Instigator / Con

Is Faith a Reliable Pathway to Truth?


The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
Better sources
Better legibility
Better conduct

After 5 votes and with 11 points ahead, the winner is...

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Pro

I will be arguing that faith is not a reliable path to truth, my opponent will be arguing that it is. In this debate, Faith means belief in a deity based on a strong conviction and not any evidence. Example:

Person A: "I believe God exists."
Person B: "Do you have any evidence that God exists?"
Person A: "No, I believe based on faith."



1. Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.

1. Consistently good in quality or performance; able to be trusted.

1. A way of achieving a specified result; a course of action.

1. In accordance with reality.


1. No Kritiks of the topic.
2. You must follow the definitions in the debate description.
3. No forfeiting rounds.
4. No trolling.
5. Provide sources for quotes or statistics.

Violation of any of those rules is considered bad conduct.

Round 1
Faith is not a reliable pathway to truth. Using faith, I could believe that the world is flat and I could also believe that the world is round. But one of those must be false, since the Earth cannot be both round and flat at the same time. Therefore, faith is not a reliable pathway to truth, since you can justify both true and false beliefs using faith alone. 
You cannot hold two opposing views at the same time, like the example you gave, of the flat and round Earth. You can be unsure, but really hold two opposing beliefs? No way. If I am wrong, please give more realistic examples of a person holding opposing beliefs (and not suffering a breakdown from cognitive dissonance.)

My argument:

There is only one Truth. All Paths must lead to this truth. Including the faith of any religion. When you die, you will find the truth, be it God, annihalation, or something else. So no matter what path you take, it always leads to Truth. You may get dragged to it the hard way, but you're going to end up there.
Round 2
My opponent did not understand my argument. I never said that you could believe two opposing beliefs at the same time using faith. I said that you could use faith to believe either of those opposing beliefs, and that would make faith an unreliable pathway to truth. Here's an example:

Ancient Greeks believed that many Gods exist.
Some Ancient Greeks believed that solely on faith.
If faith was a reliable pathway to truth, their belief would be right.

Christians believe that one God exists.
Some Christians believe that solely on faith.
If faith was a reliable pathway to truth, their belief would be right.

But there cannot be only one God and many Gods at the same time. Which means that either the Ancient Greeks or the Christians are wrong. But if faith is a pathway to truth, then how could they believe in contradicting beliefs using faith? If faith is a pathway to truth, then how can you reach a false belief using faith? Surely, only one of those beliefs can be true, right?

If you can use faith to believe in both true and false things, then faith is not a reliable pathway to truth, since it can lead you to both truth and lies.


By the way, threatening me with going to hell or whatever you did in your R1 is not an argument.

You misunderstood my argument. I certainly did not threaten you with hell, mention hell. I do not even believe in hell. 

I will try again, and my argument will refute yours. 

All paths lead to the truth. 

Thus any path, including faith in any religion, will lead to truth. 

This is because we will all find out the truth when we die.

The truth could be God, annihalation (permanant death, like most atheists believe), or something else entirely. 

When I said "the hard way" this means whoever is wrong, be it the atheist, theist,or both, will be proven wrong at the end. 

Round 3
I misunderstood my opponent's comments on anihilation. He did not threaten me with hell (I thought that was what "anihilation" meant), so please ignore that voters.


"All paths lead to the truth. 

Thus any path, including faith in any religion, will lead to truth."
This is completely wrong. If all paths lead to truth, that means all beliefs is true. But all beliefs cannot be true, since there are beliefs which contradict other beliefs! This argument is not only nonsensical, it is also irrelevant. We are discussing whether faith is a reliable pathway to truth, not what is true and what is false.

Let's try a different example. Is faith a reliable pathway to truth? Yes it is, according to my opponent. Could I use faith to believe that my opponent is wrong? Yes I could. Therefore, if faith is a pathway to truth, then what is believed on faith must be true, so my opponent is wrong! Can't you see the flaw in this argument? My opponent can't, apparently.

 If all paths lead to truth, that means all beliefs is true
I believe this is wrong, and that I am correct. All paths technically lead to the truth, because there is only one truth. Whatever path you are on, you will eventually find the truth, by necessity, because of the fact that there is only one truth. You may be wrong at first, but truth will present itself to you in the end. 

That being said, there is only one path that can take you from beginning to end to the truth, so in that way, pro is sort of right. Any particular faith in any particular religion could be wrong. Thus any particular faith is not a RELIABLE way to the truth. I didn't think this through beforehand, and now I must concede the point. I thought I had a good argument, but I failed.