The Instigator
Dr_Obvious
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
distraff
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Every ill society suffers from is a direct result of disobedience to Gods will.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
distraff
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/30/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 990 times Debate No: 59756
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (20)
Votes (2)

 

Dr_Obvious

Pro

It is my belief that every societal ill we suffer from, is a direct result of disobedience to Gods will. Con must come up with one societal ill that is not a result of doing something that the Bible says NOT to do.

For this debate, we will not be discussing natural disasters or disease, as these are something that we cannot control. This debate is solely about behavior and how it affects us as a society.

Four rounds. Usual format. Acceptance, opening arguments, rebuttals, closing arguments.
distraff

Con

I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Dr_Obvious

Pro

Thank you for accepting this debate. I'd like to remind everyone that this debate is about personal behavior, how it negatively affects society and how said behavior is in direct opposition to Gods Word.

wrath, avarice, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony.

The seven deadly sins. Why are they called that? I've often wondered, so I looked it up. Each is a form of Idolatry-of-Self where the subjective rules over the objective. It is believed that these sins destroy the life of grace and charity within a person. A person without charity is a person who does not know God.

Here are some other things that the Lord hates.

A proud look
A lying tongue
Hands that shed innocent blood
A heart that devises wicked plots
Feet that are swift to run into mischief
A deceitful witness that uttereth lies
Him that soweth discord among brethren

These are just a sample of things that are against Gods will. Con must provide an example of human behavior, that is destructive to society, that is not caused by disobedience to the Word of God. I guess I'll pause here, and see what con can come up with. Please don't disappoint me. I want a good debate.

P.S. I know I haven't really given my opponent anything to rebutt, so he can rebutt my rebuttals, I guess.
distraff

Con

This is a very hard debate for me because the bible has much advise against very general ills like every religion. I do not like how Pro created the resolution and that leads me to my first point.

What is God's Will?

So what is God's will. How do you know the bible is God's will? All I see are individual books written by different people. The resolution assumes the existence of God and that we know his will through the bible. A better one would be:
Every ill society suffers from is a direct result of disobedience to biblical principals.
Every ill society suffers from is a direct result of disobedience to God's will as given in the bible.

It should have been clarified in the first round that this argument is interpreting God's will by looking at the God as written in the bible and not assuming his existence.

Lets take a few biblical commandments. If I can show them to be bad, then they produce ills if obeyed. Since at least some Christians are likely to obey them then obedience to these commandments produces ills. If that is true then disobedience to God cannot by the 100% complete explanation for these ills.

Matthew 19
8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

So all ills resulting from all men who stay in a bad marriage when things would be better by leaving are an exception to your rule. One can interpret this verse to apply to women too because the reasoning he uses against male divorce also is true for female divorce. and the same ills would be true for women who stayed in a bad marriage.

1 Timothy
1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God"s name and our teaching may not be slandered.
2 Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare of their slaves.

All ills resulting from slaves who believed that they should not try to be free and should actually respect them is another exception.

1 Peter
3 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,
2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives.
3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes.
4 Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God"s sight.
5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands,
6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord.

All ills resulting from such an imbalance of power between husbands and wives is another exception.

Matthew 5
38 "You have heard that it was said, "Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth."[h]
39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

All ills resulting from not standing up for yourself and always letting people borrow from you also cannot be explained.

1 Corinthians 7
27 Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife.
...
29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;
...
36 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong[b] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married.
37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin"this man also does the right thing.

These verses advise that if you are single, don't marry if you are able to control yourself. If you are married it is best if you live as if you are single. That will create many problems for those who try to be life-long virgins. It will also create marital problems for people whose spouses have decided to live like they are single.

Ills from work mistakes

Ills resulting from actions that come from mistakes cannot all be attributable to the bible. Sometimes people make mistakes at their jobs even if they work hard.
Debate Round No. 2
Dr_Obvious

Pro

I specifically asked my opponent for examples of human behavior that causes societal ills, that are not opposed to Gods will. He has not done so. Instead, he has turned the tables and provided examples, and poor ones at that, of how OBEYING Gods will actually causes societal ills. I can refute every one of them, but I'm not going to. That is not what this debate is about. Since my opponent has ignored me and decided to change what this debate is actually about, I'm declaring that he has forfeited the debate. You should vote accordingly. Thank you.
distraff

Con

The resolution is that every ill in society or every problem that results from human action rather than nature is the result of disobeying what God said.

I provided a list of commandments in the new testament that would produce ill if obeyed. Since there are so many Christians, these commandments have been obeyed by some people. So if ill comes from obeying God's word, then it cannot possibly come exclusively from disobeying his work. Therefore these are legitimate examples of showing that some ills do not come from disobeying God and can come from obeying him.

My opponent even agrees with me:

Pro: he has turned the tables and provided examples, and poor ones at that, of how OBEYING Gods will actually causes societal ills.

Since I have shown that some societal ills are caused by obedience, these ills cannot come from disobedience completely. So some ills do not completely come from disobedience.

My opponent claims that these are poor examples but did not care to use any of his 10,000 characters available.

He did not address my point that the resolution is poorly worded and assumes the bible is God's will. However I will let that slip. For the sake of my opponent, I will take back that argument and assume that the resulution means biblical principals when it says God's will.

He did not address my example of work accidents as another example of an ill that does not completely result from disobeying God.

He has shown poor conduct in claiming that I forfeited the debate simply because I made valid arguments he did not expect and was not prepared for.

Just take a look at Matthew 5:
42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

People following this commandment is going to be harmful because many people get taken advantage of when they lend money to those who will not pay them back. I know many people who have been cheated by lending money that does not get returned. This is an ill and specifically this ill is being too friendly and lending money to irresponsible people. This ill is actually commanded in the bible and so does not come from disobedience. Logically some Christians have read this verse, obeyed it, and have gotten cheated because of their obedience.

Look at 1 Peter 2:
13Submit yourselves for the Lord"s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.
Romans 13
1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Think of all the ill that has come from people who did not take their freedom because biblical commandments and all the rulers who justified their rule with the bible. Imagine an America still under American rule.

Romans 1
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Leviticus 20
13 If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

People who are gay can be in loving relationships with those like them. The only difference is that they are attracted to the same sex. Why does this make them so sinful? If being in a loving relationship with someone of the same sex brings them more and deeper happiness than being with the opposite sex they have no attraction to, or just being virgins, then why are gay relations sinful?

Think of all the ill that has come from parents trying to "fix" their gay children, or the lack of legal recognition for gay marriage because Christians do not want to legally recognize a sin. Think of all the ill from well meaning societal disapproval and harrasment of gays when gays are not doing anything wrong.

The bible has terrible advice about dealing with attackers, borrowing, gender equality in the home, gay relationships, slavery, loyalty to government, divorce, and lifelong virginity. These commandments have caused ills that cannot be blamed on disobedience to God.
Debate Round No. 3
Dr_Obvious

Pro

I repeat. I asked you for behavior, that is harmful to society, that is not against Gods Word. You have failed to do so. Because you can't. Your example about mistakes in the workplace doesn't qualify, either. Mistakes happen. People do not intentionally make mistakes. They are beyond one's control. You have failed to follow the rules of this debate, by not giving me what I asked for. Therefor, you have forfeited. I ask everyone to vote accordingly. Thank you.
distraff

Con

I asked you for behavior, that is harmful to society, that is not against Gods Word.

Yes, I was asked for human behavior that produces ill that is not disobedience to God.

You have failed to do so.

Ummm, I showed like 10 examples of behavior that was obedience to God's will that produced ill. Therefore it cannot be disobedience. I did not fail to do that.

Because you can't.

Trolling.

Your example about mistakes in the workplace doesn't qualify, either. Mistakes happen. People do not intentionally make mistakes. They are beyond one's control.

You asked for human behavior that produced ill and was not against God's will. Mistakes in the workplace is human behavior and you never tried to refute my argument that it is not against God's will. The fact that it is not intentional does not mean that it is not human behavior which you asked for.

You have failed to follow the rules of this debate, by not giving me what I asked for.

I followed the rules to the letter. It is you who decided to redefine them in this round to try to avoid one of my counter-examples.

Therefor, you have forfeited.

Nope, you did by posting no arguments.

I ask everyone to vote accordingly. Thank you.

I think they are all going to vote for me, no offense. Well, thanks for inspiring me to do new testament research. I had no idea how radical it was on borrowing and celibacy.
Debate Round No. 4
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
Going to come back to this one...
Posted by distraff 2 years ago
distraff
Starvation and thirst are ills and are either produced from societal problems or problems in nature. The societal problems can still be attributed to not following biblical principals and the problems in nature is not valid in this debate.

However, overpopulation can cause starvation and that has happened in the past. The bible says nothing against overpopulation.

Saying that people go to heaven anyway doesn't count because sometimes non-Christians starve and even if they go to a better place the pain they went through here still caused harm to them.
Posted by evangambit 2 years ago
evangambit
Haha, naturally I was saying their mere existence refuted your theory :p. "All things work together for good" would be an extremely difficult claim to defend (e.g. genocide, many (most?) homicides, etc.). The disciples' (God's) goal was certainly accomplished (if Christianity is anything, it is a wildly successful religion), but this argument can hardly be applied to any but a small minority of Christian deaths. For instance, many Christians died on their immigration to the New World, but it would be hard to argue each of these brought "good" into this world. And, not to make this impossible for you, if such an argument is possible it would be hard to make your original debate topic ("Every ill society suffers...") not beg the question (i.e. "every ill society suffers is a direct result of disobedience to God's will -- because anything with accordance to God's will is, by definition, working towards good"). Certainly you can still believe it, but asking someone to debate on it seems a little ridiculous. Sorry, I've sort of made some assumptions about what direction(s) you might go, so I'll let you speak for yourself before I attempt (and likely fail) to continue debating for you.
Posted by Dr_Obvious 2 years ago
Dr_Obvious
Being a Christian doesn't mean you're invulnerable to harm. The Bible teaches that all things work together for good, to those who know Christ. Take the twelve Apostles, for instance. All but one of them died for their belief in God. But their legacy will live forever. God allowed then to complete their mission. That mission was to build the early Church. Once that was accomplished, He called them home.
Posted by Dr_Obvious 2 years ago
Dr_Obvious
Well. They're dead. They can't refute anything. Besides. They're in a better place. I wouldn't complain. Sometimes, the answer to prayer is a no. God has His reasons for what He does.
Posted by evangambit 2 years ago
evangambit
Don't the Christians that have died from lack of food/water/shelter refute this belief?
Posted by Dr_Obvious 2 years ago
Dr_Obvious
" If I may ask, if a person is about to starve to death and they steal money to buy food, is this a sin?"

I believe it would be a sin. Christians should trust in God, to provide their needs. God has been good to me. I've been homeless, before. No income, No place to live. But I never went hungry. God looks out for His children. This is something atheists can't believe, because they have never experienced it.
Posted by evangambit 2 years ago
evangambit
I think I understand your argument completely; I pointed out that using unintentional actions in the argument is "cheating" as it is misinterpreting your argument :). Of course this argument is a little odd (perhaps begging-the-question-esque?) since the line between not being greedy and being greedy seems to be based on the ethics of your actions to get 'wealth' (whether food, money, housing, etc.). If I may ask, if a person is about to starve to death and they steal money to buy food, is this a sin?
Posted by Dr_Obvious 2 years ago
Dr_Obvious
I believe you're missing the point. My contention is that everything that hurts society, and is a direct result of ones willful actions, is a sin. Granted, someone can unintentionally harm someone, through their actions. But it wasn't willful harm. Take the sin of greed, for example. 1% of the worlds population controls more than 95% of the wealth. This is harmful to society, as a whole. Is it not?
Posted by evangambit 2 years ago
evangambit
I suppose one could argue that much of the international humanitarian aide offered by a country negatively harms it (in the short run at the very least) through decreased productivity which likely contribute to a lower standard of living. Though it's conceivable that Pro meant humanity as a whole rather than any specific society in which case this argument falls flat on its face.

I wonder where scientific advancement falls. Many of the scientific studies (e.g. much of mathematics and astrophysics) will contribute basically nothing foreseeable to humanity (though many would argue their benefits are simply several decades / centuries down the road, particularly with mathematics). It is also worth asking if such research is a sin. Pride perhaps, believing we can comprehend the universe? Assuming you don't mean the Bible as a whole, but rather simply the Seven Deadly Sins, this is an interesting question.

I suppose it's worth pointing out that drone pilots can kill innocent people without feeling necessarily wrathful (or greedy).

Perhaps most significantly: people can hurt others without intent. Though such a point seems a bit like cheating.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Dr_ObviousdistraffTied
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: Pro misspelled "therefore". Pro also admitted Con "provided examples, and poor ones at that, of how OBEYING Gods will actually causes societal ills.". That meets the.requirement of "Con must come up with one societal ill that is not a result of doing something that the Bible says NOT to do." Personally I disagree that Con did so, but the way Pro worded that statement, it becomes a concession. Sorry Pro, if you hadn't said that, I would've voted Pro.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Dr_ObviousdistraffTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: pro really gotta try harder