The Instigator
induced
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
justin.graves
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

mormonism is false

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 3 votes the winner is...
induced
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/22/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,188 times Debate No: 31539
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

induced

Pro

i will argue that mormonism is false
justin.graves

Con

First off, I do not believe Mormonism is true, but for the sake of improving my debating skills, I will argue that it is true. So, yes, I accept the challenge.
Debate Round No. 1
induced

Pro

according to mormonism, baptism is a major part of the gospel and baptism was widely practiced throughout the old testament times and that Adam was the first to be baptized
http://www.lds.org...

however, in the Old Testament, there are absolutely no mentions or descriptions of baptisms. if baptism was so crucial to their gospel throughout the Old Testament times, they must have written a lot about it in their scriptures, but they didnt. it is clear that baptism was popularized around the time of jesus. this contradicts mormonism, so mormonism isnt true
justin.graves

Con

Isn't it interesting to note that many practices that we know were in the Judaism of the Old Testament were never recorded in the Bible? The exact practices of the Pharisees, for instance, are not recorded in the Bible or the Book of Mormon. However, we have learned some of their practices through archeology. These practices were important to the religious rulers, but God did not put them in the OT.

This same thing applies to baptism. Just because the Old Testament doesn't talk about it, doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Also, look at the New Testament before Jesus was baptised in Matthew 3 : "

7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8 Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. 9 And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. 10 The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

11 “I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Obviously baptism was important to the religious rulers. The religious leaders were forbidden by God's law to change much in their religious practices. Therefore, this practice must have gone back millenia, even to Adam. So it is not a contradiction, only a misunderstanding to one who does not know the Holy Books.

Debate Round No. 2
induced

Pro

the type of god that mormons believe in is very strict and organized about things like baptism. mormons must keep official records and genealogy of everyone who they've baptized, including baptisms on behalf of the dead. there are many strict rules about baptism that must be followed, like full immersion, and who it is who can or cant baptize or be baptized, what priesthood you need to perform it and how you get that priesthood, at what age you can be baptized, the laying on of hands, and the words you speak when performing it, rules for baptizing the dead, etc. if one small thing is not done right, the baptism is void and doesnt count, and that person wont be able to advance in an afterlife until they are baptized properly. of all the detail the old testament goes into, god and his followers would have made sure that it was put in the scriptures as a priority.

as for your argument, i disagree...religions change all the time. circumcision was introduced long after adam. mormons allowed blacks the priesthood after denying them, and prohibited polygamy after requiring it. mosaic law wasnt established until long after adam, and was pretty much ignored after jesus came along. jesus taught many messages that were contrary to established old testament doctrine, such as turning the other cheek and loving your enemies and not casting stones as people. he also started sacrament.

if you look at the evidence, there is no reasonable doubt that baptism wasnt practiced throughout the old testament, so mormonism is evidently false
justin.graves

Con

Who are you to question God? There were many, many more scrolls of laws in the Old Testament that were simply not added to the OT. I have already stated that. The Book of Mormon is just as valuable, if not more, than the Bible on these issues. God revealed things through angels and spirits as well. Also, you must remember that there was a dark time in the history of the world where the truth was clouded. No one was truly a believer. That is why we must baptise the dead. Just because God didn't reveal something earlier to a future generation doesn't mean it wasn't true.

Second, you were stating that baptism did not reach into the Old Testament. I was saying it does. I was confirming that by showing that the religious leaders thought that baptism was important, and the religious leaders were forbidden by God to change without His permission! Jesus had God's permission to change the religion, while the Pharisees did not. That is why baptism must have reached back ages.

The Book of Mormon states that there was Baptism in the OT. Therefore, the only way to prove that Mormonism is false is to prove that the Book of Mormon is false.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by RockvilleSoftworks 4 years ago
RockvilleSoftworks
I lol'ed at the first post. My answer would have been, "That's great, when do you plan on starting this debate?".
Posted by Tim98 4 years ago
Tim98
I'll accept this debate on the condition that it is based off of the scriptures, and that you have the burden of proof. Also, I'd want you to name a belief of the mormon church which is not true, which i will back up with a scripture that says it is.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by badbob 4 years ago
badbob
inducedjustin.gravesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had the best argument discussing John the Baptist when the religous leaders did not ask him what this baptism thing was thus showing it already existed. Very nice point.
Vote Placed by Nimbus328 4 years ago
Nimbus328
inducedjustin.gravesTied
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: Baptism was the central part of the debate, Con's round #2 was illogical.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
inducedjustin.gravesTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used most reliable sources and made better arguments. Con basically dropped one argument by putting up a smokescreen around it.