The Instigator
noctos
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
lowan99
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

is your religious standing better than the other religions?

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 5 votes the winner is...
lowan99
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,004 times Debate No: 20943
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

noctos

Con

Why are Jews better than Catholics. Christians better than Buddhist or a Buddhist better than a Jew? i don't care what religion you claim to be apart of i only urge that no religion is better or worst than any other. Prove me wrong. Why your church over his?
lowan99

Pro

I think that one religion is better than the other. I think that Christians are the best because of our one and true God. Other would argue against that. I think this because all the other gods are dead. Our God is alive. Can't wait to hear what you have to say.
Debate Round No. 1
noctos

Con

i like your stance that the christian god has a bigger dick than the other gods. But are you suggesting the god your church fallows slayed the other gods? if your god is truly powerful enough to say all other gods then i would say he is an evil dictator and would not wish to fallow or worship him. The christian god much like the catholic god sent his own child to earth torture and sacrifice him. i will suggest this was a harsh action vile of a parent in to days standards yet you religious fanatics isn't it was for your salvation. If your god is so great why did he murder is own child. since your god according to the scriptures demand tribute insisting on both money and slavery of your soul in devotion to him i would again suggest he is both greedy and corrupted with his benevolent power. i also distrust any being willing to punish babies and young children with an Eternity in limbo for not going through a ritual with the common mortal name of a baptism. if these are the actions of your so called great god. i wish that he too was dead.
lowan99

Pro

Sir let me explain before you start your name calling. My church follows God because of what his son did. His son died on the cross for everyone sin including me. The young children and babies are not in hell they are in heaven. That is why he put his son on the cross. He did not murder him. He gave his son to die for us. Baptism is a sign or showing other that you are a Christian. And also, be careful what you say. The words you chose are not the best. Next time I will report your comment. Can't wait to hear what you have to say.
Debate Round No. 2
noctos

Con

i name calling? i did no such thing i just used the actions described in your book of ethics and morals named as the bible reflected them in to mortal human standards. god is suppose to be great yet he does things numerous times that we as society labeled as vile actions preformed by those only with corrupted goals. warlords, dictators, serial killers, terrorist, tyrants, exe.... for him to be an entity so great i would only suggest he would be able to refrain from such actions that we as humans have decided to be unwarranted and acts of cruelty when preformed by use who are mere mortals.

if find that your cult leads through fear of the unknown. the religious group and it's leaders pry on the weak spreading tales of divine brutality to keep it's followers obedient.

you claim he didn't murder his son. so your trying to tell me that part of the bible is a lie. if so what other parts are lies. and to base a religion around the sacrifice of god's son i find to be disturbing in of it's self. but then to say it didn't happen based on the idea he didn't murder his son kind of make the entire foundation of your cult even more preposterous.
you can only enter heaven if you have been baptized it's not the babies fault but you still can't get in to heaven so swipe those little suckers in to limbo.i did make this stuff your religious leaders of a long time ago did.

based on the few things you have stated i find it hard to sallow your god the christian god is worthy of my fallowing. or any ones for that matter.
lowan99

Pro

Hold your horse right there. Let me point out a couple of things real quick.
1. You did name call I will even quote it for you. "I like your stance that the Christian god has a bigger dick than the other gods." OK so yeah you did name call.
2. Like I said before God didn't murder his son. God brought Jesus into the world to save and that the world thought him might be saved. God did not murder his son. Jesus died for your sins. Jesus loved you so much that he put his butt on that cross for you. It was Jesus choice. He could have started all over from scratch but he didn't he died for you. That is why Christianity is so important.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by noctos 5 years ago
noctos
I'm amused that me complementing the christian god for having a larger dick than all other god is found to be insulting and or abusive. i thought i was being flattering
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 5 years ago
KeytarHero
noctoslowan99Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Honestly, both sides didn't argue well at all. Con trying to attack Christianity but Pro didn't really give a very good defense of why Christianity is the superior religion. I gave conduct to Pro due to Con's ad hominem attacks (e.g. "religious fanatics"), and spelling and grammar to Pro due to Con's excessive use of run-on sentences in round two. No one used any sources.
Vote Placed by Blithe 5 years ago
Blithe
noctoslowan99Tied
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: Con appears to have a very immature understanding of Christianity. Though neither arguments were very convincing.
Vote Placed by Fusionized 5 years ago
Fusionized
noctoslowan99Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to demonstrate how his religious beliefs were superior to those of others. The debate goes to Con not because of the strength of his own arguments, but for the weakness of Pro's. Con could have refrained from being vulgar and didn't even bother to capitalize the beginning of a lot of his sentences; therefore, Pro gets conduct as well as spelling and grammar.
Vote Placed by Ricky_Zahnd 5 years ago
Ricky_Zahnd
noctoslowan99Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: this seems about equally weak on both sides, but since pro failed to compare with any other religions he seems to have proved the point con may have been attempting to draw out.
Vote Placed by baggins 5 years ago
baggins
noctoslowan99Tied
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: There was no real debate. Con loses conduct due to abusive language.