BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Jesus is not the messiah

Extend my arguments. My opponent has not refuted my arguments as to why Jesus is NOT the Messiah. Moreover, he has yet to defend his arguments that I refuted. My opponent cites a few scholar's using the appeal to authority fallacy. To respond to this, I shall post the Artscroll commentary. Isaiah 52:13 i. e. G-d's servant the people of Israel (Rashi) 52:15 Just as Israel had once been astonishgly degraded, so it will astonish the nations by its exaltedness when the time of redemption arrives. 53:1-3 this is the prophecy foretelling what the nations and their kings will exclaim when they witness Israel's rejuvenation. The nations will contrast their former scornful attitude toward the Jews (vv. 1-3) with their new realization of Israel's grandeur (vv 4-7). 53:5 we brought suffering upon Israel for our own selfish purposes; it was not, as we had claimed, that G-d was punishing Israel for its own evil behavior. 53:6 We sinned by inflicting punishment upon Israel. Such oppression is often described as "Hashem's punishment" (see 10:5, Habakkuk 1:12), for He decreed that it should happen (Abarbanel). 53:8 When Israel's exile is finally ended the nations will marvel that such a generation could have survived the expulsion from "the land of the living, i. e. Israel, that the nations had sinfully inflicted upon it. 53:9 Ordinary Jews chose to die like common criminals, rather than renounce their faith; and wealthy Jews were killed for no reason other than to enable their wicked conquerors to confiscate their riches (Radak). 53:10 That is, Israel. G-d replies to the nations that Israel's suffering was a punishment for its own sins; and when the people realize this and repent, they will be redeemed and rewarded. 53:11 Israel will teach the nations of G-d's righteousness. . http://messiahtruth.yuku.com...In his essay entitled "Contra Celsus",church father Origen concludes that Isaiah 53 "bore reference to the whole [Jewish] people, regarded as one individual, and as being in a state of disperson and suffering, in order that many proselytes might be gained on account of disperson of the Jews among the numerous heathen nations. " Quoted on: . http://www.aish.com...On a final note On a final note, I wish to quote this verse from the 53rd chapter of Isaiah. "God desired to oppress him and He afflicted him. If his soul would acknowledge guilt, he would see offspring and live long days, and God's purpose would succeed in his hand. " The Hebrew word "offspring" ALWAYS means a physical child. The word is zeta and it can only mean the actual seed or sperm from a man. Source: Rabbi Tovia Singer "Who is the Suffering Servant. " Lecture. ConclusionI have shown how my opponent's arguments are false and out of context.
Jesus is not the messiah

Mr. Infidel,Thank you for allowing me the honor of debating such an important topic with you. I also thank you for your fair requirements. My ResolutionJesus is the Messiah that was predicted in the Old Testament. SupportI do agree with you on your definition of "Messiah". It does in fact, interpret as "anointed one" in Hebrew. However, I do not believe that He was to be anointed with oil. As you stated earlier, "Generally, this is being PROPERLY anointed with oil. " The word to note in this passage is "Generally". A Note Of Requiring PropheciesYou stated that " I request a max of 3 messianic prophecies that Jesus allegedly fulfilled so I can have the most time to rebut them. " Will assure you that there are over 400 prophecies Jesus fulfilled. And that it would be a 1 in 100 Trillion chance for Jesus to fulfill at least 8 of them. I also should mention that in order for this argument to be successful and efficient, we must assume that the Bible (KJV) is an accurate and historic text WHILE agreeing that all events recorded in the Bible are true. If you are coming from a Judaism belief system, you may find yourself to be rejecting the New Testament. In that case, there would be no evidence to base my claims on unless we at least compromised on the New Testament being a historic document, which it is. PropheciesBecause you have only asked for three Messianic prophecies, I will provide three that I find to be interesting. 1. Prophecy:Isaiah 53:3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Fulfilled:John 1:11He came unto his own, and his own received him not. And Luke 23:18And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: 2. Prophecy:Psalm 35:11False witnesses did rise up; they laid to my charge things that I knew not. Fulfilled:Mark 14:57-58And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands. 3. Prophecy:Psalm 34:20He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken. Fulfilled:John 19:32, 33, 36Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified withhim. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake nothis legs: For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. ConclusionThese prophecies clearly demonstrate some of the fulfillments of Jesus Christ. To deny these would be to deny the Bible, to deny the Bible would be to deny the Old Testament and thus, Deny the prophecy itself. I ask that my opponent supply a prophecy that was not fulfilled by Jesus (if any).
Jesus is not the messiah

ResolutionJesus is not the messiah that was predicted in the Old Testament. The opponents of the debate, and what positions they will argue.Mr.Infidel is possitive, my opponent is negative. The length of the debate, in number of rounds.Arguments begin in round 2There are a total of 4 rounds.The maximum length of each statement.8,000 characters.The time limit between statements.72 hours.Burden of ProofEither I have the full BOP or my opponent can share the BOP. Either one works for me. If my opponent chooses the latter, I request a max of 3 messianic prophecies that Jesus allegedly fulfilled so I can have the most time to rebut them. ______________________________For the Old Testament, I request my opponent use the JPS translator available online at chabad.orgThesis: Jesus is not the Jewish messiah because he failed to fulfill the messianic prophecies, and he did not embody the personal qualifications to be the messiah.Messiah: The messiah is a Hebrew word meaning annointed one. Generally, this is being PROPERLY annointed with oil. I will explain in round 2.DO NOT ACCEPT IF YOU ARE JUST GOING TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE! PLEASE BE SERIOUS ABOUT THIS DEBATE! IF YOU TROLL, I WILL BLOCK YOU!
President Duterte's plans for the Philippines are justified.

You have literally taken my words and phrases and understood them letter by letter, Con. "When drug users are brought to trial, they receive due justice?" Big yes! It is always understood mate especially in district courts which handle civil and criminal cases, that the magistrate judges may oversee certain cases, issue search and arrest warrants, conduct hearings, etc... By this, those persons on trial received due process of law which is right just deserved by every citizen. This also simply relates to your response to the 5th " 6th paragraphs. Well, didn"t I ever specified "suspected" people fighting back to the police and armies undergo the said due process? This makes it even funnier, Con. Put this situation in your shoes. You are tasked to maintain peace and order to your assigned site, somehow someone has been very naughty and you ask him to be still. Yet he insisted and put the gun directed to you, what should you do? Of course, as armed you should fire back - unless you wanna be a hero at your stake. This comes with more cases on the "innocents", shall I call it, who repulse being arrested by police. If they were not drug-users why not? I"ll comment on your "study of the actual drug use" why focused on these studies? Have you been in the Philippines, Con? Now, you should be. You might not find it very rampant but our PDEA (Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency) estimated 4.7 M dug personalities involved in the country which shouldn"t be weighted against the global average but locally. "He non-specifically called for the killing of any and all drug users" " should you have more research who our President is, what will be his plans and what are those for. And with your gratuities or money-tipped police, where are your concrete stands on it. Polices here are in their normal duty and once they have excelled in things they usually do, awards and appreciations are given not even a penny, aside from their wages, they will receive. So why quote these payments brought by an intelligent officer, if he/she is an intellect, this police, and armed government officials were captured and put in jail this time. I believe in our strong and just government here. In very amenable and impress by the cited example, Con but let"s put the boat on the Dead Sea. By making reference to a non-official and unreliable source, you end up with a good point wrapping along a futile cargo of fabrications. I concede with the extra-judicial killings, but most involved people were proven positive in drugs not counting the behind-persons on huge caffeine there are. I know the HRW will always follow these apprehensive events for claims and I know that UN has created an independent investigation to determine irresponsibility and ensure accountabilities on these deaths, but nothing was proved and concluded "til now. By this, all rumors, hearsays, and searches from unreliable sources were invalid and all recent actions in the Philippines were justified.
President Duterte's plans for the Philippines are justified.

In your aspect of 'death sentence removed from any form of justice' is definitely invalid to me and to our nation. Remember we have October 10 in 2015 which is the World Day Against the Death Penalty where the world speaks out together to condemn this punishment for it is just such of a brutal sanction violating the right to life. Pull us out with your list of 32 countries imposing this death penalty for drug smugglers. Of course, in the due process of law, legal and capital punishments are allowed for certain drug offenses (mostly practiced in several countries) which includes DEATH. Some others will have mandatory death sentence perhaps depending on the depth of the offense the crime carries. I mean this simply, the offenders when caught and brought to court for decisions, they still get their rights and so, their justice. You may want to argue and have your white coat taken off and search for criminals undoubtedly fighting for their lives on this divisive issue.
President Duterte's plans for the Philippines are justified.

For the purpose of preventing everyday people from adopting Duterte-like ideals, I accept the challenge. I will argue that Duterte is a monstrous figure, and that his ideas do not belong in present society. His terrible administration should thereby earn him a legacy that ought to be looked down on. The idea that drug addicts deserve a death sentence removed from any form of justice will be the main aspect I will debate against.
President Duterte's plans for the Philippines are justified.

The recent administration under Presidente Duterte has become the best in History. Being a Filipino myself, I am all for the President's plan. National peace and order are very important because it can take a country to its economic peak. I know that I would not have the best country with total peace at all, but I will have it here in the Philippines. People who oppose the President's plan which for them is for the loss and fall of my country do not know how advantageous those can be. It is true that questions and doubts will always be there but we are free to our best right as a citizen.
President Duterte's plans for the Philippines are justified.

My opponent is making quite the baseless argument, while proceeding to make statements that justify things that really cannot be proven. "Most involved people were proven positive in drugs not counting the behind-persons on huge caffeine there are." Even if we go by what you say (which you haven't proven) pro is apparently okay with at least some innocents being gunned down for the greater good. Unfortunately, this contradicts the idea that my opponent cares about innocent life. He claims he wants to protect it by killing all of the drug users, but is fine with at least a few innocents being killed in the process; for most is not all. The obvious reality, is that calling for the killing of the vague idea of 'Drug users' without a trial goes against the very idea of democracy. If you support that, you cannot claim you support a just system. If you accept that some innocents will be killed without a trial because they might be drug users, you are objective against democracy in that sense. " You might not find it very rampant but our PDEA (Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency) estimated 4.7 M dug personalities involved in the country" Alright, 4.7 million, let's take a look at that. If we do some very basic math, we can find the percentage that is on the total population. 0.05%. Look out everyone, 0.05% of Filipinos are drug personalities! I really hope that my opponent can take this number into perspective. You are simply lying to yourself if you think this is a huge threat to the well-being of the Philippines. "Polices here are in their normal duty and once they have excelled in things they usually do, awards and appreciations are given not even a penny, aside from their wages, they will receive. So why quote these payments brought by an intelligent officer, if he/she is an intellect, this police, and armed government officials were captured and put in jail this time." That's not true though. As I mentioned previously, these police officers (and vigilantes) are given monetary incentive to carry out killings. It is in their financial interest to kill as many people as possible. This gives them a reason to kill based on gut instincts, which just leads to more innocent death. "why focused on these studies? Have you been in the Philippines, Con? Now, you should be." I don't need to go to the Philippines to read statistics. Any one person can draw a conclusion from anything anywhere, if they're at the right place at the right time. I thought this was basic knowledge, but I suppose not. Statistics paint a clearer picture of reality than individual experiences. Anyways, I stated most of my argument in the first round, so I'm gonna conclude here. Thanks.
Raising the minimum wage is a negative action for the citizens of The United States of America

I am disappointed that you chosen not to post an argument twice in a row now, but nevertheless I will still finish out the debate. In conclusion I believe that inflation is a major problem that stands in the way of raising the minimum wage, raising the minimum wage past $8.50 for at least the next 10 years is unnecessary, and that citizens in The United States of America already live "rich people" lives and that raising the minimum wage would only increase unemployment. I believe that this was a very amusing debate and that you were a very intellectual opponent, although I was not joyed with you forfeiting rounds 3 and 4.
Raising the minimum wage is a negative action for the citizens of The United States of America

(. http://reason.com...) The link which I have posted above contains some great examples of what raising the minimum wage would do to the current economy of The United States. This article claims that raising the minimum wage to president Obama's proposal of $10.10 per hour would eliminate around 500,000 jobs. As I stated in the previous round raising the minimum wage encourages and sometimes even forces companies and small business' to layoff as many workers as possible in order to balance out the shear amount of funds needed to meet the requirements of the new minimum wage law. Tell me, is not better to have 100% of the willing workforce on the job earning a decent wage than it is to have say, 75% or 80% of the workers collecting large pay checks while the other 20% to 25% stay at home, living off of welfare, hoping that they will be able to secure a job before their living conditions become "unlivable". As I have already stated in Round #2, business owners would also raise their prices to correspond with inflation, and now to cover the extra cost of keeping their employees. Youth unemployment is also go up because many young Americans earn minimum or close to minimum wage, and they would be the severely impacted by this. Most of the workers being laid off would be minimum wage workers as their compensation would be affected by the raise and not the higher earning jobs. Therefore, I believe that the real world consequences of raising the minimum wage outweigh the benefits, and that raising the minimum wage would hurt minimum wage workers the most as their wages would be the only ones increasing.
Raising the minimum wage is a negative action for the citizens of The United States of America

SunGod, you state that "Even the lowest paid workers in America should be earning a living wage.", but the thing is that minimum wage is a livable wage. "http://newsroom.blogs.cnn.com...; Above I posted a link about just a few of the items that people who work on "unlivable" wages own. These include air conditioning, televisions, refrigerators, and an Xbox. What this article is saying is that even though you might not have premium channels on your television, or a smartphone with 3G capability, that does not in any way make your life difficult and unlivable! Just because you don't have enough money to pay your cable bill, or buy a new refrigerator does not mean that your wages are "unlivable". Today I find it very sad how many United States citizens classify themselves as poor. What these people/families need is budgeting help, not overly increased wages. In 2011 the U.S. Citizens with the lowest income (3.52%) earned a little less than $5,000. However this number is is not a good representation because, if we assume that these people each worked 8 hours a day (which many lower class workers work more) They would end up getting about $2.40 an hour. Unless these people are very bad restaurant waiters, then my calculations show that these people are not working enough. And if they have a disability or something that holds them back from working, then they should be receiving welfare from the government, which is more than enough to live without starving day and night. According to Wikipedia, (http://en.wikipedia.org...(PPP)_per_capita), the poorest country in the world is The Democratic Republic of Congo, which has a GDP per capita, or how much wealth one person has on average of 400 International Dollars. The United States has a GDP per capita of 53,101 International Dollars, which puts it at #6 in the world out of 195 countries. (http://en.wikipedia.org...) The link above shows a list a of countries and their minimum wages. I personally believe that the minimum wage could be raised a little bit more to about $8.00 to $8.25 an hour but some of the proposal's are absolutely ridiculous. (http://inequality.org...) The link above says the minimum wage should be raised to $21.16 or higher! This amount is ridiculous and probably would lead to a steep incline in inflation. I hope that you do not think such a wage is realistic. It might be possible by increasing the wage steadily by a few cents every year, but then again inflation would always keep up with it. Also, raising the minimum wage destroys jobs as companies, especially small businesses cannot possibly produce enough money to pay these wages. Small and large businesses would have to fire so many workers to afford the minimum wage, that raising the minimum wage would practically create more unemployment and poverty. Many of these fired workers would be minimum wage workers as the wage raise would not affect the cost of hiring employees for higher paying jobs. Therefore, I believe that raising the minimum wage past $8.50 for at least the next 10 years would only create more poverty and problems.
Raising the minimum wage is a negative action for the citizens of The United States of America

SunGod, before I begin my argument let me say thank for accepting my debate, I hope that by the end of this debate you will see the consequences and problems that come along with a higher minimum wage. In a perfect society on a perfect planet raising the minimum wage to decrease poverty levels is a stellar idea, however since sadly since we live nor work in a perfect society raising the minimum wage has consequences that defeat the purpose of the initial raising of the minimum wage. One of these unfortunate consequences is called inflation. (http://en.wikipedia.org...) Today many lower and middle class Americans live under the hope that their minimum wages will continue to rise, they believe that a bigger salary will lead to more purchasing power, which allow them to continue a safe, average life and maybe once in a while that they will be able to treat themselves. Wether this treat be a new car, a Caribbean cruise, or a more affordable education for their children. However sadly, since macroeconomics is not taught in public schools, most of these people do not understand the effects of inflation on the economy. Due to inflation raising the minimum wage is a useless weapon in combating poverty because the economy will simply boost their prices in response to a raise of the federal minimum wage. Below is a link to a list which contains a few items whose prices have been inflated over time in The United States. (http://www.thepeoplehistory.com...) In conclusion, raising the minimum wage does practical nothing as inflation is always on guard, waiting to pounce as soon as the government officials put pen to paper.
Raising the minimum wage is a negative action for the citizens of The United States of America

Debate Rules & Regulations 1)You may include as many sources as you want, or no sources if you wish. 2)All source citation types and sources will be accepted. 3)The winner will be decided by an "Open Voting" style taking place over the course of a month after the debate is completed. 4)Failure to post an argument in 48 hours will not result in automatic disqualification although voters are encouraged to vote for a debater who does in fact post an valid argument for each and every round. The order and purpose of the five debate rounds are as following: 1) Challenge & Acceptance 2) Why or why not raising the minimum wage benefits the United States . 3) What a reasonable minimum wage value would be and this amount is reasonable. 4) Examples of scenarios (real & hypothetical) the would come as an effect of raising or maintaining the minimum wage.