BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Greeks wrote parts of the New Testament... before Jesus was born.

Many dates are only approximate, the symbol a. meaning “after,” b. meaning “before” and c. meaning “circa,” or “about.”Books of the Greek Scriptures Written During the Common (Christian)Era Name of Book: Matthew Writer: Matthew Place Written: Palestine Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 41 Time Covered: 2 B.C.E.–33 C.E. Name of Book: Mark Writer: Mark Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 60-65 Time Covered: 29-33 C.E. Name of Book: Luke Writer: Luke Place Written: Caesarea Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 56-58 Time Covered: 3 B.C.E.–33 C.E. Name of Book: John Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Ephesus, or near Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 98 Time Covered: After prologue, 29–33 C.E. Name of Book: Acts Writer: Luke Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 61 Time Covered: 33–c. 61 C.E. Name of Book: Romans Writer: Paul Place Written: Corinth Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 56 Name of Book: 1 Corinthians Writer: Paul Place Written: Ephesus Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 55 Name of Book: 2 Corinthians Writer: Paul Place Written: Macedonia Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 55 Name of Book: Galatians Writer: Paul Place Written: Corinth or Syrian Antioch Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 50-52 Name of Book: Ephesians Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 60-61 Name of Book: Philippians Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 60-61 Name of Book: Colossians Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 60-61 Name of Book: 1 Thessalonians Writer: Paul Place Written: Corinth Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 50 Time Covered: Name of Book: 2 Thessalonians Writer: Paul Place Written: Corinth Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 51 Name of Book: 1 Timothy Writer: Paul Place Written: Macedonia Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 61-64 Name of Book: 2 Timothy Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 65 Name of Book: Titus Writer: Paul Place Written: Macedonia (?) Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 61-64 Name of Book: Philemon Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 60-61 Name of Book: Hebrews Writer: Paul Place Written: Rome Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 61 Name of Book: James Writer: James (Jesus’ brother) Place Written: Jerusalem Writing Completed (C.E.): b. 62 Name of Book: 1 Peter Writer: Peter Place Written: Babylon Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 62-64 Name of Book: 2 Peter Writer: Peter Place Written: Babylon (?) Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 64 Name of Book: 1 John Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Ephesus, or near Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 98 Name of Book: 2 John Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Ephesus, or near Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 98 Name of Book: 3 John Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Ephesus, or near Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 98 Name of Book: Jude Writer: Jude (Jesus’ brother) Place Written: Palestine (?) Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 65 Name of Book: Revelation Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Patmos Writing Completed (C.E.): c. 96 Source: http://wol.jw.org...As you can see, all the Bible books are dated after Jesus.
The United States should stop all unconditioned aid to Africa

We must stop unconditioned aid to Africa to stop kleptocracies. Whenever we send aid to Africa willy nilly it is squandered by these foreign elites and they use it like currency amongst other elites and get money for the aid and then they pocket the cash or send it Swiss bank accounts. I can understand where you are coming from on the education in Zaire and I agree that when a society is well educated they can better speak out against their governments but if the governments establish themselves as superior and while the people are being oppressed the corrupt African leaders are investing in their own benefits such as a stronger military so that IF the people ever do retaliate against him, he will be ready to crush the opposition and maintain control. If we stop giving unconditioned aid and only give conditioned aid to Africa, we would be forcing corrupt regimes to follow our bylines if they want to survive because our aid is the only thing really keeping Africa afloat. To find a happy median though between the two of us, I placed a clause in the topic specifying that the United States should stop all unconditioned aid to Africa, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) however do not fall under the United States and will continue to give unconditioned aid successfully. The reason why we should allow NGOs to continue giving aid is because they are more grassroots based, they are not tied in with crazy bureaucracies, and they educate the people while supplying aid and the United States can never solve with unconditioned aid because we face the problems of bureaucracy, we don't stay at a grassroots level, and we do not educate the people when giving aid. Hopefully these are clear reasons why we must reject the United States from giving aid that only fosters corruption and sets a more dangerous precedent to Africa and that the only course the US can take is to give conditioned aid to stop corruption where it stands.
The United States should stop all unconditioned aid to Africa

Let me start off by saying that your point is well taken. If the circumstances were that the majority of the nations of Africa could just "stop being so lazy and actually DO something," as your argument makes it sound like, I wouldn't be having this debate with you. I actually agree with your view on unconditional aid when it comes to welfare and social programs in the United States, because yes, here in this great land, we DO have the ability to pull ourselves out from the gutter and make something of ourselves. This is not the case in Africa, however. Most of Africa is plagued with some of the most corrupt governments in the world. Many of the governments in the African continent were were founded solely on European greed and profiting. As a whole, the states were mismanaged and exploited, which consequently played a devastating role in the countries' post-colonial infrastructures. Take, for example, the country of Zaire. In Zaire, during the decades of Belgian rule, there was a lack of secondary or higher education. Once the country was granted independence, only sixteen individuals in the country had earned a degree from a university. Due to Zaire's newly established country status, this obviously placed it at a crucial disadvantage by dangerously handing the power over to a few individuals. During Zaire's Mobutu regime, authoritarianism flourished. So began the country's infamous kleptocracy, which resulted in the loss of millions. Zaire was not the only location of the rise of these kleptocracies, as they occurred in Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Somalia as well. So when you say that we should stop giving unconditional aid to Africa, you undermine all of the progress that has occurred there. More schools are present in Africa today than ever before, so as more and more African children become educated, the government's rule over the people's ignorance dwindles. To abandon that area of the world is not only unethical, but dangerous for us as a nation in terms of our safety at home and abroad. Uneducated children can easily be recruited by the likes of Al-Qaeda to do harm to the U.S. We must keep on promoting modern education, and giving aid to Africa, unconditionally, until their governments become more responsible with the power that has been given to them.
The United States should stop all unconditioned aid to Africa

For nearly fifty years, the United States has given trillions of dollars aid to Africa in hopes that we can solve for development, infrastructure, poverty, and diseases. We have set a far more dangerous precedent for the African individuals by providing aid to countries without putting any conditions on it. If we just keep giving aid to Africa without putting on a restriction for its use. Look on the bright side for America. We can still feel good about ourselves AND we can save money by not just throwing more money to a problem hoping that it will solve. Now we will have a more thought out plan for solving.
Light has no speed, cuz darkness dosnt slow light down

Darkness is not itself directly affected by the passage of time, so you could say it is timeless. However, it is incorrect to then conclude that light is time. Light is a form of energy whereas time is the passage of existence. It should be noted that darkness is defined as the absence of light. So the opposite of darkness would be the presence of light, not light itself. It is different because presence is a property of something that depends on a referenced location. Using myself as an example, I could say that right now in my room I am present, but right now anywhere else I am not. Talking about my presence is different from talking about me. Light is not limited by darkness, it is the other way around. You can shine a flashlight through a dark tunnel and the darkness will not impede the passage of light. I'm not sure what the temperedness of Earth has to do with anything. Not having much speed running in Pluto does not contribute anything substantial to this debate. Light indeed has speed, I explained why in round 1. Light cannot be on or off, it can either be present or absent. The range of light is not constant, it will vary according to the distance a said photon travels. You have failed to offer counterarguments to what I said in round 1. http://www.exactlywhatistime.com...
Light has no speed, cuz darkness dosnt slow light down

Light cannot be frozen indeed, but that is because for something to be frozen it has to be in a liquid state prior. Light has no state of matter, it is energy. Those equivalences you drew between all those terms seem to be arbitrary and based on nothing concrete or scientific. Please explain how light represents "constant time". What does that even mean? Darkness not slowing something down doesn't make that something unable to have speed. If you run in the dark, you will still have some speed. Speed is nothing more than distance traveled over time. Light has been proven to be able to travel certain distances over limited time intervals.
Judas saw Jesus resurrected.

This will be a funny one. As per Christian believe, they believe that every word in the New Testament is inspired. A thing I don't, I only believe in the Hebrew Bible and believe Jesus was not the messiah. But I will use all the scriptures in the Protestant bible to prove my point. First 2 timothy 3:16: All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 1 Corinthians 15 Here, we have it! Jesus appeared to the 12! The 12 disciples indeed, and it could not have been Matthias, because Jesus went to heaven before he was chosen. Thus if all scriptures are true, Judas most have been raised from the dead as well or he hanged himself after! :)
Inaction in the face of Injustice makes an individual morally culpable

Thanks for this debate! I hope that forfeit was a one-time thing...In this round, I'll briefly address Pro's case. C1: Bullying Pro is making a fundamental mistake here. His argument goes as follows: P1: Bullying is bad P2: Inaction enables bullying C1: Inaction is bad Firstly, Pro has failed to sufficiently warrant why P2 is true. Perhaps, if a student intervenes, they too will become the target of bullying. This may inflame rather that snuff out the problem. Secondly, this argument does not affirm the topic. The topic is not "inaction is bad" but rather it is that inaction leads to culpability. So even if inaction is bad, that does not make people who don't act culpable for the injustices they are witnessing. For instance, it might be bad to accidentally kill someone, but that does not make you legally (or even morally) culpable for their death. Pro makes no arguments about culpability, just badness, thus, there is no link to the resolution. C2: The Collective Same as the above. Moreover, what if the collective is the one perpetrating the injustices? If so, then the affirmative would require that we take action against the collective. So really, this argument is either potentially contradictory, or, at the very least, non-unique. SA: Fascism Really this is just taking things to a ridiculous extreme on the most tenuous of link stories. Look at society in real life, people do act against injustice, so these impacts aren't unique to the affirmative world. The negative doesn't have to argue that people don't act or shouldn't act, merely that they are not culpable should they choose not to act. And ultimately these impact don't matter if you fail to show culpability, because that's the baseline you need to meet in order to affirm.
is internet useful

EXPAND REACHABLE MARKETS Okay, I will agree to this stance. INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION Sometimes it is not a great idea to do this because what if someone tries to steal your ideas/work and make claim to themselves for it? VALUE ADDED SERVICE This may be nice to do, but only simple based things ought to mentioned for safety reasons. USER INFORMATION REQUEST Not sure what this is meaning? Could you elaborate a bit please? EASY LOCATION OF DATA Unless it is for business purposes, this is not the safest way to approach anyone’s interest. CONSISTENT MARKETING Do you have evidence for this one? SAVE MAILING COSTS If everything is done through the Internet for the sake of saving mailing costs, no point because there are times when mail is lost and all data/information can be lost and no way to be accessible. SO even if it takes not using the Internet for this purpose only, it would be reliably exceptional. CHANGING CONTENT IS EASY Okay. Acceptable. UTILIZE EXISTING NETWORKS Why would someone want to do this though? PROJECT AND WORK SHARING How can a person/ user be certain that it is surely protected?
One Piece is a better anime than Naruto

Character DesignOne Piece quality (trust me these guys are hardly ugly relative to the show, I'm begin fair to my opponent here choosingthe ebs to fhte ugly lot):Source: http://onepiece.wikia.com... Source: http://onepiece.wikia.com... Source: http://onepiece.wikia.com... The video I posted says it all.http://www.youtube.com...If you still need help to understand the gap in visuals observe this:Naruto quality visuals: Much better. StorylineNaruto has more twists than inception1) Itachi was forced to kill the Uchiha Clan.2) Itachi wasn't doing it with Madara's help; Madara was beign impersonated by Obito.3) The Akatsuki wasn't led by Pein, Pein was a puppet of Nagato4) The Akatsuki wasn't led by Nagato, Nagato was manipulated by Tobi5) Tobi is ObitoEvery bad guy is esseintailly linked ot Obito. This is f*cking epic. They are all linked so intensely that One Piece cannot compete: http://www.gamefaqs.com...;One Piece has baby twists.No internal conflicts, no variety nothing.AS FOR THE ATTACKS: every character in Naruto, aside from Rock Lee, does 3 or 4 of these Jutsu forms: http://naruto.wikia.com... can do unique kinds of them.
One Piece is a better anime than Naruto

"Idk where you got the idea I haven't seen One piece. I understand One Piece's crack-headed fighting mechanisms". Well, just understanding their "fighting mechanisms" doesn't mean you have watched the series from beginning to end. Now I will go ahead and give a rebuttal to each of your arguments. Gross Profit 2013 Who cares about gross profit!? Differences in gross profit are caused by the decisions of an anime's management team and marketing strategies. The quality of the anime really doesn't have anything to do with its economics. It is better to concentrate on which anime has shown to be most popular with the views. From the same site you referenced, I obtained a popularity poll that revealed much different results than you did (http://www.crunchyroll.com...) According to this survey, Naruto is 1, One Piece is 3, and Bleach is 5. Keep in mind that the reason Naruto has more viewers than One Piece is because Naruto is much more well-distributed and marketed in USA, whereas One Piece is mostly only in Japan. It has nothing to do with the quality of the shows. One Piece is literally way uglier than Naruto You have found a totally invalid picture of the Straw Hat pirates. That is not their standard clothing as shown in the regular anime. I feel that you have chosen such a picture on purpose to fool the readers. This link is a far better source for pictures of the Straw Hats: (http://onepiece.wikia.com...) Story Line You act as if One Piece never has any plot twists. To name a few major ones: 1) Nami betraying the crew 2) Robin betraying the crew 3) Rob Lucci the shipwright turning out to be a CP9 guy 4) The entire Straw Hat crew getting defeated by Kuma who actually turned out to be protecting them 5) ACE DYING :( Character Intensity EVERY ONE of the major characters in One Piece has an intense back story. And EVERY ONE of them has their quirks that make them who they are. Ask anyone who has watched the series. You can only claim that these elements of character development aren't present in One Piece because you haven't watched past the first 10 episodes. Curse you and your 3 hour time limit >.<
One Piece is a better anime than Naruto

Idk where you got the idea I haven't seen One piece. I understand One Piece's crack-headed fighting mechanisms better than I do the spiritual pressure system of Bleach (of course I understand the Chakra system more than those two since it's undoubtedly the supreme system of fantasy fighting power).For this round, I'll ignore the poitns Pro raised and simply come up wiht my own, I'll deal with rebuttals later.7Gross Profit 2013One Piece isn't even in the top 5. Naruto is the top (Naruto Shippuuden is just he enw Naruto, it stilll counts as the same series): [http://www.crunchyroll.co.uk...]One Piece is literally way uglier than Naruto This comes down to taste but it's widely reknowned in the anihem community that Naruto is one of the most visually appealing animes (bleach being the top) whilst One Piece is one of the least.Here are the straw hat pirates you speak of: Here is the Konoha 11 you compared them to, visually: Overall, the entire symmetry, precision of jaelines and breasts, as well as faciel features, of the characters (let alone the outfits) are far more intensified nad superior in the Naruto group than the Onbe Piece group you compared them too.StorylineSPOILERS ALERTOne Piece has good guys and bad guys. That is it.Naruto has a series of people that consistently either change alignment or are revealed in epic twists to have been good/bad guys all along (such as Itachi from bad-good and Kabuto/Sasuke from good-bad then you hav echaracters like Madara Uchiha who seem pure evil but then you realise their brother Obito is actually the bad guy, when he was always made to appear like the good brother).Character IntensityYou have people like Sai who respresent those suffering from Asperger's Syndrome; socially awkward geniuses.You have people like Sasuke and Gaara who represent near-suicidal teens both of whom got to this stage for entirely different reasons and both with hugely different temperaments and moral codes. You have characters like Itachi, Madara, Nagato and Deidara who all seem severely evil at first but then you begin to understand them.You have characters like Sakura, Ino, Tsunade all of whom either have bipolar disorder or suffer from some severe emotional swings that they hav eto cope with on a regular basis.You have lazy geniuses (Shikamaru), fat heroes (Choji), skinny heroes (Tenten), sociopathic heroes (Neji), Insane/brutal Heroes (Rock Lee), split-personality heroes (Naruto), narcissistic heroes (Sasuke), Histrionic heroes (Ino) and a whole bunch of other guys suffering from severe psychilogical disorders.The villains vary just as much as the heroes in their internal conflicts and varied psychological disorders.You have orphans by birth, orphans by chilhood, sibling rivalries beyond your wildest dreams and many other fantastic character conflicts that simply are not present in One Piece.TIME RAN OUT SORRY!
One Piece is a better anime than Naruto

Okay, I guess I have the Burden of Proof in this debate, so I'll present my argument first (3 hour argument time limit!? Why!? I have other things to do today!) First of all, I would like to say that I have watched both series and really like both of them, whereas it appears that you have only watched Naruto and maybe 3 episodes of One Piece. This makes it a bit harder to have a fair debate... Nonetheless, let's say that there are 4 major criteria for judging an anime on: 1) Character Design This point definitely goes to One Piece. I agree that Naruto has some pretty cool looking people in it, but ALL THE BOYS HAVE SPIKY HAIR!!!! One Piece characters are WAY more varied in design. Look at a picture of the Straw Hat Pirates. Then look at a picture of the Konoha 11. Look at a picture of the 7 Warlords. Then look at a picture of Akatsuki. Look at a picture of the 3 Admirals. Then look at a picture of the 3 Legendary Sennin. If asked which group of characters looks more interesting, someone who has never watched either show before will always choose the One Piece characters group (except for maybe the Admirals-Sennin comparison). 2) Character Development Ask anyone who has watched both shows. They will tell you that One Piece's character development is much much MUCH better than Naruto's. In One Piece you get emotionally attached to every one of the Straw Hats, as well as all the people they befriend along the way, and even some of the villains. In Naruto, you get attached to some of the main characters (e.g. Naruto, Kakashi, Jiraya, Itachi), but everyone else is sort of just there. I mean, just look at Sasuke, one of the main characters. Barely any of the viewers even like him anymore, even though Naruto himself wants him back more than anything else. That is not a good sign of character development. 3) Plot This is a bit harder to decide. Naruto has two giant sagas throughout the series (against Orochimaru, and against Akatsuki). Meanwhile, One Piece has several smaller sagas (East Blue, Baroque Works, Skypeia, CP9, Paramount War, Pirate Alliance). In my opinion, every saga in both series is equally awesome, with similar methods of building suspense, excitement, and emotion. The only thing that I think gives One Piece an edge over Naruto here is that almost half of Naruto is FILLERS that no one really cares about. 4) Fighting Mechanisms Let's face it. Everyone in Naruto has basically the same powers, with each character having only one or two special moves unique to them. Naruto himself (the character) is the only exception, having wide arsenal of powers. Meanwhile in One Piece, NONE of the main characters share any of the same powers. Everyone has totally different powers and fighting styles, making battles much more interesting than the ones in Naruto. This is why I think that One Piece has better fighting mechanisms than Naruto. If you feel that I have left out important criteria, then please inform me. However, I do not consider music important at all, as that is entirely opinion based. Thank you for challenging me to this debate. I look forward to your next argument.