The Instigator
xxx00
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
emospongebob527
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

atheism a superficial (weak) understanding of life and nature

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 2 votes the winner is...
emospongebob527
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/30/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 677 times Debate No: 26737
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

xxx00

Pro

1. it is based on failure of one religion, christianity. may be another, islam. but there are other religion which are left untested.such as buddhism, taoism, zen, shintaoism, wicca, shamanism etc.

2. it is based on darwin's theory of evolution which is not an absolute truth. there are many rooms for criticism in that theory.

3.atheism survives on attacking the violence part of christianity and islam. it totally ignores the peaceful part of those religion.

4. the existance of great scientists who believe in god such as copernicus, francis bacon, galileo, descartes, max planck, lord kelvin, issac newton etc. proves that there may be a supreme power to run the world.
emospongebob527

Con

1. it is based on failure of one religion, christianity. may be another, islam. but there are other religion which are left untested.such as buddhism, taoism, zen, shintaoism, wicca, shamanism etc.

Atheism is not based on counter-Christianity, it is simply the absence of belief in Gods.


2. it is based on darwin's theory of evolution which is not an absolute truth. there are many rooms for criticism in that theory.

Atheism is not based on the theory of evolution, this false presumption sickens me.
Evolution is completely unrelated to atheism.

3.atheism survives on attacking the violence part of christianity and islam. it totally ignores the peaceful part of those religion.

Atheism does not survive by attacking Theism.
It survives by defending from Theism.

4. the existance of great scientists who believe in god such as copernicus, francis bacon, galileo, descartes, max planck, lord kelvin, issac newton etc. proves that there may be a supreme power to run the world.

How so?
Debate Round No. 1
xxx00

Pro

it seems that my opponent has never seen any debate between theist and atheist. please watch debates between richard dawkins, sam harris, christopher hitchens and theists and you will find that atheists raising these points:

1. christianity and islam are failed religion. atheism is the only way out.

2. christianity and islam have violence side.

3. uses of theory of evolution against creationism.

4. difference between science and atheism true scientists must be atheist.

you can see these points in many lectures of richard dawkins, sam harris and christopher hitchens etc.
emospongebob527

Con

1. christianity and islam are failed religion. atheism is the only way out.

2. christianity and islam have violence side.

3. uses of theory of evolution against creationism.

4. difference between science and atheism true scientists must be atheist.


My opponent is listing arguments I could use, although much more detailed and less atrocious.


These do not relate to his resolution.
Debate Round No. 2
xxx00

Pro

xxx00 forfeited this round.
emospongebob527

Con

Vote for me and you will get free Krabby Patties.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
Pro has lost from the outset by using false arguments which Con can easily rebut. :D
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
Frequently scam through the debates in the challenge period, but you have to do this OFTEN.
Posted by DeFool 4 years ago
DeFool
If I could figure out how emospingebob was finding these debates... My jealousy is maddening.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Torvald 4 years ago
Torvald
xxx00emospongebob527Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I do not believe in a default vote for forfeiture (even though I've used it, on occasion). I was prepared to give the conduct point to Con, but he urged the voters to vote for him in an impolite behaviour, as is his habit. The arguments go to the Con, for obvious reasons. Both sides had faulty grammar and spelling, and neither used sources, resulting in ties.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
xxx00emospongebob527Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited.