The Instigator
creationismisright
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Seeginomikata
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

all gods are technically the same

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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...
Seeginomikata
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/20/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 599 times Debate No: 55095
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

creationismisright

Con

i believe that this is false and will challenge seeginomikata to this debate i thank him for voting for me but his comment in his voting is wrong
Seeginomikata

Pro

I accept your challenge. I would like to point out that this is not exactly what I said in my comment, but nonetheless, I think I can argue this. What I did say to you earlier was the all Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) follow the same god.


Since the con has not put forwards any definitions, I will provide some. This debate might be influenced by the semantic interpretation of the terms "gods" and "technically the same". I propose that "gods" be defined as the general pantheon of all human dieties. According to the English dictionary, technically means "in fact, exact meaning, strictly". I propose that "the same" be defined as meaning "having the same nature". Obviously, it would be impossible for me to argue that Hera and Kali have the same traits and characteristics. Thus I instead limit "the same" to meaning that all gods are inherently similar in the nature and significance of their existence.

I hope my definitions are fair and acceptable to the con.
Debate Round No. 1
creationismisright

Con

creationismisright forfeited this round.
Seeginomikata

Pro

I don't much in the way of arguments, but whatever I have is extended due to con round forfeit.
Debate Round No. 2
creationismisright

Con

gods having the same nature and gods are completely different. yes i know i forfeited the round but as i was typing it in i still had an hour left and it said that i had forfeited the round very sorry about that. but our god jesus is different. you dont have to earn forgiveness it just comes to you
Seeginomikata

Pro

All gods are the same in that they are all, in their nature, human constructs designed to aid in the functioning and cooperation of societies. People create gods to explain the unknown. People create gods in order to personify their culture and values in the form of story and song. That is what all gods are. Thus Jesus and Vishnu are no different. They offer their believers a set pattern of behavioral norms, and attatchment to common ideology that serves as the social and emotional glue holding together different people into a common system. Gods may differ between each other in trivial details, such as what the afterlife is like, who gets to go to the afterlife, what supernatural feats did they perform to earn their position as a god. But these are superficial matters.

The only argument that con gives to suggest that gods are not all inherently the same is that this one specific diety happens to forgive people freely. Many other gods offur such spiriual pleasantries as well, but that is besides the point. One can not try to compare gods to each other only on the most fickle and minor details.

By the very nature of their existance, origins, and purpose, all gods are the same.
Debate Round No. 3
creationismisright

Con

creationismisright forfeited this round.
Seeginomikata

Pro

Arguements extended. All gods originate from the same purpose and exists in the same manner. Thus all gods are inherently the same.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Saska 3 years ago
Saska
creationismisrightSeeginomikataTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con loses points for conduct for forfeiting two rounds and Con loses points for spelling and grammar because of the inability to use proper capitalization, grammar and punctuation. Argument also goes to Pro because Pro actually made one.
Vote Placed by baus 3 years ago
baus
creationismisrightSeeginomikataTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: FF without any sources.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
creationismisrightSeeginomikataTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I was irked by Pro's attempt at dishonest semantic games, when he/she tried to change the resolution. Pro even stated that 'technically' involved the word strictly. For Pro to then propose a far more liberal definition, I think is unfair. But whatever, Con didn't call Pro on that, and so Pro won easily. Conduct to Pro for Con's forfeits. Con's grammar was also pretty bad, so much so that I had to read most sentences twice.