BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Bible has too many contradictions

You start by saying that the Bible contains contradictions, please provide 3 contradictions for me to focus on. If I refute your contradictions, I win so feel free to take your time. Also present the verses so that I would know where to find these contradictions. Incidentally I also find others error funny ergo we will enjoy this debate. 1. "That is to be taken metaphorically." I cannot fathom how this can be a problem. The Bible contains metaphors and parables though its not as common as one might think. Other verses simply can't be metaphors. Are you suggesting that all books may use the art of metaphors (and similes) but the Bible is an exception ? 2. "There was more there than...." You do realize that the Bible is a collection of books hence things will be recorded from different perspectives ? If we agree on that then we don't have a problem anymore. The last part is just rambling. 3. "It has to be understood in context." There is no excuse for taking a Bible verse out of context. I hope my opponent won't do this. Additionally John 3:16 doesn't conflict with the Bible when considering the context hence its more than okay to use it out of context. 4. "There was just a copying/writing error." I will argue that a translational error is not a contradiction however for my statement to work I have to expose the translational error and show you the correct one. Wherefore my stance is that what was done was written but not necessarily translated correctly (after all we have too many bible versions for a translational error not to happen). 5. "That is a miracle." How is this an argument ? 6. "God works in mysterious ways." I will argue that we can't comprehend the mind of God and unless you object I don't see how we could fully understand the ways of God but rest assured that the Bible contains no contradictions. I know that at this moment this is an assertion but I decided to post this nevertheless: "The Internet Infidels website is merely a repackaging of old conspiracy theories, as well as blatant misinformation and overstatements, almost all of which have long since been abandoned by the consensus of scholarship. Nonetheless, the infidels continue to attract a substantial volume of internet traffic." Gotquestions.org
The bible is fable.

Now allow me to go on to my arguement: The Bible has historical evidence. In Exodus, Moses (with the help of God) parted the red sea so he and his men could walk across on dry land. The water then caved in and trapped the "bad guys". There is evidence of this miracle. . http://www.wnd.com... This website proves that it happened. How is the a short story? My opponent says that this is a short story, merely convaying a moral. I would strongly have to dissagree. He has given me no proof of his assumptions. I, however, have given proof that what is written in the Bible has truly happened. I hope that you will see the logic and reasoning in my arguement. Thank you.
The bible is fable.

EmotionGod does feel emotion and, at the same time, he doesn't. Because he created emotion he understands it. He fully knows what each feels like, he does not feel lust though. That is a sinful emotion that the devil created.2. Jesus God did have to give up Jesus because that was the only way we could be accepted into Heaven. Only the pure may enter Heaven, but since we are all impure and do evil we are not allowed inside the gates. So Jesus took the punishment. He died for our sins so that we don't have to; we may live eternally. But only if we accpet Christ as our Lord and Savior and freely confess that we are sinners.3. Creation Where exactlly did you get you're evidence as to when God created the earth. Because God created the world millions of years ago. ..4. Killing I never said that there is no killing; humans kill each other all the time. That is a result of sin. We used to live in harmony with all animals, but once Adam and Eve sinned we lost communication with the creatures.5. God There is one God. .. we do not know how he came into existance because that it outside OUR realm of time. And because we are human, we only have so much memory space. If we knew everything about God and everything that he has done, our head would explode. .. we wouldn't be able to hold HALF of it all. Because we think in two dimensional ways. .. God works in 3. 6. EvidenceYou asked for proof, I gave you links. You also falsely accused me of plagiarism. .. plagiarism is when one claims someone's work as their own. By giving the links to the websites, that shows that it's not MY articles, but theirs'. Therefore I DID NOT plagiarize. As much as I enjoyed this debate, I will not tolerate people falsely accusing me. I would also like to point out that yes, I posted links, however I do believe you did the same. I would like to sum up my argument saying that my opponent has not only had weak arguments, but has falsely accused me of a criminal law. .. plagiarism. My arguements have been backed with logical facts and based on conductive reasoning. Biblical events (not just the one's I showed here) have proven to have been true. I had wished my opponent had given me more arguements to rebut instead of just attempting to rebut mine. However, that being said, I have enjoyed this debate as it has brought me stronger to my faith. I wish to become a missionary, and these types of questions will come up. .. so this has proven to be beneficial. So, for that, I thank my opponent. I hope you all see that I have given logical points, and may the best debater win. These are support for the Bible being truth. .. note that I give CREDIT by listing the sites. .. . http://www.icr.org...http://www.bibletoday.com...http://www.bible.ca...
Increase Voter Turnout by Holding Money Until Vote

I have received no counter arguments from my opponent, so I will present them myself, and refute them. The implementation of this system would not force anyone to do anything, simply enact a self-provided incentive to do so. The only part yet to be figured into the plan is how to set this up. I believe that the money should be held by the state Division of Elections department. Part of every citizen's taxes will go towards this incentive; it will be put in their voter account. It provides some nice side benefits as well; if the money is absent from their account, you know that they have voted. It will be set up by someone with more knowledge of the whole process than myself, only 14 years old; I have yet to hear any fact based arguments, so I assume it has been found to be a possible option. Thank you for reading my arguments.
Increase Voter Turnout by Holding Money Until Vote

I was rolling the idea over in my mind and I realized that it had a fundamental flaw; it didn't solve the root problem. [1]Citizens would still be uneducated and uncaring in the world of politics. Therefore, this change would only be used as a temporary proposition until we can reform our education and voting system. My proposition is flawed in the fact that we force citizens to do something against their will; however, some things are necessary, just as a schoolboy who wishes to avoid his education. We must force that schoolboy to complete his education until he realizes the importance of receiving one. I await my opponent to present his case. [1] http://www.forbes.com...
Increase Voter Turnout by Holding Money Until Vote

I was pondering things we could do to increase voter turnout and I came up with this; every election, we require people to deposit a small sum of money to an election bank about a month before an election they're eligible for; maybe only around $7 dollars, or however much they make per hour. This money has no interest on it or anything like it; once they vote, they can withdraw the money they deposited earlier. If they don't vote, it stays in the account, but they cannot withdraw it. Perhaps the money can be collected from their pay check, income taxes; I'm not sure. It's not a fully formed idea ready for implementation, but hopefully you get the gist of it. I was wondering if anyone had any objections or additions to it. Thanks.
Jesus did not rise bodily from the dead

=====> Introduction <======Because this is the last round, I will make only a few minor points and respond to a few of his. This last round (as per the terms) is for final rebuttals and closing. I like keeping the last round under 5000 characters. I must say, I am highly disapointed in my partner. =====> My case <======I have argued that the Bible cannot be relied upon as historical evidence based upon the numerous contradictiosn and faulty history that exists within the four gospels. My partner neglected to respond to this and added new arguments every single round. "My partner claims..."•Jesus was real, until I used the Bible as evidence I conceded this based on the type of debate not based upon the Bible. •The Bible is not taken seriously by any real scholars Where did I claim this? •The evidence I posted doesn't count for no other reason except his foot-stomping protest. Huh? Where did I claim this? Refuting that Jesus never called himself God:I never claimed this. I claimed that it was misquoted. Likewise, this point is irrelavent to both of our cases. New Arguments:As seen earlier, my partner made new arguments every single round. I believe this shows poor conduct. Here is a list of historical person that verify the Bible as a historical document:Argumentum ad populum.Tentatively Identified This proves nothing. Conclusion My partner added new arguments every single round, which shows lack of conduct. My partner copied and pasted from wikipedia's sources, showing that he plagarized his sources and did very poor research for this debate. My partner defended none of his opening arguments. My parnter has not proved that Jesus rose bodily from the dead. I have shown that the Bible is not a reliable source; thus casting doubt on the resurrection. For these 5 reasons, I strongly urge an affirmative vote.
Jesus did not rise bodily from the dead

RESOLUTION Jesus of Nazareth did not rose bodily from the grave. Clarification This debate focuses on the historical accuracy of the New Testament concerning the resurrection. Before anyone accepts this debate, I concede two points: (1) Jesus was a real person, and (2) Jesus died via crucifixion. However, we are debating if Jesus rose from the dead.INTRODUCTION I would like to express my appreciation to anyone who accepts this debate and this opportunity to debate this subject. I also thank debate.org for setting up this platform for us to debate. DEFINITIONSJesus of Nazareth is the centural figure of Christianity, and in Christian theology, the promised messiah of the Old Testament. Jesus is allegedly God incarnate and died to atone for our sins. [1] The resurrection is a fundamental claim of Christianity; namely, if Jesus did not rise from the grave, then Christianity is in vain. RULES A) Structure1. Acceptance2. Opening arguments3. First rebuttals4. Second rebuttals5. Final rebuttals/statements. (No new arguments) B) Acceptance1. Only accept if you are serious about this debate.2. Only those 17 and older may accept. 3. If you are a troll, you will be reported and blocked.C) Conduct1. Forfeiting and plagarism will result in a forfeit.2. If you wish to forfeit this debate, then say so; don't let the time run out. 3. No ad hominems.D) Voting1. Please provide an RFD for your vote. If your vote is not up to par with RFD, your vote may be countered.2. Please read the entire debate before voting.3. Please do not vote based on your bias.Good luck, I anticipate a good debate. References 1. http://carm.org...;
Resolved:We should move all education standards to be based on Freirean Pedagogy.

Hello, and I'll be joining you for debate. I believe freirean pedagogy is not beneficial to society. I honestly have never heard of this, but I'll try my best... Freirean Pedagogy is a way for teachers to communicate with their students by having discussions in-class. However, doing this will give the teacher less time to communicate with each individual student. An average class has about 25 students. Having to have a discussion with each of the students, each with their own individual beliefs, shortens the time-frame the teacher gets to actually teach. With the banking method, every student gets the same amount of information in the same amount of time. The teacher can fit an immense amount of info in one class period, speeding the education process along. If the student didn't take notes, that's just the student's study habits. If the student is lagging behind, they could just have an individual discussion with the teacher (which every teacher is obligated to help) outside of class time, thus eliminating the con of shortening the time-frame of teaching. Critical thinking seems to be a big part of the freirean philosophy, but that is easily solved by assignments that require critical thinking. Essays, reports, all of these require what freirean pedagogy offers. As almost every education system in the US (or in other places) assign these types of assignments, all students develop these skills in the "banking" system anyways.
Are mermaids real

Your first video was literally labeled by Animal Planet as science fiction based on a theoretical claim. [1] It was admitted to be fake. Your second video is unavailable. In conclusion, Pro has offered 0 legitimate evidence besides debunked hoaxes and unsupported assertions. I have successfully debunked all of it, And thus fulfilled my BOP. I thank Pro for this debate. Vote Con! [1] www. Dailymail. Co. Uk/news/article-2333515/Mermaid-hoax-How-mockumentary-gave-Animal-Planet-biggest-audience-EVER. Html
Are mermaids real

"I believe that most mermaids some are not majestic animals and would probably cause harm to people do to there past inter actions with people. " Once again, No evidence. The authorities agree that there's no evidence as well. [1] "There is a mermaid museum where they have fossilized mermaids " Where? Is there evidence that these fossils are real? "and there is a man who reported seeing a mermaid while in a submarine and he got it on video so if at one point in time they were real" Show me the video? Just because says it happened doesn't make it true. "not only reported sightings but there are also videos then they are real in my opinion. " Show me? SOURCES: [1] www. Livescience. Com/21377-mermaids-no-evidence-noaa. Html
Are mermaids real

I believe that most mermaids some are not majestic animals and would probably cause harm to people do to there past inter actions with people. There is a mermaid museum where they have fossilized mermaids and there is a man who reported seeing a mermaid while in a submarine and he got it on video so if at one point in time they were real and there are still not only reported sightings but there are also videos then they are real in my opinion.
Are mermaids real

-- BOP -- Since Pro is Pro, And Pro is the instigator of the debate, Pro has the Burden of Proof and has to prove that mermaids are real. I do not have to do anything but refute his points. -- Arguments -- "I believe that mermaids are real, Because there is so much proof of them being real we are just being blinded/misdirected by the government because they do not want people to be scared" No evidence. Why would people be scared of mermaids? According to most "sightings", They are supposedly majestic creatures. "people shouldn't disregard the question because we have only explored 10% of our ocean ["] best hiding spot in the world. " The debate is on whether mermaids are real, Not whether they could be. Pro gives 0 evidence.
Multiculturism causes racism

To round up this debate I should like to remind the voters that the issue at hand here is that multiculturism causes racism. I have contended throughout that, while multiculturism may lead to tensions in certain quarters, it does not follow that this is the norm. Let's take one example where there has been two-way traffic between countries. For generations the English have emigrated to India and the Indians have emigrated to England. This has led to a significant and welcomed exchange of cultures. Take language: English in India "enjoys the status of subsidiary official language but is the most important language for national, political, and commercial communication." (1) Similarly, many words of Indian origin have entered the English language including: avatar; bandana; bungalow (what the English call a single storey house); candle; candy; cash; cashmere; chutney; cot (what the English call a crib); cummerbund; ginger; guru; gymkhana; juggernaut; jungle; khaki; lilac; loot; motor; mugger; nirvana; opal; orange; pyjamas; sandal; sapphire; shawl; sugar; shampoo; thug; veranda and yoga. (2) Sport is another good example. England gave India cricket, which is now the most popular sport there and the Indians gave the English polo, which is now very popular with the British aristocracy. Trade and exchange of knowledge is another important example of how multiculturism has benefited both nations: the English built the Indian railways and in return the Indians gave the British their cuisine – there are over 10,000 Indian restaurants in England and Wales alone (which is a lot in an area only two thirds the size of Kansas) and chicken tikka masala has replaced fish and chips as Britain's national dish. (3,4) Regarding the political situation in the United States, it broadly reflects that of most European countries. The Republicans are akin to right-wing European political parties who are conservative by nature, resistant to social changes and patriotic to the point of nationalism. Similarly, the Democrats are akin to European left-wing European parties who are progressive by nature, more open to social changes and patriotic but stop short of nationalism. In terms of multiculturism this means Republicans rarely support immigration except when it is politically or economically expedient for them to do so, such as when wealthy Cubans fled the revolution in 1958 or dissidents fled the Communists regimes during the Cold War. Left-wing and liberal parties, on the other hand, are more willing to accept their international obligations and will consider each case on its merit, rather than dismiss immigrants if they are poor or do not share their political ideology. Thus, we can see that multiculturism may, indirectly, lead to racism in a small minority of individuals but the solution is to educate and reform these people rather than block immigration altogether. Thank you. (1) https://www.cia.gov... (2) http://en.wikipedia.org... (3) http://en.wikipedia.org... (4) http://en.wikipedia.org...
Multiculturism causes racism

as a conclusion, I think it has been proven that multiculturism does cause racism, imports racims, and brings ethnic conflicts to the countries. It destroys national identity and pretty much leads to the destruction of the native groups. The laws about asylum and refugees are nonsensical and must be repelled. With the refuges, usually from both bands, you are bringing the conflict that caused them to leave with them. You are not solving anything, you are just spreading the problem to other nations,making it worse. here an example of foolish immigration policies importing the somalian islamic civil war to america: http://minnesota.publicradio.org... that is why I am opposed to any international agreement and I think that every country should look for its own people only "So, since clashes between cowboys and Indians now only take place in movies and racial clashes between British, Dutch, French and Spanish-Americans are almost unheard of, it is proven that, in the long term, multiculturalism does not cause racism" Indians received special reservations in the early 1900s, a reservation involves territorial separation, so it cant be classified as multiculturism. That is why the clashes ended, not because multiculturism solved the problem somehow. Untll then, Geronimo and his people had kept fighting for a homeland should the native americans have never gotten their special homeland, clashes would have continued to this day. Europeans were far more numerous than indians, Indians did not want to integrate, because it was them and not the europeans the ones that were going to end up being assimilated. and they understood very well that assimilation very well meant the cultural death of their civilization btw. British, Dutch, French and Spanish cultures are all different variations of the western civilisation. You just can compare it to letting people from arabia and Myanmar going ito your country Anyways, I dont really think my opponent knows how things are going this side of the Atlantic. Politically and ethnically, the country is very divided, with a multicultural coalition in one side (the democrats), and a capiltalist party whose support is basically white men only (republican) in the other side. This divide can be seen in the vote for Obama, that had a strong tribalist elements, with majorities of blacks and latinos voting for him, while whites slighty aligned with McCain; and the wave of recent racist attacks against whites after Obama's victory, the most shocking one in Ohio, when a mob of blacks attacked a white family because "it is a black world" http://www.ohio.com... police as always denying it was a racist attack, typical this other case is telling, not even blacks want multiculturism http://www.cnn.com... of course, for the leftwing media and the police it was not a hate crime either I wonder what would you do if one day you were the victim and you are left ignored by your beloved leftwing media and the multicultural police sorry, but in the left wing multicultural utopia, white men are not welcomed
Multiculturism causes racism

With many thanks to my opponent for his considered comments which were, unfortunately, solely focused on the negative aspects of multiculturism. However, I should like to remind the voters that immigration also brings many positive things, such as: ethnic foods; exotic girls; world music; international theatre; exotic girls; foreign clothes; overseas art and exotic girls. Never mind that though, let me address my opponent's question "do you think (importing violence) is worth the pair of exotic girls that you are going to have sex with?" Well, that depends. Does my opponent mean at the same time? I mean, it's a tough call, especially given that British girls are now the third fattest in the world (1) and without the all foreign girls there would be an even more acute shortage of physically attractive women! Seriously though, I do concede that there are problems associated with immigration: lack of suitable employment opportunities; increased levels of crime; lack of affordable housing; increased pressure on the national health and education services, etc. However, all countries that are signatories to the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees have an obligation to accommodate any "person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it." (2) The United States is a notable exception in that it is only party to the 1967 protocol and, as such, does not share the same obligations as the other 147 signatories, which may be why my opponent is surprised at the amount of asylum seekers there are in Europe compared to America. In the final analysis, accepting refugees is, for most countries, a legal obligation, though it is also a moral one, and while immigration does cause friction in some quarters most people treat asylum seekers the way that they would like to be treated if they found themselves in their unfortunate circumstances – which means they don't persecute them on the basis of their race. The resolution is, therefore, negated. Thank you. (1) http://www.nationmaster.com... (2) http://en.wikipedia.org...