The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
princearchitect
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

religion is false

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 3 votes the winner is...
princearchitect
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/30/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,020 times Debate No: 90432
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (112)
Votes (3)

 

vi_spex

Pro

doing math is slaying dragons, some get ate.. religion
princearchitect

Con

I accept Pro's challenge, I will be arguing that religion is not false.
Thank you Pro for accepting me and I look forward to this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

present the dragon of your choosing
princearchitect

Con

I would like to thank Pro for this debate entitled: "Religion is false." To potential voters of this debate allow me to express that Pro should be penalized for bad grammar on both of his comments and that Pro didn't establish any ground rules for this debate. For the sake of argument, the religion of my choice is Christianity as revealed in the Holy Bible, inspired by God through the Holy Spirit, the same inspired Word of God taught by His only begotten Son Jesus Christ.

With that being said, " I find no reason to believe religion is false." According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, religion by definition means: The belief in a god or in a group of gods. A second definition states: religion is an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods. We now have a clear understanding of what religion is and the evidence suggests that religion is a belief that is synonyms with faith, worship, and creed.

False by definition means: not real or genuine: not true or accurate; especially: deliberately untrue: done or said to fool or deceive someone. If religion is false Pro must provide ironclad evidence against why men and women who gave up their lives and was martyred for standing firm for their religion. As Michael De Groote of Deseret News Published: A Christian get killed every 5 minutes for their faith. That they would give up their lives unto death for a belief they know within themselves is not true. Logic tells me, "If I'm deliberately trying to fool or deceive someone, I would not give my life up over it.

From a pure secular perspective, religion or Christianity have changed the course of this world and society abroad and have had such a profound impact on our everyday lives the evidence is to overwhelming to ignore. The very years on our calendar was influenced by religion and the universal impact Jesus Christ made on this world. That according to Cullen Schippe and Chuck Stetson's Biblical textbook, "The Bible and its Influence," Which is the only First Amendment approved Biblical textbook taught in Public Schools across the United States suggests, for millions of people the Bible is seen as sacred scriptures. It is believed by many Jews and Christians to contain God's revelation-an inspired communication from the divine to the human. This scripture has been influencing people for thousands of years. That influence extends not only to the synagogue or to the church. It is felt in the language people speak. It is experienced, too, in much of the art, music, and literature of Western culture. The Bible has influenced law and politics as well. And in the United States, The Bible-its characters, narratives, teachings, and the like-have played an important roll in American history and culture.

If your name is Joshua or David or Michael, Mary or Elizabeth or Sarah, Zeke or Deb or Sam or Sue, your name has its source in the Bible. If you have read William Golding's Lord of the Flies, John Steinbeck's East of Eden or John Milton's Paradise Lost, you have read works inspired in part or as a whole by the Bible. If you have watched Francis Ford Coppola's movie Apocalypse Now, or the film Chariots of Fire, you have experienced works whose titles come right from the Bible.

In the movie, New Jack City Starring Wesley Snipes, on more than one occasion they quoted, " Am I my brother's keeper?" was taken straight out the Bible which was of course influenced by religion. Ladies and Gentlemen, theses are ironclad evidence of how religion particularly Christianity and the Bible has influenced our everyday lives in more ways than one and for anyone to suggest that religion is false, that religion have no impact or have not impacted many important aspects of our lives is either ignorant because they just don't know or willfully ignorant in choosing to refuse any evidence that conflicts with their worldview.
I look forward to a spirited debate from Pro who must tear down the evidence of my opening statement and in doing so erecting better arguments of his own to replace them.

Source:
1.http://www.merriam-webster.com...

2.http://www.merriam-webster.com...

3.http://www.deseretnews.com...

4.http://www.amazon.com...
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

religion is belief, beliefs are false or unknown

only know is true, how do you know a belief is true? why believe then

i am sure christians are convinced of it, like the mother that killed her kid, standing outside looking to the clouds and smiling with her dead kids in the hands, for they went to heaven..

the reason you write so much tells me immediatly that you dont actually have a demonstration that religion is true.. there is no specifik point just tekst, you might as well tell me Jesus was real or that santa really lives in hidden underground caves in spain

do you understand that i can write a book and write names have special meaning and then give a list of names?

belief that there are snakes under my bed can influence lives.. does that mean there are snakes under the bed??
princearchitect

Con

Thank you Pro for posting your rebuttal, in my opinion you have failed to give sufficient reasons to validate your claim that religion is false. You have failed to provide any reliable source to substantiate your claim & your personal analogies are childish at best. I mean for real, what does a snake under your bed have anything to do with if religion is true or false?
Again, from an educational perspective your grammar is so poor on many levels Its difficult to understand, I would suggest for you to spend a small portion of your day to learn basic english and sentence structure and less time in these debate forums trying to force your worldview on people. From a competitive advantage perspective, it may look foolish of me to give
my opponent advice during a debate, but in the end I want you to do better, I want you to be better. According to your profile you're 27 years old, you're suppose to be at a level in your life where little children in the 3rd and 4th grade shouldn't be writing better sentences than you. It's difficult to take anything you say seriously when you write things like (quote) there is no specifik point just tekst, (end quote).

With that being said, "lets get back to the debate shall we?" You stated in your rebuttal, "religion is belief, beliefs are false or unknown." Your logic makes no sense to me because we have overwhelming evidence that their are beliefs that are verified by science for example, "I believe the earth is real, or I believe the sun is hot." Such beliefs have obvious tangible evidence to validate the claim. So to convince yourself that beliefs are false or unknown tells me you need to educate yourself more to consider that if I believe carpenters build homes and I have the evidence to prove it, theirs no logical reason to believe that my belief is false.

You stated, (quote) only know is true, how do you know a belief is true? why believe then (end quote) again I'm not fully understanding what your saying here, I would guess what your trying to convey here is only knowledge is true and I don't want to assume your intentions but its difficult to compose a logical argument when your opponent misspelled words.

You asked the question, "why believe it then?" As I stated in my last comment, why would I believe in something and willing to die for what I believe in if I'm not convinced within myself that what I believe is false? That argument and logic makes no sense to me.

You stated, "i am sure christians are convinced of it, like the mother that killed her kid, standing outside looking to the clouds and smiling with her dead kids in the hands, for they went to heaven.." Now for one, if your going to make such a claim it would be best to provide a source or an article to validate that such a story actually happen so I won't be convinced that woman smiling, standing outside looking at the clouds after killing her kid is not a figure of your imagination. Allow me to bring something to your attention that in my Christian walk I have learned to distinguish the goodness of God from insane acts that were committed in his name, as Christian apologist and Oxford Professor John Lennox stated in March 2009, in Birmingham, AL. "After all if I failed to distinguish between the genius of Einstein and the abuse of his science to create weapons of mass destruction, I might be tempted to say science is not great and technology poison everything."

I contend that what were dealing with here is your incapacity to distinguish between that which is subjective to that which is absolute. That my contention is my opponent is attempting to take that which is subjective and promote it as an absolute.
According to Google search the definition of subjective is that which is based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. But we understand that we live in a world were we experience diversities in subjectivity where what is important and logical to one person could be insane to someone else. What my opponent is doing here is presenting a false dichotomy, which assumes their are no other alternatives than what is subjectively important to him.

In June 23, 2005. NBC News conducted a survey of 1,044 doctors nationwide, 76 percent said they believe in God, 59 percent said they believe in some sort of afterlife, and 55 percent said their religious beliefs influence how they practice medicine.
If religion is false as my opponent claims it is, if he or a love one close to him falls sick and is treated by a Christian doctor whose religious beliefs influence how he practice medicine, whatever prescription he writes to make him well again, he should rip it up and burn it because he contends religion is not real.

My opponent stated, "the reason you write so much tells me immediatly that you dont actually have a demonstration that religion is true." I would disagree because the reason why I write so much are based upon years of research, years of studying a wide-range of intellectual information not just from the Christian point-of-view but from a atheistic and evolutionary point-of-view as well, so I could come to a better understanding of the evidence.

My opponent stated, "you might as well tell me Jesus was real or that santa really lives in hidden underground caves in spain"
I will tell you that Jesus is real based upon the evidence of his historicity, eye-witness accounts, according to live science.com states, "most theological historians, Christian and non-Christian alike, believe that Jesus really did walk the Earth."

With such overwhelming evidence, any rational human being can conclude that religion is not false based upon the examples my opponent has given "snakes under his bed." But that religion is true based upon the evidence presented in my argument.

I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal in the next round.

Sources:

1.https://www.youtube.com...

2.https://www.google.com...

3.http://www.livescience.com...

4.http://www.nbcnews.com...
Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

religion is false, not true..

religion is belief and disbelief

the sun is real, life on earth depends on it..

why not just believe you are god.. if beliefs are true. you seem to have no limit on what is true

its like a commen paradox that people dont see they dont know what they believe.. obviusly they dont

apples are not holy, they are good

i dont have beliefs, know is true
princearchitect

Con

I want to thank my opponent for his round four rebuttal and argument, I also would like to apologize for a few grammar errors of my own in my last rebuttal, that it got really late last night and I was getting sleepy during my argument.
I take the rules of this group very seriously and I do attempt to put forth the best effort to make sure that I convey the right message to the public. Thank you for your understanding.

As I consider my opponent's round four argument, I see some self-refuting statements, like when he wrote, "religion is belief and disbelief" How could religion be belief and disbelief? That's just like me saying, "your heart beats and doesn't beats."

I want to thank my opponent for confirming that their are beliefs that are real when he stated, "the sun is real, life on earth depends on it.."

My opponent also stated, "why not just believe you are god.. if beliefs are true. you seem to have no limit on what is true"

(1) Why not believe I' am god? Well, a short personal definition of a god is "what I deem worthy of worship." I don't think any human beings are gods because of our inability to create universes out of nothing and because of other limitations in our capacity. (2) My opponent stated, "if beliefs are true, I seem to have no limit on what is true?" On the contrary, I do have limit on what is true John 14:6 King James Version (KJV)

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. According to Biblical theology Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life.

My opponent stated, "its like a commen paradox that people dont see they dont know what they believe.. obviusly they dont"

Wow! Five spelling errors in one sentence, this is difficult to observe.

It may be a paradox to you, but its not a paradox to me.
I can't speak for everyone else when my opponent implies, "people don't know what they believe in." But I do know what I believe in, 1. I believe in God the Father as he is inspiringly revealed in the Holy Bible. 2. I believe that the same God incarnated himself some 2000+ years ago as Jesus Christ. 3. I believe in Jesus Christ, his life, his teachings, his death, his burial, his resurrection, and his ascension. As you can clearly see, this is no paradox to me as I' am convinced of this.

My opponent stated, "apples are not holy, they are good," I can agree with my opponent that apples are not holy, but when he implies that they are good, again that is subjective that apples might be good to him, but apples might not be good to someone else.

My opponent stated, "i dont have beliefs, know is true." two more spelling errors in this sentence. Since my opponent refuses to be clear, I' am assuming he is trying to imply that knowledge is true. If he is implying that knowledge is true, then his statement is a oxymoron and self-refuting because he believes that what he know is true.

It seems to me that my opponent only trust in his own understanding and logic as he have not cited one single source to validate his claims. I also think my opponent have done a poor job of answering any of my refutations as I have of his so we can conclude that he simply concede many arguments that he didn't addressed. But I ask of him, what do how apples tasting good have to do with why religion is false? His arguments makes no sense to me.

I think I have made my points in this round, As I will wait until my opponent make his final round statement, then if God is willing, I will close out this debate with my closing argument. Again I want to thank my opponent for this debate.

Source:
1. https://www.biblegateway.com...
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

no in heaven or hell you already dead, no heart beat.. its more like, the more theist you are the less you approve of non theism

you dont know beliefs

i dont have those limits.. universes can only be created, like the rest of a new house i am discovering

not a single spelling error

belief=belief
princearchitect

Con

As this debate comes to a close, I would like to thank Pro my opponent for sharing with me his thoughts and knowledge.
Before I give my closing statement, allow me to answer some of the round 5 objections my opponent has laid out.

My opponent stated, "no in heaven or hell you already dead, no heart beat.. its more like, the more theist you are the less you approve of non theism"

If I'm already dead, how could I have the capacity to debate anyone? Any rational human being should conclude that such a ignorant comment is false. Also, I became a theist or in a more personal term a Christian due to the evidence, due to the accuracy of his divinely-inspired Word. So I do not deduce that I don't know what I believe in because,

John 14:26 King James Version (KJV)

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

My opponent also stated, "i dont have those limits.. universes can only be created, like the rest of a new house i am discovering"

On the contrary, Christianity or religion is not limited to our own natural understanding because from Biblical theology perspective we believe in the infinite wisdom from a transcendent intelligent being scriptures describe him as God.
Excluding him out all together actually limits us to our own naturalistic understanding. Therefore, believing in God is not the enemy of knowledge, as a matter of fact it is God's desire for us to increase in knowledge.

Daniel 12:4 King James Version (KJV)

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Therefore, all things are possible and given unto us. I don't think the issue is the evidence, that it matters not if you're
a Christian, an Atheist, an Agnostic, a Creationists, or a Evolutionist etc. we all use the same evidence in the same universe
as everyone else. I think the heart of the matter is in the philosophical differences in our interpretation of the evidence.
All we could do is present the truth as intelligent moral beings as we understand it based on the evidence.

Well I pray and hope that my opponent as well as everyone do come into a knowledge of the truth that knowledge is progressive and ongoing that we may leave a legacy of wisdom and education for the next generation after us to build upon.

To potential voters of this debate, I hope you make your vote count based upon the evidence presented in each of our case.
I feel that my arguments was better in this debate, I used more reliable sources to validate my claim. And I find that my opponent poor grammar, no use of one single source to validate any of his arguments, and obvious refusal to answer any refutations I have presented like I answered his because he failed to establish any credible evidence to validate his claim that religion is false for you to consider voting for me as the clear winner of this debate. I hope you have learned and increased your understanding during this debate, God bless each and everyone of you. If you have any questions, you would like to ask me feel free to send me a message.

Source:
1. https://www.biblegateway.com...
2. https://www.biblegateway.com...
Debate Round No. 5
112 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
if its his own house i guess
Posted by thebestdebate 7 months ago
thebestdebate
Princearchitect is doing what they call "tearing it up."
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
what
Posted by canis 7 months ago
canis
No...Religion is not false..It is religion..Santa is not false...That is why we have Santa...
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
atheism is a religion, you will never ride a unicorn atheist
Posted by HoneyBadger0 7 months ago
HoneyBadger0
A unicorn as far as minkind knows is fake, but religion is very real it its prooven to be real
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
like those*
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
i mean obviusly you would wanna ride unicorns and not have to watch those that simply look on forever, never even getting to pet one
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
that the black gold horned unicorn is god? i know its hard, the atheist dont reason well
Posted by vi_spex 7 months ago
vi_spex
i know salt is real
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Kescarte_DeJudica 7 months ago
Kescarte_DeJudica
vi_spexprincearchitectTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con definitely won the debate. Pro's sentence structure was poor, he quoted no resources, and made very weak arguments. Con did exactly the opposite. He made a strong argument for his position, which his opponenet failed to tear down, used a proper sentence structure, and quoted resources.
Vote Placed by SkepticalAtheist 7 months ago
SkepticalAtheist
vi_spexprincearchitectTied
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: Yea, like what the hell vi_spex. The trolling is pretty constant and you should probably stop. Even though I think religion is false, there is no way I can possibly vote for you considering that you basically didn't argue at all.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 7 months ago
Phenenas
vi_spexprincearchitectTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con presented an argument as to why religion is true, and Pro failed to refute it. Pro, in fact, presented no arguments of any substance. He also failed to use any sources at all, which Con did. Finally, neither of their grammar was perfect, but Con at least bothered to use capitalization and punctuation.