The Instigator
Bound_Up
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
Vapeo
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Christianity causes many problems - Wrong or not, it's dangerous in big ways

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Bound_Up
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/20/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 382 times Debate No: 86984
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

Bound_Up

Pro

I'll be arguing that Christianity as a religion, as a philosophy, as a system, as a collection of doctrines
has significant dangerous, unhealthy, bad parts.

Now I do mean Christianity itself. I'm not going to say anything historical, pointing out holy wars or something. The whole POINT of this is that the IDEAS are bad, independently of any history.

At the same time, Con WILL have to defend the significant doctrines of Christianity. You can't just say you don't personally happen to believe some basic doctrine that mainstream Christians do.

Whether Christianity is true or not is a separate issue to be discussed elsewhere.

Whether its good qualities are greater than its bad qualities is also not the point. Con will have to defend the particulars of Christianity.

Again, let me clarify that Con will not have to defend Christians and that I will not be making any appeals to historical events to prove anything.

If this is unclear, please message me to clarify before accepting the debate.
Vapeo

Con

Im assuming first is acceptance, so yeah, I accept this debate.

My position is opposite that of Bound Up, who will henceforth be referred to as PRO.
Debate Round No. 1
Bound_Up

Pro

Emotionally damaging
Instills poor patterns of reasoning with practical consequences
Existential negligence

Emotionally damaging:
How are you?
"Better than I deserve" comes the classic Christian response, an expression emerging from one of the most basic Christian doctrines: You are lower than the dust of the earth. Without outside intervention, your deserved destiny is to be lit on fire and then be kept alive like that for eternity.

The finest of your efforts are filthy rags. The worse ones are so repugnant that the most just of responses is to light you on fire. In the depths of that infinite agony, scream for pain, but never for relief, never in protest, it is only what you deserve.

Take away the flames, the state we are in now. But always remember that you deserve nothing better. Peer into the depths of your very essence and know that it is corruption to the core, awful wickedness, repulsive.

Are you loved? Oh, sure, your family and friends and so on. They think well of you because they don't know what you're REALLY like. Or alternatively, they themselves are too wicked to be properly horrified at your licentious state. God knows. Only God has the knowledge of how full of poison and depressing worthlessness you are. Only God is righteous enough to be properly repulsed by it.
And of course, only He is still loving enough to love you anyway.

They love you. He loves you.

But His love counts for extra, since only he can properly appreciate how little you deserve it.

Do we really want people to believe this about themselves? Can it possibly be emotionally healthy?

By all means, I understand if it's TRUE. If it's true, may we all believe it and do the best we can.

But if it's not true, it's not merely mundane in its falsity, it is dangerous. It hurts people. I would implore you to stop contributing to that pain.

Poor patterns of reasoning:
The standard Christianity is one of faith. It lauds the beautiful faith of children, who never question, never doubt.

We are implored to be like them, the "little children," are we not?

In this way, Christianity contributes to a stilted maturation of critical thinking skills.

It teaches a SYSTEM of thinking.

By teaching people not to doubt, it allows them to keep beliefs which do not stand up to doubt.

What starts as a pattern of thinking which defends Christian belief spreads. Humans cannot contain safely to one part of their mind such patterns of thought. They become susceptible to not doubting ANY comfortable beliefs.

The greatest opportunities for progress, in our own growth, and in that of our relationships, often lie on the other side of some uncomfortable realization.
This progress is, not totally, but still substantially, denied to patrons of Christian thought.

Existential negligence:
Christians rely on God to save the world. They are wont to discount any threats to humanity at large. This affects government decisions and increases our vulnerability to extinction-level events.
Vapeo

Con

A Christian should indeed believe that they are better than they deserve, since they by no means control all of their fate by willful choice. In regards to Christian doctrine and scripture, man was created " In the image of God". (Genesis 1:27) This refutes your point that Christians believe that we are lower than the dust of the earth.

Also, you stated that Christians believe that your deserved destiny is to be lit on fire for eternity. This is not true. Many Christians are divided on this issue, but the Bible is clear that in order to go to Hell, you must reject Christ. This seems incredibly exclusive, unless of course Christ is the only legit way to salvation. But your point on CHRISTIAN doctrine here falls apart, mainly because it is not based in Christian teaching, ie, the word of Jesus himself, and the Bible. For example, Christians do not believe that babies go to hell. Your point is disproved.

"Are you loved? Oh, sure, your family and friends and so on. They think well of you because they don't know what you're REALLY like. Or alternatively, they themselves are too wicked to be properly horrified at your licentious state. God knows. Only God has the knowledge of how full of poison and depressing worthlessness you are. Only God is righteous enough to be properly repulsed by it.
And of course, only He is still loving enough to love you anyway."

The Bible does not teach this, I do not know what kind of Christianity you are attacking, Christians believe that Christ"s righteousness becomes ours, through salvation. We aren"t perfect, and we should acknowledge this and repent. In doing so, we become righteous through Christ. Your point stands disproved.

"Poor patterns of reasoning:
The standard Christianity is one of faith. It lauds the beautiful faith of children, who never question, never doubt."

Correction, it lauds the beautiful innocence of children. (See Mark chapter 9)

Also James 3:17 states "But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere"
Open to reason, not blind faith. Your point is, disproved. This is just one example, there are many more places, in which Christians are called to reason.

You are correct in stating that Christianity teaches a system of beliefs. Unfortunately, that is the only thing you are right about. We believe that God created the world, but we aren"t wont to neglect real problems. This is not a debate, it is a foolish hate filled rant. Be objective and unbiased, and good luck in life.
Debate Round No. 2
Bound_Up

Pro

Allow me first to say, that I hold no hatred for people of any kind.

I don't even think I would say I hate the dangerous doctrines of Christianity. I disagree with them, and worry about their effects, is maybe how I would put it.

Perhaps my...use of vocabulary gave you the hatred impression, though I would it was otherwise. This was not the intention.

Now. That being the case, my points are sound. You've used a little bit of sly wording to manage to not say outright what Christianity most CERTAINLY teaches.

Tell me which of the following is NOT a Christian teaching, or a logical conclusion of the same:

1. Without God, a man will go to Hell (lit on fire for eternity)
2. This is his just penalty for his sins.

Therefore:
3. Without God, man deserves to be lit on fire for eternity.

and then:
4. What this man has done (whether it be jaywalking, or something more serious, like yelling too much) makes him deserve to be lit on fire for eternity.

Plain as day, my friend. I regret the need to dwell on such ugly topics, but it is for the sake of those in pain because of them that it is necessary to expose their nature.

As I said with clarity before, to believe that one deserves to be lit on fire, DESERVES it! As a JUST recompense for their own "wrongdoings" can hardly be healthy.

"in order to go to Hell, you must reject Christ. This seems incredibly exclusive, unless of course Christ is the only legit way to salvation."

Oh, sure, that makes it inclusive, does it?
Let's not forget that it's the same person DECIDING that He's the only legit way to not be lit on fire.
Or that he created the blessed land of fire and puts you there.

And did you not catch that my "the best of your works are filthy rags" line is right out of the writings of Paul? I used some expressive language, but that was partially because I was using the Bible's OWN TERMS to describe people.

Is it not written that no unclean thing can dwell in the presence of God? Because He hates sin? That those who God "knows not" are to be cast into everlasting fire?

Right. So just repent. Does this not include abasing one's self before God and admitting that one is a sinner in need of salvation from Hell? Acknowledging that that is what you deserve, for the wages of sin is death?

And most churches will teach that this is a continual process, always remembering to beg again for your latest transgressions. You can say "His righteousness becomes theirs," but it's not enough to keep them from having to return to this again and again, remembering again that they're worthy of hellfire and damnation.

Reasoning - A scripture that says "Go reason, yay!" does not change that Christianity encourages people to be as undoubting as little children, and that this has consequences.

Christians believe the world is destined to end. God would never let it, unless it were His plan, in which case it's SUPPOSED to happen. So, if the world's ending, either that's good, or God will stop it.
So we can just watch
Vapeo

Con

You are begging the question. Consistently.

You say that people go to hell because of what they do. No, they go to hell because they don't accept the truth, simple.

Now, i have not much to say but, If God as Christians believe does indeed exist, what actually are you arguing? Alot of things in life are terrible, but sometimes we have to deal with it. So the real question is, "Is Christianity the right way?".

A question that I, even as a Christian continually ponder... Christianity is a belief system that I use to view the world, and I am convince that it is true. However, if something happens, I may change my mind, and thats perfectly fine, because then I am searching for truth. We all are.

Now, on to your points, yes hell is terrible, but no one is forcing you to attend. If hell exists and the bible is true, then guess what? Yup. But if it doesn't, then who cares right?

Christianity is true, at least in my opinion, and I think that is more important than whether or not the details are appealing to me. The world doesn't revolve around our personal opinions, it exists on its own. Our job is to discover, not to imagine.

That said, on what basis should I even consider your claim that Christianity is detrimental. Who cares?

Is it true or not?

The truth hurts sometimes, but it shall set you free.
Debate Round No. 3
Bound_Up

Pro

I'll rely on the discernment of the audience to distinguish between what seems to me to be clear wording versus sly wording. In either case, the wording refers to the same idea.

God made Hell.
God judges us.
God tells us we need a Savior. Why? Why do we need a Savior?
It's obvious. To try and hide from it is...I don't know, but it's not being upfront about Christian belief.

Without God's action, none of us would go to Hell.
With God's action, whether you go to Hell depends on YOUR choice.

But never forget that even the POSSIBILITY of going requires that God act: as the starter of the flames, the setter of the punishment, the judge of the crime.
And Christianity tells people He's just and right for doing so, and if they end up in Hell, it's THEIR fault, and they can't complain against their executioner.

I suspect this is not really necessary. You can reword things to make it sound nice, but pretty much everyone knows about the Christian Hell, it's a pretty basic doctrine. They'll know independently of whether you admit it in public or not.

Also, Christians are taught not to doubt, a careful system of not-thinking that bleeds over into other areas of life and keeps them from confronting uncomfortable truths, and from enjoying the sweet fruits of accepting them.

And they are prone to neglect resolving sufficiently serious dangers to the world, since they expect it to end anyway, according to the will of God.

Since you've dropped these other arguments, and just said that it's more important to know if it's true than if it's nice, I'll just finish up by reminding everyone of the terms of the debate by quoting my opener and title. If you'd like to discuss the truth of Christianity, just say so and we can do so in another few debates.

"Whether Christianity is true or not is a separate issue to be discussed elsewhere."

"Christianity causes many problems - Wrong or not, it's dangerous in big ways"
Vapeo

Con

God made us, therefore we aren't to judge him.

If he doesn't exist then feel free to do so, but not if He does, because then you would be earning Hell, and rightfully so.

Christianity isn't damaging because it provides a ray of hope for humanity, tells us that God will save us if we just accept the love he is giving. You want to frame God like an evil monster, but without God, you wouldn't even have the morality that you are arguing with. You can't tell right from wrong, unless there is someone who OBJECTIVELY knows, and told you. God did that with humans to an extent, giving us his "spirit" or "breath", but it still remains for us to accept the truth when we see it. The truth hurts sometimes, but ultimately it is true.

Saying Christianity is bad because Hell exists is pointless. Because Christianity is not a fairy puff, please everybody, cream puff, way of life. It is just there, and you accept it or not.

If God exists, then this whole issue raised is a non issue. If he doesn't, it is still non important because what does danger even mean. How do I know? Why does it matter? Why does anything matter? How do we know what right or not? Those are the important question.

Yours doesn't do anything constructive imho....

In terms of this debate specifically, no Christianity isn't dangerous. The way people apply it can be dangerous, but Christianity itself isn't dangerous. Very simple.

A gun in a grocery with bullets can be dangerous if the store owner doesn't keep it locked up in a safe place, using it only in emergency. Of course the store owner is dangerous, but not the inanimate nonliving gun. This is because if you hid the gun forever, it wouldn't magically hurt innocent people. But if a criminal comes into the store, and the gun safely hinders the criminal either by injury or by stalling for police or extra help, then you can say it was safely used. It depends on the store owner....

Likewise, it depends on how you interpret Christianity, and I fail to see how it is inherently dangerous.
Debate Round No. 4
Bound_Up

Pro

Would you like to debate the morality we can have with and without God in another debate?

For the earning Hell bit...
Suppose you were granted the knowledge of my guilt. You don't need to judge if I'm guilty or not; God did that.
You also know what God says about sin, and the wages thereof, as also His words about Hell.
To you has been given the decision to determine what punishment I'll receive for my guilt.

If you had a way to light me on fire and keep me alive like that for eternity, would you do it? Is that what seems moral and just to you, from what you know of me, know of my guilt, know of what God has said?

In the opener, I said the following: "Whether its good qualities are greater than its bad qualities is also not the point. Con will have to defend the particulars of Christianity."

I haven't said that Christianity doesn't give people hope, comfort them in trials, etc.

I have said that at least one basic doctrine is psychologically damaging. And that other ones contribute to poor thinking habits and existential negligence.

These ideas, some praising Christianity, some criticizing it, are not mutually exclusive; they can all be true.

The truth of Christianity is a separate issue to be discussed elsewhere (if you'd like to :) ).

I also said in me 2nd argument:
"By all means, I understand if it's TRUE. If it's true, may we all believe it and do the best we can.

But if it's not true, it's not merely mundane in its falsity, it is dangerous. It hurts people. I would implore you to stop contributing to that pain."

Actually, I never said if it was true or not.

So, I feel we are not actually disagreeing about this point, or at least, your argument isn't one that actually addresses my point.

You're right about the guns and so forth. Some things grant power, to be used either for good or for evil. For example, Christian ministers have a pulpit from which to preach ideas and morals. If they use it well, they do good. If they use it for evil, they do bad.

The influence itself is not good or bad.

But doctrines are not like that. They're either true or false, either dangerous or not.

And if the ministers use their influence to tell people that they'll be lit on fire for eternity, and that this is just, unless they repent and accept Jesus, they're teaching an idea which inflicts psychological and emotional damage to people.

I believe it was Paul who said that if you have to frighten people into accepting Jesus, then go for it; it's better than them going to Hell.

So the psychological effect of the idea is conceded by the Christian viewpoint, it seems...

Of course, if Christianity is true, as I said before, let us accept the truth, damaging as it is, and do what we can with it. But that's a separate issue.

Let the issue be settled: The doctrines of Christianity inflict psychological harm on people, teach them to avoid certain kinds of clear thinking, and to let God decide when the world ends instead of saving it themselves.
Vapeo

Con

Vapeo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Vapeo 1 year ago
Vapeo
I apologize for the presumed forfeiture, it was unintentional. Thank you.
Posted by Bound_Up 1 year ago
Bound_Up
I don't know if Vapeo will accept my offer to debate morality and the truth of Christianity or of God's reality.

Would anyone like to accept one or some of the following debates?

1. We can have as much morality without a God as we can have with one.
2. A rational analysis of evidence does not support the truth of Christianity.
3. There is no scientific evidence for God.
4. Spiritual experiences are not evidence of God.

'Twould be a pleasure :)

Actually, you can choose Pro or Con for any of these, and I'll take the other side.

I argue that Christianity is true here.
http://www.debate.org...

If you read it, do I seem more convincing in that debate or in this one? Can you tell what I really believe?
Posted by Stonehe4rt 1 year ago
Stonehe4rt
Hm I see, Well I guess your correct, but also wrong. Its like one of the previous statements said, its not the religion or science or a weapon or whatever is evil, its the person using it that is responsible.
Posted by Bound_Up 1 year ago
Bound_Up
Perhaps you just wanted to make a point, and that's fine.

In this particular debate, I did say in the opener the following:
"Whether its good qualities are greater than its bad qualities is also not the point. Con will have to defend the particulars of Christianity."

I haven't actually said anything which disagrees with what you've written, I've merely pointed out certain dangerous parts mixed in with the good ones you've mentioned.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 1 year ago
Stonehe4rt
Yeah really, if Christianity was dangerous, then it wouldnt teach to love others. Yes it teaches some hard core radical parts of killing the evil, however it also states that if your evil you have not right to kill another evil. Or Eye for an eye will leave the world blind. Look at the plank in your own eyes before picking at the dust in your brothers. When war comes, you must do what you must to save your family, these are what Christianity has taught. Even if you don't believe in it, Religion is something that has helped inspire many things and people, it has given hope to the poor, allowed for uprisings against the corrupt, and defense of the weak. Of course, people throughout time have been known to use religion as an excuse and twist its teachings to try to make God look evil or to justify their own evil. However it comes down to the fact that throughout history, there are times that Mankind might not have made it if they were not inspired by Religion, whether you believe in it or not, its a fact that religion has helped. Yes many Wars have started due to Religion but also the Freedom of Slaves came from Religion. This is why the Constitution had that every man is equal under the eyes of God. This wasn't liked as it fought against slavery. Religion has been an inspiration for many good things of this world, whether you think its just a happy fantasy or the truth, I leave up to you, however the fact is that Christianity isnt dangerous. But people are.
Posted by Vapeo 1 year ago
Vapeo
PTW you are a bit condescending here....
Posted by PTW 1 year ago
PTW
Christianity in it's self is not dangerous!, but the idiots that believe in it are!. That goes for all religions, I don't understand why people cannot see they are being fooled!!. As for science, it goes along the same lines, science is great, but again there are some who abuse it!!. Weapons don't kill people people WITH weapons kill people!!!.
Posted by WaraiOtoko 1 year ago
WaraiOtoko
Science doesn't hurt people with propaganda/ideas. It hurts people because it gives people the ability to wield enormous power and when bad people get control of these things, bad things happen. Science it self is neutral but it is humans who are flawed some wield science for good, others for evil.
Posted by Bound_Up 1 year ago
Bound_Up
Dead on, my friend

Science is super bad

And Christianity is pretty bad, but not as bad as science

Of course, that WOULD mean I win the debate ;)
Posted by Longline 1 year ago
Longline
Here is a little thing. Christianity has been around for a really long time. i don't want to go into to much detail. But withing that time, the amount of death claim by it is nowhere close to the amount of death total by science withing less then a 100 years. If you thank this is wrong challenge me. Lets see how many people have die cause of science compare to religion? and also considering the time period both are in.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
Bound_UpVapeoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture