Thank you for accepting my challenge @RationalMadman.
"Islam as a summarised religion of Jewish and Christian" is a statement that reflects the idea that Islam incorporates and builds upon the teachings of Judaism and Christianity. Both Judaism and Christianity are monotheistic religions that share common beliefs and values, such as the belief in one God, the importance of prayer and moral behavior, and the centrality of scripture. Islam, which emerged in the 7th century, recognizes these shared roots and asserts that it represents a final and complete manifestation of the monotheistic tradition, building upon the previous revelations and teachings of Judaism and Christianity.
This argument is supported by the fact that many of the figures and stories central to Judaism and Christianity, such as Moses, Abraham, and Jesus, are also revered in Islam and are considered prophets in the Islamic tradition. Additionally, the Qur'an, the central text of Islam, contains many references to the Bible and Jewish scripture, and Muslims are taught to respect and honor the earlier revelations.
From this perspective, Islam can be seen as a summation of the monotheistic tradition, bringing together the best of what has come before and offering a comprehensive and unified understanding of the divine. This unity and synthesis of the monotheistic traditions allows for a more complete and cohesive understanding of the divine and provides a path for individuals to deepen their relationship with God.
Similarities
Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are monotheistic religions that share many similarities, including:
Belief in one God: All three religions believe in the existence of one supreme deity who created the world and governs all that happens within it.
Importance of moral behavior: All three religions place great emphasis on ethical conduct, teaching that individuals will be judged based on their deeds and that good behavior is essential for a meaningful life.
Centrality of scripture: All three religions hold scripture to be central to their faith and study it for guidance and inspiration. In Islam, this scripture is the Qur'an; in Christianity, it is the Bible; and in Judaism, it is the Torah.
Respect for previous revelations: Islam recognizes Judaism and Christianity as earlier revelations from God and considers their scripture to be of great value. Christians and Jews also have respect for the scripture of each other's religion.
Prophets and messengers: All three religions believe in the existence of prophets and messengers who received divine revelations and brought them to the people. Key figures such as Abraham, Moses, and Jesus are revered in all three religions.
Ritual practices: All three religions have a set of ritual practices and observances, such as prayer and fasting, which serve to deepen their connection to God and strengthen their faith.
Focus on community: All three religions place a strong emphasis on community and the importance of coming together to worship and support one another.
As we know Islam is the new religion as it was relieved 1400 years ago , so it's has been a asset we can say it is an summarised religion of Jewish and Christian
That was very clear. Thank you for taking the time :)
Your recap was mostly correct.
"- if the debate forbids it, one single forfeit can be considered as FF and as such, make a side lose"
Correct. Thats if the debate forbids it, this all depends on the description and/or the amount of rounds you forfeit. Such as if there were 8 rounds, only forfeiting one of them can not make someone lose a point towards arguments. But lets say that theres 2 rounds and that person forfeited one, they (voters) could vote against them for arguments and conduct if the voter chooses. Also, there are debates that in the description state "forfeiting = concession" meaning if the person forfeited, voters must keep in mind the rules of the debate. Which would usually results in the loss of a concession, meaning all points (or important) points goes towards the other.
"- If one forfeits more than 40%, he may just have a poor conduct vote"
This goes for the multiple citations. Not only, but voters are able to vote against pro or con on arguments as well because its 40% or more forfeits by pro or con. Same applies for winner selection, you can vote against pro or con for that reason.
Check out my vote on this 'debate' if it better explains.
"- If so, the voter may give "conduct" vote to the opponent without giving explanation"
Usually the vote against con or pro would say "forfeited round(s)", which is the explanation.
In this debate my opponent plagiarised their round 1 for starters but ignoring that, you can just vote Pro because Pro forfeited after they posted their opening Round and didn't argue since.
You can do whatever you want, I am not sure the issue. The voters can still penalise people posting just 'gg' in their votes but look what I was against here.
I still believe it's up to the voter.
I have a few other things to say, but I think i've mostly said them, so i'll leave it here.
thank you. I will try to recap it :)
- if the debate forbids it, one single forfeit can be considered as FF and as such, make a side lose
- If one forfeits more than 40%, he may just have a poor conduct vote
- If so, the voter may give "conduct" vote to the opponent without giving explanation
@RationalMadman:
You say "If I post as little as 'gg' I count as not technically forfeiting. The key to not technically forfeiting isn't to avoid the 40% as much as to avoid FF" " in the scenario one forfeits 40%+ but did not FF, you can only give conduct without explanation, not arguments etc."
so if someone simply "argues" "gg", as a voter, I will have to vote for his "gg" argument and explain the why of my vote?
Yes in 'choose winner' it gives the total win. If you forfeit 40% but don't FF the person can only give conduct without explanation in the four-section system.
"If, after Round 1 of your arguments (even if the first round you argue is the penultimate Round) you forfeit, that counts as a pure FF on the rules. If I post as little as 'gg' I count as not technically forfeiting. The key to not technically forfeiting isn't to avoid the 40% as much as to avoid FF."
Depends on the voter, but kinda.
"The difference isn't in this debate as it's 'winner selection' but in the scenario one forfeits 40%+ but did not FF, you can only give conduct without explanation, not arguments etc."
"but by the choice of one side to miss at least 40% of the debate, the requirement ceases. And yes, this does apply to Choose Winner, which otherwise would not allow conduct to be the sole determinant)."
My bad. I wasn't reading the entire description and was talking in general without reading it.. i'll update my response.
I'm not into religion all that much, I wouldn't know.
I will make this clear:
If, after Round 1 of your arguments (even if the first round you argue is the penultimate Round) you forfeit, that counts as a pure FF on the rules. If I post as little as 'gg' I count as not technically forfeiting. The key to not technically forfeiting isn't to avoid the 40% as much as to avoid FF.
The difference isn't in this debate as it's 'winner selection' but in the scenario one forfeits 40%+ but did not FF, you can only give conduct without explanation, not arguments etc.
well no, I lost it because the description says don't forfeit. Also that debate after the site update made it unrated is so stale to me.
Arguing that Islam is authoritarian is like arguing that bread has starch.
Per the rules of DebateArt, "but by the choice of one side to miss at least 40% of the debate, the requirement ceases."
As for the debate against Yassine and RationalMadMan, with his forfeit, it won't affect him terribly. The 'worst' that will happen is giving a point of conduct to Yassine.
RationalMadMan didn't forfeit 50% of his arguments, he only forfeited one of four.
Hello
@Intelligence_06: As i am new and trying to understand the voting system, can you please elaborate on the why of your vote?
Indeed, I see PRO has forfeited but the absence of rules for this debate implies that forfeit isnt automatically a loss. Or, am I wrong?
RationalMadman brings not proof or references to assert his arguments.
Also, when he used the same unargumented claims in another debate against Yassine, he forfeited https://www.debateart.com/debates/3939-islam-does-not-encourage-authoritarianism
So, what weighted in favor of CON ?
Hoping to learn more, thanks for your help!
ps: @RationalMadman sorry, it isnt against you, I am just trying to understand how to vote in future debates. You obviously make great points in many debates :)