BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
You do not worship god, you are gay, you curse at you parents, you are an adulterer, you WILL DIE!

Why do you have so much hate. You can say you don't, and you can believe in your mind that you don't, but like how it says in Matthew 15:18, "...whatever comes out of the mouth comes from the heart..." You should not be putting other people's beliefs, it is what they believe and they can base their actions upon what they believe. As far as I know, you do not believe in the Christian God, so you are in no position to tell others what their actions should be. Jehovah (God's actual name), does NOT speak through you, and so what you think should be done, and your interpretations are false. What is currently being taught is that God has an appointed time for judgement to take place, hence terms such as Armageddon. Matthew 24:30 actually describes what that day will be like. And it is THEN when Jehovah God will execute judgement and slay those who practice things that He detests. VIOLENCE is also something that God HATES. It would be unreasonable of Him to ask his followers to commit violent acts. He only does such acts (and He does it Himself mind you) to further His will on the earth and in the heavens. That is why He has an appointed day, to allow time for his followers to teach others, John 5:29 explains what happens next, "...those who did good things to a resurrection of life, and those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgement." He is giving time for everyone to change, and the opportunity through His followers, because He wants all to live as it says in 2 Peter3:9, "Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance." But He cant have any disobedient ones in His new kingdom, so he will not hesitate to destroy them when the time comes. So if you truly want to see yourself destroyed, and if you feel as if you need to be destroyed, keep doing what you are doing until the day comes. And if you die before it, tell me what it feels like to die twice, because He will resurrect EVERYONE. He is going to give all those who didn't hear the truth before their death a chance. But he will resurrect even the bad people, just to judge them, and destroy them eternally, even wiping you from EVERYONE'S memories. When he says that he will destroy the kind of people you mentioned above, he is not saying he will do it on the spot, rather if you practice such things, you surely are on track to die. And he does not, nor will he ever use us humans, to carry out the acts of Judgement He has planned.
To be decided during the debate

I doubt my opponent is going to read this before his turn arrives, so I'll have to do this. 1. The topics proposed by my opponent are essentially one topic. In exchange for being forced to debate both a position and a topic that I myself do not choose, I request only that I be given a choice between a variety of topics. This request has been denied by my opponent and I ask kindly that he proposes three new topics (of which one of the old ones may be included) that will fulfill my requirements. I request that these three new topics be posted in the comments section, which I will diligently check at least once a day. I will then comment on my topic of choice and the debate will continue on as detailed in the first post.
To be decided during the debate

This will be a three round debate. The debate will work in this manner: 1A: First Post Instigator: This explanatory post. 1B: First Post Contender: Contender suggests a list of 3 topics, phrased in valid format (ie. not in question format) Topics should be legitimate, and varied. 2A: Second Post Instigator: Instigator responds with his choice of the three. 2B: Second Post Contender: Contender then chooses a position on that issue and has the choice of whether to go first or second. If the contender chooses to go first, he effectively becomes the instigator and makes his opening statement immediately. If he chooses to do so, he must forfeit his last round response by typing "thank you for the debate" until the character count is satisfied. Otherwise, he types "I will allow my opponent to make the opening statement" until the character count is satisfied. The rest of the rounds act as the rounds of a typical debate.
To be decided during the debate

You'll take my life but I'll take yours too You'll fire your musket but I'll run you through So when you're waiting for the next attack You'd better stand there's no turning back. The Bugle sounds and the charge begins But on this battlefield no one wins The smell of acrid smoke and horses breath As I plunge on into certain death. The horse he sweats with fear we break to run The mighty roar of the Russian guns And as we race towards the human wall The screams of pain as my comrades fall. We hurdle bodies that lay on the ground And the Russians fire another round We get so near yet so far away We won't live to fight another day. We get so close near enough to fight When a Russian gets me in his sights He pulls the trigger and I feel the blow A burst of rounds take my horse below. And as I lay there gazing at the sky My body's numb and my throat is dry And as I lay forgotten and alone Without a tear I draw my parting groan.
Distance Track is Better than Cross Country

For this debate, I would really like a runner, who participates in both Distance Track and Cross Country. First, a couple ground rules when it comes to what can be debated. Distance Track shall be defined as the 400 meter dash, 800 meter run, 1600 meter run, 3200 meter run, 3200 meter relay, and 1600 meter relay. If I forgot any events let me know in the comments. Let's just keep the considerations between the high school version of these sports. Additionally, factors like weather should not be used in the following sense, "The weather is less cold and rainy during Cross. " Depending on where you live this may or not be true. Try to keep things universal.
Distance Track is Better than Cross Country

EFFICIENCY I do agree with you that it is far easier to measure your time when running Track than when running Cross. However, I believe that this takes some of the fun out of running. For me, when I have a set pace i simply try and match that pace. If I do not have a set pace, I simply push myself and try for the best possible time. Sometimes, this allows me to get better times running Cross than I could have gotten while running Track. Track is more scientific and detail oriented, and Cross is just the basic essentials of running. However, this does not make Track better, it instead makes Cross better. VARIETY There are many different types of Cross courses depending on which school you are running at for a meet. On the other hand, almost all of the Track "courses" are the same. The material that the track is made of can vary slightly, but once you get down to the track; it is just a 400m oval. There are more distance that you run, but once you strip Track down to the bare bones, the only difference between races is how many times you run around the same oval. I will give you the benefit that more distances to run are better suited for different runners, but the basics of Track are still just running in an oval. EXCITEMENT I feel that I must completely disagree with you in this category. The fact that Track meets last so much longer than Cross meets doesn't add to the excitement, it takes away from it. I had a track meet once where I didn't get home until 9:30 (The meet started at 3:30). Some people are finished all of their races before 6:00, but they still have to sit around waiting while the rest of the team runs. Getting cheered on may be good for some people, but I prefer to just push myself. I'll usually run with my one friend during Cross, since he runs around the same pace that I do. We'll push each other throughout the race, and that is all the motivation that we need. I hope I have countered all of the points that you have mentioned.
Questions for an Athiest

Hey I have accepted your debate, I can't claim to represent atheists as a whole but I will do my best to give my own personal feelings: 1. I am opposed to the existence of a God. I would not be extremely opposed to a god if he turns out to be moral but I am extremely opposed to gods who would condemn to hell such as the Christian god. The death of god is the death of meaning but also the birth of a sort of independence. 2. Love to me means the same thing it would mean to any other human being, my atheism does not affect this. 3. Knowledge to me is justified true belief (excluding Gettier cases). 4. Truth to me (and I will be more radical in this view) is non-existent in an objective sense. There is no such thing as objective truth (I assume here we are talking the truth of claims which cannot be empirically tested) in that truth is necessarily based in subjectivity. 5. Goodness I believe must relate principally to the well-being of conscious creatures. Goodness exists only as it is experienced and is experienced only in the minds of conscious creatures. 6. I honestly have no idea and it is extremely hard to tell. With the model we currently have of the Big Bang we can't extrapolate before t=0 or when the Bang starts to occur and therefore right now we really have no idea where the first something comes from, then again theists still have no idea where god came from. 7. The universe will end. I am not sure how the universe will end (there are several cosmological theories see https://en.wikipedia.org...). 8. Nothing, I will lack consciousness. Death concerns me not because once death has come I will not exist and therefore will be unable to experience anything. 9. I have thought that but I consider the possibility so unlikely that I don't worry about it. Also I would rather spend an eternity in hell than serve a god so evil that he would condemn a human to eternal suffering just for not agreeing with them. Thanks.
Questions for an Athiest

I have a few questions, which i legitimately want answered. I have never heard one of these properly answered by an atheist, without him using circular reasoning or unnecessarily long arguments. I have given only a short amount of time (60mins) but it should be plenty enough. I have also provided for only a short amount of characters, to avoid long redundant statements, but you should have plenty of space to answer all of the questions with easy explanations . This is not really a debate. Okay 1: Are you completely opposed to the idea of a God, or are you simply indifferent? 2: What is "love" to you? 3:What is "knowledge" to you? 4:What is "truth" to you? 5:What is "goodness" to you? 6:Do you believe there was ever nothing? 7: Do you think the world will ever end? 8: What do you think will happen when you die? 9: And have you ever thought that if there is a God, will you end up in Hell? Please keep the answers one to two sentences short, you should not need any more than that. No defense for you answer is required, just the answer.
Golden Goose 2.12 Sale reading

At the vintage street lunch, Nick introduced a blind manufacturer to ball degreasing, though Jordan' s hair was red with hints of black and white, interest on capital investments rose to 19.85%. Ready meals were available and popular, but out of date, sneaky sneaky. Jackie was a Navajo and must shave in the wardrobe, it was a favourite scandal, Oh such a nice lass as well, top drawer glorification, slip them on strappy and thongy no what I mean. Two step and high end dance shoes for sure and Buck adjusted to the combined nations, he was a berk and stuck over 400, it was wearing on the feet though G.G.G. application at a ratio of 2.12. Thongs will always be classic as Jack rogers Teva, an Arizonan Scandal some might say. Fitted wardrobes for sure, high end society fitments and Buck straps the American designer, he's always at it. Adjust your sails and put on your deck shoes, high end and on offer at most top outlets. 70% of the world are intent on using and ogling and display a different type of cycle, high end for sure with the advantage of carbon interfacing. When buying a cycle there are different points to look out for and when fishing always make sure your net works. There was a conducted tour with a potential for custard and folk used the moment for giving, clickety click G.G.G. and they had only themselves to blame re trailers, it was challenging and stand to attention, you may or may not miss it but search in the wood mid morning and by starlight. On the trail too, high end trail runner for sure. Yes Paul had a little zing and also one leg shorter than the other, he was a different colour but fancied a whole goose for sure, top drawer bottom drawer, taut bottom, ease it G.G.G. (applicator supplied). He was a bit green though but had to feed his need I suppose. G.G.G. Fanny's sneaky and so is Uncle Bob, threeway Bob and Fanny criss cross croo as it were, oops upside your hole, oops upside your hole, or something similar and a slack hole is worth two in the bush as the expression goes. Sneaky sneaky and Paul liked it lacy, crisscrossing for sure if you know what I mean, his hole corresponded and Uncle bob wasn't fussy, it's not normal. TV you said it and he was fit, in fact we were both fit and game as were Mick and Mimi, they liked to display on screen, in motion and in control, physical and certainly not boring.
Any form of music can be a form of praise and worship music. (Rap, Rock, Country, Etc.)

I am arguing this In worship, reverence is Requisite! Other forms of music outside of hymns is acceptable for appreciation, and celebration of the Lord. If I am at a Jesus festival listening to some christian rock than I am CELEBRATING the Lord, not worshipping. Merriam-Webster defines the following: Praise: to glorify (a god or saint) especially by the attribution of perfections Celebrate: to honor (as a holiday) especially by solemn ceremonies or by refraining from ordinary business b: to mark (as an anniversary) by festivities or other deviation from routine Worship: reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence When worshipping god, one is praising and celebrating him. However, the act of praising and celebrating god comes in different forms, many of which are simply praising and celebrating, not worship. As seen by the definitions, reverence is requisite in worship, unlike praise and celebration. Worship is an act, not simply an emotion. It is an action the requires reverence and calm and controlled behavior. It requires a serenity that allows someone to keep his mind dedicated to the Lord. You Topic of Debate: "Any form of music can be a form of praise and worship music" Any form of music cannot be a form of worship music because not every form of music provides the reverence that is requisite to create a state of worshipping.
Any form of music can be a form of praise and worship music. (Rap, Rock, Country, Etc.)

JTSmith I think that you misunderstood the argument, or you have a very limited understanding of praise and worship. You keep using the word reverent to describe worship, when reverence is only one aspect of worship. Webster's defines worship as to perform acts of homage or adoration. Easton's Bible Dictionary defines worship as homage rendered to God. Praise is defined as the joyful tribute of gratitude or homage rendered to the Divine Being; the act of glorifying or extolling the Creator; worship, particularly worship by song, distinction from prayer and other acts of worship; as, a service of praise. So when I am saying that you can praise and worship God through any form of music, by these definitions it is easily possible to worship God through multiple forms. Worship is not limited to reverence. What you are speaking of is an experience in worship, not worship as a whole. The problem with your argument is that you are limiting God and worship to a specific form. You are putting it in a box. Which, I am trying to expand the way worship is approached and viewed. It is agreeable that many people experience worship in similar ways. Most people won't find themselves in those deep heartfelt passionate moments listening or singing a rap or screamo song. However, to those who can, they often won't find themselves in deep heartfelt worship during slow songs. People worship in different ways. Also, when you make the claim that performance takes away from the worship experience, I would argue that the worship leader at the time is taking away from the experience, not the actual song. A good worship leader is never the center of attention, and a good backing worship band will not detract from the worship experience. You can't fault the song because of the band. Lastly if you look at the psalms, you cannot make the claim that every psalm is reverent. There are many that are very joyful and I would imagine, upbeat. Also when David says " "I will become even more undignified than this" (2 Samuel 6:22)" I don't think that he is referring to or in the spirit of reverence. So to say that reverence is the only form of worship is an injustice to worship and praise as a whole. God doesn't want our worship to become stagnant and devoid of happiness and excitement. Our God loves to see his children happy and joyful and also reverent and in awe of him. He is not looking for only one emotion in our praise.
Any form of music can be a form of praise and worship music. (Rap, Rock, Country, Etc.)

There is a time and a place for different kinds of music. When I am sad, I listen to some acoustic When I am feeling good i turn up some rock When Im partying a crank some hip-hop When I am celebrating god, throw on some christian rap/rock/country/whatever When I am worshipping him I sing something that keeps me reverent. Most christians would agree that worshipping the Lord God would include reverencing his name. Reverence, as defined by merrian-webster: "a feeling or attitude of deep respect tinged with awe; veneration." Most people would agree, that an act of reverence usually infers some silence, or controlled behavior. We show are respect for the Lord through humility and good behavior. We shouldnt act out, or make spectacles of ourselves during church services. Loud and irreverent music brings out emotions that drive a person to act out. Dancing and yelling while reverencing the lord takes attention away from him. A good rockband still gets more attention than god even if they are repeating "I Love Jesus" over and over again. Loud and irreverent music doesn't have the emotional effect of slower more meaningful and melodic tunes. For example, most people would be moved more by the melody from "Titanic" than from "Party Like a Rockstar". About 8 months ago I attended a festival dedicated th jesus christ in my school auditorium after school. They had all kinds of neat shows and music. Two women came out and sang a slow duet and I wanted to cry I was so moved by the Lord. Then they played the rock and the rap. I still felt as though I was celebrating the Lord but not worshipping him. I wasnt moved by his word or message. Only by the notes the band played. Rock/Rap/and Country can give the message just as well as a slow song, but they cant give the same emotional effect. When we are in a worship service we should be moved. We should feel Christs love. Its much harder the feel the spirit while listening to a strong beat and hard chords. Lastly, these performance take attention away from the Lord that is due during a church service. People become more entranced with the skill of the lead guiatarist than the skill of the Creator. People get wound up in the sweet tunes and not in the telling lyrics. People become more focused on celebrating and dancing instead of reverencing. Celebrating and dancing for the Lord are great! ...but only outside of Sunday Service Sunday Service needs to be all about the Lord and his spirit! We should be reverencing him. It shouldnt be a rock concert
Presentism Is False

Presentism is the theory that only the present plays a part of reality. This entails that the past was real and did play a part of reality, but only exists as a memory now, and that the future has no part of existence. This seems to be the view that most people share. People believe that now is real, and that the past is not real, and that the future is not real but will become the present. For example, 5 minutes from now plays no part in reality, but in 5 minutes, it will be a "now" point and part of reality. "Presentism is the view that only present objects exist. More precisely, it is the view that, necessarily, it is always true that only present objects exist. " [. http://plato.stanford.edu...] Of course, that definition above only applies to temporal objects (objects that exist pertaining to some temporal order). I will argue that this view of the Presentist is false, or at the very least way more plausibly false than its negation, and that some other theory of time which views the future as a reality is preferable; my opponent only has to undermine my argument sufficiently to win.
Presentism Is False

Present-ism is true since all events and entities that are wholly past or wholly future do not exist at all. So it is logical to assume that only the present exists. Some of the difficulties and paradoxes of presentism can be resolved by changing the normal view of time as a container or thing unto itself and seeing time as a measure of changing spacial relationships among objects; Thus observers need not be extended in time to exist and be aware, but rather they exist and the changes in internal relationships within the observer can be measured by stable countable events.
Five Nights at Freddy's 2 is the best game of the trilogy

Con has forfeited Round 3. Since this is my last post, I will give a brief summary of the debate. Con has stated his or her position, and has forfeited Rounds 2-3. On the other hand, Pro has stated his reasoning for his claim and has had nothing to rebut for Rounds 2-3. Round 4 is only meant for conclusions, meaning Con cannot post an argument or rebut my argument. It is already too late.