The Instigator
TheMasterofEnglish
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RoyLatham
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Christianity disgusting?

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 4 votes the winner is...
RoyLatham
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/13/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,668 times Debate No: 61647
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

TheMasterofEnglish

Pro

I think it to be a cruel religion (with stupid rules) have a look at some snipets from the bible.

For touching Mount Sinai
Whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death. Exodus 19:13

For taking "accursed things"
Achan ... took of the accursed thing. ... And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones. ... So the LORD turned from the fierceness of his anger. Joshua 7:1-26

For cursing or blaspheming
And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:16

For adultery (including urban rape victims who fail to scream loud enough)
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. Deuteronomy 22:23-24

For animals (like an ox that gores a human)
If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned. Exodus 21:28

For a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her ... and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel's father shall say ... these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. ... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die. Deuteronomy 22:13-21

For worshipping other gods
If there be found among you ... that ... hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them ... Then shalt thou ... tone them with stones, till they die. Deuteronomy 17:2-5
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers ... thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 13:5-10

For disobeying parents
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother ... Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 21:18-21

For witches and wizards
A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:27

For giving your children to Molech
Whosoever ... giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. Leviticus 20:2

For breaking the Sabbath
They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. ... And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones.... And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses. Numbers 15:32-56

For cursing the king
Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die. 1 Kings 21:10

1: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." - Leviticus 20:13

2: "Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property." - Exodus 21:21-21

3: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." - Deuteronomy 22:28-29

4: "And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." - Matthew, Chapter 5, 5:29

5: "Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire." - Matthew, Chapter 18, 18:8. And please no personal attack, all debate should be professional.
RoyLatham

Con

1. The New Testament says the cruel rules do not apply to Christianity

Pro claims that “[Christianity is] a cruel religion (with stupid rules)” and he cites rules given in the Old Testament as his only proof. For example, Pro cites “And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:16” I agree that is a stupid rule with cruel intent. It is not a rule of Christianity. The cited Old Testament laws are called the Old Covenant, and the cruel rules of the Old Covenant were not adopted by Christians.

Christians, by definition, believe in Christ. Christ appears in the New Testament, so therefore Christians must embrace the New Testament. The New Testament effectively revokes the objectionably cruel Old Testament rules, so therefore they are not rules of Christianity. Not all of the Old Testament rules are revoked, but the cruel ones are revoked. Since Christianity did not exist before the cruel Old Covenant rules were revoked by Christ, there is no time at which those rules were part of Christianity.

Christians point to the release from Old Testament Law by the apostle Paul in the New Testament. (I quote a blogger who in turn gives the New Testament as the ultimate reference.)

[Paul] said the Law was “our guardian until Christ came”, but now “we are no longer under a guardian” (Galatians 3:23-25), a thought reinforced by Galatians 2:18-19.

Paul says we now under “a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:6). And in Romans 7:6 he explains this further: “we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code”.

And most amazing of all, he says in several places that even parts of the Ten Commandments no longer apply – Romans 7:6-8: “we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code …. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet’.”. And Colossians 2:16-17 says we shouldn't’t allow ourselves to be bound be any law about “a Sabbath day”, or other rules for that matter (2:20-21).

[1. http://theway21stcentury.wordpress.com...]


Many of the Old covenant rules call for execution by stoning. That was explicitly forbidden by Jesus in John 8.7: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Galatians 3:23-25 makes clear the difference between 'before' and 'after.' 'Before' corresponds to Old Testament law and 'after' corresponds to New Testament inner faith:

"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." -- Galatians 3:23 KJV

All Christian sects to my knowledge agree that the outrageous Old Testament Laws do not apply to Christians. There is controversy among Christians about which, if any, other Old Testament laws do apply. For example the laws of each of the Ten Commandments“ are debated. Wikipedia summarizes "Christian tradition denies that all of the Old Covenant still applies directly to Christians, but different arguments are used to reach that conclusion and there are differences of opinion within Christianity as to which parts, if any, still apply. The predominant Christian view is that Jesus mediates a New Covenant relationship between God and the People of God, according to the New Testament, which ended or set aside some or all of the Old Covenant.” [2. http://en.wikipedia.org...]

2. Christianity in practice does not mandate cruel and disgusting acts

Often enough, religions fail to conform to the scripture which is supposed to govern them. For example, the medieval Christians burned witches, which contemporary Christians will us is contrary to the Bible. It's always possible for religious extremists to provide a rationalization for evil acts. As Forest Gump put it, "stupid is as stupid does." The principle applies to evil.

My view is that religions are human institutions, so they evolve with society over time. So the question is: Does Christianity currently exhibit disgusting behavior? "Disgusting" is synonymous with "loathsome,sickening,nauseous,repulsive,revolting,repugnant, abhorrent,detestable." [3. http://dictionary.reference.com...] That is a level of offensiveness more intense than "wrong" or "annoying" or "irrational." Belief in astrology, for example, is ill-advised, but a reasonable person doesn't put it in the same category as stoning someone to death for blasphemy. Even an atheist who thinks that all religious belief is unjustified ought not claim it is "disgusting." The betrays a problem on the observer, not the belief.

Some Christians do disgusting things. There are murderers on death row who claim they are Christians. But clearly Christianity is not inspiring or intellectually facilitating stoning for blasphemy, stoning for adultery, stoning for lack of virginity, or any of the things on Pro's list of Old Covenant rules. I did web searches looking for examples of Christians carrying out the punishments that Pro cites, and could find nothing since the witch burning of the Middle Ages. I cannot say it's never happened, but it is clearly so rare that cannot be claimed to be characteristic of the religious teaching of Christianity.

Pro's claims fail in both ways. The Old Covenant rules are cited in the Bible as history, but the New Testament clearly says that they are not rules for Christians to obey. Neither is
Christianity "disgusting" in any reasonable practical sense. They don't actually do any of the disgusting things referenced.

Debate Round No. 1
TheMasterofEnglish

Pro

TheMasterofEnglish forfeited this round.
RoyLatham

Con

My opponent has forfeited, making no rebuttal arguments. He had personally challenged me to this debate; it was not an open topic to which I responded.

Perhaps he will argue in the final round.

Debate Round No. 2
TheMasterofEnglish

Pro

TheMasterofEnglish forfeited this round.
RoyLatham

Con

Pro quoted the Biblical rules given in the Old Testament. What Pro apparently did not realize is that not only do those rules not apply to present day Christians, but they have never applied to Christians. Christianity began after promulgation of the teachings of Christ as codified in the New Testament. The teachings of the New Testament effectively revoke the cruel rules of the Old Testament. It is a matter of some debate among Christians which rules of the Old Testament still apply, but all agree that the rules Pro cited do not apply. Nowhere, to my knowledge, do Christians practice those rules, so clearly the fact they were revoked is understood.

Pro provided no rebuttal arguments, so my arguments stand unchallenged. After challenging me to the debate, Pro then forfeited the two remaining rounds.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BLAHthedebator 2 years ago
BLAHthedebator
The master of English isn't really the master of English...
Posted by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
Good luck with being the master against Roy......
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 2 years ago
imabench
TheMasterofEnglishRoyLathamTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
TheMasterofEnglishRoyLathamTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by frozen_eclipse 2 years ago
frozen_eclipse
TheMasterofEnglishRoyLathamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit and better argument
Vote Placed by YYW 2 years ago
YYW
TheMasterofEnglishRoyLathamTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF; though clearly PRO wouldn't have had a chance anyway.