CreateDebate


Debate Info

48
32
Bulwark Progressive Islam prevail
Debate Score:80
Arguments:74
Total Votes:85
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Bulwark (42)
 
 Progressive Islam prevail (29)

Debate Creator

brontoraptor(28599) pic



Is Christianity the bulwark to something worse?

When even Atheists see the cold, harsh truth...

Bulwark

Side Score: 48
VS.

Progressive Islam prevail

Side Score: 32
2 points

Jesus is the focus of Christianity.

Jesus was executed for religious heresy.

I wonder what sort of impact that might have on the concept of civil rights in an enlightened Christian society?

Maybe all the sinners should be grateful for the mercies of God, and use this as an opportunity to repent while they still can.

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Side: Bulwark

There is no denying the correlation between the lie of separation of church and state, and the moral breakdown in America.

When you separate religious expression and moral values from a nation, the family unit falls apart. Without loving parents, our children grow up lacking the most basic of common sense morality.

What replaces this moral vacuum is one night hookups, promiscuous lifestyles, no fault anything goes values, etc.

It creates swollen welfare roles filled with unwed mothers and fatherless children. With each generation comes more broken famiies and more irresponsible children.

This opens the door to all types of problems in the future.

Side: Bulwark
1 point

Exactly - I mean just look at the terrible conditions of the least religious countries:

Japan

Sweden

Norway

Hong Kong

Netherlands

United Kingdom

New Zealand

Australia

Germany

Spain

And how great life is in the most religious countries:

Ethiopia

Yemen

Somalia

Afghanistan

Egypt

Guinea

Cambodia

Jordan

Chad

Ghana

Rwanda

Side: Progressive Islam prevail
2 points

Almost every country on your great countries list stems from historical Christian dominance and is still majority Christian.

And almost every country on your shithole countries list is Islamic.

The point? You've destroyed your point.

Oh, and one more thing. Japan is Buddhist. Thanks.

Supporting Evidence: Japan Buddhism (asiasociety.org)
Side: Bulwark
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
1 point

I can't beat Bronto's answer to your joke of a list..............................

Side: Bulwark
1 point

Now, let's use your logic. America is 80% Christian. America by far and away has the largest economy in the world. Abrakadabra! Christianity did it.

Side: Bulwark
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

Why would a Progressive oppose the "Religion of Peace" that is called Islam ? Are you going against the wishes of your Progressive Handlers like Barack Obama ?

Side: Bulwark
1 point

Ok, even if you don't believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and God and Son of Man, etc. Take that part out, but how can one not see values like: love/honor your parents, don't murder, don't steal, don't judge, be loving, be giving, be humble, compassionate, forgiving, help the poor, give unconditional love, etc, be a bad thing?

In any case, there is always going to be a war of values, beliefs, cultures, etc. If it ain't Christianity, maybe it'll be Islam, or maybe it'll just be "americanism", or maybe it'll just be capitalism/consumerism/secularism etc.....whatever it may be, someone or something will always be the ruling power. So pick your poison? Choose the lesser of two evils kind of thing.

Side: Bulwark

Bronto is trying to take advantage of the myth that Muslims were responsible for 9/11. He knows full well that they were not.

The big problem for bronto's attempt to deceive people is that Dawkins, in the quote used, concedes the obvious. The WTC buildings were blown up. They didn't collapse because of pancakes. Someone blew them up.

So now you have to explain where fundamentalist Muslims obtained the specific type and quantity of explosives used to blow up 3 WTC buildings (military grade nanothermite according to professor Harrit's 2009 study), and how they smuggled all of that past WTC security.

The company in charge of WTC security, incidentally, was run by George W Bush's cousin. Before that, it had been run by his brother.

Side: Bulwark
1 point

They didn't collapse because of pancakes. Someone blew them up.

Yes. Wahabbist Muslims from Saudi Arabia in airliners filled with fuel used as missiles. Even Obama admits this by going after Ben Laden.

Ben Laden claimed credit for the attack.

People on the ground got phone calls from passengers describing the hijackers as foreigners, Arabs, Muslims, etc.

Also, your theory would look very bad on Barack Obama, seeing he and Michelle are very close with the Bushes. It also would suggest that Hillary Clinton knew about said conspiracy, seeing her comments on many topics show that she was in the know on all top secret details within the government.

Your narrative would imply a conspiracy by globalist elites consisting of Democrats and RINOs, and would thus imply that we needed Trump to stop this madness. He is the only President since Reagan to not use billionaire Rockefeller's globalist term "a new world order" in which he claimed it would take the "right tragedy or catastrophe" to implant said order. Which in theory could explain why Obama was using surveillance on him, the DNC tried to frame him, and their media has declared a war on him. Rockefeller also praised the media, and the New York Times by name, for covering up their deeds and being their puppet.

And finally, Islamic terrorist groups continue to threaten another 9/11 to this day.

The point? Either you are completely dead wrong, or Liberals and RINOs are willing to use anything and do anything neccessary to get their NWO, including murdering 4,000 people, killing members of the government, destroying their own skyscrapers, fighting a war allowing a void for ISIS to fill, allowing CIA agents to be discovered and murdered in Benghazi, ousting Middle East leaders like Mobarek and Gaddafi to give territorial access to ISIS, taking out Sadaam Hussein to free up Iraq to Iran and/or ISIS, and intentionally allowing Russia access to Syria in order to destroy it. And if you are correct, Hillary winning would have guaranteed ISIS's growth and another 9/11 event would have been planned out by the globalists possibly in Europe or Mecca.

If you want to claim the above, I'm game on a constrained level, but the hijackers were Muslims, and even in your theory, the globalists used Islamic hate of the West as a tool knowing what maniac terrorists would and could do if they, the globalists, stepped aside and/or gave them a little help knowing what was planned by Al qaeda.

Supporting Evidence: Rejection of liberal World order around the world (www.japantimes.co.jp)
Side: Progressive Islam prevail
1 point

May the moving forward in our submission to God be effectual?

"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven . Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

Side: Progressive Islam prevail
1 point

Islam by it's very nature is divisive. It's goal and aim is to rule the entire world or should we call it, "Islamize" the world. It's not that different from Christianity's goal which too, was to rule the world (evangelize to every nation). Coca Cola is the only entity that has actually conquered the world. They exist in more countries than either Christianity or Islam and McDonalds not far behind....I believe McDonalds has already bid for the moon. I don't actually think Islam fighting against western values is necessarily a bad thing. I think that if we didn't have another force trying to oppose the Western values from taking over the world, we'd have another threat or monster on our hands. It's almost as if having differing and competing beliefs keeps everyone in check from basically taking over the entire world and having a strangle hold on it. We need there to be opposition always. Without opposition, we would be living in another sort of totalitarian rule or system. Think about it like this: if one corporation monopolized the entire industry, it would be a bad thing because competition keeps prices competitive and low, and it allows for flexibility, diverse options etc. If everything was owned or run by one entity, think about how bad that would be and how easily it could turn into a one-sided affair.

Side: Progressive Islam prevail
TzarPepe(763) Disputed
1 point

Christianity is not a global domination scheme.

Why is it written, "the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven"?

Maybe you don't get it as much as you think.

Side: Bulwark
KrutonHybrid(71) Disputed
1 point

Christianity is not a global domination scheme.

Then why does the Bible order its followers to slaughter everybody who worships a different God? It is very specific in this. In fact, there is one Bible verse in particular in which God orders every inhabitant of every city in which a worshipper of other Gods is discovered, to be put to death:-

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

A global domination scheme is exactly what Christianity is. It isn't all it is, but for the cynically minded this phrase could actually be used as a definition.

Side: Progressive Islam prevail