The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Christianity has had more positive than negative effects on society and the world.

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/11/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 553 times Debate No: 82426
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)




The burden of proof is on me. If I can prove that Christianity has helped the world more than it has hurt it, I win the debate. If I cannot, I lose.

The rounds will go as follows:

1. Con accepts the challenge.

2. I will list and explain the positive effects of Christianity, and Con will list and explain the negative effects.

3. Rebuttals.

4. More rebuttals, defend previous arguments.

5. Conclusion.


I accept.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting. As a reminder, please do not read this argument until round 2 is over.

The positive effects of Christianity are listed below:

Christianity is an advocate of human rights.

In the Roman empire, infanticide was common, and it was legal to kill a child. [1] Constantine, the first Christian Roman emperor, was the one to finally outlaw it. [2] Christianity was also a large factor in the abolition of slavery. According to historian Glenn Sunshine, "Christians were the first people in history to oppose slavery systematically. Early Christians purchased slaves in the markets simply to set them free." [3] In addition, two thirds of the American abolition society in 1835 were Christian ministers. [4] Martin Luther King Jr. was also a Christian minister, and he is a great example of a human rights supporter. [5]

Christianity is responsible for high literacy rates.

Christianity has been a leader in education because Bible literacy was so important to Christians. The first law to require education of citizens was passed by American Puritans in Massachusetts. [6] All but one of the first 123 American colleges were Christian institutions.

The principles in the American Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution came from the Bible.

The idea that all men are created equal is a biblical doctrine. [8] The notion of God's authority is part of the Declaration of Independence and all 50 state constitutions. The preamble of the declaration states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable rights...".

Christianity helped to make advancements in science.

Many of the founders of modern science were Christians, such as Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal, and Louis Pasteur. [9]

This should be enough evidence.



I will now list all the bad that has come from Christianity:

1.Dark Ages
"There was once a time all people believed in God and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages" -Richard Lederer
The Dark Ages referred to the period of time ushered in by the fall of the Western Roman Empire. This took place when the last Western emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was deposed by Odoacer, a barbarian. AD 476 was the time of this event.
This era takes on the term "dark" due to the backward ways and practices that seemed to prevail during this time. Despite the religious conflicts, the period of the Dark Ages was seen as an age of faith. Despite the religious conflicts, the period of the Dark Ages was seen as an age of faith. Men and women sought after God; some through the staid rituals of the Catholic Church. Intellectuals view religion in any form as, itself, a type of "darkness." These thinkers assert that those who followed religious beliefs lied to themselves, creating a false reality. They were dominated by emotions, not fact. Religion was seen as contrary to rationality and reason, thus the move towards enlightenment -- a move away from "darkness." Science and reason gained ascendancy, progressing steadily during and after the Reformation and Age of Enlightenment.
As you can see above, religion hindered are progression in science,literature,math, and other subjects that if we avoided this we could be extremely more advanced than we are today.
This link goes to a picture showing the drop in technology during the Dark ages

While many believe Christianity promoted peace, it actually has brought great damage. Not only has it affected it's followers, with believers and even his disciples being crucified, burned, ect. for believing in Christianity, and even today with 100 millions christians being prosecuted for their faith. It has also impacted other people, as it has brought wars and slaughterings. Tons of examples can be found at this site
Also, at this site, it list 10 biggest religious wars ever fought, and Christianity and its denominations(catholic) are involved with around 5 of them.

3.The offering
At church(Atleast for Catholic Churches) they go around asking for offerings(money donations). The church wants you to give 10% of your works pay that week towards the church. Some people aren't wealthy enough to just give 10%, but some will do it anyways. This could lead to a financial burden to the family/individual. Also, the donations do not count as tax deductions, so no benefits go to the donator in that sense. Think about the money donated. If all of that money was donated to a charity how many lives it would impact. Think about if it was given to St.Judes or another organization similar to that, how many lives it would save and help further medicine. Church taking the offering is putting a burden on struggling families and the growth of medicine/well being of others.

Let me ask you, what is the ... Amendment? It's the Freedom of Religion. However, it is no secret we support Christianity. With 77% of our citizens being Christians, it is the most dominant religion by a extravagant margin. Because of this, our nation has put christianity and made it part of our society and government, breaking our amendment and the separation of church and state. They put in our currency and in our Pledge of Alligence. Tell me, how would you feel being a Muslim having to say "One nation, under God..."? You would feel like a minority. With everything around you, including your government, supporting a religion, you almost feel obligated and self conscious about your own personal belief, and feeling as if you need to change. This is violating a persons belief and amendment.
Also, another demonstration on how Christianity runs our government is how no atheist have been President of the United States. On this poll it shows how people will less likely vote for an atheist than any other option. An atheist, no matter how good a politician, is less likely get elected, taking away their job opportunities. Christianity is making the land of the free every judgmental.

5.False hope
For many, christianity is hope. It's assurance that no matter how tough the times are, things will get better. Yet the harsh reality is, it's uncertain there is a God. And if there is no good, then chances of your situation getting better become more slim. Take, for example, a man who just lost his job. He prays for everything to get better, and for God to help him. He is hopeful as his omnipotent omnibenevolent God will surely help him, yet he is devastated as loses his house. His hope turned into false hope, which led to no hope. For some, they rely too much on this hope, and won't do anything as they feel God will do it for them.

Along with that, I found a site listing 40 harmful effects of Christianity

So in total, that is 45 negatives to Christianity.

Debate Round No. 2


Dark ages

The "dark ages" were not as dark as they are often considered to be. The Middle Ages produced classic literature such as "Beowolf" and "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight", great architecture such as the many castles and cathedrals, and art such as stained glass windows that rival modern art. The Renaissance depended on the science and philosophy of what was apparently "the dark ages". Modern philosophy is built upon the work of medieval philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas, who was a devout Catholic monk educated at a Catholic university. In fact, the first universities were created by Catholics who valued education. Historians have even found that "the Renaissance" was improperly named; there were in fact three other ones on the Middle Ages. [1]

I'm not even going to respond to that inaccurate picture you linked from a highly biased, unreliable, random blog.


As you have said, many Christians have gotten themselves killed for their faith. That is a lot like soldiers dying for our country. Our country has problems, many of its people die unnecessarily, but it is still a good thing. I and many other people are proud to be American despite the country's corrupt laws and politicians, because it is still a young country and it is still trying to help people. The same could be said of Christianity. It has done bad, but it is trying to do good.

That was an interesting link you posted. Let me respond to each part separately.

Ancient Pagans

Before you say that Christians are bad for killing pagans, first consider what the pagans did. They burned children alive as sacrifice, they allowed slaves to be mistreated, they dehumanized women and made them slaves of their husbands, they raped children, they killed Christians (that was probably their main motivation for killing pagans), and many other things. Being a pagan was rightfully seen as equivalent to being a murderer, a rapist, and a slave trader. [2]


Since you only showed two examples here, that shows how rare Christian corruption is. Remember what I said about wars.


This was a war, so of course people died, and Christianity is not to blame. Muslims were oppressing Christians, and the Crusaders rescued them. [3]

Atheists and Heretics

All the examples here are a few corrupt Christians (although they were not really Christians) going against their religion.


This had nothing to do with Christianity.

Religious Wars

This is yet again Christians protecting Christianity from those who wish to harm it.


When Jews were harmed, it was either an unfortunate side effect of a war, a response to Jewish aggression, or a few corrupt bishops acting against their religion.

Native peoples

All the examples here are used as part of a huge cherry-picking fallacy. Many people believed that Native Americans were violent savages because many of them were, and stereotypes formed because of that. However, he is ignoring the Quakers who made peace with them and bought their land at a fair price, the Catholic missionaries who set up shelters and schools for the natives, and the French (most of them Christians) who traded with them and treated them equally with themselves.

Extermination camps

This had nothing to do with Christians. The so-called Christians who did this broke nearly all ten commandments in the process. This is also another cherry-picking fallacy; he ignores Maximillian Kolbe, a Catholic priest who was arrested for sheltering Jews and later volunteered to starve to death in place of a Jewish man (the Jewish man survived the camp). He also ignores the fact that Hitler discouraged going to church, and had many Christians killed for opposing him. I could go on and on things like this if I only had the time.

Now I will respond to your last arguments:


I am shocked by your ignorance on the subject. Muslims believe in God and we have had an atheist president (Abraham Lincoln). I will ignore everything you say here until you confirm your assumptions.

False hope

Christians do not think that God will do everything for them. They simply ask for help.


So far, you have found one negative effect of Christianity (radicals), while I have found four.



I thank Pro for the rebuttal. I will rebuttal those claims in the next round, and rebuttal your arguments from the second round this round.

Here are my rebuttals to arguments posted by pro in the second round:

*Christianity is responsible for high literacy rates and *Christianity helped to make advancements in science

Both of these claims are false. The time christianity ushered in greatness and superiority was the Dark ages, where we actually went backwards in advancement and became illiterate.
As far as the scientists, their religious beliefs play no affect in their contributions to science, as it would not matter if they were atheist or a different religion.

*The principles in the American Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution came from the Bible

This just proves my point of how the United States is favoring Christianity and breaking people's first amendment right AND the separation of church and state.

*Christianity is an advocate of human rights

In your very own words you stated that,
"Christianity was also a large factor in the abolition of slavery"
In the Bible, the most prestigious book in a christians view, talks about owning a slave. If slavery was wrong, the bible would say it is wrong and anyone who did it was condemned to hell. However, it does not, and actually informs us what to do with the slave. Therefore, it does not think slavery is bad, and actually guides us to be better slave owners. Now it is possible some christians set them free, but if they were truly devote christians they would follow what the bible says, and the bible says,
Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money [property]."
You went on to say how 2/3 of the American Abolition society were Christian ministers. What about the other 1/3 then? Just because you are christian doesn't mean you are
automatically a great person. An atheist, Muslim, Jew, Buddist, ect, can be as good and even a better person as a Christian.
You also talk about infanticide, and how the Christian Roman emperor finally outlawed it.
In the Bible, God talks about slaughtering children.
"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."(Hosea 13:16)
You can find more verses, like God ordering moses
to slaughter babies, at this site agree. Martin Luther King Jr. was a great human activist. However, there have been many other great atheists in US history alone who have made a big impact, such as Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Edison. Other examples can be found here
Also, more examples can be found here,
and it also goes in depth about the story of Pat Tillman. The man was hated because of his beliefs, more than likely killed for his beliefs, and his family was harassed because of his beliefs.

Good luck to Pro in the following rounds.

Debate Round No. 3


Thank you for a good argument.


I already negated your argument about the dark ages.


I also negated that argument.

Human Rights

I can see a lot of misunderstandings on your part. I will list corrections to them below:

1. The Bible does not have to state that something is wrong in order for Christianity to teach that it is wrong. The Bible is not the "book of rules" for Christianity. Christians use the teaching of Jesus to determine what is right or wrong. [1]

2. People are not condemned to hell for sinning. People are condemned to hell for knowing and hating God. Many Christians even believe in Empty Hell Theory. [2]

3. The Old Testament is not considered to be infallible by Christianity. It contains Jewish teachings; Christians only use it as a source for the history of the Israelites, prophecies, Psalms, and some stories with good morals. The books of Exodus and Hosea are not Christian doctrine and are not entirely relevant to Christian beliefs. [3]

4. Two thirds is a lot. Most Americans in 1835 were not Christian ministers, so if most of an organization consists of Christian ministers, Christianity very likely has something to do with it.

5. I never said nor implied that Christianity automatically makes someone a good person, or that a non-Christian can't be good; I actually said that Christianity makes someone more likely to be a good person.

6. Saying that atheists can be good is not relevant to the debate. Christianity and atheism both have positive effects; however, this particular debate is about Christianity.

More Evidence

Do some research on the following people and you will see how their Christianity influenced them to help society and the world: Mother Teresa, Gregor Mendel, George Mueller, William Wilberforce, William Penn, Boethius, Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Harriet Beecher Stowe, J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis. Those people in addition to the people mentioned in previous arguments (MLK, Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal, and Louis Pasteur) make up 16 positive effects.



Thanks for the intriguing argument. I'm going to rebut your arguments from Round 3 and 4, so please bear with me if I'm jumping from an argument you said one round to one in another.

In your argument, you stuck up for the christians actions of war. The killing of people is by no means a positive, and you defending and saying it is dumbfounds me. The lost of any life, no matter the cause or reasoning, is a negative.

You also said Christianity had nothing to do with witches. That is a false statement, as you can look at examples such as the infamous Salem Witch Trials.

As for my Judgement argument, I shouldn't have said Muslim, but you know what my notion was. Who would you feel to have to stand up every morning and praise something you don't believe in?
If that part is what you ask for confirmation, their truly is no need. You should be able to put yourself in their shoes and see the issue.
Other than that, I see no other part of that argument that needs confirmation.
As far as Abraham Lincoln benign atheist, their is no solid ground for that as many aren't certain what he was. Until you give 100% proof he was atheist, your claim doesn't stand, and mine does.
In the false hope argument I stated that not all christians rely on God, but many do. They ask for help, but some rely to the point where they hope for a "miracle".
I'm going to use the Paris attacks to help explain my case. What happened to Paris is completely inhuman. Many people from all around the world have showed their support. A trending hashtag for the last few days has been #PrayforParis. However, when people say this, what are they truly doing? Saying I'm praying for you is practically the same as saying I hope everything works out. You are not truly doing anything. By saying you are praying for them, you are relying on God to answer your prayer and to help the people of Paris. But unless you(or anyone else) don't do anything, it won't help them, therefore you have created a false hope.

As far as me having misunderstandings, I'm afraid I have to disagree. I was a catholic for 16 years, and I thought I had a pretty good understanding of christianity.
From what I've learned, the bible is how we are suppose to live our lives off. It's teaches us about our creator and what he says, and I figured we should live off what he says.
As far as not going to hell for sinning, I'm almost positive you do. By saying you don't go to hell for sinning, that's saying serial killers go to heaven with their victims. That's ludicrous. Murder is a sin, and if you're saying they don't go to hell for committing sins(no matter how big or small), then what's the point of having it? This would also add to my false hope argument, making the victims
Families think the murdered will spend eternity in the depths of hell when actually they get to spend eternity with God.
As far as the Old Testament being infallible:
If a man murders a family, but is now a "changed" man(church going, compassionate, giving, charitable), he's still a murderer. Even though he has changed, the murder and his past stay with him.
Therefore, things from the Old Testament christians are trying to forget about are still with their religion.
Saying that "christianity makes someone more likely to be a good person" is completely prejudice. Just because someone isn't a christian doesn't mean they can't be a good person. By what you said, you're saying atheist and other religions consists of not so good people. Considering you're a christian, then I'm going to assume you got your views because of your biased belief, meaning christianity has given you prejudice beliefs, which is a negative.
Once again, just because a person is christian and does something good, doesn't mean you can give a positive to christianity, I stated several people who were successful who were atheists. Isaac Newton could have been an atheist and still made the discoveries he made, his religion had no affect in it.

In addition, there is 45 more negatives on the site I listed below of my arguments that you completely ignored. Therefore, I would have presented more than one negative claim like you previously stated.

In counting, I have presented atleast 43 negative arguments(I have presented more, but you have rebutted them and it is up to the voters to see if they think it's a negative or not) as you agreed the offerings caused hardship to families, hurt scientific growth, and takes away from others, and then the 40 negatives on the site.

Good luck to Pro in his concluding round.
Debate Round No. 4



Killing people is not a positive and I never said it was. It was not an effect of Christianity.


The Salem Witch Trials were not caused by Christianity. In fact, many people were suffering from ergotism. [1] View this for more information:


No one has to praise something they don't believe in. When you say "One nation, under God" you are not expressing your faith; you are recognizing the Christian origins of the United States. If God does not exist, then the nation was still created under the idea of God. Abraham Lincoln was an atheist. [2]

False Hope

Using the hashtag #PrayforParis does not create false hope. It makes the people feel better by showing that you care for them. In a situation like that there isn't anything else you can do.


I see even more midunderstandings. Even though you were Catholic, you apparently were ignorant of your religion.

1. The Bible is not what God says. It was not written by God, nor did God teach all of its content. [3]

2. Christianity teaches that if you sin and don't repent, you go to hell, not just if you sin.

3. Thinking that someone is in hell is not false hope, or any hope for that matter.

4. The Old Testament is not considered to be infallible by Christianity. You have contradicted that statement but you have not disproved it.

5. I am not prejudiced against those who are not Christians. I know some atheists who are good people, but I know even more atheists who are not, and the Christians I know are almost all good people.

The arguments you claim that I did not respond to

All the effects are either one of the arguments I already responded to or something like abortion where the argument only works if you can prove that abortion is not bad. I dismiss all of those arguments unless you can find evidence.

I also never agreed that the offerings caused hardship to families, hurt scientific growth, and took away from others. I clearly stated the opposite multiple times. Since you aren't being honest, I doubt everything you said and voters should take that into consideration.






The wars were an effect of christianity, as people killed for their religion. Since christianity was their motive, that means Christianity is the reason they committed the killing, therefore making it an effect.

People were hung by the judges of the court (who were christians) because witchcraft was seen as an act of the devil. Therefore, Christianity caused the hanging of all those who died in the Salem witch trials.

Just because you personally know more good christians than atheists, does not mean that's a solid case. You are playing to stereotypes.
If someone killed someone you love, would you not hope for them to be punished for it? Sure prison for life and the death penalty would be punishment, but I know a lot of people would want them to burn in hell. But you're saying if they got repent, they'll get a clean slate? That's an injustice in my eyes. The fact they will get to go to heaven after the horrible deed they committed just because they repented, seems very wrong to me.
Also, the bible does have God teachings and Gods words in it, written by people who have dealt with God. However, saying God didn't teach all of its content is completely ignorant.

False Hope:
It is creating False Hope. Their is things we can do, such as donate money, provide help(resources,protection, ect.) to Paris, ect.

You never argued against the offering once in any of your arguments. If you did, then I have overlooked it and I apologize, but I have yet to see where you have argued it.

It is now up to the voters to decide who made the better case. Good job Pro, and thanks for the intriguing debate.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
>Reported vote: kingkd// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I believe Con wins this debate because Pro did not answer wars well enough, and war was the largest impact of the round. Pro rebuts that wars are not the fault of Christianity but Con says that Christianity was the motive behind it and Pro concedes that christianity creates the radicals, who conducted the war. Pro had some good points about ethics but the war impact was larger. Good debate

[*Reason for non-removal*] The vote is still sufficient. The reporter is right that it could have taken the time to explain why it was weighing war so heavily, but as neither debater sought to weigh the arguments, and thus he's not ignoring any text from the debate with his selection, this isn't against the voting standards. Weighing analysis is a good thing to show, but it's not absolutely necessary.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
>Reported vote: kingkd// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I believe Con wins this debate because Pro did not answer wars well enough, and war was the largest impact of the round. Pro rebuts that wars are not the fault of Christianity but Con says that Christianity was the motive behind it and Pro concedes that christianity creates the radicals, who conducted the war. Pro had some good points about ethics but the war impact was larger. Good debate

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voter clearly explains what the most important point is in the round in his estimation and examines the outcome of the debate based on who won it. While the voter downplays other issues, it is up to the voter to determine what the most important point in the debate was, particularly if the debaters themselves aren't doing that for him.
Posted by David1999 11 months ago
I'm quite intrigued by the topic. I feel that both make great cases with ample evidence, however both sides seem to falter a little as they reach the peak of their argument. Con seems to be better at building off of pro's mistakes however, and really highlights the errors. My biggest concern is that neither side seems to understand the underlying factors of the dark ages. Although called the Christian Dark Ages, the setbacks of the time cannot be solely traced to Christianity. The fallen Roman empire, the plague, little ice age which caused famines, and attacks from vikings in the north and a French battle with the expanding Moors in the iberian peninsula. All of these contributed to the turbulent times and especially in the plague, we see that in relatively the same period of time from when a European country was initially struck by the plague, it would experience the effects of the Renaissance.
Posted by maxajcd 11 months ago
in broader aspects beyond Christianity, but religion its self, there are event's such as the holocaust and9 9/11 that had religious influence
Posted by miloisqueer 11 months ago
Good to see that Con is making valid points. Always nice to see religions properly brought down to their reality--a form of mind-control and a systematic assurance of hatred.
Posted by miloisqueer 11 months ago
Good to see that Con is making valid points. Always nice to see religions properly brought down to their reality--a form of mind-control and a systematic assurance of hatred.
Posted by Allin247 11 months ago
This should be interesting... I'm siding with the con on this one, hopefully he blows you outta the water.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kingkd 11 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe Con wins this debate because Pro did not answer wars well enough, and war was the largest impact of the round. Pro rebuts that wars are not the fault of Christianity but Con says that Christianity was the motive behind it and Pro concedes that christianity creates the radicals, who conducted the war. Pro had some good points about ethics but the war impact was larger. Good debate