BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
People should have a religion

Thank you for taking the challenge. The definition of religion: A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion. So following that statement, A religion does not only consist of Islam or Christianity etc. To have a religion is to believe in something whether it be a higher power or even yourself. If you believe that running every morning before work will make you a healthier person and so you do it religiously every day. Therefore you have adopted running as your religion. A guiding force that gets you through the day. I'm not saying people should submit themselves to a higher power, I'm saying that people should devote themselves to something meaningful that gives their life a meaning. Why shouldn't someone believe in something greater than themselves if it makes them better people in society.
People should have a religion

Why should people be forced to have a religion? Do you mean by everyone should have a religion? We must acknowledge that majority of the world practice religion in different manners, Like Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Paganism, Etc. However, What about the 16% or 1. 2 billion people who are atheist, Agnostic, Secularist, And anyone non-religious? Why should they have to adopt a religion? It's freedom to express whatever religious or non-religious affiliations you want to express. Not everyone has to be in a religion. *Please elaborate more on your position so I have a clearer understanding on your views*
People should have a religion

"Religion is all about giving and loving". I disagree that religion is "all" about giving and loving. Although there are many good people who are Christians, Muslims, Jews, Etc, There are people who have done bad things in the name of religion. - During the Crusade period, Many Christians killed anyone who was non-christian because the teachings of other religions were contradictory to the bible. In the bible, It does say "bring there those enemies of mine (Jesus), Who did not want me to reign over them, And slay them before me", Luke 19:27. It's a wonder where the Christians in the crusade period got this idea of massacre of non-christians. I don't know about you but that doesn't sound very loving to me. - Let's look at the present. ISIS is a terrorist organisation that promotes the idea all non-muslims should be killed because it's Allah's message. In the Quran, It states to "not to make friendship with Jews and Christians" (5:51), "kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (2:191), "murder them and treat them harshly" (9:123). This is where the organisation get their ideology from. My point is that religion can inflict harm onto other people, And forcing the 1. 2 billion non-religious people to adopt a religion is absurd. However, Just because someone is religious, Doesn't mean they don't do good deeds, But the same can be said to the non-religious. There are good and bad people in every position. One thing to point out is that there are a lot of non-religious organisations that help make our world a better place. One example of an organisation is Kiva, Where they donated over $40 million dollars to fund many people who are financially unstable. So to need religion to be a good person is an understatement. The only reason for someone to be religious is if they are convinced the particular religion they are apart of is what they believe to be true. You don't need religion to be a good person. Reference: - History, June 7 2010, Crusades, Https://www. History. Com/topics/middle-ages/crusades#section_10 - Ibn Warraq, July 2 2004, A Call To All The Muslims Of The World, Https://centerforinquiry. Org/blog/a-call-to-the-muslims-of-the-world/#warraq-ibn - Kiva, Https://www. Kiva. Org/team/a_atheists_agnostics_skeptics_freethinkers_secular_humanists_and_the_nonreligious *P. S. - Thanks for actually having a proper debate with me. *
People should have a religion

You have a fair enough point. So let's look at the main definition, 'the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, Especially a personal God or gods'. Religion is all about giving and loving. Christianity speaks about loving your neighbour as yourself. Islam speaks about training oneself to give to charity in times of wealth and struggle. Judaism speaks about disbursing ones bounty to others. Thus, When you are in a position to assist someone else you do so as means of justice. And I can go on and on. Let's look at the case of the Belize prison, The prisons main principal is religion terrorists and rapists go there and they leave there changed men, Yes they can't change their past but they leave the prison with a changed mindset all thanks to religion. Whether what they believe in is true or not, That is for another debate all that matters is that they are leaving willing to be a change in the world, Why would you stop that if it is proven to work time and time again?
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

My name is Gordon Jospeh Thomas Fiala, and I fancy myself to be the false Prophet ~ yes the very same. I have come to my faith naturally as a child without incentive and philosophized Hinduism before I had recognition of the church. Having read the Bhagavad Gita, I was assured Hinduism is in fact 100% monotheist, and that no other deities or demigods (as gods are not hinud) have personalities or bodies of their own, but are a portion of Lord Krishna, to whom they are like freckles, hairs and cells of his Cosmic being { Krishna is the only God in Hinduism and gods are not in any way comparable entities in any of the worlds religions, and never have been believed to be by any religious people. }. As we progress, I am going to encourage you to not be belligerent by suggesting: that people who think they are Christians are Christians; who want to be Christians are Christians; that say they are Christians are Christians; or who act like they are Christians are Christians. You loose by default if you are so incapable of comprehending Faith that you use agnostics as examples for people who "found God". Regarding The difficulty of revealing God to unfaithful disbelievers, this will be a truly wonderful experience for us both; given I love to do just that, while you are Begging for it. With further-a-due I will be presenting Science, which I doubt has reached your ears, historical anomalies, modern cultural activities and influences, philosophies that exist in all renowned world cultures, and present my own personal experiences and Efforts. You loose by default. Because you are incapable of actually holding your ground in this debate; Ludwigs 7th law of Philosophy: you cannot stipulate about that, where you are not. You are ignorant and thus able to present no evidence. I will accept your first submission as soon as you like. Thank you, my Regards ArcaneUnit { remember the name }
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

If I had a pound for every person who declared that they had 'found God' I would indeed be a rich man. Many of these people subscribe to the Biblical Faiths. Let us consider this declaration within the context of this 'Hide and Seek' Biblical God.Check out your doctrines before you challenge me on this. If God revealed himself then what credit is due to you?If you found a 'concealed' God then tell us where/how you found him/it. Let me give you a scenario that you can consider.I am an entrenched atheist. If a Biblical God or anything remotely resembling same revealed itself to me then would my acceptance of same be worthy fare for my salvation. If I stumbled on this God inadvertently then surely I should be able to direct people to it. If a child runs in from the garden declaring that they have found a caterpillar, then instantly they will respond to my request to show me where it is. Isn't it that simple. I think it is. What is this 'finding God' about in your 'neck of the woods' I want to offer you kudos if you deserve it.
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

IN my opponents last post he acknowledged that sinful acts are conscious decisions ~ As are all acts. This indicates Credit is merited for finding God. If God was to reveal himself to you, and you do not willingly and consciously act, you will not see or acknowledge him, regardless of how well you know he is there. ~ I once had a dream, that I looked up from a table where I sat with God, and a waitress with a beautiful body leaned over the table to make a brief comment, and I looked away from her and God in shame, and I no longer saw him. My opponent failed to suggest in which way no credit was merited. Most assertions were directed at his own lack of principal beliefs. He did not direct those personal errors in consideration as debate arguments or substance of merit. Gods people searched for him and found him. You only find God when he reveals himself to you if your looking. Every murderer, thief, gangster, drug addict, perverts, criminal, arrogant individual, pompous and ignorant fool, negligent coward etc... knows of their lack of effort and good deeds and the excess account for syphoning off the system parasitically. One is arrogant not ignorant for all their own sins. NO one is credited ignorance for their sins. We are in a world that is: as it is ~ capable of hosting all that is possible. We as religious people do not see the world any different than it is perceived and proven to be. God is clear as can be. one only needs stop insisting that God is wrong to justify the current world affairs; And than by removing God conclude that the world affairs are inconsequential. Thus indicating the affairs were only so unpleasing as they were forbidden. ONe deserves credit for suggesting that ^That theorem is immature and irrational.
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

Arcane Unit states: 'To begin, we will re-establish the principal of Faith shared by every follower of each of God's religions since the beginning of Time; that condemnation is justifiable through the arrogance of the sinner ~ for even if God himself miraculously was not real, it would still be arrogance, and not ignorance, to sin.'I think that you request of me to look for God within my 'moral self'. Is this correct? I commend you for your sincerity and help here. I asked for directions and I honestly feel that you have given some to me.Your expressed clarity in the above statement has explained many things to me regarding the indifference shown by many religous people to the plight of the sinner as they face damnation and torment. You clearly state that evil doing is a conscious act and that it is essentially wilful and that it is normal that it will receive censure. Am I correct in this?When I look into my moral self I see the mercy and love of Jesus, the human being towards the sinful woman at the well, I see the bravery and love shown by the staff of Médecins Sans Frontières ,who mop up the misery left by mankind's constant ignorance. What I see is humanity, I do not see God. Nevertheless, I feel that I have made progress because I am examining a very specific place. This definately is what was demanded from you because of your acceptance of this debate challenge.Let me look again:I feel a tremendous pain in that I can almost taste the potential that lies within human love for a species epiphany. Jesus believed that this energy might prompt us to transform the world back towards its created glory where our wonder might once again re-establish itself .God is within life on Earth if God is anywhere. Our sinful nature is that part of us that is winning. It is greed, ambition, fear, cruelty and indifference. A higher love can only be an objective morality that is present within life and of which mans 'love' is a component. It cannot be personably human except when considered in terms of our responses to it. Do you accept this point? Our inability to respect our fellow life forms is a litmus indicator of our self imposed isolation from this objective energy. Am I talking about your God or do I need to take a step backward. If you can answer my enquiries, then you are well down the road of victory in this debate. I would nearly concede already. Thanks
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

Arcane Unit: 'These are all the same religion, and they all have the exact same principals, ethics and philosophies. IN none of these religions is there any but one true God.'Good work here Arcane Unit. All I want to do is give you kudos.Just tell me where he is and why I am too stupid to see him.All religions purport to be selling goodness and ethics, etc and they all fail dismally to deliver on their divinely inspired promises. Why is this. There is no visible difference between a billion people using Google and a billion people believing in this one God thing.If you doubt what I say you would have to say that the religious of the US were more 'elevated' than the Chinese. If you continue your course and declare that these people are not 'true believers' and assert that you alone speak truth then you by default place yourself in a long queue of 'one man religions' which is the lonliest place in the world.Let us be blunt. Tomorrow I want to experience this God of yours. If he is hiding from me then you just tell me where and how you found him and I will look there. Tell me what to do and I will be grateful. Be very precise. Thanks
You deserve no credit for 'Finding God'

Arcane Unit (?) states :You loose by default. Because you are incapable of actually holding your ground in this debate;Ludwigs 7th law of Philosophy: you cannot stipulate about that, where you are not.You are ignorant and thus able to present no evidence.I agree with you, I am at a disadvantage here. I do not know where Lord Krishna is but you say that you do. I will not say a bad word about him because I am ignorant of his ways . Show me and I will be eternally grateful. I am really looking forward to this especially the following items on your menu.,historical anomalies,modern cultural activities and influences,philosophies that exist in all renowned world cultures,Ready, Steady, Go! (If you please)
god does not know how to love

First of all, I would like to say I know where you are coming from believe it or not. There are bad theist debaters, just as there are bad atheist debaters. How good a debater is depends on: A: How correct they are. A LOT of religions are out there, so not all of them can be true. More accurately, only one can be. Everybody picks the one they think is right, and I've picked mine, because let's be honest here, sending babies to hell just for dying without being baptized is stupid. B: How well they debate their point. You mention people "inventing lies" because people WILL do almost anything to protect their beliefs. you have been victim to both of these things and see most of theists as slobbering idiots. People can, and do invent and lie if they are caught in the spotlight. Second off, I would like to apologize for being unclear. By saying that the children would "be punished" I meant that the evil people around them would have turned them evil, making horrible amounts of lost souls. I don't think that it was an abortion, because that is killing babies just to get rid of them. Any babies that are the unfortunate victim of early death, coincidental to the cleansing of the earth or otherwise, I believe, will go to heaven. Sorry if this debate has been an unpleasant experience. And, I would like to point out, it's not that they don't HEAR you. They won't listen to your arguments and make said lies because they are caught in the spotlight, so insulting them just causes a spiral into chaos. I believe you could be a great debater, just don't insult people. I would like to apologize for me in-concise wording, misreading and other errors for my first debate. I look forward to debating you again under friendlier terms, and apologize to the audience for an unfinished debate.
god does not know how to love

Seasoned beatings. Oh whoops, sorry I meant to say greetings, yeah that"s it. And how are you drooling today? Oh sorry, I meant to say doing today, yeah that"s it, just a slip of my furry tongue. I've got to stop making these deliberate miss-steaks on my part. I do hope that you are in the very best of spirits and that you do know what you are squawking about unlike nearly all who have made the attempt to debate me in which they have not known their subject matter at all and instead tried to invent excuses and or flat out lie for something in which they claim to have knowledge and prowess upon and yet they pretend that they do in which they clearly don"t. Bad idea. Well if you are going to debate with someone then you need to learn to READ. I truly hate it when people cannot do something as wide and as vast as what "reading" is as so many christians here on debate.org cannot do which is one of the major reasons why they do not have any genuine friends or loved ones in which is a HUGE red flag for them. Now I do believe that you do have genuine friends and loved ones, but the rules to the debate as stated in RD1 (and I repeated them TWICE!) were and still are pretty clear and rather blatantly clear. So until you follow them I cannot with all good conscious continue with this debate.
god does not know how to love

Hello. This is my first debate ever on Debate.org. After a couple weeks of checking this site out I decided to join. I look forward to an educational and enjoyable experience. Due to my New-ness do not expect me to debate perfectly. I'm still learning the ropes. I may not be a somewhat "conventional" Christian. I'm a Mormon, so I will be using a different scriptural text occasionally, the Book of Mormon. First, off the bat, I want to make sure this is a DEBATE. Not an opinion war. If you are an atheist but you find my arguments well-composed, more so than my opponents, vote for me. The same goes vice versa. Your beliefs should be left at the door. Try to avoid biases. But, without further ado, here are my arguments. 2 Nephi 4:21 He hath filled me with his love, even unto the consuming of my flesh. Sure, perhaps a bit gruesome of an analogy, but He able to fill someone with his love. He has done GOOD for somebody. Jonah 1:2 Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me. This shows that He's willing to give them a second chance, which usually never works out. But He's still willing to give it to them. Genesis 38:21 But the Lord was with Joseph, and shewed him mercy, and gave him favour in the sight of the keeper of the prison. Again, He's showing him mercy. He didn't have to. But he gave him an unnecessary boost. Alma 62:51 And they did pray unto the Lord their God continually, insomuch that the Lord did bless them, according to his word, sot that they did wax strong and prosper in the land. Here He has blessed them for their righteousness. Nehemiah 9:26-28 Nevertheless they were disobedient, and rebelled against thee, and cast thy law behind their backs, and slew thy prophets which testified against them to turn them to thee, and they wrought great provocations. Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies. But after they had rest, they did evil again before thee: therefore leftest thou them in the hand of their enemies, so that they had the dominion over them: yet when they returned, and cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and many times didst thou deliver them according to thy mercies; Once again showing mercy, even if it seems undeserved, to those that repent. So in summary, He punishes the wicked, but he shows mercy to the good, blesses them, and even shows mercy to the bad sometimes.
Resolved: American democracy best promotes man's most important values.

I am sure that no matter the outcome, this will be a very worthwhile experience for both of us. With that being said I would like to administrate some very basic guidelines for this round. I request that this debate be conducted in a formal, professional and constructive manner. Also, please do not include any new points in the third and final round. The reason for this is so that no arguing factors will be left open unfairly. Also I would like to establish that this resolution is not of my making. Victor Jih, of Victory Briefs is the attributed author of this resolution. However, I do claim all evidence and the entire case presented to be of my making. "We hold these truths to be self- evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…" (The Declaration of Independence) I believe that the point our forefathers were trying to convey here is one of which exposes our basic rights. Our basic rights as people, as humans, as Americans. When they initially dampened their quills with the ink; the very blood of this country that defines what it means to be a free person still today, they wanted to constitute a government that would last as one that produces a fair and just society for the people. And so, democracy was born. By definition, democracy is "A form of government exercised either directly by the people or through their elected representatives; rule by the majority; the practice of legal, political, or social equality. " The last definition says it all. Democracy in America is established to provide social equality. The principle that the decisions that you make, and the things you do directly affect you and you alone. In a democratic society such as ours, your wealth, your success, your job, and your future are truly only restrained by the ambition you possess. This clearly represents the values of Americans. These rights all circulate around freedom; the most palpable right that we possess. Freedom in American democracy is like no other value to be found. Freedom entails within us the ability to do as we please so long as it is the greater good. It grants us the right to vote for whom we desire to lead us, or it can present us with the right to become these esteemed leaders. It grants us the right to prosper and to retain our wealth and what we can afford. We can also thank freedom for the right to speak our minds and voice our thoughts as we are right now. In order to defeat my present case my opponent will be challenged to disprove that freedom is the most important value and furthermore that no other form of government can provide freedom to the same degree that American democracy does. It is for all these reasons that I argue in affirmation of the resolution, "Resolved: American democracy best promotes man's most important values. " Thank you.
The earth can look after itself

"You are quite ignorant I can tell that by the way you said all the earth does is spin pfffftttt..." You are quit vague you showed no support. How am I ignorant? Alright the Earth is not a living thing. "The only thing it would affect is us, not earth" Is there anything that does affect earth? Okay I misinterpreted this debate. I thought without humans on earth, can the earth sustain human life. Apparently you meant the earth can sustain itself. Since this is the case no person will argue with that because I can't think of anything that will destroy earth.