The Instigator
timou
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
pantai_rhei
Con (against)
Winning
46 Points

isam is the only way to heaven

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 9 votes the winner is...
pantai_rhei
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,550 times Debate No: 29406
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (9)

 

pantai_rhei

Con

Accepted.

Please provide your arguments in support of the statement.
Debate Round No. 1
pantai_rhei

Con

The affirmative gives a quote, which seems to be from the Quran:

And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.

Translated:
Quran says there is a heaven and Islam is the only way to it. Thereby Islam is the only way to heaven.

This assumes that the Quran is right. No evidence has been provided for that. Therefore so far there is no evidence in support of the motion.


Debate Round No. 2
timou

Pro

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
iron came from stars
God said in Quran:"we sent it down"
http://quran.com...
---------------------------
http://quran.com... quran said that montains move .
---------------------------
bible found in turkey and video
http://english.alarabiya.net...
video of that bible

---------------------------
i have more http://anti-brainwash.overblog.com...
pantai_rhei

Con

Ok this is a ridiculous debate. You keep posting links without making the effort of making any arguments yourself. At the same time the posts are restricted to 500 characters.

So I repeat, no evidence has been provided for the existence of a heaven (see earlier refutation), therefore the question of whether Islam is the only way or not does not even arise. Therefor I negate.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by timou 4 years ago
timou
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

christians are lost , quran is true , Jesus is prophet without father, your own bible said that , my father is your father=God .
Posted by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
No, you lost the debate. In fact, it was a shutout. You need to learn how to read the score better.
Posted by timou 4 years ago
timou
i see alot hating islam ,you're brainwashed by rothshild family ,they control your media. i won the debate
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Pro should talk to Geo.
Posted by timou 4 years ago
timou
like always hey avoid my scientific proofs because rothschild famil own their media, they made hate islam . brainwashed
Posted by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
There is no heaven. Therefore, there cannot be a way to get there.
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
If you know who this is, Dr. Eben Alexander, he is most likely right and wrong. He is possibly right that he experienced the other dimension. He described it very well. He just has a delusional view and label of this dimension.

HOWEVER, he is wrong calling it "Proof of heaven". He is attaching claim to this other dimension from knowledge gained from a book that is vile, disgusting and complete outadated childish BS! There is no talk of heaven in scientfic writings regarding this dimension or level of conciousness, that is a religious word, and religion does not own the rights to another dimension, anymore than they own the rights to any behavior or morality, or legal marriage of two consenting adults just because they "called it first" :)

Defining this other dimension with a label that claims certainty regarding this other dimensions origins, is nothing short of ignorant arrogance. This other dimension or level of conciousness has nothing to do with leprechauns at the end of rainbows, flying horses called unicorns, zeus, mytholgy, allah, or a slave supporting sexist, interested in human sacrifice or any superstition concerned with what days we hold holy in its honor while we obey. :)

Science, you have never had to prove to the devil that someone loved you by asking a them to take their son to a mountain top as a burnt offereing.

To belittle science, thats like belittling love. There's nothing divisive about science or love, science and love are Not about beliefs or being right, theyre about understandings and being aware, religion is intrinsically divisive, and each religion or sect, or cult has their own incessant claim to be right, and in every religion, when some of their followers become agitated they express their ignorance in the form of violence :)

Lets give a shot out to science, that sexy mo fo that saves your butt in the hospital :)

The preceeding Shout Out, is brought to you by our faithful sponsors, CHECK and MATE :)
Posted by timou 4 years ago
timou
i can't help yo more then this .
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
You can't expect us to follow your links, or to guess what part of what we found there interests you if we did follow it. Your opening post is effectively blank. But, I suppose, a blank post is still better than plagiarism.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
timoupantai_rheiTied
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: Conduct to Con because Pro didn't debate, he link-spammed. S&G to Con because Pro had awful S&G when he actually wrote something that wasn't a link. Arguments to Con because Pro was all sources and no argument. Sources to Con because Pro's sources suffered from less than baseline reliability. This debate seems less a debate and more a means to drive traffic to Pro's blog.
Vote Placed by Jarhyn 4 years ago
Jarhyn
timoupantai_rheiTied
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: See Magic8000 RFD.
Vote Placed by LaL36 4 years ago
LaL36
timoupantai_rheiTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro did not debate. He just threw sources. Spelling and grammar: Look at the title. More convincing argument: pretty obvious con had more convincing arguments because he actually argued.
Vote Placed by jh1234l 4 years ago
jh1234l
timoupantai_rheiTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources are not arguments, they are only used to support arguments.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
timoupantai_rheiTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro presented zero evidence in support of his resolution -- arguments to Con. Pro didn't even spell "Islam" correctly -- s&g to Con. Pro did not make arguments but rather spammed links -- conduct to Con.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
timoupantai_rheiTied
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: All pro does is post links. His source are biased and have no sources within them. Spelling to Con as pro misspelled Islam. Arguments to Con as there wasn't a single independent thought from pro. Sources to Con, as there's no authentication in pro's sources to the validity of the book. Conduct to Con, pro doesn't debate at all.
Vote Placed by DoubtingDave 4 years ago
DoubtingDave
timoupantai_rheiTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro simply copied and pasted links and did not even argue in this debate. Con was debating you, pro, not your sources.
Vote Placed by Luggs 4 years ago
Luggs
timoupantai_rheiTied
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: Conduct to Con because Pro clearly doesn't know how a debate works. S/G to Con because of poor grammar by Pro. Arguments to Con, because Pro made no argument. Sources tied, because neither cited sources, but Pro's sites are basically supposed to be his "argument".
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
timoupantai_rheiTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: The hell kind of argument is that, Pro?