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.
Christians why won't you question the Bible?
Normally I'd stop making waves, and accept that the difference between the religious and the non religious was that e are on two different spectrums. Yet you think you're on the same spectrum as us, and you won't even point out what's wrong with your God, or at the very least what is wrong in what is written about him. I hate to say this (I mean really hate to say it) but the best Christian I have met, if she really is one, is Sitara/DanaForYeshua/Ismalia. Unlike the lot, she questions him, and she has her own opinions of the world, not based off of some ancient book, but because of the book's affect on her morality and the way the world actually works. No one is saying leave the faith (or at least I'm not) just question what does not belong, for the love of God, question what does not belong.
Again, don't get into a huffy over the picture, it's mildly relavent.
1 John 4:1 -- Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.
We do; we just have come to the conclusion that there is nothing wrong with the Bible.
He looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in the name of Yahweh. Two female bears came out of the woods, and mauled forty-two of those youths.
Srom, I found you to be one of the tolerable ones. It is mostly my biased that liked you because you did not make waves, but that time is over. Think, really think.
How can an all powerful, and all loving being standby why evil happens? It's not because we have free will, because we can use our free will to do evil, and God in his all lovingness could still stop us, since he couldn't stand to see his creations fight, and since he couldn't stand to know his creations would burn for eternity.
Mind me for using another of my overplayed analogies, but it's the only weapon I have against people who don't see as I do, which is what I believe to be objectively logical.
If your child was on a destructive path, and you loved that child, wouldn't you do everything in your power to stop them from going down that path?
I would hope so, and if so, then why can't God, with more power than you, stop atheists from being atheists, stop murders from wanting to murderer, etc. He wouldn't void out free will by helping us to be better, he'd be using his all powerful and all loving self to guide us on the right track. You love your children, and know they will make mistakes, but you love them too much to let those mistakes cost them their lives right?
How can an all powerful, and all loving being standby why evil happens? It's not because we have free will, because we can use our free will to do evil, and God in his all lovingness could still stop us, since he couldn't stand to see his creations fight, and since he couldn't stand to know his creations would burn for eternity.
We don't know for any instances why God allows evil to happen for His ways are not our ways. He see's things in a totally different picture then what we do. He see's the big picture while we as humans see a fraction of it. We only know a limited information and we can't comprehend God because we have finite minds our mind isn't infinite like God's.
Evil exists in this world because of sin of what our own doing happens if God eliminated evil in the next minute or so, would you and I still be here? No we wouldn't because everyone has a potential to do evil things, actions, or think evil thoughts in our minds. That would eliminate the whole human race and thus God would have to start all over again and that isn't what God is going to do. He is doing defeat evil and get rid of it when He comes back for His Second Coming.
why can't God, with more power than you, stop atheists from being atheists, stop murders from wanting to murderer, etc.
God gave man over to this earth and as a result you see that people have turned away from God and have tons horrible things in the past such as wars, slavery, racism, murder, stealing, etc because of it. Some are still going on today because its getting worse and worse.
Romans 1:21-22 "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools"
That verse explains what most people think that they are wise but the Bible says they are fools and if you look down further into it. It says that God gave them over to a deprived mind and let them continue to do it because God tried to call out to them so he gave them over to what they believe or the certain addictions they liked.
We don't know for any instances why God allows evil to happen for His ways are not our ways.
That's all well and good, but if your ways are telling you something is wrong, you should run with it, not just accept it because his ways are different or because some text said he's right.
Evil exists in this world because of sin of what our own doing happens if God eliminated evil in the next minute or so, would you and I still be here?
Like I said, he doesn't have to destroy sin all together. I personally don't believe he can. I just think he should educate us, like I'd do with anyone I love if I saw they were heading down a bad path.
God gave man over to this earth and as a result you see that people have turned away from God and have tons horrible things in the past such as wars, slavery, racism, murder, stealing, etc because of it.
Then for the love of him, why won't he help us. How can he claim to love us, but sit by while we tear each other apart. Some people have turned so far away from God they trust some secret shady organization to destroy the world. People have accepted groups of humans to rule them in the place of God who does not help.
Romans 1:21-22
That's just words in a book, you won't question they're wasted on me.
That verse explains what most people think that they are wise but the Bible says they are fools and if you look down further into it.
The verse explains e are fools, and you just agree with it. You don't question that you might not actually be a fool. I do. I think that that verse may be true of some, but to those who actually know, they know they are correct, and they will continue to question everything until they can no longer.
Then it as Nox0 says, and I'm afraid there is nothing more to say. There is no point in arguing if you've already made up your mind that the person you are disputing is wrong.
I've said it multiple times before, I did not come to this site to learn or to debate. I came to this site to show atheists that they are wrong and to possibly convert some of them through logic, and to teach Christians that their religion is the most logical worldview. If it is something minor to the big points and someone shows me that I am wrong, then I will admit that I am wrong. However, in regards to the big issues, I side with Dostoevsky who said the following: “If someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth, and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth.”
I've said it multiple times before, I did not come to this site to learn or to debate.
You should never do anything with a predisposition not to learn from it, and clearly you are in the wrong place if you don't intend to debate.
I came to this site to show atheists that they are wrong and to possibly convert some of them through logic,
This is just you contradicting your earlier statement that you didn't come here to debate. I wonder what ways I am as blind to my own hypocrisy.
and to teach Christians that their religion is the most logical worldview.
This aim is based on the arrogant and false presumption that you have a thorough knowledge of every "worldview", and ignores the fact that there are various "worldviews" within what is called christianity. The term worldview is just another tool for thinking in terms of stereotypes as opposed to treating individuals with genuine respect. But then you've made it clear that you want respect to be a one way street. I will do what I can to influence people not to accept relationships like you are after.
If it is something minor to the big points and someone shows me that I am wrong, then I will admit that I am wrong. However, in regards to the big issues, I side with Dostoevsky who said the following: “If someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth, and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth.”
This is just you contradicting your earlier statement that you didn't come here to debate. I wonder what ways I am as blind to my own hypocrisy.
How is this contradictory? There is a difference between debate and teaching. Also, that even if it were contradictory, it wouldn't be hypocrisy by definition.
Also, i sense that your post was very resentful and bitter. Maybe I struck a nerve? Truth is hard to accept a lot of the time so I don't blame you.
If you can't tell, then if I were you, I would be seriously worried about my skills of interpreting scripture. It would be hard to illustrate it any more clearly than what is already in text above.
There is a difference between debate and teaching.
But not trying to convert through conversation that's debate anyway you slice it.
Also, that even if it were contradictory, it wouldn't be hypocrisy by definition.
Technically you may be right here. Perhaps I should have been more frank and just called you out as a liar.
Also, i sense that your post was very resentful and bitter. Maybe I struck a nerve?
I am opposed to your style of engagement. I am not bitter but I feel like it's my calling if you will to in no uncertain terms oppose people like you. I will now be looking at what you post and sharing my opinion along side yours to try and make sure anyone you wish to indoctrinate sees an opposing viewpoint.
Truth is hard to accept a lot of the time so I don't blame you.
This coming from I guy who a few posts ago declared that he would put aside truth to be with Jesus. I AM looking for challenges to the way I think. I suggest you do the same....In the interest of not hiding from the truth.
If you can't tell then if I were you I would be seriously worried about my skills of interpreting scripture. It would be hard to illustrate it any more clearly than what is already in text above.
Please demonstrate to me then.
But not trying to convert through conversation that's debate anyway you slice it.
Discussion does not equal debate. Discussion can mean teaching, while the other person asks questions.
Technically you may be right here. Perhaps I should have been more frank and just called you out as a liar.
How have I lied? You keep making assertions with no backing.
I am opposed to your style of engagement. I am not bitter but I feel like it's my calling if you will to in no uncertain terms oppose people like you. I will now be looking at what you post and sharing my opinion along side yours to try and make sure anyone you wish to indoctrinate sees an opposing viewpoint.
Thats fine; the only problem though is that the opposing views are not logically sound/cogent or, most of the time, even valid/strong.
This coming from I guy who a few posts ago declared that he would put aside truth to be with Jesus. I AM looking for challenges to the way I think. I suggest you do the same....In the interest of not hiding from the truth.
Look at context, please. I know that a lot of people on this site refuse to consider it, but it really is important. I said that Jesus is truth but that if someone did convince me that the truth was out of Jesus, then I would side with Jesus rather than truth.
Why when a few breaths ago claimed that you are not here to learn?
Discussion does not equal debate. Discussion can mean teaching, while the other person asks questions.
When you enter into conversation with an aim to convert that is debate. Why is this so difficult to teach to you. Perhaps because you have made up your mind that you are not here to learn.
How have I lied? You keep making assertions with no backing.
The backing is the existing record of this conversation, you wont have to back track far. Learn to interpret scripture...it's right above in rather plain english. I will create a seperate debate to highlight your lying if you want to be insistant.
Thats fine; the only problem though is that the opposing views are not logically sound/cogent or, most of the time, even valid/strong.
I think my arguments will shine by comparison :)
Look at context, please. I know that a lot of people on this site refuse to consider it, but it really is important. I said that Jesus is truth but that if someone did convince me that the truth was out of Jesus, then I would side with Jesus rather than truth.
I agree that context is important.....but paying closer attention to context won't dig you out of the hole you've dug for yourself with that totally lame quotation. potential students will be fleeing from you if you bring up crap like that.
Why when a few breaths ago claimed that you are not here to learn?
It was rhetorical to demonstrate that I have not done so.
When you enter into conversation with an aim to convert that is debate. Why is this so difficult to teach to you. Perhaps because you have made up your mind that you are not here to learn.
Entering a conversation trying to convert is not necessarily a debate. I have had multiple sit-down discussions with my philosophy professors where no debating was done. Your argument does not follow practically nor deductively.
The backing is the existing record of this conversation, you wont have to back track far. Learn to interpret scripture...it's right above in rather plain english. I will create a seperate debate to highlight your lying if you want to be insistant.
Please show me where I have lied. I still do not see where I have lied.
I think my arguments will shine by comparison :)
I've debated with you and seen you debate. They might shine through rhetoric but logically, in religious aspects, they are lacking.
I agree that context is important.....but paying closer attention to context won't dig you out of the hole you've dug for yourself with that totally lame quotation. potential students will be fleeing from you if you bring up crap like that.
You do realize that the person who said this quote is considered by many to be a big existentialist philosopher?
It was rhetorical to demonstrate that I have not done so.
Well good job. You have shown that you haven't learned.
Entering a conversation trying to convert is not necessarily a debate. I have had multiple sit-down discussions with my philosophy professors where no debating was done. Your argument does not follow practically nor deductively.
Even though you are so blatantly wrong you think by calling attention to your interaction with professors, this will somehow lend credence to your position. It doesn't. Just because you are unable to recognize the logical basis of an argument, doesn't mean it's missing one.
Please show me where I have lied. I still do not see where I have lied.
Even though you are so blatantly wrong you think by calling attention to your interaction with professors, this will somehow lend credence to your position. It doesn't. Just because you are unable to recognize the logical basis of an argument, doesn't mean it's missing one.
That wasn't even the point of what I was saying. I was saying that we would sit down and talk about a bunch of random things and I would learn from them but I wouldn't debate.
The point you choose to attack was just about the weakest point in his entire post. It was more rhetoric than it was argument. The fact that you chose to attack this point is very revealing. The rest of his post was devastating, yet you ignored it. Was it because you couldn't defend or understand his criticism?
Take the challenge he presented for you instead of mindlessly appointing attention to some irrelevant point.
If you too lazy to look it through yourself here it is:
"This aim is based on the arrogant and false presumption that you have a thorough knowledge of every "worldview", and ignores the fact that there are various "worldviews" within what is called christianity. The term worldview is just another tool for thinking in terms of stereotypes as opposed to treating individuals with genuine respect. But then you've made it clear that you want respect to be a one way street. I will do what I can to influence people not to accept relationships like you are after."
This aim is based on the arrogant and false presumption that you have a thorough knowledge of every "worldview", and ignores the fact that there are various "worldviews" within what is called christianity.
Because I never said that I knew evert worldview thoroughly. It was irrelevant to the topic. I was simply saying that I was teaching what Christianity teaches, which is singular, not multiple.
I know, I just wanted to let you know. This is not a school site, this is a debate site. Where everyone has come to learn. If you've only come to teach, you've closed your mind off to knowledge, assuming we are all wrong, and there is nothing more we can do for one another.
I can help others, through Christ, show that Christianity is the only truth in the world. The only thing that other people can do is sit and listen or try and prove truth wrong.
If you don't try to prove the truth wrong, how do you know it's truth? I don't question, in the hopes that it's wrong, I question to learn. What I learn more often than not, is that it's wrong.
Difference context of trying to prove truth wrong. First context is the sense in which one challenges everything; that is not the sense that I have mentioned here. The sense in which I have mentioned is trying with the intention to prove wrong.
Which by extension means you have come to the conclusion that there is no room for improvement regarding how you interpret scripture. Way to be prideful. I hear Jesus has a special surprise in store for the prideful.
Then I, as a non Christian, see you as a great Christian. No scientist in their right mind would just accept what another scientists says, not would they just accept that apples fall from trees, they'd test retest and question everything until they had the answers themselves. With faith you can only test so much, but to close your mind to any answers, because you've surmised that one text is correct is always going to lead to bad things.
I will say that genesis does not bother me so much because i see it as a metaphor for what happened during creation as opposed to an exact testament. I believe in planned evolution, which i see as a balance between my religious and scientific perspectives.
I will say that genesis does not bother me so much because i see it as a metaphor for what happened during creation as opposed to an exact testament.
Do you believe that Eve was tempted to eat from The Tree of the knowledge of right and wrong, who then in turn persuaded Adam to also eat from that tree?
I believe (and this is just my opinion) that the story of the garden of eden is about Gods first attempt at creating paradise. We were not ready for it because we did not know what it was like to not be surrounded by perfection. Now we live in this world so that we can experience both joy and pain and gain a better appreciation of what it means to be at peace.
Well like i said the story of adam and eve was a metaphor for God's first attempt to create the world. We could not appreciate the gift we were given so he remade the world so that we could prepare ourselves for heaven. Jesus was God mad man. He came to earth to so us the way. After enduring a good deal of suffering on the cross, he returned to show us that there is peace afterwards.
1) to show us that it is possible to find peace in the afterlife after going though a large amount of pain in life
2)maybe to live life the way we could not. Without greed or lust or anger. Maybe when he was on the cross, he thought he was going to go to hell for eternity so that we could go to heaven despite our sins.
In the end, i am not sure. I am just thankful for him.
2) I am not talking about sending Jesus to hell, i mean the fact that he would go there willingly to save us. I could not think of a more selfless act. Maybe that selflessness led God to forgive us of our many sins.
That's fair. Every Christian I ask tells me that we have no choice but to live in sin because of the original sin of Adam. If you believe that the Christian god planned us to evolve this way, then he planned for us to be sinners. I'm confused as to why he punishes us for behaving the way he designed us.
As my answer, I believe it's that you're afraid you'll find one thing wrong, then another, then before you know it, you will have left that thing you've been apart of for so long, that has always kept you safe and made you feel warm. If this comes off as insulting, it's only because that's the way you perceive it, as a bad thing.
I think a lot of people have been taught by church leaders that to question the Bible is wrong, my view is that they are afraid that if people question it they will lose their power and hold over their followers
Its funny because we do question it alot of times. We see problems then we try to answer it. When we do answer, we are ridiculed for being biased when we are simply answering a question we were asking ourselves. No, we don't drop our faith at the first sign of trouble. We search for answers to questions we have and because we find, we learn to trust the Bible. Sorry if some people havent learned to do that, we have. Please get off our backs. Christian does not mean non-thinker.
Hey I did question the bible when I was a youngin'. Now I'm not Christian! Of course I'm... not athiest either but let me tell you that was a fun phase. It's a good thing my folks are heathen now because during that period of time? Whew. Talk about being disowned.