azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Old Testament, numerous entries. Different denominations of Christianity differ in their interpretation of the Old Testament, their opinion on how relevant (if at all) the Old Testament is to the faith, and the extent to which they believe Old Testament Law was 'recanted' by Jesus. Such is the problem of ambiguous scriptures with multiple differing translations and countless possible interpretations. For an easy example, scroll down a bit to Idiotobx' quote from Deuteronomy.Are you not familiar with the rules that are to be followed in order to gain access to heaven? Are you not familiar with the new testament? The law given then was the laws of the land. This is dispensational theology. The laws of the old testament were given to a particular group of people. We are not that particular group of people. Thus we do not follow those set of rules. Also if you do say that these things are found within the old testament can you show me where the bible commands us to attacks clinics? To go on crusades?  So you say. What makes you so confident? Simple. All translations of a prime verse lead to the same conclusion. This prime verse is Exodus 20:13 - "Thou shall not murder". This makes me fairly confident that those acts are not permissable. Do you have a scriptural basis for making these claims that is consistent across all translations of the bible and isn't ambiguous enough to allow for varied interpretations? I assert that you do not.Exodus 20:13.....its only four words. What disagreement comes about that verse? The only one that comes to mind is what counts as murder? How do we define murder? That's it. Take you assertion back home with you.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Are you not familiar with the rules that are to be followed in order to gain access to heaven? Are you not familiar with the new testament? The law given then was the laws of the land. This is dispensational theology. The laws of the old testament were given to a particular group of people. We are not that particular group of people. Thus we do not follow those set of rules. Also if you do say that these things are found within the old testament can you show me where the bible commands us to attacks clinics? To go on crusades?Again. Different denominations of Christianity differ in their interpretation of the Old Testament, their opinion on how relevant (if at all) the Old Testament is to the faith, and the extent to which they believe Old Testament Law was 'recanted' by Jesus. Such is the problem of ambiguous scriptures with multiple differing translations and countless possible interpretations. For an easy example, scroll down a bit to Idiotobx' argument where he quotes Deuteronomy.Simple. All translations of a prime verse lead to the same conclusion. This prime verse is Exodus 20:13 - "Thou shall not murder". This makes me fairly confident that those acts are not permissable.The original Hebrew word transliterates as Ratsakh. It translates roughly to 'dash to pieces' but the meaning is roughly equivalent to murder. Certain types of killing were not considered Ratsakh. Among these are enemies killed by soldiers in wartime, and executions for violations of certain parts of Old Testament law. The wartime exclusion would apply to most of the activities involved in the Crusades. An admittedly twisted, thought not necessarily inconsistent interpretation of much of Deuteronomy could 'justify' much of the other killings.Exodus 20:13.....its only four words. What disagreement comes about that verse? The only one that comes to mind is what counts as murder? How do we define murder? That's it. Take you assertion back home with you.Again- the word is not in fact murder, but Ratsakh. 'Murder' is just a convenient, though inaccurate translation. It is distinct from whatever definition we apply to murder, and has important distinctions from modern uses that are not merely perspective. This is exactly what I'm talking about regarding the problem of different denominations each having their own interpretation of their preferred translation of the bible. The permutations of these are incalculable.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Are you going to site all this information you are bringing? The word still translates to murder and was probably used as murder. In that event my argument is still valid.You're entire first paragraph stills strays from the questions I haved asked. Where are the commads to go on crucades or bomb abortion clinics?
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

http://www.levitt.com/hebrew/commandments.html There are no direct commands to 'go on crusades' or 'bomb abortion clinics.' There are, however, direct orders that certain crimes carry a penalty of death- even for outsiders. Obviously, this means that it crosses the boundaries of jurisdiction/sovereignty. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 (as quoted below by Idiotobx, which I've stated multiple times and you've ignored) is one such verse that, while not directly commanding the faithful to 'go on crusades,' can be easily interpreted as such without any stretching at all.Similar commandments are issued towards those who engage in various sexual immoralities, murdering (especially children), etc. Read your own Bible. The passages of the Bible used to condemn homosexuals are incredibly close to those used to justify the crusades and many other things. Proving my point exactly; I'm certain your church recognizes the part of deuteronomy that decries homosexuality.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Proving your point? You have already failed to. There are no applicable commandments for us to follow besides the ten commandments and the others that do not specify who must follow them. That is why I ignored your verse (which you failed to realize at least 3 times in a row). Varying interpretations do not matter. My verse stands firm. Again, you must not have encoded what I've been telling you. Your second paragraph demonstrates so. Those laws are for a specific group of people during a specific time period in a particular setting.  'm certain your church recognizes the part of deuteronomy that decries homosexuality.I don't go to church. I don't care about gays. If they wish to have sex or get married then go ahead. I'm all for it.  Read your own Bible. The passages of the Bible used to condemn homosexuals are incredibly close to those used to justify the crusades and many other things. Justifications don't equal the action committed. Justifications are not acts.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Proving your point? You have already failed to. There are no applicable commandments for us to follow besides the ten commandments and the others that do not specify who must follow them. That is why I ignored your verse (which you failed to realize at least 3 times in a row). Varying interpretations do not matter. My verse stands firm.Again, you must not have encoded what I've been telling you. Your second paragraph demonstrates so. Those laws are for a specific group of people during a specific time period in a particular setting.Different denominations of Christianity differ in their interpretation of the Old Testament, their opinion on how relevant (if at all) the Old Testament is to the faith, and the extent to which they believe Old Testament Law was 'recanted' by Jesus. Such is the problem of ambiguous scriptures with multiple differing translations and countless possible interpretations. For an easy example, scroll down a bit to Idiotobx' argument where he quotes Deuteronomy.I didn't fail to prove my point- you've proved my point for me. This is YOUR interpretation. It is not applicable to any other denomination of Christianity. It was not YOUR specific church participating in the Crusades- it was several much earlier branches of Christianity. Varying interpretations DO in fact matter. Stating that your interpretation is the correct one is akin to saying that every other branch of christianity is wrong. Isn't Hubris one of the 7 deadly sins? It would seem you are in need of repentance.Perhaps you misunderstood what my point was- my point was that these were actions of christian churches, and were justified, or even commanded, by particular interpretations of particular translations of particular verses. Your own reply has demonstrated several key areas where your particular faith differs from 'mainstream' christianity, as a result of selective interpretation of a selected translation.Your verse does NOT stand firm, because it is an inaccurate translation that has been used to serve the agenda of your church. If you are going to assert that your interpretation of the inaccurate translation is what was actually intended by the verse- prove it.I don't go to church. I don't care about gays. If they wish to have sex or get married then go ahead. I'm all for it.This stance is not representative of Christianity at large. If your church is an exception to the rule, that does not speak to the validity of anything else I've said. If you don't believe Christianity in general to be anti-gay, then prove it.Justifications don't equal the action committed. Justifications are not acts.Tomato, tomato. What we might call 'justification' for an act, they might call 'commandment' to perform the act. If you don't believe that such an interpretation of the scriptures is possible, then prove it.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Again you failed to prove your point and continue to act like you didn't. That ia not my intretation that is the correct generalization for thw old testament. Don't keep giving me this subjective bullshit. Isn't Hubris one of the 7 deadly sins? It would seem you are in need of repentance.Too bad the seven deadly sins don't exist wise one. If so, I'm sure the bible would list you for incompetence. Your verse does NOT stand firm, because it is an inaccurate translation that has been used to serve the agenda of your church. If you are going to assert that your interpretation of the inaccurate translation is what was actually intended by the verse- prove it.Prove that 4 words are correct? Read it. Thats it. That requires Christians not to kill. Simple as that. The verse is fine. Also again I don't go to church.  This stance is not representative of Christianity at large. I'm not a fucking Christian. Understand that. I have never claimed that I have a religion.  Tomato, tomato. What we might call 'justification' for an act, they might call 'commandment' to perform the act. If you don't believe that such an interpretation of the scriptures is possible, then prove it.Why am I proving a negative? You're the one with the claim.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

You are completely and utterly ignorant of the subject matter you are discussing. No further discussion on the matter would seem to be fruitful; none up to this point has been either, it would seem.If what you are stating in your post is true, then not only are you ignorant of the subject matter in question, you are in no position whatsoever to be offering perspective on it. Plain and simple- you are wrong. Profoundly wrong, and you are unable, it would seem, to even see why you are wrong.Such is evident to anyone else still following this exchange at this point. You can retort if you which, but the facts remain. You may have the 'last word' in this exchange- I will not be replying further. Feel free to accuse me of whatever you will at this point; you were never my target audience, and with that in mind I've been wasting both of our time.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

There were more deaths yesterday at the hands of Boko Haram than have ever been committed by Christian domestic terrorists... How does bombing (closed) abortion clinics even make the list?
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Please let me know just how many deaths it takes to qualify? Jihad is holy war- a war between religious ideals, not nations. It does not require a battle line as such- its generally rare for such war to be conducted openly. War is not limited to killing the enemy, but also generally includes destruction of buildings and such as well. These were all cases of individuals putting their perception of gods law ahead of all human law and jurisdiction, and carrying out violence in the name of said god. Abortion clinics were not always closed, and there have in fact been deaths. Moreover, this is not limited to 'domestic terrorists [within the US].' We're speaking globally here, after all.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Bible:Deuteronomy 13:6-9"6 “If your brother, your mother’s son, or your son or daughter, or the wife [a]you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods’ (whom neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 of the gods of the peoples who are around you, near you or far from you, from one end of the earth to the other end), 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. 9 But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people."Christian Reaction: Christians don't follow the old testament; the immoral Jews do. Koran:Qur'an 9:123"O believers! Fight the unbelievers who hem you in, to let them know how strong you are; you should know that Allah is on the side of the Godfearing."Muslim Reaction: Those parts don't apply anymore. Islam is a religion of peace. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notice anything similar? At least Muslims are nice enough to not say "Jews are the ones who follow the immoral parts of our holy book, not us".
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

When will you people get it! Christianity revolves around the New Testament and Jesus. Not the Old Testament. I keep having to say this but you people never ever listen or understand!!!!
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

YOUR interpretation of YOUR denominations view of the translation of the Bible that YOUR denomination acknowledges is that Christianity revolves around the New Testament and Jesus, with the Old Testament excluded entirely.Your denomination is not the only form of Christianity.If the entire Christian church were to agree that the Old Testament is quite literally old news, it would be in the best interest to release bibles that contain only the New Testament- if only in the interest of not confusing the children with a moral compass that flips between two very different directions for North.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

YOUR interpretation of YOUR denominations view of the translation of the Bible that YOUR denomination acknowledges is that Christianity revolves around the New Testament and Jesus, with the Old Testament excluded entirely.I don't discredit the entire Old Testament. Just the part where it talks about the Levticus and Number laws. Your denomination is not the only form of Christianity.I know that. If the entire Christian church were to agree that the Old Testament is quite literally old news, it would be in the best interest to release bibles that contain only the New Testament- if only in the interest of not confusing the children with a moral compass that flips between two very different directions for NorthThe reason why the Bible has Old Testament is tell about the story of how God created the earth, and what happened through the course of history with Israel, and the coming of the Messiah. That's basically what the Old Testament is about.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

You need to recognize a few things...1st the quran is one book written in one lifetime by the same person. The only parts that can be ignored are verses that are abrogated by newer verses addressing the same thing. 2nd the quran is not printed in Chronological order. 3rd Chapter 9 is actually the 2nd to last chapter to be written.So while the bible starts off kind of violent, then there is a big difference (different covenant) and newer, much more peaceful text.The quran actually starts off pretty peaceful, but then turns violent... All being written by the same person.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Islam is to testify that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, to perform the prayers, to pay the zakat, to fast in Ramadan, and to make the pilgrimage to the House if you are able to do
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Not to mention Jihad. Christianity is also similar to Islam in this regard."38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."-Matt 5:38-39Yep. Completely similar.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Trolls... .
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Turning the other cheek = JihadLogic = TrollingIslam = Peace
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Did Jesus ever kill anyone? NoDid Jesus ever capture sex slaves? NoDid Jesus ever call on his followers to fight? NoDid Muhammad kill anyone? Yes, ( see Massacre of Banu Qurayza for example)Did Muhammad capture sex slaves? Yes (he had rights to 20% of all spoils from conquest and fathered a son from a slave)Did Muhammad ever call on his followers to fight? Yes (he even threatened them with damnation in Hell if they did not)
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Did Jesus ever kill anyone? NoGod has. If you believe in the trinity, then god and Jesus are the same (yet separate) people.Did Jesus ever capture sex slaves? NoAs far as we know...Did Jesus ever call on his followers to fight? NoYes he did. I could give you a list of Bible quotes showing that he has.... but you have obviously read the Bible so you should know them already.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Yes he did. I could give you a list of Bible quotes showing that he has.... but you have obviously read the Bible so you should know them already.I'm waiting...
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Here. Note: not all of these Biblical quotes are from the new testament, but the entire Bible is supposed to be the word of god/jesus/holy spirit; so yea....................
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Take this one for example...Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11Is this a call to violence? No, it isn't. It is a warning, be thankful for it.Any old testament violence is finite in scope. They target a certain people at a certain time.The quran gives blanket endorsements of violence that were utilized during and after muhammad's life, up to the present day..
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Do you even know what Jihad is? It means a holy war. As i said in my other argument, extremists are brain washed. They think they are doing the right thing and fight a Jihad.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

No, Not at all. yes I'm not Islam. But i know enough to say it is not Islam, it's extremists. yes extremists generally do come from Islamic religion. But that doesn't mean all Islams are terrorists. That is a racist belief. Extremists, for example the late Osama Bin Laden, take the words of the Islamic religion and twisted them to serve his purpose. and effectively brainwashed his organization. So the aggressive acts committed by these extremists, are what the believe to be the right thing to do.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

That is a racist belief. Explain to me how exactly Islam is a race.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

no religion is perfect. how many Christians are murderers or rapists or pedophiles?
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Correction, no religious person can be perfect. A cornerstone of christian theology is that we are all broken, fallen sinners who deserve to die. Christianity makes no claim of being able to make someone free of sin, or transform someone into a perfect person. In fact, if that were possible, Christianity its self would be invalidated. A religion however, can be good or bad, imperfect, or if it is the one true religion, can be perfect. The teachings of a religion can be perfect. I believe the teachings of Christianity, when you take into account the "whole picture" are perfect, where as the teachings of islam are horribly flawed and cater to the most evil ambitions of men.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

Are you a Muslim? Have you read the Koran? I haven't so I can't say it's a violent religion. I don't know if what you say is true but if it is, I will switch my side to "violent".
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

And he (Ishmael) will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren. -Gen 16:12Islam is a moon-cult made up by the insane murderer/rapist/pedophile/idolater Mohammed (Perdition Be Upon Him) in order to satisfy his carnal desires, not least of which was bloodlust and conquest.
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.1 Cor 6:9-11Yes, all have fallen short of the Lord (Rom 3:23), save Jesus Christ in whom we are saved (2 Cor. 5:21.) Both the Old and New Testaments make it clear how flawed human beings are in the various people it records, and that we need to repent of our evil ways. Chrstianity, at least, will lead people away from sin instead of towards it.This is a stark contrast to Islam and its belief in Ismah, or infallibility of their filthy 'prophets' (Matt. 7:15). If their pedophile/rapist/murderer prophet and his goons cannot be criticized, how can Mohammed's (Perdition Be Upon Him) followers possibly put an end to their evil manner of life?
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

How many founders of Christianity are murderers, rapists, or pedophiles? 0%How many founders of Islam are murderers, rapists, AND pedophiles 100%
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: peace

can you prove that? i'd love to see it where did you hear this about Muhammad? and how are you so sure Jesus was innocent?
Debate: Is Islam a religion of violence or a religion of peace?
Side: violence

Islamic sources say Muhammad's wife Aisha was 6 at betrothal only 9 when the marriage was consummated. He is on record ordering the assassination of critics like asma bint marwan, in addition to beheading captives. Ibrahim bin Muhammad was the son of a sex slave and muhammad.Pedophile-Murderer-Rapist