Gosh, it seems so strange having the top debater debating so much at once consider most of the time the one with the most potential is also the one quiet. It just seems strange.
It is easier to lie in an autobiography because all people will believe in you. However, self-prove is not proof. When you comeback with the words of "Cuz I said so and My momma said so", it is the same level of proof and a lack of proof as god saying "I am omnipotent".
Define reality show. Well, Mythbusters and Top Gear are also reality shows, as well as Dr. Phil. Your two examples are simply trash ones and outdated ones in the bucket. I think Top Gear is a LOOOOOOOOOOOOT better than Kardashians.
I know I will probably lose but just debating people I know I will win isn't going to let me learn as much as debating the master like my opponent here.
Are you arguing for that:
Women are never fit for leadership,
Women are not there not because they are scared,
Or that women of leaderships should not be scared?
"I mean, the bible says God is all-mighty, uses the same Greek word for powerful"
How do you know that God is not lying? Did he say it? I said, I am the president of the United States in 1266, how do you know I am lying? How do you know God lies not?
I would say that every religion is morally correct: if they aren't they will be listed as a cult. However, every single religion has blind faith, and that is the most major reason some people don't believe in it. Well, this debate will be biased consider the bible gives way too little proof for whatever it says, and we can't prove it.
I forgot one thing. My first argument is for ANY god, not just the Christian one. However, God of the Bible is still within the domain of "any god". I don't need to recite the bible unless you refute that the Biblical God is omnipotent despite I had made a *seemingly irrefutable*(Which is probably incorrect) argument.
Just if you think I am too fast. I am a slow typer(slower than 55 wpm) and I had copy-pasted the argument since the debate had started asking for people to accept it. It doesn't matter because it is the opening argument anyways.
Because I don't support suicide pacts, why don't you present an argument against the alternate me that supports suicide pacts in the comment section, if you have time to?
If you are just going to accept it, don't try to convince me. Try to convince the people that are just standin' around looking for interestin' stuff. I am not meant to be convinced and no one shall try or otherwise they will learn this the hard way(Trust me, I did too). You don't need refutations, even, if you got such a claim that is good enough and materials that has infallible evidence.
Remember, debating is not meant to convince your opponent. It is meant to convince the voter. Also, A god can certainly exist, but it may not be omnipotent as I will prove as soon as someone on the internet approaches to my inquiry.
I don't need the holy spirit(No offense) because it is never proven. I don't believe in things that have ZERO proof of happening. Prove why the God of the Bible is real(It has not been proven by anyone yet), and prove why the holy spirit exists in terms of humanity. Nothing is right until they are proven. You can't say Trump is a bad president and expect neutral people to believe in you if you don't have the evidence. You can accept this debate if you want, but be sure to prove these things.
"Define omnipotent for your opponent. Also God. And exegete the power God has, to show whether he is "omnipotent" or not. Because according to scripture God has all power in heaven and in the earth."
We don't know if God is lying or not. The "God" can easily be an alien and some traits could be made up. We are unsure if the Bible contains only truth and no lies, and we cannot prove it without using blind faith. God is not here and he cannot prove himself present. If he can't even prove himself present, that means he is not omnipotent.
I spilled a little too much information. My opponent in debate tradition is discouraged to refute anything in the comments section unless I bring up the sentence to the arguments section.
Dictionary Definition: Omnipotent
adjective
(of a deity) having unlimited power; able to do anything.
noun
God.
God
1.(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2.(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.
I just came from DDO today. An intricate and sophisticated debate like "Proof of the existence of the Biblical Deity" would receive 0 votes, let alone one like this.
I am starting to feel like that Ramdatt is Hezikiah of DDO.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EFJ2aa4UYAAVJqT.jpg
Agnosticism, pantheism, transtheism?
Gosh, it seems so strange having the top debater debating so much at once consider most of the time the one with the most potential is also the one quiet. It just seems strange.
"Because he has never lied. Revelation 19:6"
It is easier to lie in an autobiography because all people will believe in you. However, self-prove is not proof. When you comeback with the words of "Cuz I said so and My momma said so", it is the same level of proof and a lack of proof as god saying "I am omnipotent".
I'm placing the bet on Ragnar.
define "long".
Are you Hezikiah in DDO?
Then I agree. However, no not-born-yet child gets an ID card while their parents are just finishing having sex unless it is royalty.
Are we arguing about biological personhood or social personhood? A boy in the womb would not receive an ID card in the social security system.
Define reality show. Well, Mythbusters and Top Gear are also reality shows, as well as Dr. Phil. Your two examples are simply trash ones and outdated ones in the bucket. I think Top Gear is a LOOOOOOOOOOOOT better than Kardashians.
How do you know?
Pro has to prove reincarnation works though. Like you can't say I am 50 because I can prove otherwise.
I know I will probably lose but just debating people I know I will win isn't going to let me learn as much as debating the master like my opponent here.
Wow, debating the top debater in the whole website. Have lots of pressure.
Are you arguing for that:
Women are never fit for leadership,
Women are not there not because they are scared,
Or that women of leaderships should not be scared?
Sorry this comment is not just for you. it is for anybody who can vote. I just somehow typed SupaDudz when I didn't mean to.
I would suggest you put the topic IN the title next time so no one would exploit this as I did.
C'mon, let's vote.
"I mean, the bible says God is all-mighty, uses the same Greek word for powerful"
How do you know that God is not lying? Did he say it? I said, I am the president of the United States in 1266, how do you know I am lying? How do you know God lies not?
I would say that every religion is morally correct: if they aren't they will be listed as a cult. However, every single religion has blind faith, and that is the most major reason some people don't believe in it. Well, this debate will be biased consider the bible gives way too little proof for whatever it says, and we can't prove it.
Hello moderator.
I forgot one thing. My first argument is for ANY god, not just the Christian one. However, God of the Bible is still within the domain of "any god". I don't need to recite the bible unless you refute that the Biblical God is omnipotent despite I had made a *seemingly irrefutable*(Which is probably incorrect) argument.
I know it right. 1000 is too compact to pack a piece of a link that supports me.
Just if you think I am too fast. I am a slow typer(slower than 55 wpm) and I had copy-pasted the argument since the debate had started asking for people to accept it. It doesn't matter because it is the opening argument anyways.
Both sides assuming God exists. We argue from the Bible.
Because I don't support suicide pacts, why don't you present an argument against the alternate me that supports suicide pacts in the comment section, if you have time to?
To be fair, I had never even thought of this in relation to suicide pacts. In fact, I hadn't thought about suicide pacts before.
no. I don't support suicide pacts.
Your turn now.
I don't know about all the policies, but in North Korea, poverty exists on 99% of the population, female or not.
Only if I can vote pro, I will agree with him. Here is my evidence.
https://www.debate.org/debates/Luigi-is-a-better-brother-than-Mario/1/
I don't know much about this guy, but seems like he is banned right now. I would place it in society's class or religion's class.
Wtf why is this in the cars class?
If you are just going to accept it, don't try to convince me. Try to convince the people that are just standin' around looking for interestin' stuff. I am not meant to be convinced and no one shall try or otherwise they will learn this the hard way(Trust me, I did too). You don't need refutations, even, if you got such a claim that is good enough and materials that has infallible evidence.
Remember, debating is not meant to convince your opponent. It is meant to convince the voter. Also, A god can certainly exist, but it may not be omnipotent as I will prove as soon as someone on the internet approaches to my inquiry.
I don't need the holy spirit(No offense) because it is never proven. I don't believe in things that have ZERO proof of happening. Prove why the God of the Bible is real(It has not been proven by anyone yet), and prove why the holy spirit exists in terms of humanity. Nothing is right until they are proven. You can't say Trump is a bad president and expect neutral people to believe in you if you don't have the evidence. You can accept this debate if you want, but be sure to prove these things.
Is there any limitations to what I can and can't do in each argument? Do I have the privilege of refutation in round I?
"Define omnipotent for your opponent. Also God. And exegete the power God has, to show whether he is "omnipotent" or not. Because according to scripture God has all power in heaven and in the earth."
We don't know if God is lying or not. The "God" can easily be an alien and some traits could be made up. We are unsure if the Bible contains only truth and no lies, and we cannot prove it without using blind faith. God is not here and he cannot prove himself present. If he can't even prove himself present, that means he is not omnipotent.
I spilled a little too much information. My opponent in debate tradition is discouraged to refute anything in the comments section unless I bring up the sentence to the arguments section.
Dictionary Definition: Omnipotent
adjective
(of a deity) having unlimited power; able to do anything.
noun
God.
God
1.(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2.(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.
Con got points doing nothing. Ok I am jealous now.
I just came from DDO today. An intricate and sophisticated debate like "Proof of the existence of the Biblical Deity" would receive 0 votes, let alone one like this.