BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Eight reasons christianity is false

I can refer to anything and anyone I want for reason and/or evidence. You have (mis)quoted the Bible to make arguments against the morality of God according to your personal values system. You don't have unilateral authority to evidence only to ignore my own with a quip of "yawn" or "duh. " This is akin to me taking everything YOU have written so far and saying, "well, That just proves your point, So it's biased. " Also, Stephen Hawking was NOT a creationist. I'm not going to address your own quibbles about linguistics until you can learn to read, Write, And express a coherent thought. In English. And Latin. And Greek. And Japanese. And interpret law. Everything I have to say about faith and scriptural interpretation you may refer to above. Math is not a "universal" language, And "universal" is not exclusive to extraterrestrials. Calling it a universal language just means it's a least common interpretation of existence. I can say "2 + 2 = 4" to you 'til I'm blue in the face, But it doesn't mean anything unless you understand it or it has some implication on reality extending to things everything including that which is beyond our comprehension. That is what I mean by "Math is not a universal language. " Atheism is literally "no belief. " I have "the foggiest idea" because I've studied Atheism and Christianity, Been a Christian, And been an Atheist. If you were an Atheist, You wouldn't even care whether or not I had offended you because it wouldn't exist in your system of values which contain no values for you to believe in. Of course, You took the low road YET AGAIN by ignoring my justification. If you were an atheist, You wouldn't believe in "Gaia Mother Earth" either, And if you value it higher than the Christian God, More power to you: Except that you DO believe in God as a conceptualization that you accused certain Christian groups of earlier. You worship a god that flows from your own mind, Whom YOU created, Because it fits your nihilistic world view. I only worship a God who created ME, Whom I aspire to love and serve. Only in the end, Whether one of us is right or wrong, I can't possibly lose.
Eight reasons christianity is false

Third (serious) debate taken up on this site. There is really nothing we can prove in this world or any other, Because our means and perspective are limited compared to the natural universe. This is especially true of the supernatural aspects of the universe, Where we only have God's revelation and the gifts of reason and wisdom to interpret it. Strictly speaking, You are correct in that Christianity cannot be "proven. " But I believe it can be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt to contain the fundamental objective truths about the supranatural aspects of the universe we can't immediately perceive of our own power. First, To address your arguments on their face: 1. There is clear evidence that prayer does not always work the way we want it to, And the Bible acknowledges this. Secondly, There is evidence to suggest that prayer can work, Especially in charismatic areas like healing and conversion. 2. The fact that humans have invented gods does not mean that there is no true God. The evidence is in the history; the relics and the continually self-cross-referenced scripture (which points to Christ as the Messianic figure). 3. (Refer to 2). Supernatural miracles are evidence that Christianity is instituted by a potent God. Discarding the evidence to fit the theory does not constitute scientific lack of evidence. 4. I don't argue this point. Christianity has become corrupted over time, Often for the intention of over-evangelization or convenience. The Bible and the Catholic fathers teach that most people, Including most Catholic priests, Go to hell. 5. The notion that God is "omnibenevolent" is not a common Christian doctrine. God is "all-good, " but He is also just, And part of His justice is defined in how He acts. Giving people the free will to chose their own destiny is benevolence in a different form than some people perceive. It gives meaning to our choices and elevates our dignity to that above angels. 6. The Bible discusses many things, And cannot be read through just any interperative prism. There is such a thing as understanding and knowledge which brings us to truth. There are many different interpretations versions of the Bible today written to conform to particular beliefs. Most of them lose their authority when they lose grasp of their cross-referencing and particular literary interpretations. 7. Christianity is absurd, But not so incoherent. Man sinned against God. God is a just being, And there is a price to be paid for disobeying Him, Which is a supreme sacrifice since He is a supreme being. Man cannot provide this on his own, But God is so completely loving of the Human race that He is willing to provide that sacrifice Himself. Christianity makes a rational sense in that Christ's blood potentially provides for all the sins of the world (Rom. 5:15) and because Christ had power over death anyway. But Christianity is not meant merely for our rational comprehention, But for the love and glorification of an Almighty, Loving God (Je. 32:38, Rom. 11:33). 8. (Circular argument)
MAC computers Vs PC computers

"I will take on this classic debate of which is better MAC or PC and I am siding that PC is superior to MAC"- You said your siding with PC, but you are a Pro to a Debate known as Mac computers Vs Pc computers, this concludes that you need to say that Mac is superior than PC. " I in tend to put on twist in this debate to be reviled later my opponent will be arguing that Mac's are superior to PCs. "- Can you clarify this please? I would have liked to have written an argument, but I have no idea which side I should side with.
Vegetarianism globally would benefit the nation.

In your counter-argument for my first argument, you imply that eggs, nuts, and dairy products can single-handedly replace all meat. While nuts do provide protein and several key nutrients, they lack important amino acids that are required to maintain the body as I said in Round 1. Plus, if every person in the world ate just 10 nuts a day (based on a rough estimate), a whopping 73 billion nuts would be consumed on a daily basis-which brings me to my next argument. How would we feed everyone in the world vegetables, dairy, and nuts? There are many arid regions in the world where farming isn't possible. Would vegetarian food be airlifted? Shipped? Also, please take into account that world resources are finite. Meat is helping to keep a delicate economic balance within the major food industries. Suddenly removing meat from the table would greatly increase the amount of products taken from cows, chickens, and farms across the world and, in time, these resources would be slowly depleted until humanity completely runs out of dairy, eggs, vegetables, and fruit-and is forced to return to meat.Sources: http://www.livestrong.com...Think: how would this be enforced? Would meat-eaters be fined? Imprisoned? While I concede that humans more closely resemble herbivores, humanity has relied on meat for millenia in order to feed themselves. Meat is a major food source and one that, I believe, the public won't want to be taken away. Public outcry would be huge. With around 3.75 million people employed in the fast food industry (adding to the 6 million employed in the meat industry) almost 10 million people in total would be put out of work. 10 million! You even concede that it would have an economic impact. As I said in my second argument, the meat industry accounts for 6% of the United States' GDP. While that may seem like a small number, keep in mind that the GDP of the US is around $16.77 trillion dollars. You go on to say that it would take "adjusting and getting used to" in order to adapt to the sudden removal of meat from the world's diet. How would this adaptation take place? Furthermore, killing is an instinct in humans. It is not morally wrong, unless you consider killing plants themselves to be immoral. And then, you'd have a problem with your new vegetarian diet.Sources: http://www.statista.com... http://data.worldbank.org... http://blogs.discovermagazine.com...
Vegetarianism globally would benefit the nation.

I believe that global veganism would not benefit the nation, or the world. My arguments are as follows:1. Meat contains proteins and other nutrients that cannot be found in vegetables and are extremely beneficial to the well-being of the body.Proteins are combinations of amino acid used to maintain body tissue, synthesize hormones and enzymes, and serve as an auxilary source of energy in the absence of carbohydrates or fat. While one could argue that beans and nuts also contain protein, they do not contain as much protein as actual meat and lack several essential amino acids that are necessary for the body. Sources:http://www.meatpoultrynutrition.org...healthyeating.sfgate.com/can-enough-protein-beans-7842.html2. Switching to a global vegetarian program would put millions out of work and cause the economy to take a hit.The meat industry is worth $89.9 million US dollars. More than 6 million people are employed in this thriving industry, with their combined salaries totalling over $200 billion USD, and the sales of all meats in the industry total about $186 billion. The vegetable industry in the first eight years of the 2000s totalled only around $17.6 billion-and, while that number is expected to rise due to a growing public emphasis on health and nutrition, as well as several government iniatives including MyPlate, the vegetable industry cannot compete with that of meat-and suddenly removing 6% of the United States' GDP-would not be a very wise decision for the government of the US.Sources:https://www.meatinstitute.org...http://www.ers.usda.gov...While I concede that the current methods of meat processing may be inhumane, the meat industry is far more valuable and iconic to the public than vegetables-sparking such icons as McDonald's and Burger King. Meat has paved the way for fast food chains all across the world, and has sparked the public eye much more than a dirty stalk of celery ever could.
Vegetarianism globally would benefit the nation.

I believe that global Vegetarianism would benefit our nation and bring back a sense of humanity again. I remember when I was told how meat was made and felt very disgusted at how we slaughter innocent animals although we have plenty of other food options and sources. Other food sources may include: grains, nuts, vegetables, fruit, carbohydrates and in certain Vegetarian diets dairy products and eggs are also consumed. Going Vegetarian benefits the animals as 2.5 million innocent animals are being slaughtered everyday in the UK alone and most are killed in extreme conditions and are treated with lack of respect beforehand. Between the years of 2010 to 2012 the numbers of Vegetarian adults and children, between 1.5 and 18, has increased significantly. In 2010, 583 children and 548 adults reported as being Vegetarian across the UK. In 2011 this figure increased to 1095 children and 1031 adults. Rising to 1582 children and 1491 adults in 2012, shows that Vegetarianism is becoming a more and more common necessity in people's diets. In this debate I will be arguing that Vegetarian is the way to go and the position of Con should argue that it is not. I hope this will be an interesting debate. Good luck. Sources: https://www.vegsoc.org...
Everything is a result of chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists.

The topic of this debate is that simultaneously everything is a direct result of random chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists. I will be arguing against the topic. Everyone please remember to keep calm and carry on... and to be polite. If everything is a direct result of random chance, for every detail of an illusion, it is a direct result of random chance that that detail doesn't destroy or prevent the illusion. The complexity of the illusion considered, the illusion wouldn't be both robust and not prevented. By this view, any logic or proof against this is also a result of random chance and could have been anything else instead, For a rebuttal to be precisely fit to disprove the idea that said illusion cannot occur from random chance, it has to have been caused by a means other than random chance, as random chance simply creates random noise, as consistently order and complexity to the observer, except by complete random chance, so with a tiny probability. So, a rebuttal that disproves my statement would prove that it is not the case that everything is a direct result of random chance. A reason why random chance can't create as much order and complexity to the observer as the observer experiences is because there are literally trillions of alternate things it could have created that are not that very specific case, so it is very unlikely that random chance would create the order and complexity the observer experiences. Also, if everything is caused by random chance, so is the answer to "What caused the universe?", which could have been anything. The best bet on the pro's side of the argument appears to be that random chance has hidden the solution of why and how everything is a direct result of random chance and why and how it randomly deceived us otherwise, but that still lacks a reason to believe it. Ultimately, the question to ask is: Which is more likely, random chance created the illusion that it is not the creator or an intelligent creator created the illusion that they don't exist?
Everything is a result of chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists.

So, you're saying that the clear appearance of design in the universe does not exist? Because it would not be expected to be there without a god or simulator. You're saying the fine-tuning of the universe isn't there? Really? It's because I do understand how the appearance of design is possible that I explain it with a god or simulator. Anyone not actively trying to convince themselves otherwise can see that an intelligent being is the most reasonable explanation for the universe. It takes intelligence and intent to make such a high quality universe. Quality doesn't just randomly appear out of chance. Wait, you're saying that nature can create an illusion without even having a brain or mind to do so, without someone setting it all up to do so? Do you hear yourself? I asked how order emerged so rational people could realise that, by far, the best explanation is that an intelligent being is behind it. By the way, I'm not sure you won't find a convincing rebuttal; if you do, it could be part of the illusion that a god or simulator created that they're not real. So, if there was a spaceship, how might it have emerged? "Oh, it might have grown as a plant?". Do you see how unrealistic that would be? "It must have been designed by something intelligent" is not at all unreasonable, and so too is the case with the universe. A universe where there is an illusion of a god is not at all unlikely. For that universe to exist purely by chance, however, is an assumption rational people are not willing to make. Which is more likely, that you're in an incredibly rare universe that happened by chance or that arm pulling excuse of multiverses making this universe exist is a decoy made by a god or simulator? I believe the god or simulator of this universe likes to make monkeys out of us by making us believe that a roll of the dice is responsible for the exact opposite of a roll of the dice and does a very good job, indeed. There needs to be someone that designed something. If the universe was randomly generated, the generator must have been designed. If the generator was randomly generated, the generator for that must have been designed. It's either that or a god or simulator fabricated that logic. To say otherwise is like saying, "Hey, I found this coherent and impressive website online that emerged purely by chance". It's a matter of common sense. Please be more realistic. Regardless, the conclusion is that the topic, which argues that the universe was made by chance, is false.
Everything is a result of chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists.

The simple illusion of god is not a universal construct, the concept of a higher power was not given to us by the universe, religion is simply something that gives people an excuse to believe in the things we can"t prove. Therefor the concept of god is not an illusion of the universe, god is an illusion of man. You see, the core of your argument is that the universe is a product of a higher power, your reasoning for this is: how can the universe have constructed its self with order if it is a product of random chance? Before I answer your question allow me to point something out. Because you don"t understand how this is possible, you explain it with god, this proves that the bases of your explanation of god is a product of your ignorance and proves that the giant "I made this" you are talking about is the real allusion. You haven"t given any proof of god; you have simply asked "If everything is created without intent, everything was created by chance. If everything was created by chance, how did order emerge," and because you don"t have the answer to that question you can"t make sense of reality and explain it by calming that god did it. This proves that a universe were god is an illusion is not all that unlikely since you live in a universe were this is the case Now back to your question "If everything is created without intent, everything was created by chance. If everything was created by chance, how did order emerge?" Actually that is a fair question. Lucky for you I have an answer to that question. In quantum physics there is something called multiverse theory: in a nut shell, describes how our universe is one of many. Anytime an uncontrollable force or unforeseeable outcome acts on our universe, our universe splits into many different universes each one were something different happened. So let"s start at the beginning, what were the odds that a universe exists? It doesn"t matter if the odds are 0.001^100,000,000,000 because multiverse theory explains how every single one of those out comes will happen there for our universe being formed is 100% likely. Now what are the odds that a universe would be formed with an order to how it functions? Still 100% what are odds of earth being created? Still 100% what are the odds you were born? 100% what are the odds you were born in a universe with order, an earth, and religion? 100% you see the universe is governed by chance, it just so happens, that chance is always going to be 100%. So to answer your question the chances of this universe being formed the way it is simply by chance, is 100% You are simply misunderstanding the concept of a random universe. So, in conclusion, just because you don"t know the answer doesn"t mean god did it.
Everything is a result of chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists.

Chance begets chance, not order, and the "illusion" of a god is clearly evident of something intentionally creating that "illusion". If everything is created without intent, everything was created by chance. If everything was created by chance, how did order emerge, and more importantly, why does it look like a god practically wrote their name on the universe saying "I made this"? If you see a well-written book, you know it was written by something intelligent. In the same way, we know that something intelligent made the universe because they put their mark all over it and it's clearly designed. If you saw a spaceship with a natural explanation (meaning it was made by nature and not even by people or their machines), you know the excuse that nature made it is a decoy. The real reason the spaceship exists is because something intelligent made it. The same is true of the universe. Something as complicated and grand as this universe appears like it must have been designed by a genius. This genius must be responsible for the decoy which is the illusion the universe was created purely naturally. To argue otherwise is insanity; it's like saying this computer is natural, even if every scientist and computer scientist believed it to be; they would all be wrong, no matter where the fake evidence points. However, regardless, it is still not true that everything is a direct result of random chance, but even if it was an indirect result, there would be no order emerging except by random chance and there are so many more things that can happen randomly, which look random then things that happen randomly which look clearly designed, so if everything was an indirect result of random chance, it would look random, not clearly designed. You may say, "Thing's could have only looked designed", but by what odds? Things could have only looked any way, so they would look a way that's far more likely, instead; they would look like they happened by chance. If the universe was natural, it wouldn't look clearly artificial. It's a no brainer, really. So, in conclusion, the universe was not a result of direct or indirect random chance and the topic is true.
Everything is a result of chance and there is a robust illusion that God exists.

Just so you know nobody believes that every second they live and every outcome of those moment is completely random. nobody believes that one second you could be starving in a street or ally and another you are rich living in a mansion. not even the most extreme atheists believe that EVERYTHING is up to chance, because that simple isn't how the universe works. Atheists may believe that the universe is random in most of the senses,depending on the exact context or situation. Atheists obviously don't believe that there are any gods who created and are guiding the universe, so it's unlikely that they believe the universe was made or exists with purpose, aim, or reason. Atheists don't dispute that there are patterns in the universe, though, and even in truly random sets like sequences of numbers patterns will emerge. The existence of patterns does not contradict the existence of randomness. The universe can exist and progress for random reasons and in random directions, and still understand that the universe functions under certain principals like physics or math, natural laws which may or may not favor particular outcomes and sometimes, those outcomes may be random for all practical intents and purposes. so to answer your question, with the evidence we have it is far more likely the universe was created and that we exist by chance, but that doesn't mean everything is random.