BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
MCDCBC will win this debate

"I find it unlogical that she would request for votes. She's arguing that she is going to lose, so, how can she possibly ask for votes?"To answer your question according to DDO rules to lose I have to get less votes but sense I am arguing that I will lose this debate getting less votes would mean I would win. So I would be both winning and losing at the same time, even if I get more votes and win by DDO rules I will have lost this debate and won it at the same time."Huh? Let's see how unlogical this entire debate is."Just so you are aware unlogical is not a word. The correct word would be illogical. To answer your question sense this entire debate is based off of an illogical statement then of course the resulting debate would be illogical.
MCDCBC will win this debate

I would agree with you about this except you put "Thus, it is only logical to vet pro." it should be vote.Lol. I see, we now have a tied s/g But if I lose the debate meaning I win the debate then I will have actually lost the debate because I will have won. Huh? Let's see how unlogical this entire debate is.Resolution: I will not win this debateBOP: Relies on me to show that she will win this debate, and she needs to show that she will lose this debate.According to the rules of DDO, a person wins by getting the most votes.(1)Now, if I win this debate, I have proved that my opponent will win this debate. Why? Because the contention here is that if I win, her resolution comes true that she will not win this debate. Thus it is a tie from both sides.I find it unlogical that she would request for votes. She's arguing that she is going to lose, so, how can she possibly ask for votes?Turn it back to con.1. http://www.debate.org...;
MCDCBC will win this debate

"I have not one a debate should be won not one....so at lease vote pro on spelling and grammar."I would agree with you about this except you put "Thus, it is only logical to vet pro." it should be vote."I affirm she will win this debate because the resolution makes it clear who will win. By her stating she won't win, she will win this debate if you vote pro."But if I lose the debate meaning I win the debate then I will have actually lost the debate because I will have won.
MCDCBC will win this debate

"I don't think I can win this debate because I have not yet one a debate due to the fact that I constantly get off topic." First time for everything! Also, you do get off topic, but I do not see that in this debate. I have not one a debate should be won not one....so at lease vote pro on spelling and grammar. If my opponent does get more points than me, thus winning the debate by the DDO rules, then she has lost the debate because the outcome contradicts her opening resolution. As stated before, t is only logical to vote pro. She affirms she will not win, therefore vote pro! I affirm she will win this debate because the resolution makes it clear who will win. By her stating she won't win, she will win this debate if you vote pro. Thus, it is only logical to vet pro.
MCDCBC will win this debate

'The resolution is that con will not win this debate. Therefore, if con gets the most votes, she won the debate...which really means she lost."Yes and sense I am arguing that I will lose I will have actually one"I'd like to see why con doesn't think she could win this debate."I don't think I can win this debate because I have not yet one a debate due to the fact that I constantly get off topic.
MCDCBC will win this debate

"That is another example of an illogical question. Just like this resolution. When we look at this debate, I should win because my opponent has asked me to debate illogically--which is impossible. "My opponent thinks that arguing an illogical argument illogically is impossible. In reality it is much easier then arguing an illogical argument logically. It is illogical to argue an illogical argument logically.
MCDCBC will win this debate

I've been doing a lot of serious debates, time to step it down. The resolution my opponent brings if that I need to prove you will win this debate. This is an impossible resolution because it is illogical. In order for him to win the debate, he must lose! According to the second law of logic, something cannot be true and not true in the same sense. If someone walks up to you and says that he is lying, is he telling the truth? That is another example of an illogical question. Just like this resolution. When we look at this debate, I should win because my opponent has asked me to debate illogically--which is impossible.
A Christian cannot lose salvation

You summed up the definition of a true Christian very well. I will accept your rebuttal to the verses, John 10:27 and Mathew 7:23. Because they do not establish they are the only two categories of people. Your first argument, With my rebuttal and counterargument - Take note that the book of Ezekial is the Old Testament. Therefore This is not talking about Christians, Since the new covenant has not been made yet. Now I will use a verse a few chapters later in Ezekiel where God talks about the new covenant. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, And you will keep My judgments and do them. Ezekiel 36:26-27 I want to use this verse to help support that a Christian cannot lose salvation. Notice how it says "I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, And you will keep My judgments and do them. " Gods Spirit inside us causes us to walk in His statutes and keep his judgements and do them, And not us. Therefore we will not turn from Him if He is the one causing us to walk with Him. My second argument - For the wages of sin is death, But the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:29 Romans 6:23 says "the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" and a few chapters later in Romans 11:29 it says Gods gifts and calling are irrevocable. I even looked up the Greek word that is translated to "gift" in both verses. They both use the same Greek word. Which is "charisma. "
A Christian cannot lose salvation

2 ========== Your definition a TRUE CHRISTIAN has put their faith in Jesus alone (not in their works), Has genuinely repented, Has been born again by the Holy Spirit, And is following Jesus (i. E. , Is growing in the fruits of the Spirit) I hope I have not mis-characterized your intent. If I have, It was not on purpose and I invite you to correct the definition. May I please note that there are 4 characteristics in the definition. The first three are written in the past tense. However, Characteristic #4 is written in the present tense. This is where I will squeeze you. 3 ========== Your first argument (with my rebuttal) You have defined two categories of people: --- Category A --- John 10:27 defines what I"ll call "TRUE CHRISTIANS who are still saved. " Please note, That the sheep "hear" and "follow" in the present tense. --- Category B --- Mathew 7:23 defines what you call "false converts" or those who were never saved. I accept both of these two categories. However, You have in no way established that these are the ONLY TWO categories of people. For all we know, There could be 98 other categories. Thankfully, The purpose of this debate regards only 1 more: --- Category C --- "TRUE CHRISTIANS who lost salvation" 4 ========== My first argument "But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, Will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, They will die. . . If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, They will die for it; because of the sin they have committed they will die. " Ezekiel 18: 24 & 26 Ezekiel takes aim at Characteristic #4 ("is following"). In context, The entire chapter is teaching that our salvation is not finalized until we die. The first part of the chapter is hopeful: no matter how bad we"ve been or how late in life we finally come to Jesus, If we are a TRUE CHRISTIAN at the end we will be saved. Similarly, Even if we accept Jesus early, Our salvation is not certain until the end. A TRUE CHRISTIAN who "turns from" his righteousness (who "does the same" as the wicked) at the end of his life will lose his salvation. Furthermore, Ezekiel also takes aim at Characteristic #1 ("faith in Jesus"). He accuses the no-longer-righteous man of "unfaithfulness. " Perhaps we should revise the definition of a TRUE CHRISTIAN to remove faith from the past tense. After all, Faith is a condition of the heart not an event.
A Christian cannot lose salvation

1. The 66 books of the Bible, Old and new testament. Not anything else. Not even the Apocrypha. 2. There isn't really a way to tell who is a true Christian. Other than by examining their fruits, And testing to see if they are following Jesus commandments. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, Joy, Peace, Longsuffering, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Gentleness, Self-control. Against such there is no law. Galatians 5:22-23 If they are a true Christian they should atleast be growing in these fruits. Also they should be atleast trying their hardest to follow Jesus command. "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, So you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, If you love one another. " John 13:34-35 A true saved Christian is someone who has been born again by the Holy Spirit. They have genuinely repented and put their faith in Jesus alone to save them. They are not depending on their works to save them. They do works because they are saved and not because they are trying to be saved. They have realized they have sinned against a Holy God and there is nothing they can do to save them. They need a savior. There is no way to absolutely tell who exactly is a true Christian. Since it is a heart condition, And so only God knows. 3. I will use one reason for now to start off with. My sheep hear My voice, And I know them, And they follow Me. John 10:27 In this verse Jesus says "I know them, And they follow me. " Jesus is talking about Christians here. So Jesus knows his followers. "Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord, " shall enter the kingdom of heaven, But he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, Have we not prophesied in Your name, Cast out demons in Your name, And done many wonders in Your name? " And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, You who practice lawlessness! " Mathew 7:21-23 This verse is talking about false converts. People who profess to be Christian, But were actually never born again by the Holy Spirit. Notice how they say stuff like ""Lord, Lord, Have we not prophesied in Your name, Cast out demons in Your name, And done many wonders in Your name? " They seemed like they thought they could get into heaven by their works. They were not trusting in Jesus alone. Then notice how Jesus says ""I never knew you; depart from Me, You who practice lawlessness! "" He didn't say that he use to know them, And now he doesn't. John 10:27 says Jesus knows his sheep, Mathew 7:21-23 says to the people who were never actually Christians that he never knew them. This would imply that those people Jesus never knew were never Christians in the first place. Meaning the people who were never Christian couldn't of lost salvation, Because they were never saved in the first place.
A Christian cannot lose salvation

I am a Christian. I am happy to debate the topic on your terms, But they are rather squishy right now. We have plenty of time, Rounds, And character count to go over a few useful preliminaries. So please include answers to these questions in your Round 2. ============= 1= When you say "the Bible", Do you include the Old Testament? The Apocrypha? The Nicean Creed? The writings of St. Augustine, Etc. ? ============= 2 = We need a more concrete definition than "true saved Christian". One way to define it would be to say that a "true saved Christian" = "a Christian who cannot lose salvation". Please tell me that"s not what you mean. I certainly cannot rebut A = A. I would suggest the following options (take your pick, Or come up with your own): --- 2a --- Lowest standard --- Someone who has accepted Jesus as their personal Savior through prayer to God (and done nothing else to become saved) --- 2b --- Highest standard --- Someone who has taken on the image of Christ by totally reforming their beliefs, Actions, Desires, Etc. Into constant alignment with God"s will --- 2c --- Realistic standard --- Someone who recognizes (but does not excuse) his imperfections and uses God"s Grace to try to come closer to Jesus every year ============= 3 = Since this is your debate, It is customary for you to make the first argument. Please provide at least 1 reason WHY the debate title is true. I am willing to accept your personal rationale as an argument. However, Since you asked me for "good Bible explanations" it seems like you should start your argument with the same.
ALLAH IS A MOON "g"OD

It's funny how some anti-Islamics claim that Muslims worship a moon god when Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran directly refuted this: "Among His Signs are the Night and the Day, and the Sun and the Moon. Adore not the sun and the moon , but adore God, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve. (The Noble Quran, 41:37) ".This verse clearly portrays that the moon is just one of the signs of the ALLAH. Muslims do not believe in worshiping idols or moon Gods. Nor any Muslim believes that the reason why the Crescent is the Muslims' symbol on their flag is because Muhammad (peace be upon him) had cut the moon in half with his sword. That is a fabricated lie about Muhammad and Islam. The reason why the Crescent is the symbol on our flag is because we start our fasting month "Ramadan" when the Crescent appears, and we end that month when the full moon appears after 30 or 31 days of the Crescent's appearance. "They ask thee Concerning the New Moons. Say: They are but signs To mark fixed periods of time In (the affairs of) men, And for Pilgrimage. It is no virtue if ye enter the houses from the back: It is virtue if ye fear Allah. Enter houses Through the proper doors: And fear Allah: That ye may prosper. (The Noble Quran, 2:189) ".As we clearly see in the Noble Verse, moon is nothing but a tool used by the Muslims. It is not GOD Almighty to us, nor do we use it in our worship. No where was it written in the Quran that ALLAH is a moon. for now, I rest my pen
African American Deaths in the United States in 2014-2015

okay, so let's set something straight right off the bat. the deaths of those people you mentioned were those peoples fault. no they didn't deserve death no one really ever does. however, when you look at it from a logical point of veiw they did wrong and wouldn't do what was asked of them and were extremely voilent those cops defended themselves which led to the death of those people. a cop has just as much right to defend his/herself at all costs as do the rest of us, every cop is serving us US citizens! no killing innocent people! african americans bring everything upon themselves that they get, it isn't anybody else's fault but the their's if they abided the law instead of breaking it then they'd have nothing to complain about!
What's better, Team Fortress 2 or Overwatch

I think that team fortress 2 is a better game because it has more use of skill and it is open to kids. Overwatch is intended more for teens and adults because of the style of characters that are used. A child would not be able to easily play overwatch, while team fortress 2 is very basic. The Game is controlled by basic movements of forward back and sides while overwatch uses skills such as bunny hopping, teleportation, and proper use of evasive skills. A child can play but will not succeed far in overwatch but in Team Fortress 2 a child has more of an ability to get good. Overwatch is also a very sexualized game, They often have skins that show a lot of skin or are very suggestive. This would not be appropriate for a child. An example would be Odette, a skin for widowmaker.
Aladdin is a Superior Movie over The Lion King

Out of many Disney movies I have watched, I felt like Aladdin was the best. (Have yet to watch Beauty and the Beast) However, The Lion King, however emotional it was, felt like it had no comedy side to it, and in addition to the *ahem* "strange" parts of the movie, could not make it to beat up Aladdin. However, my opponent does not think so. He even says his gut says The Lion King is the best Disney movie of all time. Thus, we come to a clash of an epic battle-- the only slightly better-than-average debater, 9spaceking, versus one of the best debaters on the site, Raisor. I am almost certain that I will concede at some point of this debate, or at the very least get my butt kicked all the way to Pluto, but I wish to see more of how awesome The Lion King really is. Can the Lion King really beat my second favorite movie? Will I change my opinion? We will find this all out within this debate.Please wait at least one day to accept this debate, I am quite busy.Round one is for acceptance only.Good luck and I hope you have a magic carpet ride of a debate! :D And yes, I am aware there's a zombie judge there. I just put him there for fun and laughs. :P
Wandenreich (Bleach-Pro) vs Akatsuki (Naruto-Pro)

[R1] Yes many Vandenreich members were considered useless however this only because there power didn't live up to what was required against the forces of the Zero Division. Yes Yhwach might use this ability against the Akatsuki but it's not a necessity. Also the activation of Ausw"hlen simply means that it's now inevitable that whatever the elite force is up against, will surely be annihilated. Yes GiGi was the only one but the Vandenreich have a huge army and I really don't need to revive anyone. Oh and although they were deemed useless they still have yet today and seemed to refuse to. [ http://i16.mangapanda.com...] [R2] Of course but his Shikai state is already powerful and beyond that of anyone from Naruto. His spiritual pressure is so intense that even while not using his shikai he was able to bring Grimmjow to his knees. [R3] I'm not backing down from my argument as their is no evidence that quincy couldn't destroy the soul of reincarnations. Yes quincy are humans and they could be used for "Summoning: Impure World Reincarnation" however Kabuto has kept himself hidden the entire war. He isn't going to come out just because one stern ritter finally died. Coming back to your argument about the quincy soul destruction and also amplifying my point on why Kabuto wouldn't and shouldn't waste his time trying to retrieve DNA: 1. GiGi for one could turn Kabuto into a zombie and simply tell him to call of the the jutsu. 2. Stern Ritter 'L' PePe Waccabrada "The Love". Under the ranks of the Vandenreich is Pepe. Pepe has the ability to make anyone he hits with ability "in love" or more accurately "his slave" as they are now under his control and do whatever it takes to defend him or please him. Pepe could make Kabuto love him and simply tell him to stop Edo Tensei. Not only this but Pepe could also control Reincarnations as Itachi proved they weren't completely under his control. [http://i8.mangapanda.com...] [http://i32.mangapanda.com...] [http://i15.mangapanda.com...] [http://i34.mangapanda.com...]
Wandenreich (Bleach-Pro) vs Akatsuki (Naruto-Pro)

On your point regarding Gigi's abilities, the problem with said abilities was that she was the only one in the Wandenreich with those said abilities yet even then Yhwach disposed of here because she was found to be useless. This proven in chapter 604 when Haschwalth quoted the power of "Auswahlen" " The power of useless quinces are collected and distributed to those who need it, those whose power is taken from die.." it is also shown earlier in the chapter that Gigi was amongst the quinces who were to die. this shows that despite that the quinces had a counter to the Edotensei they would still fail to realise her power and was hence killed off. Hence it would be safe to assume that in a battle between the Akastsuki and the quinces the same situation would have occurred. "Aizen's ability is well beyond that of anyone from naruto and it's obvious Yhwach would have been tricked. " However when Aizen was meeting with Yhwach he was completely tied up and restrained, the only ability he was able to use in that situation was that of his zanpakuto. Only his Shikai state was necessary to trick anyone no matter strength or abilities. "I already went through how and why reincarnations wouldn't be a problem. This is post-war akatsuki so most of them are already dead. Those reincarnations will be killed with no problem. However if you're implying that even after they're destroyed they would can still be resurrected, they you weren't paying attention. Quincy destroy the soul not purify it, so there is no soul left , meaning that individual is gone forever" You have a good point there however The quinces can only destroy the souls of hollows or other undead such as arrancars or reincarnated individuals in this case just like how the zanpakuto only purifies the souls of hollows or undead. However the benefits that the Edotensei would have against the Wandenreich would be that dead Akatsuki can be brought back after one death giving them a second chance at fighting, this the quinces do not have an equivalent to. The edotensei also doesn't necessarily bring back only the Akastuki from the dead but also anyone else regardless of any conflicting affiliation (an example would be Minato). This means that the Akatsuki can also bring back the souls of dead quinces to fight on their side. sources: 1. http://www.mangareader.net... 2. http://bleach.wikia.com...