BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
If Jesus is not god, then you are committing idolatry.

This is the doctrine of the trinity : The fact that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons means, in other words, that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Jesus is God, but He is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is God, but He is not the Son or the Father. They are different Persons, not three different ways of looking at God. http://www.desiringgod.org... If Jesus in not G-d, then that person worship another god and breaks the first commandment. Because you fall into the definition of a trinitarian (at least for most trinitarian) any further argument go beyond the scope of this debate. Do you believe Jesus is god? If so, I clearly stated in the title "IF JESUS IS NOT god" Thus my argument stand, if Jesus is not god, then you are breaking the first commandment by putting a god before the L-rd!
If Jesus is not god, then you are committing idolatry.

My opponent believes in the Trinity. The trinity believes that Jesus, god the father and the HS are three distinct person, but in one. . http://study.com... Let me continue my debate, even if my opponent did not know he was trinitarian. First Idols are not only physical objects. Ezekiel 14:3 says: ""Son of man, these men have set up idols in their hearts and put wicked stumbling blocks before their faces. Should I let them inquire of me at all? " So anything that takes more place than G-d (the L-RD) in the earth of someone is idolatry. Second if Jesus is not God the father, then you put a second god in the face of G-d. "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. "You shall have no other gods before[a] me. Furthermore, Moses said "The Lord alone led him (Israel out of Egypt); no foreign god was with him. " If the L-rd (the father) alone was there, Jesus was not! Also G-d said I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. Isaiah 43:11. Thus if Jesus is not G-d, as per what I said in the first round, he cannot be your saviour. But again, my opponent believes in a godhead, which is also unbiblical. Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. Deut 6 The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name. Zecharaiah 14 So if Jesus is an angel, the son of man, the memrah, or anything else than G-d himself, that would be idolatry of the earth. But my opponent does believe Jesus is god (part of the godhead). And he does believe in the trinity. Thank you
If Jesus is not god, then you are committing idolatry.

Hello CapAhab! Thank you for the opportunity to have this debate! Though it is inappropriate to introduce rules or arguments in the opening statements, I'd like to ask that the following definitions be considered for the readers who do not understand the difference as this is likely to come up in the debate. The Trinity: The trinity is a believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are actually all the same exact person. This means when Jesus Christ was on the earth it was actually God the Father on the Earth and the Holy Ghost at the same exact time. It also means that right now in Heaven there is only one being there. God. As soon as you cross over into the believe that they are actually three different people all one in purpose you are crossing over into a belief called the Godhead. The Godhead: The Godhead is a belief that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct people all one in purpose. This would mean that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and while he was on earth, God was in Heaven. This would also mean that in Heaven Christ sits on the right hand of God and is not actually our Heavenly Father. I will debate the Con in this and will be arguing that although I do believe in the Godhead I am not blaspheming or committing idolatry according to Christs teachings in the KJV, or Hebrew Bible . I assume when you stated "the Hebrew Bible will be the only authoritative word of God. " You where referring to the KJV Bible both Old and New Testament. As both are commonly referred to as the "bible" and both are Hebrew meaning originally written in and of the Hebrew culture. This would rule out all other books such as The Quran, The Book of Mormon, Dead Sea Scrolls, the Catholic Bible, and any other source. If by some odd chance you actually meant Torah, or Jewish Bible, then that should have been made more obvious. It would also be absolutely ridiculous to have a debate on the beliefs of Jesus Christ and his followers and then rule out the only fundamentally historical document we have of his teachings (The New Testament).
If Jesus is not god, then you are committing idolatry.

Round 1 - Opening Arguments Only (No rebuttals) Round 2 - Rebuttals Only Round 3 - Counter-Rebuttals Round 4 - Counter-Rebuttals Round 5 - Closing Arguments and Closing Statements For those who believe the New Testament and Jesus as the messiah, but don't believe Jesus is the L-rd/G-d (Trinitarian - Oneness). The Hebrew Bible will be the only authoritative word of G-d. Idolatry = Worshipping another god / bowing to an idol
Macro evolution 4

first were did the orginal orginism come from? how do you figure in the great flood? how do you figure that this earth of ours just came about by chance with all the thins that had to be so perfect for us to live? why are we the most advanced species? why dosnt all mothers have 14 arms? (because they would notice the need for another arm and that magic process would go into effect.) the rest of them take a genral assumption that you believe in the big bang (i do to so there something we can agree on) if that tiny ball of matter was so hot wouldn't it purge it of all living organisms? if not why do we get sun burns? basically thats all
Macro evolution 4

Special thanks to solo for taking up 2 of my debates. Ok my debate will be posted in one piece which is a general statement because many of you made the same argument. I would appreciate if you would be so kind to read any of the other debates so that I don't end up copy pasting the same argument several times First my general argument ok next I don't want to here about carbon dating ok because all that says is that the fossils are in the earth and because how far down they are we know how old they are. This then immediately posses the question well how do we know that. Here is the answer creationist receive well that's how old the dirt is. This posses the question "how do you know that. " here is the answer we receive oh well its cause off the fossils that are in it then we say well you just told me you date the fossils by the dirt which you date by the fossils. isn't that the same thing as saying we date the fossils by the fossils and there fore I say well then cant i say the fossil is 6,000 years old and there for the dirt is and then the fossil is. Those who would like to post links that would explain this in a scientifically provable way please. Ok next many of you brought up the fact of me not providing evidence for the earth being under 10,000 years old 1. The gravitational fields of the sun and stars pull cosmic dust toward them known as the pointing-Robertson effect. Our sun sucks in 100,000 tons a day if our son was more than a couple million years old all the dust would be gone better there is still some in our system and estimation sets it that 10,000 years of dust has been sucked out . 2. ok second you say well no duhh it would take light billions of years from the farthest star to get here. (well this part not scientific but religious if god created it couldn't he have light were he wanted it if he created the universe) ok also it has been scientifically proven that light is slowing down and 6,000 years ago the light from all the stars would have arrived in three days in time for animals to start seeing it. 3. ok now the hottest stars burn well really hot and if we were to go back more than 100,000 years they would fill the entire universe currently and from what I have read monkeys were evolving into humans must be monkeys wearing real good sun screen 4. ok here is my two favorites the moon we all believe in the moon I hope. Ok well the moon has been slowly moving away 2 inches a year ok so 4.5 billion years ago the moon would have been 142,045 miles closer to earth hmm let me check that would mean that the earths gravitational field would suck the moon down and ka boom no more life on earth. 5. next the Eagle(the piece of the Apollo space craft that landed on the moon) was designed to land in 6 ft of moon dust which would roughly line up with some millions and billions of years but no there was ï¿½ of an inch (easly visible go look at any one of the pictures of the moon foor print) well guess what that is the 6-10 thousand year period. Ok well there you go
God is not Good According to the Bible!

I guess my opponent concedes? I still stand saying a great king did not pray to a good god. I follow Jesus Christ the The Root and Offspring of David. Rev.5:5 Rev.22:16 Jesus Christ never gave more than a word of thanks in public, He always went away alone to pray. So why do you want me to be a hypocrite like you? Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. Revelation 5:5 | Read whole chapter | See verse in context And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. Matt. 6 5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. 7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. 8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. 9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. hyp·o·crite G2;hipəG6;krit/ noun noun: hypocrite; plural noun: hypocrites a person who indulges in hypocrisy. synonyms: pretender, dissembler, deceiver, liar, pietist, sanctimonious person, plaster saint;More http://www.google.com... http://www.google.com... I do believe in The God of the Bible, The Alpha of the bible = Adam was is God Himself. So I do declare Christianity is totally false along with 99.9%of all religions. And as I stated Christians are totally biblically ignorant. So I again refute your judgement against me, judging me to hell when not one soul is currently in a burning pit. Not even Satan! Why Christ has not ruled the earth for a thousand years. It is called the millennium, Duh! http://www.google.com... http://www.google.com... http://www.google.com...
God is not Good According to the Bible!

This is a waste of time. The Bible clearly and repeatedly says God is good. "O give thanks unto the LORD for he is good......." means he is good. I don't even want to dignify my opponents ignorance with any further arguments......if you say there is no God who created all things, life's value certainly is questionable. God values life and especially His creatures which he endowed with free will, reasoning, and creative powers like His because He is good and He enjoys Himself and He enjoys all of His creatures who do what He designed them to do, to enjoy the freedom He gave them honorably, and to give their Creator all of the honor and glory for the life He gave them.Why should a man complain about the punishment for his sins? God does not willingly afflict or grieve people. He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. All who are turned against Him will be turned into the fire of Hell. God is not willing that any shoudl perish, but that all should come to repentance. Repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.Life Means God is Good!!!!! That is why it's value is unquestionable!!! For crying out loud, repent and believe on the LORD JESUS CHRIST and you will be saved from the fire of Hell!! God Himself (Jesus Christ) died in your place to pay for your crimes against Him and rose from the dead so He is just to punish your violations of His holy law with the fire of Hell if you reject His payment for your sins and you refuse His offer of pardon through the blood he paid with for you......God's gift offer is eternal life, salvation from the fire of Hell which we all deserve! Recieve the LORD JESUS CHRIST as your Saviour through faith and you will be a child of God and heaven.Let me know if I can help you pray about this.
God is not Good According to the Bible!

I will gladly educate my clueless opponent. Yes David did pray that God was good to him personally. However this is not a description it is personal song/prayer. So I refute your false claim, I admitted God has goodness, however God given common sense knows, that what was always good for David was very bad for others.So I say again God is not good. You error again.I suggest my opponent use Strong's concordance or Lexicon before babbling religion over bible. The bible is not the good book. It is about one man the Alpha of the bible, His family Israel, and their impact of earth. Here a link free.https://www.google.com... 2896 towb tobe from 2895; good (as an adjective) in the widest sense; used likewise as a noun, both in the masculine and the feminine, the singular and the plural (good, a good or good thing, a good man or woman; the good, goods or gocod things, good men or women), also as an adverb (well):--beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, at ease, X fair (worwwwd), (be in) favour, fine, glad, good (deed, -lier, -liest, -ly, -ness, -s), graciously, joyful, kindly, kindness, liketh (best), loving, merry, X most, pleasant, + pleaseth, pleasure, precious, prosperity, ready, sweet, wealth, welfare, (be) well ((-favoured)). So again I stand on the bible does not say God is good. David is grateful for God's personal good fortune towards him not calling God good. So if God means the above words, which is he welfare or is God ready sweet? And the author of prosperity preaching? Or are you a biblically, bible babbling, nothing at all? So your believe everything you read in the bible? Next round try God given common sense!And try to babble not! I am waiting for an intelligent argument. I also question a man's opinions(Of what good is) who killed 200 men and cut off their penis's as a gift to another girlfriend. Luke 14:26King James Version (KJV) 26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.I guess you hate your own mother too?
God is not Good According to the Bible!

Since the theme of this debate is "God is not good according to the Bible", and my opponent shows his complete lack of understanding the Bible and ignorance of it as in his Point #2 summation saying "the Bible does not say at all anywhere that God is good!" I will try to keep this simple.he Bible clearly and repeatedly says God is good.Psalm 145:9 ..... The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.Psalms 145: 1, 5, & j (1) I will extol thee, my God, O king;......(5) I will speak of the glorious honour of thy majesty, and of thy wondrous works. (7) They shall abundantly utter the memory of thy great goodness, and shall sing of thy righteousness. Psalm 118:1 "O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good......."My opponents entire position as Pro and his assertion, clearly invalidated by the brief passages I have quoted from the Bible, show all of his arguments to be a terrible lack of understanding and awareness of the Bible.Why is my opponent referring to sources outside of the Bible when the debate is "God is not good according to the Bible" ? It seems my opponent is avoiding acknowledging that the Bible clearly and repeatedly says God is good.
God is not Good According to the Bible!

Psalms 145: 1, 5, & j (1) I will extol thee, my God, O king;......(5) I will speak of the glorious honour of thy majesty, and of thy wondrous works. (7) They shall abundantly utter the memory of thy great goodness, and shall sing of thy righteousness. The Bible clearly and repeatedly says God is good. Yes of course He is great. He is also good. His goodness is great. His greatness is good. My opponent uses a lot of words a pictures for confusion. The above passage speaks of the glorious honour of God's majesty, an of his wondrous works, a reference to His greatness which is good.Psalm 118:1 "O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good......."Psalm 145:9 ..... The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.I do not understand how my opponent can say the Bible does not say God is good. The examples I have used in this debate are three among hundreds wihich can easily be found in the Bible.According to the Bible, God is Good.
God is not Good According to the Bible!

My opponent offered nothing! I guess a 'good god' leaves my opponnet speachless. Ignorant of the bible he babbles from. 1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: I refute your claim that the bible teaches that God is Good, He is great not good. A creator of good must be better than good. So next time try God given common sense.
RESOLVED: Affirmative action should be practiced in college admissions.

"Like you said socially we are a white, male society but what happens when we reverse racism where more black students are being accepted where as more qualified white students are be rejected. At the University of Georgia this was happing where more black students were being accepted while they were rejecting the white students (. http://www.cbsnews.com......). With the election of Obama do we really need affirmative action anymore? (. http://www.massnews.com......). " In no way does President Barack Obama being elected effect this issue. Now accepting African Americans may SEEM like reverse racism, but how do we determine one's academic ability. Many, many, many standardized tests. Now these tests are shown to be in favor of white students (. http://www.raceandhistory.com...)(http://www.gale.cengage.com...) So why shouldn't we give these students a fair chance by giving them better chances to overcome the bias tests. "Are the test scores really better in school with diversity classrooms or does it depend on how the teacher teaches the material? Here it says that if there was a white teacher in the classroom the test scores would go up. (. http://www.styluspub.com......) " Could you please point out where this book supports your point? I am busy and I assume you have the place.
RESOLVED: Affirmative action should be practiced in college admissions.

I wish good luck to my opponent in this debate and the rest of the tournament. Contention 1: The Affirmative action reverses racism too far Like you said socially we are a white, male society but what happens when we reverse racism where more black students are being accepted where as more qualified white students are be rejected. At the University of Georgia this was happing where more black students were being accepted while they were rejecting the white students (http://www.cbsnews.com...). With the election of Obama do we really need affirmative action anymore? (http://www.massnews.com...). Contention 2: Diversity (economical and racial) doesn't have an effect on how kids test Are the test scores really better in school with diversity classrooms or does it depend on how the teacher teaches the material? Here it says that if there was a white teacher in the classroom the test scores would go up. (http://www.styluspub.com...)
RESOLVED: Affirmative action should be practiced in college admissions.

RESOLVED: Affirmative action should be practiced in college admissions. DEFINITIONS: Affirmative Action: The encouragement of increased representation of women and minority-group members, esp. in employment. Contention 1: Affirmative action reverses racism. Socially we are a white, male society. This has been true since our countries founding. Racism even starts at birth ( . http://www.world-science.net...) Obviously, racism is a problem, but with Affirmative action we are getting closer to solving it. If we ended affirmative action, minority enrollment would plummet (. http://www.princeton.edu...) in many major colleges. This would lead white children who had more oppurtunities at birth, to give more oppurtunities to their children, and so on, and so on. This would lead minorities to have less of an education, and less oppurtunity. Contnetion 2: Diversity (economic and racial) is desirable and won't always occur if left to chance. This study shows that economic and racial diversity raises test scores (. http://www.nytimes.com...) Obviously higher test scores are better, so diversity is better. Contention 3: Students starting at a disadvantage need a boost. Some people, by nature, are racist. This study shows that companies chose white ex-convicts over African-Americans with no criminal record (. http://www.the-spark.net...) Who is to say this doesn't happen in college admissions. (. http://psp.sagepub.com...)