azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

Common sense tells me that there is little reason to believe things that are unprovable or have no quantifiable affect on the material world.There seems to be a disconnect that I commonly notice. The amazing thing that I've come to discover is that there seems to be A LOT of corroborating evidence for Jesus and God. That being said, there is not definite proof. The thing you have to understand is that if the God of the Bible is true, then he loves you so much that he has given you the free will to choose. If there were absolute evidence, it stops being faith and becomes knowledge and in effect you no longer have the free will to choose or not choose to accept Jesus into your life. You would be compelled to whether you wanted to or not based on that knowledge.One thing that would really help increase the authenticity of the Bible is that if specific scientific statements were made that would not be known to the people of the time but could be verified well into the future.Again with my point above, you're not going to get that. That would destroy your free will to choose if you got absolute evidence. There seems to be this perfect balance between enough evidence that would compel you to believe but also not enough evidence to where you could ignore it if you like. Also, I don't think this information would exist in the Bible just for the fact that it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. The teachings of Jesus and what it means to be a Christian really doesn't have anything to do with scientific discoveries. Its all about loving everyone around you, enemies or not, and spreading the good news that God so loved us that he sent his only son to die for us on a cross. You also have to remember that the Bible is a collection of letters and writings from Jesus' disciples. God didn't sit one person down and say, "Write these words." In the contexts of the letters that are compiled in the Bible, none of this scientific information was relevant to the message the writers were delivering at the time.Or better yet, look for outside corroborating evidence.From what I've seen, when you look at the historical aspects of what the Bible describes it is either true or not corroborated. I don't believe any of the historical events have been shown to be false, just unproved. Which to me is a huge deal. There is a TON of history in the Bible and I would argue that most Biblical scholars would argue that generally speaking it is a very reliable source. Peoples, nations, and ancient cities that the Bible describes show up to have actually existed over and over again. Yet there will always be something you can point to or fall back on for disbelief. "OK fine... the 5 tribes that King David fought turned out to be true... But I'm not going to believe [insert here]." This is where faith comes in. Personally, all of the evidence points to a God and creator and then you move on from there.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

The Bible is not scientific, but you try to argue it that way. It is supernatural so your argument is somewhat dead in a religious context. As stated in an earlier post from your side of the debate, you have to speak in a language the opposing viewer understands. No one has yet to prove it wrong because you cant, it cannot be measured scientifically even though many have tried. You state that it has and I would love to see your evidence. I am a scientist and have yet to come up with any factual proof it is incorrect. Most of the OT is like a history book and should be taken in that context. Moreover, the writers did have their own views on what they witnessed as well. One final thing, all things are possible with God!
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

It is supernatural so your argument is somewhat dead in a religious context.Not really. The Bible wasn't limited completely to supernatural truths as it does make truth claims about objects in the natural world. Now natural phenomena are defined as natural because they adhere to a very specific set of rules. If something breaks those rules, we could assume a supernatural cause, but if we can't measure the affects we will never be certain. However, there are a few specific topics where the evidence is so abundantly against what Bible claims or implies, that we then have to ask why God would place those pieces there in the first place. If it is to test our faith, then I would argue that it is very irresponsible to place the fate of our immortal souls in jeopardy by enticing us to use our rational problem solving abilities, abilities which God gave us and which we use for determining truth on every other level, when the real answer is apparently faith (an approach that does not typically yield truth.) Specifically, the most egregious examples of this misuse of evidence would have to be with the timing and order of events in the Genesis account, as well as the idea that all different forms of life were created in their present forms and almost simultaneously. you have to speak in a language the opposing viewer understands.So then all of my opponents should speak to me in scientific terms? You state that it has and I would love to see your evidence. I have already mentioned a few of my contentions with Bible in my earlier responses and some new ones here. Pick what you like. Moreover, the writers did have their own views on what they witnessed as well. Precisely. This increases the possibility that one or more could be incorrect about what they saw. One final thing, all things are possible with God!And yet, we have never actually seen an example of something for which all things are possible. We can't really know how such a thing could exist.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

So you are asking if quoting a book written thousands of years ago (supposedly), a book that no-one knows who wrote (don't give me any bull shit tales of how John and Paul and all these other little imaginary friends wrote it), the same book revolving around an imaginary man in the sky who's existence is impossible to prove? Yeah.......I really don't think quoting the Christian Bible is really a good argument - in ANY circumstances.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: Yes

pizza boy, do not be so rude and disrespectful to the beliefs of others. Moreover, why do you make statements when you obviously have no clue as to what you are talking about. You sound ignorant and do not even propose a a good argument that contributes to the conversation. If you want to argue a point, do not sound so ignorant and know some facts before coming to the table.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

Clearly I do know what I'm talking about considering the "NO" side is winning and all those contributing have said the same thing I have but just in 'nicer' words. I would hardly call myself ignorant for thinking the bible is an utter pile of shit, it's called my opinion. I doubt you would believe in a magical spaghetti monster that dwells in toilets from 1AM to 2AM in the morning would you? No. No because it is your belief that that particular claim is stupid as hell. Having an opinion doesn't make me ignorant.EDIT: I'm starting to think you have some kind of thing against me, you seem to be going out of your way to dispute all my arguments?
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

There is two sides, the first is for person who believe in God and keeps words from bible in the heart; the second is for member of society who just keeps traditions but does not believe bible as a serious document. it is obvious that for the first case quoting the bible is a good argument; for the second it is just words and nothing more. This is my point of view, but our society likes to use religion as the means of the influence and control.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

THANK YOU! This exactly what I've been trying to say to people for years! The bible is not factual evidence! It was written stories and opinions by people. It was changed throughout the years as a political tool. It does have some good morals in it, but is far from a good argument.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

It depends upon the quote and the validity of the historical argument. Non-believers get too defensive when believers quote Scriptures. Not so long ago, learned non-believers would quote Scripture too. Thomas Paine, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, are just a few of these.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

It is as good as quoting Darwin to prove evolution. One most take these things at book value.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

No, there is scientific proof backing up what Darwin said. The bible may have some historical events in it, but it is not a non-fiction book.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

if we cant prove that its true we cat prove that its false and obviouly its beliveable since 1/3 of the 12 billion people belive
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

No. It's not believable. People just are brought up believing what they're told, and people also seek comfort. Which is one of the only reasons I think Religion exists.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

well first off i was not brought up as a christian all my life and religeon exists because of founder in judaism its abraham in islam its mohamed and in christianity its jesus
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

No proof. Religion was created by man, in my opinion. Men who needed comfort to deal with the world and death. Needed something to guide others.It's not a bad thing, but it's not for everyone. Not everyone needs that comfort. They seek proof for comfort.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

"well first off i was not brought up as a christian all my life "Really so how did you become one, you talk like someone who has been practising Christianity all his life.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

Mate...there aren't 12 billion people on earth????
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

I think you need to divide that fugure by two if you're taking about the current global population.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

It's believable. A lot of people believe itThat doesn't make it true.The burden of proof is on Christians to prove it is correct. The default position is that the bible is not correct. That's the way it works.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

............................................................................................sorry disputed the wrong person :(
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

"It is as good as quoting Darwin to prove evolution. One most take these things at book value."Actually there is a ton of evidence to back what Darwin stated, its is all around us, the evolution of species has been predicted the fossil record proves evolutino beyond any reasonable doubt. Even the rapidly evolving science of genetics has unearthed a plethora of evidence deatiling the evolutin of genes from early lifefomr to the present. No credible scientist denies evolution, the only that deny the reality of evolution are people that either don't understand science or don't want to understand science (i.e. Thiests)Eveything Darwin predicted was prvoen correct, although his theories have been refined signifcantly the model he put forth has served as a basis by which much of the inner workings of the natural world have been elucidated.Equating it to the bible in terms of its factual content is contemptable.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

There is a ton of evidence for the evolution of like species with modifications. There is no evidence of a species becoming a completely different species, like say a fish into a mammal. In order to make these statements you have to define what you are talking about because often times "Evolution" absorbs 3 definitions. The idea that a species can evolve to be more able to live in a certain environment (microevolution). The idea that there is a common ancestor (macroevolution). And the idea that we are a result of natural processes.There is only evidence to support the first definition and I don't think anyone would disagree with it. For definition two, would you mind providing some evidence? And for definition three you would have to provide evidence for how DNA (basically complex information) was created by natural processes.The Bible is not a science book and shouldn't be treated as such. Evolution may well turn out to be true and would have no bearing on Christianity, the most important question in my book is how was DNA created.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

"There is a ton of evidence for the evolution of like species with modifications. There is no evidence of a species becoming a completely different species, like say a fish into a mammal. In order to make these statements you have to define what you are talking about because often times "Evolution" absorbs 3 definitions. The idea that a species can evolve to be more able to live in a certain environment (microevolution). The idea that there is a common ancestor (macroevolution). And the idea that we are a result of natural processes. The natural processes of D.N.A. are explained, as we slowly evolve and are adapting, the one with the highest chance of survival leads the direction of evolution. for example dark brown butterflies are hardrer to see in the forest than a white butterfly, in fact the brown one has the same color as the tree. there are more brown ones then white ones, eventually the white die off and the brown ones takes its place.There is only evidence to support the first definition and I don't think anyone would disagree with it. For definition two, would you mind providing some evidence? And for definition three you would have to provide evidence for how DNA (basically complex information) was created by natural processes."macro-evolution is a product of micro-evolution, macro-evolution is really just a build of micro evolution. the evidence for micro-evolution is also evidence for macro-evolution. to say that micro-evolution happens but not macro-evolution would be like saying 2 + 2 = 4 + 2 = 4 + 2 = 4 and etc... after a long period where something evolves slowly using micro evolution eventually after a certain period of time, we evolve enough to call it macro-evolution. we didn't just go from being a fish to all of a sudden breathing air and having limbs in the same amount of time it would take a species to simply become a little more aerodynamic... no after enough time over many, many generations that micro-evolution has been working its course the whole time and the species has been adapting a long time into something new.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

Where is that missing link? Where are the billions and billions of fossils?The fact is scientists have failed to locate a single missing link, NONE, they have not found ONE…….If what they say is true, there should be millions that exist. Where are they?Evolution a fact? And why has it always been called a theory?The definition of “religion” in Funk & Wagnall dictionary says, “A set of beliefs concerned with explaining the origins and purposes of the universe.”So based on that, evolution at best is a religion based on faith.Evolution reveals that those who believe it are truly capable of faith in the invisible. It’s blind faith….. the same as in any other religion.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

How many times have scientists thought they had the missing link?Piltdown Man.......Neanderthal Man.........Nebraska Man.......Lucy..........http://www.allaboutscience.org/missing-link-faq.htm  Where are the fossils that connect us today with the first fossil evidence? We are talking about billions of fossils that should be the evidence. Where are they? They should be everywhere and they are not. If like you say they found ONE......why only one? Did we all evolve from that ONE fossil? Where did all the fossils go?There are scientists who reject evolution. Of course those who embrace that we were at one time monkeys swinging from trees....would discredit all of them. http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v5i10f.htm http://hosted.homeserver.com/warneveryone/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm The idea of God is just repulsive to you.........You at present are working on some degree (your on here all the time...don't know how you do it...but) so you are attending some liberal institution that also is hostile to God.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

"How many times have scientists thought they had the missing link?"You don't even know what the missing link is please stop trying act like you understand science, you don't!!!!!"http://www.allaboutscience.org/missing-link-faq.htm" I was immediately suspicious of a site claming to be scientific yet at the same time saying the missing link has never been found, this creationist argument simply wouldn't be found on any reputable science site, so i did a little digging, and what do you know allaboutscience.org is a creationist website masquerading as a science site, why am i not surprised:http://clefreethinkers.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/allaboutscienceorg-is-a-creationist-fraud/ http://lifewithoutfaith.com/?p=490You people never cease to amaze me."They should be everywhere and they are not. "You have no idea what you're talking about, your posting creationist propaganda and trying to pass it off as actual scientific fact, your argunment is null and viod, and now everything you say is suspect, have a good day you fundamentalist wackjob...;-)"If like you say they found ONE......why only one? Did we all evolve from that ONE fossil? Where did all the fossils go?"I never asid they only found one, i posted sources detailing two missing links, im not going to waste my time trying to explain the scientific nuances of studying the fossil recordr to you cause i know id just be wasting my time and your's if you bother to read it, anyone that posts creationist propaganda as science fact cannot be reasoned with."The idea of God is just repulsive to you"No its not, i believe in God, im actually a panthiest, even though i don't like ot categorise my beleif like that but panthiesm is a very broad belief system.I beleive in God, its just my conception of what Gof is is radically different to your own. God is everything and everyone, God is the universe and the forces that shaped it, God is not one person, one place, or one thing, God is everything, both non-existence and existence, and everything that flows from it.I agree with athiest so in a sense in am one, but their beleif system is too narrow, the only reason athiest ever ccame into being is precisely because theism came into being, long ago no religion dominated, people worshipped the sun, the moon, the stars, and the earth, and they were all equally valid."You at present are working on some degree (your on here all the time...don't know how you do it"I wouldn't be studying for a second masters in engineering if i couldn't work fast." so you are attending some liberal institution that also is hostile to God"In as much as any University is hostile to God, this is free thinking insitution, we have Christian societies and we have an athiest society, and secular humanist society all views are accommodated, and of some student beleive they are not they can set up their own society to represent them.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

Yes because it proves what is wrong like homosexuality,having sex with a animal,swearing, and all sorts of stuff that are wrong and good. If you watch Jack Van Impe presents Jack Van Impe is "The Walking Bible" he memorized all of the Bible verse and studies them before he is on a show.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

How exactly does it prove any of those things? And those things aren't necessarily wrong. Just because they are to you does not mean they are to everyone.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

There is such a thing as absolute truth. Based on your logic, if I were to say "I believe the Holocaust was justified." You would tell me that I am wrong. Why? Because you know that the Holocaust was objectively wrong. Let's stop with this moral relativism please.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

I can't stand when people use the Holocaust to compare to anything going on in today's time. The Holocaust KILLED and HURT people. What does another person's sexual preference do to anyone else? It doesn't do anything, therefore I don't see why anyone else should have any say in it.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

Its just an example. You say what's right for someone is right for them. If you are making that self-defeating truth claim then you have to accept it as true. I can't stand when people pretend like there are no absolute truths and then get upset when you give them one.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

A terrible example. And I'm not trying to act like there aren't absolute truths, but I don't think they should be things that don't effect other people.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

To be sure, those were terrible events. However I don't believe you can say that the mass propaganda on gay marriage is not effecting anyone. That being said, it is sad that gay marriage has taken on such a polarizing position. I would say it is a sin, however we all sin every day. We should not be judging these people as we are not free from sin ourselves.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

That's totally irrelevant, it's affecting people only because people think think they know what's right for everyone. And the actual act of being gay does not hurt anyone.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

Well said! The bible is basically just someone's opinion - it does not prove jack shit.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

Thanks :)
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

Wow that's quite the remark. If the Bible is true, then it is the word of God not some opinion.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

If the Bible is true, then it is the word of God not some opinion.Last time I checked there was no proof of the bible being 'true', quite the opposite, actually. There is much more evidence to support the argument that it isn't 'true'.
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: No

Here's your argument with a couple changes:Yes because it proves what is wrong like christianity, prettending to eat the body of dead people at church, praying, and all sorts of stuff that are wrong and good. If you watch Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows he memorized all of the spells warlocks cast and studies them before he is on a show.You see how stupid your argument sounds now to someone who doesn't believe in the bible, just as stupid as citing harry potter to one who doesn't believe in harry potter (at least I don't think you believe in harry potter, you are a little slow).
Debate: Is quoting the bible a good argument for Christians?
Side: yes

you fool do you not realize that you are being rude and disespectful and not only that but you are disrespecting gods people and followers