http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&sort=&category=Religion Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/ en-us 2009-11-07T10:29:14-08:00 2009-11-07T10:29:14-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Following-Arguments-for-the-Existence-of-God-are-Valid-1K/1/ (Debating Period) Note: the "1J" notation in the Topic title is simply for searching purposes. [Definition - Existence] http://dictionary.reference.com...... 1. the state or fact of existing; being. *NOTE* I am not debating whether or not a God exists in one's MIND, but rather in REALITY. [Definition - Valid] http://dictionary.reference.com...... 1. sound; just; well-founded 2. Logic. (of an argument) so constructed that if the premises are jointly asserted, the conclusion cannot be denied without contradiction. *NOTE* Stemming from the second definition, I don't intend for my opponent to create a syllogism. Simply put, my opponent needs to construct an argument of which I can't successfully defeat (of course, this is to the opinion of the voters). So in other words, it needs to be logically valid and sound. Let's try to avoid semantics, and get a good hearty debate going. Additionally, I require that my opponent argue for whatever deity they are proving with http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Following-Arguments-for-the-Existence-of-God-are-Valid-1K/1/comments/ 2009-11-06T01:47:39-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-sufficient-evidence-for-the-existence-of-super-ordinary-actors-on-Earth./1/ (Voting Period) There is sufficient evidence for the existence of super-ordinary actors on Earth. It seems to me that the arguments between believers and non-believers comes down to arguments about the evidence. Thus first I do not wish to argue about spiritual existence nor about any cause for the evidence, but just about whether the particular evidence indicates extra-normal cause and in general what constitutes evidence and sufficiency of evidence. Thus I will be pointing at evidence that could be explain by non-spiritual cause, the refutation of which will require a plausible natural cause and that weight of the argument must exceed the weight of the extra-ordinary argument. As far as the ‘people are liars' or the hidden agenda argument, I like to apply the 10% rule, which says that even if you discount 90% of applicable evidence, I will hold that at least one person is telling the truth and will wish to have that truth explained. Please forgive the leading dots being http://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-sufficient-evidence-for-the-existence-of-super-ordinary-actors-on-Earth./1/comments/ 2009-11-02T06:37:34-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Jesus-of-History-Probably-Existed-D/1/ (Voting Period) Introduction: I will make my case and address the most common arguments presented by the mythological Jesus camp. The Historicity of Jesus as reported by extrabiblical sources, biblical sources, and basic logic: The Case of Tacitus: 1. Tacitus was an early Roman historian who wrote early in the 2nd century. In his writings we have a reference to Jesus as the founder of Christianity and his being crucified under the thumb of Pontius Pilate. Unfortunately much of Tacitus' work has been lost, including portions from 29-32 AD – an area which would have included Jesus' trial had he recorded it (1). The Tacitus quote is as follows: "Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Jesus-of-History-Probably-Existed-D/1/comments/ 2009-10-24T19:24:54-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-contains-errors-and-contradictions-and-it-can-therefore-not-be-the-word-of-God/1/ (Post Voting Period) Many Christians believe that the Bible is the word of God. The Bible according to them is perfect because it comes from God. However, many people have claimed that many verses are contradictory to each other, e.g. one giving a specific number of Solomon's stalls, other one giving another number, yet they are telling the same story. Many people have also claimed that the Bible contains scientific errors. I have spent a lot of time reading those verses in context, and I have found out that they are talking about the same things at the same time, which means that they are contradictory to each other. Many verses that contain scientific errors seem to be free of errors when reading the English translation, or the translation in many other language besides Hebrew and Greek, but when reading the translation of some words in Hebrew, it is clear that there are errors. It would be more understandable if a verse from the Old Testament was contradictory to a verse in t http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-contains-errors-and-contradictions-and-it-can-therefore-not-be-the-word-of-God/1/comments/ 2009-10-17T14:13:07-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Religion-is-in-general-beneficial-for-society/1/ (Voting Period) Hello LD style debate http://www.debate.org/debates/Religion-is-in-general-beneficial-for-society/1/comments/ 2009-10-18T00:37:51-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Abortion-is-wrong/8/ (Post Voting Period) This is a real debate, unlike stevos. I will argue that abortion is wrong in all cases. You will argue that it is ok, but not ok after a certain point (late-term abortions). This first round is just a clarification. I will begin my arguments at the second round. http://www.debate.org/debates/Abortion-is-wrong/8/comments/ 2009-10-23T10:43:43-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-religious-indoctrination-of-minors-is-a-form-of-child-abuse/1/ (Voting Period) Adults who sexually interfere with minors, be they parents, friends of the family, teachers, priests or complete strangers are rightly punished when their crimes are uncovered. However, in addition to the sexual molestation of children, there are three other forms of child abuse: physical abuse, emotional abuse and neglect. http://www.nspcc.org.uk/HelpAndAdvice/WhatChildAbuse/whatischildabuse_wda36500.html My contention is that adults who indoctrinate children with religious propaganda, whether they be parents, teachers, preachers or anyone else and whether they be Christian, Jewish, Muslim or a follower of any other faith based belief and whether they are at home or at school or at a place of worship or any other public place, are guilty of emotionally abusing children. Please review the embedded YouTube clips of kids at ‘Jesus Camps'. Can you honestly say that brainwashing children at such early stages in their lives has improved those children's me http://www.debate.org/debates/The-religious-indoctrination-of-minors-is-a-form-of-child-abuse/1/comments/ 2009-09-21T15:08:45-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/I-am-your-God/1/ (Voting Period) I am your god. http://www.debate.org/debates/I-am-your-God/1/comments/ 2009-08-24T16:37:43-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-God-of-Christianity-is-probably-real./1/ (Voting Period) I have made it my goal in this debate to demolish the intellectual and moral pretenses of the Christian religion. Of course this demolition will have to take a back seat to the resolution that awaits us. I consider Christianity to be a wicked, depraved, and intellectually bankrupt cult that consistently perpetuates blatant falsehoods and is responsible for outrageous amounts of needles suffering- even whilst it maintains an air of superciliousness. Two thousand years is far too long far any illusion to be sheltered from the light of reason. The time of its destruction is before us. My antagonist will simply be arguing in favor of the existence of the God of Christian theism, no more and no less. ======== Contention 1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. ======== Whatever can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Or as Carl Sagan famously put it "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Witho http://www.debate.org/debates/The-God-of-Christianity-is-probably-real./1/comments/ 2009-09-20T12:31:51-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Christian-and-being-Gay/1/ (Post Voting Period) Christians argue that the Bible says gays are going to hell. But when they say we are sinning, they sin themselves; by saying we're sinning their judging, Matt 7:1, 2 says, "Judge not that you be not judged. 2. For with what judgment you judge it will be judged unto you." So if they call us the fg word or gays and say that we're sinning, they will be judged as fgs or gays as well. In the four Gospels; Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, I cannot find one single passage in which Jesus condemned homosexuality. Wasn't it Jesus who said, "Love one another as I have loved you."? And yet, Christians shout, fg, you're going to burn in hell, God hates gays! I'm sorry but that last one is totally wrong. 1st John 4:8 says, "Any man who does not love knows not God, for God is Love." In Luke, it says, "A good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit and a bad tree cannot bring forth good fruit." So how can God hate if God is love? John 3:16 says, "For God so loved the world that he gav http://www.debate.org/debates/Christian-and-being-Gay/1/comments/ 2009-10-18T17:58:03-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/God-is-not-real./1/ (Voting Period) I will demonstrate that it is logically impossible for a God to exist if that God is defined as being both omniscient and omnipotent. In the same way that married bachelors and square circles cannot exist a God that is claimed to be both omniscient and omnipotent cannot exist. It's an old argument, but it should still be pretty fun to debate. ============== A quick syllogism: ============== 1. Anything with logically incompatible properties cannot exist. (This is not arguable) 2. Any God that knows the future is powerless to change it, and is therefore not omnipotent. 3. Omniscience is logically incompatible with omnipotence. (2) 4. God is described as having omniscience and omnipotence. (given) 5. Therefore God does not exist. (1) (3) (4) This is sufficient proof to discredit the existence of any God that is said to be both omniscient and omnipotent. It doesn't work with every definition of God, but for the sake of convenience this debate will http://www.debate.org/debates/God-is-not-real./1/comments/ 2009-10-04T11:31:10-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Baptism-is-not-a-requirement-for-Salvation./1/ (Post Voting Period) INTRODUCTION: Concur CONTENTION ONE: Baptism is a public display of obedience which is symbolic of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. (Romans 6: 1-11) CONTENTION TWO: One must accept Jesus as their personal savior, believe that Jesus died for their sins, and confess him as Savior. (Romans 10: 9-10, 13) SUMMARY: While baptism is practiced, it is not a requirement. http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Baptism-is-not-a-requirement-for-Salvation./1/comments/ 2009-10-27T23:58:58-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Marriage-should-be-abolished-as-a-legal-institution/1/ (Voting Period) We'll start off with some definitions: 1) Mar·riage: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law Miriam-Webster @2009 2) abol·ish: to end the observance or effect of Miriam-Webster @2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is my contention that marriage should cease to be recognized as a legal institution as it is discriminatory in nature and in violation of any number of Constitutional amendments (The 14th in particular). In turn, all the social and economic benefits inherent to a "marriage" should be transfered to the legal contracts defining civil unions, thereby reaffirming marriage as a solely religious exercise. My reasoning for this course of action is two fold: 1) Constitutional Requirement for Equality. The 14th Amendment states: " No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge http://www.debate.org/debates/Marriage-should-be-abolished-as-a-legal-institution/1/comments/ 2009-10-26T12:46:59-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-the-Christian-God-a-gracious-and-just-God/1/ (Voting Period) Many people say He isn't because He sends people to Hell. Some say He IS because He sends people to Hell. http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-the-Christian-God-a-gracious-and-just-God/1/comments/ 2009-09-01T11:41:14-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Rationalists-should-attempt-to-destroy-religion./1/ (Post Voting Period) Most people in the world believe that the creator of the universe wrote or "inspired" one of their books. Unfortunately, there are many books that pretend to divine authorship, and each makes incompatible claims about how we should live. The diversity and profundity of these claims range from banal proclamations on the procedure of rituals to divisive and irreconcilable claims about the pleasures that await martyrs in paradise. Despite the ecumenical efforts of many well-intentioned and loving people our religions are still some of the key factors behind an appalling amount of violence and hatred. It is, of course, true that religion is not the only form of dogma that plagues our world. Although I think a fairly strong case can be made that its one of the most invidious. National and political dogmas regularly divide us both as individuals and collectively as societies. Racial dogmas and tribalism have certainly done their fare share of destruction. However http://www.debate.org/debates/Rationalists-should-attempt-to-destroy-religion./1/comments/ 2009-08-18T20:50:36-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Jesus-Christ-Never-Existed/1/ (Voting Period) Jesus Christ, contrary to popular public opinion, never existed. First to define who Jesus Christ was according to the "Holy Bible": Jesus Christ is a central figure in Christianity who supposedly lived from around 4 B.C. to 30 A.D. He was a prophet of Judaism who many believed was the Messiah, the one who would deliver the Jews to salvation. He began a new religious movement, called his ministry, that was composed of 12 disciples and other followers. He was sentenced to death by the Jewish authorities of Judea and was crucified by the Roman authorities. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus Now to define the term existence: The term existence means in simple Latin form to be. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence Jesus Christ never existed because he never lived. All documents that are about his life were written many years after his death, with the first gospel being written in 70 AD, 30 years after Jesus' supposed death in 40 AD. H http://www.debate.org/debates/Jesus-Christ-Never-Existed/1/comments/ 2009-07-07T21:47:53-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-No-God/4/ (Post Voting Period) There is not a thread of evidence that a god has ever existed, and it is physically impossible for a god to exist. http://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-No-God/4/comments/ 2009-06-23T19:40:46-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Biblical-descriptions-of-the-nature-of-the-Christian-God-and-free-will-are-contradictory./1/ (Voting Period) I'm thinking of running this as a stock Parli case, so I thought I'd give it a test run. The proposition for offer is that the concepts of the nature of God and the mechanics of free will as described in the Bible are contradictory. The existence of God or free will are considered opposing premises and are not up for dispute themselves; rather, Con must prove that the two are logically compatible. God is classically described as an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-loving being that created everything and who reigns over all. Free will is the concept that the actions of members of humanity are expressions of personal choice as opposed to results of some form of predestination. My syllogism is as follows: Premise 1. The Christian God exists. Premise 2. Free will exists. 1. The Christian God created humans which are free-willing and capable of doing evil, and who have done and continue to do evil. (1) 2. The Christian God maintains a domi http://www.debate.org/debates/Biblical-descriptions-of-the-nature-of-the-Christian-God-and-free-will-are-contradictory./1/comments/ 2009-08-22T22:48:06-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Children-shouldnt-be-pressured-or-forced-to-accept-their-parents-religion/1/ (Voting Period) I stand in affirmation. Children should get to choose for themselves which religion, or none at all, that they wish to participate in. Parents should expose children to all different types of faith and ultimately let the kids decide instead of the parents deciding. Let's just say hypothetically that Christianity is the one true faith. Then the Christian parents seem to have done the right thing in forcing their kids to be Christian. They just saved the kids and ensured their place in heaven! But that still leaves out 4 billion people. The 4 billion Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs, Buddhists, and the members of the countless other religious groups would be screwed and condemned to an eternity in hell for failing to believe in Jesus Christ as the savior of the human race. This is all because their parents were Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Buddhist and Sikh (mostly, I know there are some people who switch religions). Their parents hugely affected their http://www.debate.org/debates/Children-shouldnt-be-pressured-or-forced-to-accept-their-parents-religion/1/comments/ 2009-03-04T19:38:44-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/An-Afterlife-is-Impossible/1/ (Post Voting Period) Afterlife: A life or existence believed to follow death. I will be arguing that it is physically impossible for humans or animals to experience a spiritual afterlife, as the brain is incapable of being conscious of anything after the brain ceases to function. There is also no evidence of an afterlife, nor has soul ever been found in a human body. http://www.debate.org/debates/An-Afterlife-is-Impossible/1/comments/ 2009-09-05T17:41:20-08:00