Instigator / Pro
0
1438
rating
7
debates
14.29%
won
Topic
#1853

The Bible Created Western Civilization Part 1: Humanity, Rationality and Technology

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Winner
0
3

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

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
3
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Description

When I say that the Bible shaped Western Civilization I mean by its literal interpretation. For many reasons I consider that the Catholic interpretation is based on man's opinion that twists God's Word to fit its own belief system. This isn't a debate on religion or different religious denominations. I believe Western Civilization began when man began to interpret the Scriptures as written, because the Bible could finally be read by the common man who could see that the Catholic Church had replaced man's authority over God's authority. The Bible is the foundation for Western Civilization.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

This is not a debate merely on being influential, but outright created. Which even taken the least literally possible, is still a high burden

Pro dropped way too much. For starters the very definition of Western Civilization which was needed as the foundation for this debate, but the only one offered directly contradicts the resolution in light of the counter point "An act cannot create its own precedent," which indeed seemed to be ignored throughout the debate.

I do respect pro not wanting to engage in scope creep, but this isn't a matter of scope creep, this is establishing the scope to begin with.

For next time, I suggest having definitions and such in the description to be pre-agreed, and limiting to a single aspect (as pro had to drop two thirds of his contentions by the end, the rationality and technology). I was not even left with a sense of the humanity angle coming from the bible instead of from Greece (that the Torah contained some of the concepts was a nice if insufficient defense).

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I agree with the person below.

Pro never used any concrete evidence and since the Bop rests on Pro, Con can easily say that the Bop is not yet met and win, and that is what Oro did.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Arguments :
I read all the responses in detail, while CON stuck to rational understanding of the topic, PRO definition were not concrete and kept misinforming about other religions. Buddhists , Hindus have been actively downplayed by superficial understanding of PRO on sensitive subjects such as someone's religion.
While PRO made bold revelations of Hindu's understanding of the world, and how they see it, he lacked sources to back it. Similarly a lot of over exaggerated claims on the east were just not germane to the topic of how bible created the western civilization. CON made a congent case of stating the various achievements and technological marvels of Greek and Roman cultures , making it safe to say CON was the victor.
Sources: sources used by PRO were not germane to the debate , and even when used sources were outdated, CON stuck to better sources.

Conduct: PRO became very aggressive against CON, which is not recommended. CON's conduct was proper.