Instigator / Pro
7
1500
rating
25
debates
42.0%
won
Topic
#3558

Islam is more true than Christianity

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
2
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
0
2

After 2 votes and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...

Novice_II
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
20,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1890
rating
98
debates
93.37%
won
Description

Islam is more true than Christianity

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

PRO makes a gigantic claim without defining terms or setting burdens.

PRO's entire thesis begins with big leaps in logic, stating that if he can prove that his book has no contradictions while his opponent's book has contradiction his religion must be proved true but never explains the connection between these books and religious veracity. Lack of contradiction does not imply truth or vice versa. "Mary had a Little Lamb" has no contradictions while Thucydides has plenty but nobody would argue that Mary is therefore fact and the Peloponnesian War fiction. PRO never connects his argument to thesis.

This VOTER agree with CON that all plagiarized cut & pastes can be disregarded as any kind of argument.

That leaves PRO arguing that the Trinity is confusing but again, PRO never gets around to explaining why confusing information can't possibly be true.

CON's syllogism game needs some work but he nevertheless effectively bats down PRO's single argument as unconnected to thesis.

PRO's argument never takes his burden to prove Islam more true seriously. Even if we accept these arguments about Biblical contradiction vs. Qur'anic non-contradiction, we're still left with two super old pre-scientific testaments that claim all kinds of magic powers entirely inconsistent with physics and the observable universe.

CON correctly calls out PRO for claiming truths without establishing any facts.

ARGs to CON
SOURCES to CON for PRO's cut & paste plagiarism in place of argument
CONDUCT to CON for same.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Plagiarism can be avoided just be giving due credit. A single line such as 'list compiled by...' is enough. A link for the bible is not needed, but when literally copy/pasting someone else's analysis of it, it's antiethical to not give them credit.