this isnt a debate, this is advertisement. i believe that 1 debate got taken down for such a thing.
the language shows no willingness to change pro's view. proselyism.
no sense in trying to get points in a website thats gonna die in awhile.
i was intrested in a conversation, and making dinson realize that 2 hour discussions dont work.
i agree, we know that God wont contridict himself, if there is any votes against pro it is simply based on personal logic and personal understanding of the voters. feelings and ignorance dont determine truth.
barney you need to stop caring about how many votes a debate gets. thats not your job. also, votes just build egoism, they dont really matter in the long run.
both of yalls understanding of reason and God are novice level. this debate could have been more intresting in how that yalls reasoning is in contridiction with scriptures, thus showing the failing of reason because of subjective knowledge. but so far neither of yall have tried to exegete the verses of scripture in their context to explore the precepts of God.
reason fails to contridict God because humans are ignorant.
but, if either of you would be willing, i would help teach you both the precepts of scripture.
jesus= God has become salvation.
christ= anointed vessel.
dont confuse the vessel with God. Jesus Is God (its literally his name) but christ is not God.
or if you dont understand the difference, think of this.
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
was Christ (the man) before all things? no, but God was. Jesus, the son.
according to God's word, fornication is a sin, so is lying, causing confusion, hatred against a person (the person, not their actions or thoughts) pride, deception, etc.
there was no love involved in the situation described, only emotions and evil.
if this is a movie or book, its evil and propogates evil. if its a real life situation, everyone involved needs to repent and come to God.
just make sure to define indoctrinated, that will either make the debate have even footing, or make a truism/foregone conclusion debate. which will backfire on con.
you didnt specify if characters were for debateart website ONLY.
so i counted lancelots website characters he mentioned https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scientific-view-of-when-life-begins/
well, not entirely, but it was over 3.5k characters.
a source is basically a link to a website that addresses a topic with characters, just like characters im typing right now.
however the url used is condensed for ease of access, but within that url is all the characters of that website.
https://dictionary.com <this has 22 characters as url. it also has thousands more inside it.
you didnt tell us in your rules to count the characters of url of the source, or to count characters in the source.
you posted no source link in round 2. otherwise i wouldnt dispute this. you showed 2064 characters, and didnt specify if information via source link counts as characters or not.
you have to make your rules clear.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/redundancy
this link has either 44 characters or over 3500 if i count whats in it. but not both.
i already gave meep standards and bsh1 guide regarding rules in the comments section of last debate you were in. whiteflame said it can be counted by voter(s)
forcing a 3500 word limit does nothing. it only makes a lazy arguement longer. also, it will distract from the debate. if you continue to use such a measure, 1 day you will slip up, and no one will hear your crying as you lose a debate for typing 3450 characters.
i dont have to prove anything. God has spoken already.
when you reason scripture, its no longer about your desires, its about explaining God and his ways. When you cheapen it just to prove your ego and intelligence, you have proved that you are not of God. Infact, you are in darkness and do not abide in God.
i wont debate an egotistical fool who is unskilled in scripture and understanding. Look at my questionaire with speedrace as an example of how to reason scripture.
its no guess work. the scriptures prove that Jesus was always with God because jesus IS God.
The plan of God being in flesh was foreordained before creation.
I just have no desire to debate someone for 5 rounds when it takes 3 verses.
if you cant understand it with 3 verses, you still wont understand it if i give 100 more and thousands of my own words. And when you lose the debate, you still wont understand it. so im sparing you and me a headache.
ah, you misunderstood the language. i see.
he created the sea AND fountains of waters. it was worded in that way because of what was gonna happen.
but it doesnt negate the truth that God created water himself.
oh i think i know what you are talking about. i can use 2 scriptures.
john 1:1 word=logos, logos=logic or plan
1 peter 1:19-20
the man jesus christ was planned before the world, God had that plan.
if you are saying what i think you are saying. i got 1 verse, i dont need to debate you.
john 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever, but the Son abideth ever.
this proves the eternal Son.
but if you mean it a different way, like, who is the son. then consider this.
hebrews 13:8 8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
its not so much your enforcement of standards im ranting against, but the standards themselves. i dont suppose there is a method to change those until a next meep update is there?
so the integrity of debates dont matter anymore? i can just vote anyway i want as long as its analyzed to sufficently in my voting comment? nonsense.
i say nonsense, because i did the same thing when i was starting out and david took it down.
pro didnt lose either of those points, his burden of proof was that God made water and darkness. and he met that.
honestly, im starting to believe you, barney and ramshutu dont know how to do scripture debates. There has to be another standard for debating facts within the framework of a book assuming the book is true and irrefutable. ramshutu especially couldnt settle with that idea.
now, if barney was somehow able to kritik the debate via scripture (ie, mall didnt put in revelation 14:7 and he had to inductive reqson genesis 1) then i could understand that. but its a bad vote, i get you cant remove it, fine. but dont try to justify it to me, im not an idiot.
would you mind evaluating barneys vote? i question his reasoning the debate. pro very clearly gives a verse how God created water. Yet barney gives con a vote because he claimed God only moved water.
i know for sure ramshutu wouldnt tolerate that vote, nor david.
this isnt a debate, this is advertisement. i believe that 1 debate got taken down for such a thing.
the language shows no willingness to change pro's view. proselyism.
sometimes words arent needed. sometimes we just need to exist together.
no sense in trying to get points in a website thats gonna die in awhile.
i was intrested in a conversation, and making dinson realize that 2 hour discussions dont work.
lets see if with 2 hour time limit he will create a good arguement
who are you talking to?
well, he has forfeited 3/5th of the debate, so its a win for pro no matter what now.
definitions are not absolutes.
well, that will make this intresting.
i agree, we know that God wont contridict himself, if there is any votes against pro it is simply based on personal logic and personal understanding of the voters. feelings and ignorance dont determine truth.
what do you mean by false? do you think that God doesnt exist?
barney you need to stop caring about how many votes a debate gets. thats not your job. also, votes just build egoism, they dont really matter in the long run.
both of yalls understanding of reason and God are novice level. this debate could have been more intresting in how that yalls reasoning is in contridiction with scriptures, thus showing the failing of reason because of subjective knowledge. but so far neither of yall have tried to exegete the verses of scripture in their context to explore the precepts of God.
reason fails to contridict God because humans are ignorant.
but, if either of you would be willing, i would help teach you both the precepts of scripture.
this will be rough for me, but ill try.
jesus= God has become salvation.
christ= anointed vessel.
dont confuse the vessel with God. Jesus Is God (its literally his name) but christ is not God.
or if you dont understand the difference, think of this.
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
was Christ (the man) before all things? no, but God was. Jesus, the son.
according to God's word, fornication is a sin, so is lying, causing confusion, hatred against a person (the person, not their actions or thoughts) pride, deception, etc.
there was no love involved in the situation described, only emotions and evil.
if this is a movie or book, its evil and propogates evil. if its a real life situation, everyone involved needs to repent and come to God.
just make sure to define indoctrinated, that will either make the debate have even footing, or make a truism/foregone conclusion debate. which will backfire on con.
2 hour arguements are no fun. what is with people trying to argue concepts and axioms of scripture in a 2 hour time frame?
i wasnt attempting maliciousness, i just didnt see his link [1] and [2] in round 2 and because it wasnt specified where characters came from.
do you want that debate deleted? if not then you could potentially win if voters agree with your character limit
my apologies, i didnt see the [1]. and [2]. of your round 2.
then, lancelot did violate character limit 1st at round 4.
are you referring to 1. and 2.?
you didnt specify if characters were for debateart website ONLY.
so i counted lancelots website characters he mentioned https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scientific-view-of-when-life-begins/
well, not entirely, but it was over 3.5k characters.
you broke your rule first in round 2 IF i count the characters within lancelots source in round 1.
i dont think you are understanding me.
a source is basically a link to a website that addresses a topic with characters, just like characters im typing right now.
however the url used is condensed for ease of access, but within that url is all the characters of that website.
https://dictionary.com <this has 22 characters as url. it also has thousands more inside it.
you didnt tell us in your rules to count the characters of url of the source, or to count characters in the source.
thats true, in your debate with mall you both had 3500 or more characters WITHOUT SOURCE LINKS. there was no need for me to count them character wise.
you posted no source link in round 2. otherwise i wouldnt dispute this. you showed 2064 characters, and didnt specify if information via source link counts as characters or not.
you have to make your rules clear.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/redundancy
this link has either 44 characters or over 3500 if i count whats in it. but not both.
do we count the characters of the source link? or the characters contained in the source link?
besides, you never specified if the link of the source is part of the arguement character countage with/aside characters in a debate.
given that, i must count according to characters interpretable. that being your 2064 characters was the first to break your rule.
i already gave meep standards and bsh1 guide regarding rules in the comments section of last debate you were in. whiteflame said it can be counted by voter(s)
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4245-is-abortion-murder-from-the-point-of-conception?open_tab=comments&comments_page=1&comment_number=5
(same place)
comment# 9
you violated via round 2. only 2064 characters was used.
i recommend this debate be deleted as nothing will come of it and neutral votes just lower elo ratings.
both of you violated the rule. therefore the vote will be neutral.
it violates your own integrity and spirit of the debate.
but i mean more than me will vote regarding it.
i argued the same thing except with the forfeit part. now, the forfeit doesnt fall under absurdity, as the standard of the site is to not forfeit.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4245-is-abortion-murder-from-the-point-of-conception?open_tab=comments&comments_page=1&comment_number=14
forcing a 3500 word limit does nothing. it only makes a lazy arguement longer. also, it will distract from the debate. if you continue to use such a measure, 1 day you will slip up, and no one will hear your crying as you lose a debate for typing 3450 characters.
moral and evil according to who? satan sure thinks God is evil to himself.
i dont have to prove anything. God has spoken already.
when you reason scripture, its no longer about your desires, its about explaining God and his ways. When you cheapen it just to prove your ego and intelligence, you have proved that you are not of God. Infact, you are in darkness and do not abide in God.
i wont debate an egotistical fool who is unskilled in scripture and understanding. Look at my questionaire with speedrace as an example of how to reason scripture.
its no guess work. the scriptures prove that Jesus was always with God because jesus IS God.
The plan of God being in flesh was foreordained before creation.
I just have no desire to debate someone for 5 rounds when it takes 3 verses.
if you cant understand it with 3 verses, you still wont understand it if i give 100 more and thousands of my own words. And when you lose the debate, you still wont understand it. so im sparing you and me a headache.
ah, you misunderstood the language. i see.
he created the sea AND fountains of waters. it was worded in that way because of what was gonna happen.
but it doesnt negate the truth that God created water himself.
oh i think i know what you are talking about. i can use 2 scriptures.
john 1:1 word=logos, logos=logic or plan
1 peter 1:19-20
the man jesus christ was planned before the world, God had that plan.
if you are saying what i think you are saying. i got 1 verse, i dont need to debate you.
john 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever, but the Son abideth ever.
this proves the eternal Son.
but if you mean it a different way, like, who is the son. then consider this.
hebrews 13:8 8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
hold on now. when you say prove the eternal son. what do you mean? do ypu mean that the son is forever?
heh, you are hilarious whiteflame. name 2 people who would support ANY of my ideas.
lol
its not so much your enforcement of standards im ranting against, but the standards themselves. i dont suppose there is a method to change those until a next meep update is there?
so the integrity of debates dont matter anymore? i can just vote anyway i want as long as its analyzed to sufficently in my voting comment? nonsense.
i say nonsense, because i did the same thing when i was starting out and david took it down.
pro didnt lose either of those points, his burden of proof was that God made water and darkness. and he met that.
honestly, im starting to believe you, barney and ramshutu dont know how to do scripture debates. There has to be another standard for debating facts within the framework of a book assuming the book is true and irrefutable. ramshutu especially couldnt settle with that idea.
the whole reason i brought it up was because it was a bad vote and i thought it could be removed. i wasnt aware that you couldnt do that anymore.
now, if barney was somehow able to kritik the debate via scripture (ie, mall didnt put in revelation 14:7 and he had to inductive reqson genesis 1) then i could understand that. but its a bad vote, i get you cant remove it, fine. but dont try to justify it to me, im not an idiot.
so you allow it because he is half right? is that what you are saying?
water is literally half the debate context.
he cannot award a point to con just because he doesnt read. lol
i wasnt talking about genesis 1. look at revelation 14
that sucks. i wish i was avalible yesterday.
would you mind evaluating barneys vote? i question his reasoning the debate. pro very clearly gives a verse how God created water. Yet barney gives con a vote because he claimed God only moved water.
i know for sure ramshutu wouldnt tolerate that vote, nor david.