Resolved: On balance, the Christian doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement is ethically tenable.
Waiting for the instigator's first argument.
The round will be automatically forfeited in:
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Category
- Religion
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Rated
- Characters per argument
- 20,000
I, PRO, believe that, on balance, the Christian doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement is ethically tenable. As CON, you believe that the Christian doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement is ethically indefensible.
As instigator, PRO retains the BoP. CON is only required to rebut PRO's arguments.
DEFINITIONS:
On balance: All things considered.
Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA): For the purposes of this debate, PSA is defined as the doctrine that states that God, in the form of Jesus Christ, sacrificed himself of his own accord on behalf of humanity, paying the penalty of sin due to humanity in order to exercise mercy over humanity whilst upholding cosmic justice.
Ethically tenable: Not obviously or demonstrably unjust, all things considered. Able to be defended ethically.
STRUCTURE:
R1- PRO Constructive & CON Constructive
R2-3- Fluid attack/defense. No set structure here.
RULESET:
1. No new arguments made in final round
2. No trolling
3. You must follow the debate structure
4. No plagiarism
5. Must follow debate definitions.
RULESET PENALTY:
If the ruleset is broken, the penalty will be the loss of a conduct point. By accepting the debate, the contender accepts the RULESET and the RULESET PENALTY.
Given how similar our thought processes were with the eliminate racism debate, I'm guessing you are probably correct about my strategy. We'll see after the debate.
I'm pretty confident I know what sort of ploy you were thinking of. It could work for Pro technically, although if I used it, it would obviously be done in bad faith. I might get voted down just for using it.
Did not expect such a swift acceptance. Looking forward to the debate
Well, I highly doubt that he will use the strategy I'm thinking of.
You guys may enjoy keeping up with this, given the ratings involved and all.
I actually feel strongly about this topic and given our rankings it's just so utterly worth the risk.
If you wrote this in English, somebody might accept
I should probably keep my mouth shut, but there's a strategy Pro could take that would drive Con up the wall.