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.
"2 kings 2:24 This doesn't sound like god gave them years to repent more like on the spot murder."
Their is a reason I said non-Isrealite nation. The Jews knew God's law since birth and thus were told how things were. Non-Isrealite nations were not given God's law so they were given time to repent. The example you gave were Isrealites teens being penalized by law they knew of since birth, respecting your elders. Also, if you read carefully, they weren't just calling him bald, they had intentions to hurt him.
"First, the King James Version has done us a disservice by translated the term as “children.” The Hebrew word can refer to children, but rather more specifically means "young men." The NIV, quoted here, uses the word “youths.” Second, the fact that the bears mauled 42 of the youths indicates that there were more than 42 youths involved. This was not a small group of children making fun of a bald man. Rather, it was a large demonstration of young men who assembled for the purpose of mocking a prophet of God. Third, the mocking of “go on up, you baldhead,” is more than making fun of baldness. The baldness of Elisha referred to here may be: 1) natural loss of hair; 2) a shaved head denoting his separation to the prophetic office; or more likely, 3) an epithet of scorn and contempt, Elisha not being literally bald. The phrase “go up” likely was a reference to Elijah, Elisha’s mentor, being taken up to Heaven earlier in 2 Kings chapter 2:11-12. These youths were sarcastically taunting and insulting the Lord’s prophet by telling him to repeat Elijah’s translation.
In summary, 2 Kings 2:23-24 is not an account of God mauling young children for making fun of a bald man. Rather, it is a record of an insulting demonstration against God’s prophet by a large group of young men. Because these young people of about 20 years of age or older (the same term is used of Solomon in 1 Kings 3:7) so despised the prophet of the Lord, Elisha called upon the Lord to deal with the rebels as He saw fit. The Lord’s punishment was the mauling of 42 of them by two female bears. The penalty was clearly justified, for to ridicule Elisha was to ridicule the Lord Himself. The seriousness of the crime was indicated by the seriousness of the punishment. The appalling judgment was God’s warning to all who would scorn the prophets of the Lord."
This again shows favoritism. And when is calling people names and having intentions to hurt people justified by death? A punishment yes, to learn their lesson but the cruel death of being mauled by two female bears influenced by god. It doesn't shake the fact what god and Elisha called on the bears to do shows true intention of hurt but they where the ones who acted on it according to you.
It is completely morally bankrupt and backwards. And it literally makes absolutely NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. You see something in the bible that doesn't add up or contradicts the mainstream teachings or another verse from earlier and you say "Wft?" But you turn another page and you say it again! And again and again and again! There's just so much wrong with it that its like being a college English professor reading a third grader's work. Its complete trash.
Slavery wasn't as harsh as the Barbados slave code version in every bodies head today. The Islrealites had to treat the slaves with general respect. And no he doesn't send people to hell for looking at boobs, he sends them to hell for rejecting Him after looking at boobs for life along with everything else they do.
Are you actually justifying slavery? Slaves are slaves. Forced to work against their will. Slaves then were treated like shit, and slaves recently were treated like shit. The isrealites were just not able to enslave EACHOTHER but foreign slaves are fair game. God also gives guidelines on how hard you can BEAT your slave. He doesnt say that beating them is bad, just at a certain point.
This is what i was talking about, the morally bankrupt and backwards thing.
Looking at breasts is a natural, unconscious impulse that according to christian logic, HE GAVE TO US. He apparently punishes us and restricts us from doing things HE MADE US DO. Its completely retarded.
And if he really wanted people to NOT "reject" him, then he should show his ass to everyone instead of settling for a poorly written shitty ancient book that a modern human being wont find convincing in the slightest.
You assumed something, I simply stated it is not what everybody has in their head, the Barbados slave code. And you could agrue we are all held against our will to some degree. The Isrealites had to treat their slaves with respect. Also, every (relativly) successful empire/ nation have used slaves to start and/ or support their nation. Examples include the USA, Britian, Rome. The Isrealites did not have slaves after the initial start of their nation.
The Idea of people going to Hell simply for being non-Christian or homosexual regardless to whether they were good people. According to Christianity Mahatma Gandhi is burning in Hell with Hitler, suffering the same thing; What did Hitler do? Kill millions of people. What did Gandhi do? Practiced the "wrong" religion.
One of my biggest pet peeves with it was the blind faith. Christians always had an excuse to anything anyone could ask them.
Why doesn't he reveal himself? All will be known in time.
Why does evil exist? He made us with free will.
Why did he make Satan evil? He made Satan good he became evil after becoming jealous.
Etc, etc, etc. There's an excuse for every question, then if you keep asking long enough, the questions double back on one another, and paradoxes start happening, where their logic starts refuting their own logic, yet they continue to dodge all your questions with vague answers.
This is of Christian the people, the religion, but it seems that everyone of the religion acts this same way, so it would make sense to a normal person to assume that it's because of the religion.
The community. It's disturbing to see that most the principals the bible teaches are thrown out the window and they still call themselves followers of Christ.
I hate when the Christians (same with other religion) calling the good nice man as evil immoral sinful just because he have no faith in God. It is part of their belief to call non-believer that way. I found many people who doesn't have faith in god, but quite a nice man...so I think it so wrong and isn't fair to call them evil immoral.
What bothers me ... hmm ... religion related ? not really ... does extremists count ? I'm ok with beliefs , its just some people who like to force it to the others ... that's the part I don't like ... and I'm fine with the rest though ...
Nothing really. If anyone wants me to answer some questions I can answer them in my youtube video but I will do it once I get my new microphone I will be getting the mail.
I dont believe you. I would bet a million dollars that there is at least one thing that you don't think is right, or something god does that you dont agree with, ect. You may not admit it, but i know somewhere inside you, you know.
See this is your problem you think every Christian who defends the bible is biased. Maybe have some respect for people who believe in the bible, quit being such a hypocritical bigot!
Every Christian IS biased. I have yet to see any christian make a decision or argument in a debate that doesnt have some kind of bias to it.
And why should i have respect for anyone who believes in such a piece of trash as absolute truth? By that logic we should have respect for people who believe that the Holocaust never happened. No, i wont censor or neuter myself in debate to make christians feel good. Sorry buddy
As for your last statement:
Bigot? Maybe. But then again i think Christians who claim they know absolute truth and think that they have the moral basis to judge other peoples lives and decide where theyre going when they die is pretty bigotted.
As for hypocritical...that just doesnt make sense. I dont think you know what that word means.. Hypocritical is saying not to do something and then doing it. So for me to be hipocritical in this case you would have to point out somewhere where i said that i respect people who believe in the bible or told somebody else to....which i never did.
1.Every Christian is biased? Wow dude! just..wow! that's not right! I can say the same for a lot of atheists.
2.People have different opinions on the universe and history. Let people believe what they want to believe! what makes you think your opinion is better than everyone else's?
3.Not all Christians are like that.
4.Your a hypocrite cause you say that every Christian is biased yet your no different! and good job looking up the word btw XD
1.Every Christian is biased? Wow dude! just..wow! that's not right! I can say the same for a lot of atheists.
Christians have the bias of having that belief and being immersed in that culture. Atheists dont have that for any religion. We just dont accept your claim, what do we have bias towards? Not believing? I assure you, I, and ANY other self respecting atheist is committed to keeping an open mind to any kind of evidence or proof any religion has. Seriously, every time im given an argument i read every word and try to understand it as best i can. Only problem is, every argument i get is SHIT. Every one is flawed, poorly formed, unsupported, ect.
I can see where it might seem like were biased, but its only because theist arguments suck in comparison to scientific ones or logical ones.
2.People have different opinions on the universe and history. Let people believe what they want to believe! what makes you think your opinion is better than everyone else's?
I never ever said or will say that people CANT believe what they do or want to, but when people are going to assert things, im going to dispute them. And what makes my opinion better is the fact that its supported by evidence and is a logical reflection of reality, and religious ones are grounded in supernatural assumptions.
3.Not all Christians are like that.
Every single one ive ever debated to date says the same exact things, some have more arguments, some have less, but they are all flawed.
4.Your a hypocrite cause you say that every Christian is biased yet your no different! and good job looking up the word btw XD
I just pointed out that im really not. And if i am, im biased towards science and reason as opposed to pure myth, but i give every argument a fair shake.
And i didnt have to look up the word, its a very simple one.
1.No not all atheist's are biased, just ones like you :).
2.did you know that most of the bible has been proven to be historically true. Is that not evidence for you?
3.Says the biased and hypocritical atheist who doesn't respect religious beliefs! Why don't you take a lesson from zephyr and little misfit they are atheists yet they respect religious beliefs and are not as immature as you are.
4.lol then why did you ask if I knew the word if its so simple?
1.No not all atheist's are biased, just ones like you :)
Any and all arguments for the existence of a deity that i have been presented with i have all given a fair shake. If you give me one i will do the same. However, if there are errors, fallacies, and the like, i WILL point them out.
2.did you know that most of the bible has been proven to be historically true. Is that not evidence for you?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH where the fuck did you pull that out of? Almost any historian will disagree with you 100% and even most bible scholars! The bible is one of the worst "historical records" ever written.
3.Says the biased and hypocritical atheist who doesn't respect religious beliefs! Why don't you take a lesson from zephyr and little misfit they are atheists yet they respect religious beliefs and are not as immature as you are.
Why the fuck should i respect a system that is not only completely absurd but that convinces people that I and other atheists or non christians deserve to burn in hell for eternity? Your belief is not up on a pedestal out of the reach of others, you might feel entitled, but you're not. Just because i dare to call your idiotic beliefs out for what they clearly are doesnt mean im biased or hypocritical. You're more than welcome to call out atheists for being stupid and what not but the difference is, i can back up my bullshit and you cant.
4.lol then why did you ask if I knew the word if its so simple?
Because in your first response you failed to point out where i was hypocritical.
1.I don't see how you can disprove gods existence due to the fact that their is no evidence for his non-existence, then again there is no evidence for his existence either.
2.Actually believe it or not but there is some historical truth to the bible. (besides the talking donkeys and all that magical stuff that is)
3.Your a disrespectful atheist who attacks anyone just because of their religious beliefs. All just because you had a bad history when you believed in Christianity. Its fine that you don't believe in Christianity but don't shove atheism down our throats because if you do your no better than a lot of Christians. Like is said take a lesson from zephyr and little misfit. You give atheism and atheists a bad name.
1.I don't see how you can disprove gods existence due to the fact that their is no evidence for his non-existence, then again there is no evidence for his existence either.
It doesnt entirely disprove him altogether, but it gives a pretty solid reason to not believe he exists. And theres plenty of evidence against his existence! Science has given us many a natural explanation to the universe's questions. Big bang, evolution, historical evidence against the bible, archeological, ect. These are all highly suggestive of two things:
1) God probably doesnt exist
2) Many claims of christianity are wrong
2.Actually believe it or not but there is some historical truth to the bible. (besides the talking donkeys and all that magical stuff that is)
Sure there IS some historicity to the bible but im disputing you saying that MOST of it is historical. Most of the bible is about the magic and superstition so most of it is wrong or has no historical evidence. And the historically true parts of the bible are accepted as truth because they have been compared to past historians documentation or archeological evidence, that being said, why should we use the bible as the source of this? We can just use the archeological evidence.
And just because theres some history to the bible doesnt automatically validate the magical claims or God's existence.
3.Your a disrespectful atheist who attacks anyone just because of their religious beliefs. All just because you had a bad history when you believed in Christianity.
You replied to ME. I dont attack people JUST based on their religions, thats stupid. The only thing i attack is their arguments. I dont use pointless ad hominem attacks, i just destroy the argument itself, not the person.
Its fine that you don't believe in Christianity but don't shove atheism down our throats because if you do your no better than a lot of Christians.
Where the fuck are you getting this shit? All i do is respond to peoples arguments. I dont seek people out to attack them nor do i force atheism on people at all. It might seem that way though based on the way i very maticulously and passionately destroy theist arguments.
Like is said take a lesson from zephyr and little misfit. You give atheism and atheists a bad name.
I care...? Just because zephyr and misfit are tentative and neutered doesnt mean i have to be.
1.how does evolution disprove his existence? and as for the big bang theory he could've been involved in it but hey these are just my opinions.
2.I never said it validated magical claims.
3.I replied to you cause you attacked Srom he stated that he didn't think there was anything wrong in the bible and you attacked him just for his opinion. Its ok to debate I mean after all that's what this site is for but he wasn't arguing he stated his opinion about the bible and you attacked him just for his beliefs.
4.but srom wasn't arguing he just stated that he didn't think there was anything wrong with the bible.
It doesnt. It just disproves a much of Genesis and then corrodes the basis for the rest of the bible.
and as for the big bang theory he could've been involved in it but hey these are just my opinions.
Genesis is very specific as to how the universe was created. If you stray from this, then your hypothesis is nothing short of a wild guess with nothing, not even your own bible to justify your thought process. So if youre going to make this guess then you must throw out, really all of Genesis which means then you have no explaination for how heaven came to exist as well as other things. Christianity becomes vastly more complex as soon as you start adapting modern science to it. And not complex in a good way.
2.I never said it validated magical claims.
I never said you said it did. But this being said, there is no validation for these magical claims and therefore no reason to believe they are factual accounts or ever happened.
3.I replied to you cause you attacked Srom he stated that he didn't think there was anything wrong in the bible and you attacked him just for his opinion. Its ok to debate I mean after all that's what this site is for but he wasn't arguing he stated his opinion about the bible and you attacked him just for his beliefs.
"Attacked" you really love that word dont you? I didnt "attack" srom, i gave a rebuttal. Sure the bible's legitimacy is his belief but it's also his opinion which is subject to debate. In fact, anything you post on this site is fair game for debate.
4.but srom wasn't arguing he just stated that he didn't think there was anything wrong with the bible.
Saying there is nothing wrong with the bible is a stance for debate. I challenged him on it. That is fair game. By that logic, anyone who posts on a debate that isnt a support, dispute, or clarify argument shouldnt be touched.
3. Really I say it that much? Well anyways he stated that he didn't think there was anything wrong with the bible and you said that he wrong when he clearly stated that to him there was nothing wrong with the bible. If that's not attacking I don't know what is.
4.correction he said to him there was nothing wrong with the bible.
