Christianity is not based in reason or truth, it is based on superstition, brainwashing and stupidity
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
This debate is clearly a rip off troll of another debate of a similar opposite topic, it appears clearly written to God’s the opponent, as is the multiple examples of pro belittling his opponent “Nice mindless faith based asserting there buddy” and repeated petulance in favor of arguments. The debate title and content alone is good cause to award conduct points. If pro wants to make shitty parody debates, they have no place here. While con forfeited the final round, pros behaviour is extraordinarily bad, and so should be penalized.
Arguments: I will assume the burden of proof is shared on all points, other than brainwashing - which is kind of off the default position.
Brainwashing: pro offers no argument at all on this point. He loses on this point.
Superstition: pro offers no argument at all on this point. Con made a broad argument relating to faith - specifically that religion is based on the implicit interpretation of the universe, like seeing gravity or logic. Pro mostly responded saying that there is evidence for logic, and that gravity isn’t the same - but offered no warrant. I would give pro the benefit of the doubt, has he not repeatedly admonished con for doing the same thing. Given that con attempted to explain the point whereas pro mostly just made an initial assertion without warrant and then ran, I would classify this as going ever so slightly in cons direction. So pro loses this point too.
Truth: pro asserted that the bible is false, and gave a generic peace of information. Pro argues that there is factual basis and prophecies were fufilled. As pro offered the only factual support for his claim on this count: I pro edges this point.
Reason: pro offers no examples, but makes a number of assertions, con does the same here. I’m looking for a clearly poorly reasoned basis for Christianity, rather than picking apart a specific side point. Neither really argued this point other than trading assertions about faith being correct, or there being something illogical about the bible. I would score this point as a tie.
Pro doesn’t win on all points - even if I share the burden on all points. As a result, the resolution is negated and con wins arguments.
I forgot stupidity. Pro doesn’t argue this at all either, as such I would state this point is a draw to, but doesn’t change the determination.
I think this'll be my final post on this. I do not scorn the Christians for the failures of their laymen. If you want a smart Christian just look for a Jesuit, or a professional such as Alvin Plantiga, or Simon Conway Morris. Also Christian is applicable in the same way as Japanese because Christian is an Identity. That is however irrelevant as I have no interest in arguing wether it is justified to scorn a collective for the sins of another group within the said collective, Either way have a good day friend.
The Japanese are a race which is not the same at all as a member of an ideology. As for capitalists I have a similar disdain for them. Capitalism was cutting edge 200 years ago and there are plenty of intelligent capitalists (whereas there are barely any intelligent christians) but capitalism is becoming outdated. There is a reason why the greatest geniuses in modern times who are specifically the smartest people in history were socialists. We need to socially evolve in the same way we are evolving technologically or we are in for a future where we bring about our own demise as a species and capitalism is clearly not the ideal system if we to make it to type 1 civilization.
Well there's the distinction between you and I perhaps. I have been around Many a Christan, and I can say this fellow is quite the anomaly. The Orthodox tend to be very careful in how they argue. The Catholics have some of the MOST educated people I have ever seen under the banner of the Jesuits; I have a history in philosophy and even I find myself challenged by the average Jesuit. So maybe that is how we are different I do not see them as merely a group, but a vast collective with numerous shades in the same way you would examine the Japanese, or Capitalists.
Well at least some people have some sense around here it seems.I personally find it extremely difficult to respect anyone's opinion who is not at least either an Atheist, Agnostic or Deist. Christians are absolutely retarded and I truly feel as if they are subhuman intellectually.
Well I am no atheist (I am a Deist) nor have I ever been convinced of any of it's general tenets, but I must say "OH MY GOD! THIS GUY GRANT IS RETARDED!"
He has no logic, and he doesn't even quote a single exegete. You have my vote this time around.
Congratulations.
1st comment!