quick unrated debate: The apostles were Messianic Jews as opposed to Christians.
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Twelve hours
- Max argument characters
- 2,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
Con did provide a better counter-argument than pro. However he did not provide a better argument, as he claimed he didn't have to because the burden of proof was solely on pro. But I suspect that this is only because of the low character limit, and he may have provided an argument against the idea that the apostles were Messianic Jews as opposed to Christians, not specifically just against what pro said. All pro did was make baseless claims, no evidence or sources provided.
Pro fails to define "Messianic Jew" and "Christian" in a way that makes them mutually exclusive.
Pro's argument also contains frequent typos.
When person forfeits 50% of debate, by voting standards here, the need to consider his arguments ceases.
My vote is there is no opposition in what the topic statement says as long as "messianic jew" means a believer in the Messiah.
Vote?
Vote?
Oh hell yeah.
This is a debate of true substance