Instigator / Con
12
1650
rating
44
debates
77.27%
won
Topic

Is Christianity A Good Moral System To Follow?

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
9
Sources points
6
6
Spelling and grammar points
3
3
Conduct points
3
1

With 3 votes and 7 points ahead, the winner is ...

Speedrace
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Philosophy
Time for argument
One week
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
30,000
Contender / Pro
19
1623
rating
59
debates
66.1%
won
Description
~ 2,190 / 5,000

-- INTRO --
This is about whether Christianity is a good moral system to follow or not. It is focused on the New Testament and it's teachings, as it is called Christianity for a reason, that reason being that it focuses on Jesus Christ and his teachings. Therefore, all arguments should center primarily around Jesus Christ/the New Testament.

KJV Bible as the source we are agreeing to use.

-- STRUCTURE --
1. Opening (State your positions. No rebuttals.)
2. Rebuttals (Attempt to debunk opponents augments)
3. Rejoinders (Attempt to defend your case with the rebuttals given)
4. Rebuttals/Close (Rebuttals and conclusion)

When I say attempt. That is the bare minimum. You can do more and would help your case a lot.

-- DEBATER OBJECTIVES --
Pro - must sufficiently prove that Christianity is a good moral system while simultaneously disproving Con's arguments. (Basically Christianity is good and demonstrate it)
Con - must sufficiently prove that Christianity is a bad moral system while simultaneously disproving Pro's arguments. (Basically Christianity is bad and demonstrate it)

-- DEFINITIONS --
Christianity - the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or its beliefs and practices.
Good - to be desired or approved of.
Moral system - a system of coherent, systematic, and reasonable principles, rules, ideals, and values which work to form one's overall perspective.
Follow - act according to (an instruction or precept).

-- RULES --
1. No forfeits
2. Citations must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final speeches
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. No "kritiks" of the topic (challenging assumptions in the resolution)
7. For all irresolution terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution and this debate
8. The burden of proof is shared; Pro must show why Christianity is a good moral system to follow, and Con must show why it is a bad moral system to follow. Simply rebutting one's opponent's arguments is not sufficient to win the debate.
9. Violation of any of these rules merits a loss.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Are you still up for a rematch though? If you make it this weekend then I can finish my argument today or tomorrow, you had great points and I think this could been awesome if I wasn't busy

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

You would be wasting both of our time. You are still losing. Just will have to wait a while longer.

I don't see the point. When you are done with this. You can accept a new debate or do something else entirely. Now by delaying this you will be reminded every week of your forfeit then the eventual loss when you could've dealt with that right now.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Lol I know, if that's the case then it shouldn't matter to you whether I drag it along or not lol

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Drag it along then.

I win given the rules you didn't follow which you accepted.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

No, I'm gonna drag this out for as long as possible, I don't want a loss sir lol, you're doing the same thing to me

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Can you post your not argument?

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

...

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

That is a no.

If I allow you to do this I am going against the rules I laid out that you used.

I don't expect you to make changes from agreed upon rules either.

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

"1. No forfeits"

"9. Violation of any of these rules merits a loss."

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Ok, so I'll do both my opening and rebuttal here and you do both your rebuttal and rejoinder next round, ok?

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

I don't really create or accept debates that much. So whatever I did here would be wasted. I don't want that.

Basically no.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

So is that a no? Lol

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Like I said earlier:

I like winning so my ratio looks better.
That is the only reason why I don't want to delete this.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

By deleting and reposting you're basically reversing time to before I forfeited

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Can you say what you said in a different way?

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Lol well it would be a fair win on the other one technically 😂 it would be like I never forfeited at all and then you still have a high chance of winning

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

I like winning so my ratio looks better.

That is the only reason why I don't want to delete this.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Gahhhh I don't want this loss though, plus this was REALLY INTERESTING

Could you repost it and delete this one? I'm not at school today and I can guarantee that I'll get it done today, I know I make a lot of promises but I'm trying to not destroy my ratio

It's up to you though and I understand if you don't want to, if not then I'll just try to do it on here instead, my bad dude :(

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

:(

Rematch after this ends?

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

I was gonna do it this weekend, I thought I had more time, gah I guess you win

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

What happened?

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

That's fine

Added:
Instigator
--> @GuitarSlinger

>>Defending Christianity and defending the OT (Bible) are two different things

I used what Speedrace used. Basically Christianity excluding the Old Testament.

Next time I'll include it.

Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist

alright. Looks like SpeedRace took it. Bummer. Oh well. Maybe next time lol. No worries-- my usual normal self will be chiming in on this one though.

Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist

** So you want to defend the old testament as well? **

Wait a minute. Is the debate about defending the Bible or is it about defending Christianity? Your title and first sentence is about arguing whether or not Christianity is a good moral system, and you go on to state that it's based on the NT.

Defending Christianity and defending the OT (Bible) are two different things....very similar, but still different. Which is it?

** I mainly use it because it is easier for me to find people who use it."

I can certainly see that. But In my opinion the KJV is not the authoritative "Bible". The Canon of the Bible was developed some 1600-1700 years ago, and has been in use by the Catholic Church since then. Then, in the 1600's the KJV came about, pretty much the product of the Reformation.