Which side makes a better case?
avatar
24 Comments
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 3 years ago

    It's incredibly ignorant, highly arrogant and outright foolish to dismiss tre disciples as "lowly and uneducated." There is no reason to believe such and a great deal of evidence to show otherwise. Paul was among the most educated and well trained of his day while Matthew was a highly educated tax collector and Luke a physician. Many others were wealthy and well educated holding high positions.
    http://juniaproject.com/disciples-unschooled-ordinary-men/

    • 3 years ago

      @nellyj, that was not an issue we were contesting. We questioned when the books were written, and then agreed that it was a generation after Jesus, and I pointed out that the first hand witnesses the authors were speaking to were almost universally uneducated, as Jesus himself said. This was not addressed by either of us for the last 45 minutes of the debate.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 what you just said is completely inaccurate and wrong.

    • 3 years ago

      It is completely accurate, and even if it wasn't, it's what we agreed upon during the debate.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 it's simply and obviously Wrong but it's something you have pressed several times. "Unlearned" refers mainly to formal religious training but not to intelligence or to education. They spoke several languages fluently and wrote in them well enough to write. You have mentioned what you believe to be "uneducated" in a very derogatory manner in every debate you've had despite the fact that some of the most successful and intelligent people in history have no formal education. Many presidents, among the historical best, have had no college degrees as have the people who've most changed the world.

    • 3 years ago

      @nellyj I did not comment on the authors, I commented on their sources, who Jesus said were primarily the less educated members of society, which Sebastien and I agreed upon. If you have a separate argument, bring it up in a debate with me, but that was not the focus of this debate.

  • 3 years ago

    I am only in to opening comments and I'm already upset. @debateme13 you continue the same straw man argument where you spout random nonsense like it was written by slaves or uneducated people. I want so bad to go head to head with you again on a topic not the vague BS you attempted with me earlier.

    • 3 years ago

      @genuine_504 it's funny how triggered you got by me holding your faith to the standards it sets for itself. Also you can't call it a straw man when it's literally the words of Jesus. I suppose that's a good thing though. I'm open to another debate, now that this one is finished. Feel free to challenge.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 I find that you're being a bit dishonest with you quotes by giving only pieces of them like The 'give no sign.' For that specific one he immediately follows it with His biggest sign of all- the resurrection (the sign of Jonah). He also had given them countless miracles. They wanted a magic act not actual signs and they showed they didn't believe anyways.

    • 3 years ago

      @nellyj Don't make this personal. you accuse me of lying, rather than saying I misunderstood the section. This isn't fun when you guys make this personal rather than focusing on the arguments themselves.

      Now, in response
      1. You are presenting your own argument. This was not something we talked about during the round. If you want to debate me, do it in your own debate. For this one, Sebastien did not talk about what you're talking about so let's not get sidetracked
      2. The quote I presented is the last thing that happens, then Jesus gets back in the boat, goes back across the lake, and THEN works a miracle. You're the one misinterpreting the passage.
      3. Jesus did not give the pharisee's or scribes miracles. None are referenced by outside authors, none are referenced in the bible, and most importantly, Sebastien didn't present any. Let's talk about what was in the debate, not your own personal analysis from outside.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 I am an adult and I am a professional. I am speaking to you calmly. I am just saying literally everything you said was false.

      As someone who is debating on a topic it would be more productive had you used facts instead of random assumptions.

      Like saying God only talked to the uneducated. That is ridiculous.

      I want to debunk all this craziness you're stating as facts.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 your point two is false and your point three is false.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 I am very capable of conducting a debate in a professional manner FYI. I'm not going to scream at you or curse you out. That's not me.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 my apologies if my comments were attacking. Didn't mean it that way and I altered them. I only say that in that you said you've read the Bible so you know they were continually given signs and the Pharisees didn't care of maricles as they accused him of working for Satan when he did
      Matt 12:22-24
      -22 Then one was brought to Him who was demon-possessed, blind and mute; and He healed him, so that the blind and the mute man both saw and spoke. 23 And all the multitudes were amazed and said, “Could this be the Son of David?” 24 Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.”

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 this is why I don't like it much when the debate extends for weeks in the comments section. Outside commenters maybe but only for a day or 2.
      So When is our debate we were supposed to do last week?

    • 3 years ago

      @nellyj haha yeah we wound up doing Trump Jr. as a topic instead. Hmm, I'm free next Tuesday at 6:30 PST?

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13 7:30 or 8 ok?

    • 3 years ago

      @nellyj sure, 7:30 is good.

  • 3 years ago

    I made it to 15 minutes in and I can't watch anymore. @bashee7 you did a good job. @debateme13 is so arrogant uneducated about all things scriptural it's painful to watch. Literally every single thing he said was false.

  • 3 years ago
    • 3 years ago

      @chasuk There's a lot of good things to take away from this. For one thing, it's clear that my thesis was not well communicated, which means my rhetoric needs some tweaking. Considering the outrage from the other comments, my position appears to have been too inflammatory. There is a much better way of framing my arguments that I should have focused on.

      You're right that there is a distinction between 30,000 denominations and 30,000 gods. It doesn't diminish the fact that a person must choose to put faith in one of them, but you're right that the number of actual deities is much lower.

      I hadn't ever heard the distinction between religions claiming to be the "one" faith, as opposed to ones like buddhism that don't care. That's interesting and something I'll have to look into more.

      Also you're right that the natural state of man is not skepticism, but credulousness. I need to stop saying that the "natural state is skepticism". My point was supposed to be that in logic, a presumption should not be considered fact until it has been proven to a reasonable degree of certainty. Again my framing of that issue was poor.

      Thanks for your response, and I'll work on the rhetorical mistakes I was making.

    • 3 years ago

      @debateme13, I appreciate your politeness and receptiveness very much. In debate, both qualities are rare (unfortunately).

      I'll keep an eye out for your future debates.

  • 2 years ago

    Let's put it this way.. the credibility of the 4 gospels is attributed to 4 individuals that none of anyone currently alive today, nor anyone alive within the last 1900 years has ever personally met.

    Many of us have trouble believing anything we hear from people who are currently alive today, whether it's true or not.

    Sensibly speaking.. you're going to take the word of 4 individuals you've never met as the defineable measure by which you mandate an individual to being the Messiah?

    If 5, 50, 500 or 5,000 people today told you they found the messiah.. would you believe them?

    Why do you believe 4 people you've never met, nor has the majority of the last two millennia of humas ever met? Just food for thought.