?
Debate Round No. 2
yasin1thomas2

Pro

Again I will say you are interpreting something you know nothing about for example the Quran does not use jesus in a special way of the term word. Infact that verse your reciting about jesus from the Quran has nothing to do with what your saying. What it actually is talking about is it is talking about jesus when the jews were going to nail him on the cross jesus during his passion cried out to god beging god to save him from the death of the cross. Actually in hebrews it tells a lot more better about Jesus prayer in the garden asking god to save him from the death on a cross and god says in hebrews that god accepted jesus prayer.so god saved him from going through such death. So that chapter of quran your mentioning is actually talking about that scence when the jews wanted to put him on the cross jesus asked god to save him from such torture so god accepted and took him to hevean before the jews could get a hold of him. Actually your own gospels admit that jesus never wanted to die on the cross. So that is actually what that verse from Quran is talking about that jesus will go to paradise withoutout dieng on a cross just to wait till Jesus has to come again a second time to defeat the anti messiah.
2nd the verses of Quran your mentioning where in uses god as plural its not actually the way you are interpreting. In Arabic Aramaic hebrew swahili punjabi and many other eastern languages the term us we our those words in Quran it is actually not plural. Those terms in Quran are singular they actually give god higher respect majesty and honor. In arabic hebrew Aramaic to use god using singular such as I or me put god in terms as a servant a normal person. We or us shows divinity and majesty. 3rdly again don't come to conclusions about stuff you know nothing about I can see your lossing the debate because your getting angry plus again you have not answered my questions such as why didn't any prophet before Jesus ever believed god had a son or daughter? Again abraham adam jacob Isaac and so on never heard or believed god had a son or a redemer was going to save them from there sins because also that Christian belief of original sin never existed in Judaism actually in the torah it says the complete opposite. It says no son shall bear the sins of the father.
whooplaah

Con

Precursor:
I misquoted earlier. I said that Genesis 1:1 was "In the beginning was the word...," and this actually comes from John 1:1. However, both Islam and Christianity hold to this gospel, and so my point remains.

First:
According to religious scholars Hajj Muhammad Legenhausen, Diane Steigerwald (McGill Institute of Islamic Studies), Irfan Omar (University of Florida), and others Kalimat Allah is a title used in the Quran exclusively to refer to Jesus son of Mary. Muhammad himself called Jesus the Word of God in the Sahih al-Bukhari: "... and that Jesus is God"s servant and His Messenger and His Word which He bestowed on Mary and a Spirit from Him...". There is no way for me to make this point any more clear.

Second:
The reasons I quoted Quran 3:55 are: 1. it is an example of the translation of "kalimat allah" to refer to Jesus son of Mary and 2. It show's God elevating Jesus to his side, a place of honor and equality. The phrase is "I shall raise the to Myself," which is markedly different that "raise the unto heaven"

Third:
Plurality is used in Arabic, the original language of the Quran, to denote honor - this is not something that exists in English. I respect my dad, but I say that "he is my dad" and not "they are my dad." I would say "I met the president and shook his hand," instead of "I met the president and shook their hand."

If the only purpose of the plural term is as an honorific, then why is it not changed with translation? "Kalimat Allah" is not an English term, so we translate it as "word of God" or "Jesus." Using third-person as an honorific title is not an English rule, so we should translate it as "I." Quranic translations often have parenthetical notes on the translations, such as:

This is what We recite to you, [O Muhammad], of [Our] verses and the precise [and wise] message.
Quran 3:58

The phrases in brackets are added to clarify the translation, and yet notice that the above verse does not say "This is what I [plural honorific] recite..." It says "We."

Additionally, there is overlap between the Arabic Honorific Plurality of God and the Christian Trinity. Both ways of describing God use the plural sense as a means of better understanding God. In Islam, He is more honorable than an I so we say We. In Christianity, he is more complex that a single form so we say Trinity. The only difference is that Christianity goes further and explains god three different ways, while the Quran stops at a single honorific.

Fourth:
The Old Testament does talk about God in a trinitarian sense.

Genesis 1:2 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
Here there is God and then the Spirit of God.

Isaiah 48:16 "Come near to Me, hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, I was there. And now the Lord God and His Spirit have sent Me"
God and Spirit again.

Proverbs 30:3-4 "I neither learned wisdom nor have knowledge of the Holy One. Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son"s name, if you know?"
Here Agur, who is speaking, points out the failings of the priests of his time, that they do not know the name of God nor the name of His Son (who has not yet been born).

Isaiah 42:1: "Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, my Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; he will bring forth justice to the Gentiles."
The Messiah will carry the Spirit of God.

And, of course, the entire story of Abraham who went to sacrifice his son is an analogy to how God (in the form of the Father) would sacrifice himself (in the form of His Son Jesus).

Just because the Old Testament and Torah do not use the word "Trinity" or "Triune God" does not mean they did not have a concept of a plural entity - it merely shows they did not have a term for it.

Most of the book of Isaiah deals with humanity's need of the Messiah, that humanity cannot save itself without being shown an example. The innate sin of man is in the Torah - but again we see only the concept without the modern terminology.

Fifth:
Do you have no counter argument to the points I made about Islam overthrowing the messages of peace brought by the Messiah and instead teaching a doctrine of vengeance and violence?

Sixth:
Moving on, you do bring up another point in how Islam and Christianity differ. Christians believe that Jesus was crucified to death and then rose again, while Islam states that God saved Jesus and had another man die instead.

They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but the likeness of him was put on another man (and they killed that man)... Quran 4:157

This is a particularly interesting point because both religions treat the Gospels (the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) as sacred scripture. Yet the Gospels say that Jesus was killed and resurrected. The Gospels were written 80 to 90 years after the events took place. If God had indeed spared Jesus son of Mary, why then would that fact not be recorded until the Quran was written 640 years after the event?

Is it not strange that God would cause another person to die in place of Jesus? Why not just take Jesus to heaven and skip the entire Crucifixion story?
Debate Round No. 3
yasin1thomas2

Pro

yasin1thomas2 forfeited this round.
whooplaah

Con

As my opponent has not supplied a rebuttal, I will move on to another point which he brought up in a previous post - the doctrine of salvation.

It says in the Quran 53:38 "Whoever goes aright, for his own soul he goes aright; and whoever goes astray, to his own detriment he goes astray. And no bearer of a burden bears another's burden..."

Also, in Quran 6:165 "...no soul earns (evil) but against itself. Nor does a bearer of a burden bear the burden of another."

This is very similar to the Christian verse "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin." from Deuteronomy 24:16

It is held as truth by both religions that a man or woman who sins is punished for their sins, but not for those actions which are the result of another. The exact interpretation of this - such as the extent to which culture and upbringing excuse an individual's actions - is a topic for another time. For now I shall take these verses at face value; if I do something of my own free will I hold the consequence for it, and I cannot make another take that consequence instead of me.

At this point we now hit the juncture between Islam and Christianity. Though both believe that each individual is responsible for their sins, they differ in how that individual can atone for their mistakes. In Islam the responsibility rests solely upon the person, and the end result is that all good deeds are weighed against all bad deeds. Should there be more good than bad, then the person was good. Islam also believes that it is possible for a human to live a sinless life - through discipline, good parents, dedication to scripture, and a righteous environment (a religious government). Whether an individual enters heaven is a direct result of their own actions.

Christianity instead believes that man is innately sinful. There is nothing a man can do to become perfect, and at the end of the day he is completely dependent upon the mercy of God for salvation and admittance into heaven. Some say that one must "accept Christ into their heart," which is a poetic nicety. Christ says that, "[he is] the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through [him]." (John 14:6)

To reconcile these two beliefs on salvation and entering heaven, I will pose a philosophical question:
If God could have designed man perfectly, and instead chose to design man with the ability to sin, then whose fault is it that man sins?

In the Garden of Eden, it was Adam and Eve who ate the fruit - but who planted the tree in the garden so that they could get to it? Who let them eat it? This is a question that can be extremely dangerous in a theological sense, so I will tread with care along what is relevant to this debate.

Logically, I choose to kill and therefore I am at fault, but God gave be the ability to choose, therefore He is at fault for my having a choice to begin with. Additionally, God could at any point intervene in any action to prevent a sin from occurring. As I am deciding to sin, God could manifest an angel to say, "Woah, hold on now. I'm an angel, and God disproves." And yet he doesn't.

But the crucifixion addresses this:
God died on the cross for our sins; He admitted that all pain and suffering results from His design, that all sin ultimately rests with Him, and took ownership of it. A Christian who fails to live perfectly knows that God will have mercy because God understands, more than we possibly can, that perfection is an impossibility.

Compare this to Islam, which states that Jesus never died and that all men must make their own way into heaven. In Islam, God purposefully designed mankind that we should struggle to be good so that we might not make it into heaven. Would God give gills to a fish, and make vast oceans and lakes, and then place the fish in a desert so that it struggles and dies? Would God make heaven, and demand perfection as the entry fee, and then make humans incapable of perfection? A child will not be put to death for the sins of the father, and no man shall bear the burden for the actions of another man, but all mankind will bear the burden of their sins which are only possible because of the actions of their Creator. And that creator has taken no ownership of this conundrum.

Would God look at a soul and say, "I gave you free will, and you used it to steal because I also gave you hunger and desperation. This makes it your fault."

If God is a good, and if He is just, and if He made man, and if man is evil, then the sacrifice of a divine Jesus, and salvation through mercy, is a necessity.
Debate Round No. 4
yasin1thomas2

Pro

yasin1thomas2 forfeited this round.
whooplaah

Con

This debate looked at whether Islam or Christianity is Truth. Considering the grounds of the question, the debate assumed that religious works were valid and that God exists. We focused upon the distinctions between Islam and Christianity in an effort to see which of the two is more true to scripture. By the nature of the religious works and the history of each religion, the Torah (Old Testament) and Gospels were assumed to be factual and reliable because these scripts are sacred to both Christians and Muslims. The Quran, because it is only considered sacred by Islam, was subject to scrutiny as part of the comparison between the religions.

Though the two religions share much of the same scripture and history, I focused upon the following points:

In Christianity, Jesus and God are the same character but in different form. In Islam, Jesus was only a man.
---This has two distinct problems. First, the Quran, in saying Jesus was merely a man, contradicts theological tradition (plurality of God), contradicts the Torah, contradicts the Gospels, and contradicts itself. Second, the claim that Jesus was not God creates a paradox of a) man can only be punished for his own sin and b) man can only sin because he was designed thusly.

Jewish and Christian theology claims that God is a pluralistic entity. Islam claims this is untrue.
---This distinction is lest doctrinal and more scholarly, but does show a divide in how each religion seeks to understand the divine. Pluralistic representations of a single entity can more accurately capture the nuances of the personality and various traits and highlight aspects otherwise overlooked. Islam, by lacking this, lacks a holistic representation of the abstract divine.

Christianity emphasizes peace, Islam emphasizes peace towards Muslims and violence to others.
---When scriptures moved from the Torah to the Gospels, the message of God became one of peace, love, and tolerance towards all people. When it moved on to the Quran, it reverted back to the violence of the Israelite clans. The Quran holds Jesus as the messiah, but throws out his messages of peace.

Christianity and the Gospels claim that Jesus died on the cross and was raised from the dead. The Quran states that Jesus was raised to heaven and that another person was killed in his place.
---This difference raises two questions. 1) Why would the Gospels contain the wrong information, especially if they are considered sacred texts? 2) If God raised Jesus to heaven, why would he cause another man to die in Jesus' place rather than just skipping the crucifixion story all together?

With these unanswered questions, it seems clear that if either of the religions is truth it would have to be Christianity.
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 1 year ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
Speaking for the catholic church i see no contradiction in its teaching, as long as you are not misinterpreting the bible you will see this also. If you have specific places where you believe there to be contradiction i will be happy to help. As for evidence, i believe there to be plenty of evidence for the exsistence of God but infact nothing for his non exsistance, if you have some evidence i would like to hear? As for unicorns although i can't say for sure they don't exist there is Logical evidence to back up there non existence.
Posted by jglass841 1 year ago
jglass841
Yet the fact that it contradicts itself makes it false. The logic that you are using can also apply to unicorns. So, i should believe in something that has no evidence, just for no reason? There is no evidence that God exists. There is no evidence that unicorns exist. They are one and the same. All hail the unicorn.
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 1 year ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
Thinking you have to fully comprehend God before believing in him is ridiculous. Just because everything isn't explained to accomodate our own stubborn terms and dont match up to the way we think things should be doesn't mean they are false.
Posted by jglass841 1 year ago
jglass841
Christianity has many errors. Deuteronomy 3. Both are ridiculous in nature, and neither are truth.
Posted by whooplaah 1 year ago
whooplaah
@yasin1thomas2;
I hope that you make another post soon. To be honest, my life has been in a spiritual swing between Islam and Christianity for a number of years now. I started questioning the "Jesus is Graven Image" thing when I was a kid. This discussion is really helping to motivate my spiritual search.

I also want to state that if you think my posts are angry or aggressive that I apologize. I'm a bit socially awkward in person, and my writing style can be a bit dry and unemotional. I struggle with that. At one point you commented on this, and I only want to point out that I'm not trying to be argumentative.

I really do want to see what you have to say, sir or madam, and hope that you post a reply soon.
Posted by DiEgO123100 1 year ago
DiEgO123100
Christianity says nothing about Jesus being a prophet he's the Messiah...
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
jglass841 which one has no error's which is Christianity
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
jglass841 they weren't infidels the bible nevertheless said they were also it's not a commandment for everyone
Posted by Thiest_1998 1 year ago
Thiest_1998
jglass841 quote verses where does it say in the bible that we should kill infidels it says it in the quran. 9:29
Posted by whooplaah 1 year ago
whooplaah
@jglass841;
Technically that is true. God condones violence in the bible. But, as I tried to make clear in my debate post, Christianity is both Torah and Gospel. All of the violence in the Bible takes place int he Old Testament. With the birth of Jesus, the Christian God changes to one of peace, mercy, and forgiveness. This is the 'new covenant' that defines Christianity.
Islam believes in Jesus and the Gospels, but takes this 'new covenant' of peace and turns it on its head, reverting back to the violence of the Torah (Old Testament) by way of the saying of Muhammad.
Christians go from violence (Torah), to peace (Gospels). Muslims go from violence (Torah), to peace (Gospels), to violence (Quran). This is the point I was trying to make.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 year ago
fire_wings
yasin1thomas2whooplaahTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
yasin1thomas2whooplaahTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
yasin1thomas2whooplaahTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Two forfeited turns by Pro.