The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
Tatarize
Con (against)
Losing
10 Points

fixed rules don't exist for theoretical absolute minimum for things to believed for salvation

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: 2/24/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,155 times Debate No: 2887
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (7)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

no fixed rules for theoretical absolute minimum for things to believed for salvation

fundamentalist christians have a probelm.

what's the absolute minimum that a new christian or nonlearned christian would have to believe to be saved? not speaking in terms of a christian who's tryihg to do the absolute minimum just to skae by or are proactively refusing a belief... but simply hristians who don't know better.

i'd ask the fundamentalist "is it enough for them to say they believe that jesus existed?" and they'd say no as demons do that. i'd ask if it's enough that they believe he's God, and many would say not enough as demons rpobably do that.
so, they say they start listing things that should be believed. but then, i point out that that list is dogmatic like a creed or church or something, something fundamenralists don't like to be, or at least is severlly limiting who can be saved giving that a list is by definition is exclusive of those who don't match every belief yet. so, they point out a blief like "savior".

but, then i point out that many believe in savior but odn't really know what that means. if you explain atonement or eevn the idea, they have no idea what you're talking about... both new and unleared christians (there are many believe me, and are probably the rule rather than the exception) are clueless.
some fundies will insist that the spefici notion of atonement savior must be believed (and say to hell with the good majority or great minority of christians who are wishy washy in their understanding), some will say any form of savior as long as a notion genereally is believed.

but then i'll point out that the bible says "confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and that he rose from the dead and you'll be saved" and they'll acknowledge that "lord" is kind of vague for a new and unlearned christians, and so maybe they don't have to believe savior.

so, then others will have to concede that it's simply not possible to have a dogmatic rule and perhaps that person doesn't have to believe "savior" yet... cause many new and unleare christiians don't really know what they're being saved from or anything else or know to say they have a "savior" but do say "lord" etc.

at least... really the rule is that you must be good intentioned, and generally believe something about Jesus. unless you dn't care about new and unlearned christians. only God can really know. there's no way to be fundamentalist about the requirements that must be believed, speficially, for those situations.
i'd concede though that if they reject a teaching, perhaps they could be damned, for the sake of argument only thought.

(personally most of this is just fluff to me... i'm just trying to get dogmatics out of their rigid shell)
Tatarize

Con

Yeah, the Bible is fallible and there aren't any fixed rules. You know why there is no minimum for salvation? It's all a screwjob. The Bible was written by men. God doesn't exist. There's no pot of gold at the end of rainbows. Your dog never went to any farm for old dogs, and there ain't no Santa Claus.

The very concept of believing things for eternal life is absurd. Sure, some guy could have lived his entire life as a very devout Mormon and always kind-hearted and always good and always helpful... but he didn't believe in the trinity so he gets punished forever in a lake of fire! Eternal suffering or eternal bliss are stupid ideas. An infinite reward or infinite punishment for wrapping your head around a couple stupid ideas during a finite life? It's a screwjob! Open your eyes!

You know those chain letters which claim you'll have good luck if you forward this to a dozen friends and bad luck if you don't! Religion is exactly like that, except rather than luck you get a good or bad afterlife. It's a stick and carrot, and chain letters never do anybody any good.

Fixed rules for salvation are bountiful! Fundamentalists say they must accept the Trinity, Jesus as Savior, etc. The rules for Muslims are they need to follow the five pillars of Islam and lead a good life having faith in Allah. The rules depend on which version of the chain letter you get introduced to first, probably the one same your parents bought into (what are the odds!?). There are plenty of fixed rules the thing is, they don't really give you salvation.

If you forward that one letter, that sick cancer kid isn't going to get better. If you forward the Bill Gates one, Microsoft isn't going to write you a big check. If you save souls for Christ, you're getting the same rotting corpse as everybody else. Bring people into the Muslim faith, you're getting the same rotting corpse as everybody else.

Are there fixed rules? Sure plenty of them. Do they give you magic powers, eternal life, and infinite pleasure? No, they make you a gullible moron whose bad at science.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i think i agree generally with most of what you say, regarding fundamentalist christianity.

the key point where there's plenty of fixed beliefs though, hasn't really responeded to my point that there's no fixed beliefs... the reason is because the context of my intro post says "there's no fixed beliefs unless you don't care about new christians and etc" which means you have to genuinitly belief that to debate, and which means you have to provide the "logic" to back up that belief. you simply pointed out that there's ixed beliefs out there generally and ponited out that it exists, which isn't repsonding rightfully to my intro post.

i agree with much of your general other sentiment though.
Tatarize

Con

I wasn't just talking about fundamentalist Christianity, I was talking about most all religion in general.

There are tons of fixed beliefs about what gets you the infinite carrot and spares you from the infinite stick. Pretty much every religious group and subgroup within Christianity has some set beliefs. There's certainly no universal rules across all religions. And a vast number have contradictory requirements so odds are good regardless what you believe the majority of religions are damning you to hell.

I've noticed this general pattern in your debates for a while now. Are you losing your faith? It very much looks like from a number of your comments that truth is making surprising inroads. First you learn that the Bible is crap and have a bunch of debates about that, now apparently the fact that as for fixed rules there are thousands of different sets of them for salvation. Although, you did have an odd string of debates about locking up pregnant women to prevent late term abortions so maybe I wrong.

Still, yeah fixed rules, tons of them. Everybody has different rules. It doesn't make them any less fixed. Also, nothing is effectively "for salvation" as that's a crock to make sure you forward the "chain letter" to your friends and family.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i will concede that my initial post could have been clearer as to whether i was asking for fixed rules in the sense that whether any exist... which is what you were arguing.

but, i still contend that it was clear enough that i was arguing as per what we should believe as chrisitans, or theologians talking about theory of what should be believed. not what is believed.

i have been a liberal christian since my inception here. not much has changed except how i look at late term abortions.
i think you can "prove" god depending on how you define it, but ultimately i don't think you can. i tend to think the bible is not the word for word word of God, but i still think it's inspired and i believe in Jesus. i think he was misunderstood.
i was against a lot of late term abortions at first, only because i hadn't realize almost all of them are for health reasons. it'd be tough somewhat to legislate when it's not right to have that, when it's just casue the mom is merely discomforted, and since it isn't as prevalent as i thought and so it's not too big of a deal in the bigger picture.. that's why i conceded the argument in one of those debates. if abortions were prevanlent though late term for shady reasons, it'd be inhuman and immoral etc to think it's someone who can be protected two seconds after birth but not two seconds before. we can and should draw a point, even if it's arbitary, during pregnancy... if it were or became prevalent for stupid reasons.
Tatarize

Con

There are minimum rules in pretty much every religion, sect, and branch of Christianity. Some require you to be born again, some require you to believe in God, some of them require that you be human and have a soul. But, there are minimum rules in pretty much every faith. Though, moreover they tend to want you to not just do the least you possibly can.

Are there fixed minimum rules for salvation? Yes, every religion has some of those.

--

You're misusing the word theory. A theory is a model which explains a number of facts. When theologians talk, there are no facts which need to be explained.

Sure, if you define it as a sun-worshiper does then the God clearly exists. If a personal God existed he could be proved by descending from the sky and proving himself rather aptly. The only way God would be unprovable is if God didn't exist.

You think a book which says you should beat your slaves only most of the way to death and gives very specific instructions on how and when to rape a captured sex slave is inspired? Are the genocides carried out inspired? Are the silly arcane laws inspired?

Nobody keeps a bun in the oven for seven months before taking care of it if they didn't want it in the first place. I've heard of people being shunned by their family and friends for having a late term abortion when the fetus was going to die in the 8th month and had no chance of being viable.

Just sort of odd as far as beliefs go. I mean, if you actually believe the above topic what does that say about your beliefs? Do you honestly think there's a fair and loving God floating around picking salvation out of a hat? You'd be amazed at how reasonable everything is when you don't accept things on faith and have good reasons to believe the things you believe.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
Dairygirl had extra accounts, that, and she wasn't very good at debating.
Posted by Persuasion 8 years ago
Persuasion
whosoever calls on the name of the lord will be saved.
game over.
Posted by SolaGratia 9 years ago
SolaGratia
I can't help but think that Tatarize is taking advantage of Dairygirl4u2c. And honestly, how many debates do their need to be on this subject? I kinda wish this debate had been left to rot.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Don't you ever get sick of arguing this point? It's worded in such a bizarre format and it's such an easy point to argue. You must have at least 3 other debates nearly identical to this one.

How about something different o.o?
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
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 JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:03 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
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 Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
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 Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Persuasion 8 years ago
Persuasion
dairygirl4u2cTatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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