CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
I have a question...
If a man continuously sentenced everyone to death for many years, and then one day said, "If you bow down to me and declare me as your king, I will spare you," would you obey him?
Would you bow down to him because you view him as a loving ruler worthy of your worship, or because you do not want to die?
I think most would agree that sentencing people to death for everything he disliked is a little unjust.
Is he a just king who actually loves us and would do anything great things for us?
He claims to love his people, much in the same way that every dictator claims to, but like most dictators, he is often described as somewhat of a hypocrite for killing those he "loves."
I think most would agree that sentencing people to death for everything he disliked is a little unjust.
Is everything he dislikes injustice? If a judge hates evil, and sentences people, then it might seem as if he is sentencing them indiscriminately, but really is not.
He claims to love his people, much in the same way that every dictator claims to, but like most dictators, he is often described as somewhat of a hypocrite for killing those he "loves."
So, He kills his own people? Yeah, thats unjust. Good thing God doesn't kill his own people ;)
Is everything he dislikes injustice? If a judge hates evil, and sentences people, then it might seem as if he is sentencing them indiscriminately, but really is not.
At a certain point in time the things he disliked were a little excessive, but now he only punishes people for one thing... Not worshiping him. Some people think that makes him sound a bit like an egomaniac.
So, He kills his own people? Yeah, thats unjust. Good thing God doesn't kill his own people ;)
Then whose people does he kill?
Colossians 1:16 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him."
At a certain point in time the things he disliked were a little excessive, but now he only punishes people for one thing... Not worshiping him. Some people think that makes him sound a bit like an egomaniac.
Good thing God destroys people for their sin ;)
Then whose people does he kill?
They aren't God's people. God's people are those whom He has elected and saved.
Titus 2:14 ~ "who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works."
Because God is good, and not as how you are making Him out to be.
I believe that if there is a God, then he is good... But you are the one making him out to be less than good, not me. I'm just pointing out how he is described by Christians.
I believe that if there is a God, then he is good... But you are the one making him out to be less than good, not me. I'm just pointing out how he is described by Christians.
How am I making Him out to be less than good? Do you not think that sin should be destroyed?
Then why send them to hell if sinning is impossible in Heaven?
Do not equivocate.
You sure do say, "do not" a lot. That is annoying, I hope you know. I don't know you personally, so I would prefer that you refrain from telling me what to do... Especially since you tend to be more vague in your responses than I am.
People are created. This does not mean that they are God's people.
What does heaven have to do with God sentencing people to hell for having done wrong?
He isn't teaching them a lesson by sending them to hell. Either way they will no longer be able to sin. Their life on Earth is finished. It's kind of like repeatedly punching a quadriplegic.
He isn't teaching them a lesson by sending them to hell. Either way they will no longer be able to sin. Their life on Earth is finished. It's kind of like repeatedly punching a quadriplegic.
Did I ever say God was teaching them a lesson? They're there are punishment.
So, is it safe to say that everything is God's?
Of course, in the absolutes. Do not equivocate as I was telling you not to do. His 'people' is an aspect of personal relationship and fellowship.
Did I ever say God was teaching them a lesson? They're there are punishment.
It's still like repeatedly punching a quadriplegic. They cannot sin any longer. We put people in prison or sentence them to death, not only as a punishment, but to prevent further crimes. You believe that God is punishing sinners for eternity because of the actions committed within about seventy years time, if they even live that long.
If they cannot commit sin any longer and are of no danger to those in Heaven, then why even bother sending them to hell?
Of course, in the absolutes. Do not equivocate as I was telling you not to do.
Dude, you are the king of equivocal statements. It sounds a little bit silly you telling me not to equivocate.
His 'people' is an aspect of personal relationship and fellowship.
That's your description of the term... Not mine. By 'his people,' I mean his creations.
If they cannot commit sin any longer and are of no danger to those in Heaven, then why even bother sending them to hell?
It is punishment. God's wrath is upon those who do evil.
Dude, you are the king of equivocal statements. It sounds a little bit silly you telling me not to equivocate.
How have I equivocated yet?
That's your description of the term... Not mine. By 'his people,' I mean his creations.
Then your first statement was incorrect about how God supposedly loves all of His people. God hates those who are not His people in a personal sense, though He loves them in a common grace sense. God's personal, saving, and relational love is only for His elect people, a nation for His own possession.
It is punishment. God's wrath is upon those who do evil.
Why?
How have I equivocated yet?
I'm not just referring to this debate. You seem to be deliberately vague most of the time I debate with you.
Then your first statement was incorrect about how God supposedly loves all of His people.
God is love, right?
God hates those who are not His people in a personal sense, though He loves them in a common grace sense.
Okay, then I was not incorrect. Thanks.
God's personal, saving, and relational love is only for His elect people, a nation for His own possession.
So, you think that God's elect are predetermined? It sounds like you do not believe we have free-will. Then what is the purpose of the Bible? That sort of view renders a lot of things pointless.
Because evil deserves justice. All sin merits the debt of death.
I'm not just referring to this debate. You seem to be deliberately vague most of the time I debate with you.
Language can only go so far.
God is love, right?
Yes.
Okay, then I was not incorrect. Thanks.
God hates those who are not His people. Your first statement was that He loved His people, which was true. However, you were using it as a creation sense, which you made clear in the last post, which is blatantly incorrect.
So, you think that God's elect are predetermined? It sounds like you do not believe we have free-will. Then what is the purpose of the Bible? That sort of view renders a lot of things pointless.
We have free will. Who said we didn't? Who said things were pointless?
Because evil deserves justice. All sin merits the debt of death.
Why eternal justice?
Language can only go so far.
You certainly aren't pushing the limits... That's for sure.
Yes.
Okay, then!
God hates those who are not His people.
According to you he predetermined who he would hate.
Your first statement was that He loved His people, which was true. However, you were using it as a creation sense, which you made clear in the last post, which is blatantly incorrect.
What reason does he have to hate non-believers, other than not believing? There are people in the world (I know this for a fact) who have no idea who Jesus is.
We have free will.
Then does our free-will extend to anyone being able to convert, or is that all predetermined?
Who said we didn't? Who said things were pointless?
Because death is eternal, and death is the punishment.
You certainly aren't pushing the limits... That's for sure.
Well, when I get too advanced people on the internet can't understand me, thus believing me to be crazy. So, I can either keep it at a normal, layman base, which can get people to actually understand me.. or get advanced and make people think of me as stupid.
Okay, then!
God being love has no bearing on this.
According to you he predetermined who he would hate.
He hated them before the foundation of the world.
What reason does he have to hate non-believers, other than not believing? There are people in the world (I know this for a fact) who have no idea who Jesus is.
They sin.
Then does our free-will extend to anyone being able to convert, or is that all predetermined?
"Are his sentences just?" No. People have the right to feel safe. One does not freely love a tyrant. "Is he a just king who actually loves us and would do anything great things for us?" A hostage situation is not a great thing.
"Are his sentences just?" No. People have the right to feel safe. One does not freely love a tyrant.
If a man continually does evil, is he not afraid of the authorities? Does he feel safe? Does he have the right to feel safe? His feelings are simply a result of his own guilt from evil.
"Is he a just king who actually loves us and would do anything great things for us?" A hostage situation is not a great thing
If a man continually does evil, is he not afraid of the authorities? Does he feel safe? Does he have the right to feel safe? His feelings are simply a result of his own guilt from evil. Tell that to rape victims who no longer feel safe if they ever did. Did I do evil to earn being raped by my father? No. Im not looking for pity, just using my story to teach. Are all kings innately hostage takers? Yes because a monarchy is against the rights of the people to have a voice in the leaders. There will be only one one world globalist monarchy* that succeeds without hurting people and that is the Kindgom of Jesus Christ. All others who would presume upon that role are imposters and should be called out for misleading the people.
Tell that to rape victims who no longer feel safe if they ever did. Did I do evil to earn being raped by my father? No. Im not looking for pity, just using my story to teach.
And does the king not prosecute those who have done the raping, and do kings not comfort those who have been victims?
Yes because a monarchy is against the rights of the people to have a voice in the leaders. There will be only one one world globalist monarchy that succeeds without hurting people and that is the Kindgom of Jesus Christ. All others who would presume upon that role are imposters and should be called out for misleading the people.
And does the king not prosecute those who have done the raping, and do kings not comfort those who have been victims? No he doesnt actually. When I reported my father for raping me, I was victim blamed, sent back, and ignored. My father was never brought to justice and he never will be.
If a man continuously sentenced everyone to death for many years, and then one day said, "If you bow down to me and declare me as your king, I will spare you," would you obey him?
That depends on what the man sentences you to death for. Of course I would bow down to avoid death, but if he is sentencing people for a good cause then I wouldn't have a problem with him.
Would you bow down to him because you view him as a loving ruler worthy of your worship, or because you do not want to die?
That depends on the ruler. These questions aren't specific enough.
That depends on what the man sentences you to death for.
If you do not worship him, then you get killed.
Of course I would bow down to avoid death, but if he is sentencing people for a good cause then I wouldn't have a problem with him.
If you think it is okay for him to kill people simply because they do not worship him, then fine.
That depends on the ruler. These questions aren't specific enough.
He sentenced everyone to death. It should be obvious that this analogy is relating to the Christian interpretation of God and how he punishes non-believers.
If you think it is okay for him to kill people simply because they do not worship him, then fine.
Is that his only cause? Does he not offer anything else? Does he provide anything if you submit to his will?
He sentenced everyone to death. It should be obvious that this analogy is relating to the Christian interpretation of God and how he punishes non-believers.
I was aware, but this interpretation is loose. You take out all of the benefits and only use what you see as malevolent to form the analogy. The true description of this man would be "Would you bow down to a man that promises eternal life and happiness?". I don't really enjoy the way you phrased this "analogy".
Is that his only cause? Does he not offer anything else? Does he provide anything if you submit to his will?
If you submit to his will, then you get to live.
You take out all of the benefits and only use what you see as malevolent to form the analogy. The true description of this man would be "Would you bow down to a man that promises eternal life and happiness?"
Then my analogy would pretty much cease to be an analogy. People would look at it through a biased lens.
I don't really enjoy the way you phrased this "analogy".
That's fine. You don't have to take part in the debate.
I'm not trying to offend you or anything. I just didn't like the way you presented the debate.
Like I said, that is fine. Maybe that is your way of saying that you don't completely agree with Christianity.
Alright, so why wouldn't you (I see that you have taken the opposing side)?
I could not genuinely appreciate somebody who tries to intimidate people into worshiping him. He can bring people in with love by promising all sorts of benefits if they worship him, but it is the attempt to keep them loyal through fear that bothers me. That sounds kind of like a dictator if you ask me. Actually, it sounds a little bit like what goes on in North Korea. Compare the people who worship the North Korean leaders and cry during their funerals, to the people who worship Jesus and cry at church. In both scenarios, they came to be that way through fear. They were trained to legitimately love their leaders, because the consequences for not loving them are pretty bad.
Are you assuming your analogu changed my personal views or something?
No.
Possibly this too.
That's a different story. However, it seems to me that Christians often skip over the moral and spiritual teachings in the Bible, and focus more on the resurrection, Judgement Day, hell, and the miracles of Jesus.
That's a different story. However, it seems to me that Christians often skip over the moral and spiritual teachings in the Bible, and focus more on the resurrection, Judgement Day, hell, and the miracles of Jesus. I 100% endorse this statement.
If a man continuously sentenced everyone to death for many years, and then one day said, "If you bow down to me and declare me as your king, I will spare you," would you obey him?
No. Why would anybody worship someone who has sentenced everyone to death for many years? Think about how many people there are in the world... how many children are born each year. Now think about all of those people and children being sentenced to death by a single being... think about all of those people and children being brutally slaughtered because someone commanded/sentenced it.
If this were a man (mortal person) then my answer is absolutely not. If this is a cheeky stab at Christianity then (I anticipated this) my answer is that God gave me life therefor he is worthy of my love and worship for that alone, God also gave all other livening things life so therefor it is his to gave and his to take back. Humans commit murder when they take a life they had no right to take (hence the difference between murder and justifiable homicide) God always has the right to take any life he wishes to take because it was he who gave it to begin with.
Wait, hold up, wouldn't I be dead if he was condemning everyone to death? Surely, after a couple of years... well, since he has political power, everyone would be dead. I can't exactly worship him, because I'm most likely dead. Plus, religious or not, idolatry isn't cool. He probably killed my family already, so that's unforgivable... of course this is all speculation.
I guess that we are missing the bigger picture that we will die if we do not agree to this. Well, this depends on how he could kill me and where we are.... who knows, I could possibly beat him with my fists if we are alone. If he has people with him, I guess I would commit suicide if I could, and if not, I will bow down, and secretly plot to kill him. Well, religious values aside of course.
