Instigator / Con
7
1411
rating
11
debates
13.64%
won
Topic
#1646

Is the trinity pagan?

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
9
Better sources
2
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
2
3

After 3 votes and with 14 points ahead, the winner is...

sylweb
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
21
1534
rating
7
debates
78.57%
won
Description

No information

-->
@sylweb
@Dynasty
@DynamicSquid

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: DynamicSquid // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 0:5; 5 points to Pro.
>Reason for Decision: See below
>Reason for Mod Action:
In essence, this vote was just too vague. This can be avoided in future by just naming the core contention (and the main counterpoint or the lack thereof), listing a single source you found important (if voting sources), saying what conduct violation distracted you (if voting conduct)... You need not write a thesis but some minimal level of detail is required to verify knowledge of what you're grading.
To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main argument and counterargument in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
To award sources points, the voter must (1) explain how the debaters' sources impacted the debate, (2) directly assess the strength/utility of at least one source in particular cited in the debate, and (3) explain how and why one debater's use of sources overall was superior to the other's.

**************************************************

DynamicSquid
4 days ago
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments ✗ ✗ ✔ 3 points
Better sources ✗ ✗ ✔ 2 points
Better spelling and grammar ✗ ✔ ✗ 1 point
Better conduct ✗ ✔ ✗ 1 point
Reason:
Hmm... it pains to see the contrast between a lenghy text and a short text. I feel like this is time wasted.
Therefor, I shall judge this debate based on quantity.

-->
@sylweb
@PressF4Respect
@Dynasty

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: PressF4Respect // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 0:5; 5 points to Pro.
>Reason for Decision: See below
>Reason for Mod Action:
In essence, this vote was just too vague. This can be avoided in future by just naming the core contention (and the main counterpoint or the lack thereof), listing a single source you found important (if voting sources), saying what conduct violation distracted you (if voting conduct)... You need not write a thesis but some minimal level of detail is required to verify knowledge of what you're grading.
To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main argument and counterargument in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
To award sources points, the voter must (1) explain how the debaters' sources impacted the debate, (2) directly assess the strength/utility of at least one source in particular cited in the debate, and (3) explain how and why one debater's use of sources overall was superior to the other's.

**************************************************

PressF4Respect
2 days ago
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments ✗ ✗ ✔ 3 points
Better sources ✗ ✗ ✔ 2 points
Better spelling and grammar ✗ ✔ ✗ 1 point
Better conduct ✗ ✔ ✗ 1 point
Reason:
Con provided ample evidence for his arguments, and soundly rebutted the only claim that Pro presented.
Many sources vs one source, it’s self-evident who wins here.

-->
@sylweb

The reason why the father knows that day, is because Jesus was both fully God and fully man, and have to willingly cooperate the limitations of being man. Also, I heard that Eusebius and Justin Martyr have argued that Plato was influenced under the teaching of Moses. So, meaning that the connection could be the other way around.

-->
@Barney

"Pro literally schooled con."
Wishful thinking are there, kid.

-->
@Swagnarok

I agree that the Bible supports the Trinity, but I think it's untrue that it's explicitly found in there. Matthew 18:19 lists the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but it does not explain the relationship between each person. Arianists, subordinationists, and others also believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; it's just that they would understand the relationships differently. To prove the Trinity from that verse, you would have to use other verses to make inferences and deductions, meaning that it's not explicit but rather implicit.

Jesus ordered his disciples to baptize people "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19). Jesus understood "the Father" to be God the Father (generally thought to be synonymous with YHWH of the Old Testament), Himself being "the Son", and the Holy Spirit is described in the Bible as He who came to believers after the end of Jesus's earthly ministry. Besides "The Word" (generally understood to be either an alternate name for The Son or for Scripture, which was divinely inspired by God), God is only understood in these three terms in the Christian canon, thus comprising a Trinity. This doesn't answer the question of whether the idea of the Trinity is pagan, but Pro's claim that the Trinity "is not explicitly found in the Bible" is false.

-->
@blamonkey

Thanks for letting me know.

-->
@SirAnonymous

What you just wrote was sufficient.

-->
@SirAnonymous

It was weird cause we had just been talking on another thread in the forums. OK. Thanks for the heads up.

-->
@ethang5

I don't know what you mean. I saw your comment as I was reading the debate so I could vote on it.

-->
@blamonkey

Would my RFD be sufficient if I added some evaluation of Pro's arguments?

"Con dropped most of Pro's R1 arguments. He failed to show how the Trinity is a Biblical doctrine. In fact, he hardly presented any arguments. On the other hand, Pro actually took the time to explain how the doctrine of the Trinity was pagan. He showed how pagan emperors influenced the Nicean Council. He argued that the pagan Platonic philosophy was added to the Trinity and that the doctrine developed over time rather than being the beliefs of the earliest Christians. He refuted Con's argument that the Trinity is Biblical by providing a verse hinting at the opposite. I don't think he proved that the Trinity was pagan, Con failed to establish the BoP required. Pro's arguments suggest that the doctrine of the Trinity could have pagan roots. Con failed to refute those arguments. Consequently, arguments go to Pro.
There were no issues with spelling, grammar, or conduct. While Con did try to discredit one of Pro's sources, he didn't provide any reasoning for discrediting it. Thus, sources are a tie."

-->
@SirAnonymous

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: SirAnonymous // Mod action: [Removed]

>Points Awarded: 3 points to Pro

>Reason for Decision:
"Con dropped most of Pro's R1 arguments. He failed to show how the Trinity is a Biblical doctrine. In fact, he hardly presented any arguments. On the other hand, Pro actually took the time to explain how the doctrine of the Trinity was pagan. While I don't think he proved that the Trinity was pagan, Con failed to establish the BoP required. Pro's arguments suggest that the doctrine of the Trinity could have pagan roots. Con failed to refute those arguments. Consequently, arguments go to Pro.
There were no issues with spelling, grammar, or conduct. While Con did try to discredit one of Pro's sources, he didn't provide any reasoning for discrediting it. Thus, sources are a tie."

>Reason for Mod Action: To award points for arguments, the voter must survey the main arguments of the round, weigh them, and come to a conclusion based off the gravity of the arguments per the CoC and Voting Guidelines. There was a surface-level attempt to do this, and I do agree from my cursory evaluation that Con essentially drops this debate, but Pro's arguments and counterarguments must be evaluated as well. Sorry, my hands are tied.
************************************************************************

-->
@oromagi

>"the trinity can be found in the Bible" =appeal to authority, false authority

You were on point except for this one. For this argument, the bible was an acceptable authority, and the concept of the trinity being found in the bible would be consistent with con's position that the trinity was not pagan. Requiring con not to appeal to the bible was illogical. He just needed to correctly do so, and show it in his argumentation.

Interesting arguments to support the conduct point.

-->
@SirAnonymous

I know. But was it just chance that you were around to answer?

-->
@JesusChrist4Ever

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: JesusChrist4Ever // Mod action: [Removed]

>Points Awarded: 5 points to Con

>Reason for Decision: Pro used a biased source by using the Watchtower Organization, which is part of the Jehovah's Witness Cult. Plus Con had a much better argument by saying that it was beyond human comprehension.

>Reason for Mod Action: The voter is not eligible per the Voting Guidelines. He/she must have completed 2 non-forfeit debates or have 100 forum posts. In addition, the point justifications are insubstantial. To award the points for arguments, the voter must: "

1. Survey the main arguments and counterarguments presented in the debate
2. Weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself)
3. Explain how, through the process of weighing, they arrived at their voting decision with regard to assigning argument points."

To award points for sources, the voter must:
"1.Explain, on balance, how each debater's sources impact the debate
2.Directly evaluate at least one source in particular cited in the debate and explain how it either bolstered or weakened the argument it was used to support
3.Must explain how and why one debater's use of sources overall was superior to the other's"

I would recommend skimming the CoC and Voting Guidelines which can be located at the bottom of the page or at this URL:
https://www.debateart.com/rules
************************************************************************

-->
@ethang5

Because it didn't require one of them to answer.

-->
@SirAnonymous

Thanks. How come you responded instead one of the debaters?

-->
@ethang5

It goes by the number of arguments rather than the number of rounds, so it will always say there are twice as many arguments as there are rounds. Of course, you probably figured that part out already.

-->
@SirAnonymous

OK. The "arguments" tab said 4.

-->
@ethang5

There are only two rounds total.

-->
@sylweb
@Dynasty

Why is voting on with only two rounds complete?