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:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Sorry. I am not going to finish it by today. I have 6 days so I think it is best to use. Come back to my argument and add in what I think is required for my point to be convincing.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Cool

Added:
Instigator
--> @GuitarSlinger

Do you still want to debate this like after I have completed this debate with the modifications?

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

I'll post my argument tomorrow.

Added:
Instigator
--> @Ragnar

>>Why 30,000 characters?

It is a cap. Not really intended to be filled. If that does happen then I had the character limit to allow for either mine or my opponent's argument to be filled.

I don't want to personally have to remove arguments because I didn't meet the character limit. With this character limit it reduces the chance and since it is the highest it can go it is the most I am capable of doing. Going back to what I said earlier, I don't want to personally have to remove arguments I doubt my opponent would like too either.

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

Do you want to accept or do you want GuitarSlinger to take your place?

Added:
Instigator
--> @GuitarSlinger

>>Christianity is not a faith that is just solely focused on the NT. One must also include the OT (Jesus and others in NT make reference to it). Plus it was "Christianity" after all that developed the canon of the Bible in the first place, which includes the OT.

So you want to defend the old testament as well?

>> I refuse to use the KJV.

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

>>New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE)

Okay? I'll wait for Speedrace. If he wants you to take it then I'll make the changes.

Added:
Instigator
--> @Speedrace

If you want too. Sorry about not accepting before.

Added:
Contender
--> @TheRealNihilist

Want me to accept? Lol

Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist

Also, "Christianity" is a broad umbrella that covers many sects/denominations. Which one(s) are you looking to prove as "bad".....one in particular, a couple or all of them? There are significant differences between the denominations (their history, their beliefs, etc).

I really don't want to be defending my faith (denomination) while at the same time your using what another faith/denomination believes to debunk mine...make sense?

Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist

I'm not willing to accept the debate as it's written, here is why:

- Christianity is not a faith that is just solely focused on the NT. One must also include the OT (Jesus and others in NT make reference to it). Plus it was "Christianity" after all that developed the canon of the Bible in the first place, which includes the OT.
- I refuse to use the KJV. Here's why: The King James version, when looked at from the history of Christianity, is a relatively new version-- having first been published in the early's 1600's, some 1570 years or so after Christ's death and roughly 1100 years after the canon of the Bible was first incorporated. The KJV is basically a product of the Protestant Reformation

The OT must be used and I prefer we use the New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE):

http://www.usccb.org/bible/index.cfm

Added:

Why 30,000 characters?