And even taking it at the bare minimum... There is no contradiction there to begin with. Committing adultery and taking a wife who is loose is not a contradiction.

Take things into context. Humanity is entirely evil, which was an aside to the larger discussion including God.

Evil is still constant. Evil would be compared to God, the moral prescriber, the only way for their to be universal morality.

Everyone lives in an evil manner. The intricacies are different, though.

Read in context.

And what are the chances of him smiting that many people in the first place? God had to have helped him, which means God could have helped him again.

The passage is not talking about it being one slash of the sword. One man was fighting many men.

Well why would they be separate events?

Why wouldn't they be?

If one witnessed 300, then one other witnessed 800, and they are both written in the Bible, it's a contradiction. If I say yes, and you say no, we are contradicting each other you see how this works?

That is not a contradiction at all. 300 is a subset of 800. If one witnessed part of a battle, but not the ending or beginning, then he would be right in saying that the man slew 300 men. The one who watched the entire thing would be right in saying that it was 800 men.

Obviously. Yet the thing is, no one brought God into this. This is all about the faith and or works of people, God has nothing to do with it.

Are you serious? The debate is talking about faith and works. I am rebutted by saying that people who have committed rape can go to heaven, which is intrinsically implying a God. Obviously if we are going to be talking about a rapist going to heaven, then we are going to be entering into a realm in which God is in the foreground.

It's a saying, you're reading too into it. If you live in a place where the temperature is constant (let's say it's always cold) how would you know it was cold, with nothing to compare it to?

That is irrelevant. Evil is evil even if there is nothing to compare it to and whether or not people know what good is. The only thing that is needed, by definition of it being evil, is a moral prescriber to make it universal, in which good is necessarily apart of the equation in that case.

And living is still evil and evil is comparable to rape which is evil: Justification.

Living isn't evil. It is how we live that is evil. And everyone that is a human lives in an evil manner. And that is still a non sequitur.

It is not rape, it is the same as rape. If it's the same as rape, but we can go to heaven for it, then rape is justified.

It is still a non sequitur. In regards to the point about going to heaven: it is not justified; it is condemned. Jesus took the penalty for it instead of the rapist, who took Christ's place.

You are taking something cut and dry, two separate lines that say two different things about the same event, and you're taking up possibilities to justify the validity of the statement when they obviously contradict, and not overlap

You are assuming that they are the same event. Even if they were, though, it would not be grasping at straws. One might have witnessed 300 men being slain by him and then left and never heard that there were more and that, then, was passed down to others and was finally written down. There is, however, no contradiction here and not any sort of incorrectness.

What people mean by straw man is that a person takes the argument away from the logic progression of things and take it down to an illogical point in which the debater was not intending it to go to and destroy it from there.

This is not a straw man, what I have presented. I am not grasping at straws; there is no contradiction here.

Please explain to me how it doesn't then.

"We" is a term for humans, not for that which is non-humans. God is never doing evil.

Indeed it does. The saying "If everything is something, nothing is something" is a paradoxical phrase that basically means if we only know way of feeling, another way of not feeling that doesn't exist. How can evil call evil, evil? it can't because it's all evil.

If everything that we live in is cold, that does not mean that everything is not hot.

Sure there is, but evil is still evil, even if it's not as evil as eviler or evilest.

Evil is still evil and, therefore, rape is evil.

By saying that everything that we do is evil. And the foreknowledge that rape is evil. You are simply stating everything is rape. Yet since we can't choose to live, which is still evil, it's justified, and if living, an evil act is justified, rape is now justified because it's just like being alive.

That is a non sequitur. This is the logical formulation of it: (x)(Dx-->Ex)/(Er)//(x)(Dx-->Rx) That does not follow. Another logical formulation of the non sequitur is this: (A-->E)/(R-->E)//(A-->R) If anything is done by humans, then it is evil. If someone commits rape, then it is evil. Therefore, if anything is done by humans, then it is rape. That does not follow.

Not someone who is horrible with technology.