Resolved: Supernatural phenomena as the primary method of evangelization is God's intention for the

After reading this round, you will be given the opportunity to vote on the debate. As you know, the following will be your voting card: Pro Tied Con Who did you agree with before the debate? Who did you agree with after the debate? Who had better conduct? Who had better spelling and grammar? Who made more convincing arguments? Who used the most reliable sources? Reasons for your voting decision - Required Before discussing the vote, I would like to address one statement in the fourth round: "He then notes that the Seven Sons of Sceva tried to witness (despite the fact that he made a specific point that witness is a noun and not a verb), when in reality this is not at all what happened in the text. The Seven Sons of Sceva were attempting to use Jesus' name as though it were a magical incantation"Of course, the sons of Sceva didn't LITERALLY "witness. " Obviously if I was wasn't talking LITERALLY, I must have been speaking FIGURATIVELY! Re-read my statement with a figurative interpretation of that statement. My opponent made this statement late at night, so perhaps the reader might forgive him for this lapse in judgement. .. LOL! 1. Who did you agree with before the debate? -That will not be determined by this debate. 2. Who did you agree with after the debate? - I hope to have convinced you of my position.3. Who had better conduct? Well, there are a few things to look at here: First of all, one of the terms for the debate that my opponent accepted was:" I ask that my opponent:1) Be a Christian2) Accept the 66 book Bible as authority for this debate. "My opponent accepted the debate: "I accept and look foward to this debate"Then in the fourth round my opponent stepped outside the parameters he accepted with the following: " The famous evangelist Billy Graham has preached to millions and seen hundreds of thousands of converts as a result of his ministry. And although Dr Graham is a believer in the power of God to do miracles, his ministry is hardly marked by signs. Rather, his ministry is marked by a humble preaching of Sin and Grace which people find compelling. Beyond Billy Graham, the famous American Puritan Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon in 1731 that would spark what was to be known as the Great Awakening, a revival that swept over the American colonies as well as through much of Britain and other parts of Europe. The Protestant Reformation itself was a great time of religious awakening, but rather than be marked by miraculous events confirming the validity of what the Reformers preached, it is marked by a time of intellectual and pietistic reform and revival. History simply does not support the claim that evangelism efforts that lack signs are doomed to failure. " Not only does this statement step outside the parameters of this debate, it doesn't refute the resolution (which I shall review below). Secondly, another parameter of the debate was: "Debate StructureFirst Round: Acceptance Second Round: Introductory ArgumentsThird Round: RebuttalFourth Round: Response to rebuttalsFifth Round: Conclusion"My opponent did not give an introductory argument in the second round or in any other round; he simply proceeded to rebuttal one point in my introductory argument.4. Who had better spelling and grammar? I haven't noticed any significant errors in this area from my opponent.5. Who had more convincing arguments? Let me remind you of the resolution:"Resolved:Supernatural phenomena as the primary method of evangelization is God's intention for the Church. "My opponent has not offered a refutation of the resolution, he spent this debate arguing with ONE point in my opening argument. His tally board in the second round had errors which were discussed in the third round, but most of all, it never addressed "God's intention for the Church. " It was merely an accounting of what was recorded in the Book of Acts. If one did a similar tally in the books of I and II Kings to see whether the Children of Israel worshipped Jehovah God or that they worshipped idols- this tally would not have determined "God's intention" but rather history. My original point in using Acts 2, was to demonstrate what happened when the Church obeyed Jesus's command to tarry until being endued with power; thus establishing what was meant by "endued with power. " My opponent then took off in a direction inconsistent with the resolution of the debate to make an irrelevant argument. In the fourth round, I steered the debate back onto the subject of the debate. While my opponent has been offering arguments irrelevant to the resolution, I offered the following in my opening argument: "Although there was urgency in the Great Commission, Jesus's immediate command for his disciples following his departure was not to begin sharing the Gospel, nor to study the scriptures to prepare to share the Gospel. The following was his command to them:Luke 24:49And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. This was His command IMMEDIATELY following the Great Commission in Luke. This command was the ending of the Gospel account and the beginning of the Book of Acts:Acts 1:4And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Conclusion: Although there is an urgency to evangelize; Jesus's prerequisite to evangelism was 'wait[ing]' or 'tarry[ing]' for the Promise from the Father, the 'endue[ment] with power from on high. '" My opponent never offered an argument in the next three rounds of the debate against this statement which was key to establishing "God's intention" through the command of Jesus. The following statement also establishes "God's intention" through the words of Jesus: "Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. 12 I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. " (John 14:11-12) This verse offers evidence to "God's intention" concerning "supernatural phenomena;" the verses from Luke and Acts establish that "God's intention" concerning a "primary method of evangelization" (because they were so closely tied in with the Great Commission) is "supernatural phenomena. " I proved my resolution in my opening argument-my opponent has proved that he is good at making colorful posts and calculating statistics.5. Who used the most reliable sources? Obviously, the only source for this debate is the Bible as stated in the acceptance round. Both my opponent and myself have offered verses from the Bible as the source. My opponent demonstrated his lack of knowledge of the source when he tried to say that the "sign of Jonas" that Jesus referred to in Matthew 12 was repentance although Matthew 12:40 says, "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. "Conclusion:I have proven my resolution, so this debate has an obvious winner.