God is Evil
Debate Rounds (3)
God commits genocide when he floods the entire Earth, killing everyone except for Noah and his family, and by that logic, Noah and his family were forced into incestuous relationships with each other, because they were the only humans left on Earth. Incest is a sin, therefore God forces Noah and his family to commit sinful acts with each other.
The sixth commandment is "Thou shalt not kill," although the Bible directly contradicts itself by calling for the killing of infidels. "And hath gone and served other gods, and worshiped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die." (Deuteronomy 17:3-5)
God kills forty-two people for making fun of Elisha's lack of hair. "Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, "Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!" When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number." (2 Kings 2:23-24)
God commits genocide, and people still believe he is in the right (not to mention people still believe he is real).
God does flood the earth because he "saw that man"s wickedness was widespread on the earth and that every scheme his mind thought of was nothing but evil all the time" (Genesis 6:5). Every thought mankind had was completely evil. Surely a just God wouldn't allow this wickedness to go unpunished. He gave all the people a 120 year warning of the flood (Genesis 6:3) and they even had a preacher named Noah (2 Peter 2:5) to help them out. But yet no one changed their ways and things ended badly for them. Sounds fair to me.
The sixth commandment is you shall not murder (Exodus 20:13). There is a difference between killing someone and murdering someone. There is no contradiction here.
42 people is quite a lot of people. When I read that passage in the Bible, I get the feeling that this was a group that got together in order to mock a prophet of God. The people of the time period had tremendous respect for their elders...yet they openly mocked an elder who was a man of God. But the most interesting comment the 42 made was "Go up Baldy." Elijah, the mentor of Elisha (the man being mocked) had just been taken to heaven in a whirlwind. In other words, the men were "stating they want Elisha gone, and since Elijah had gone on to the "next world," the implication is they wanted Elisha dead" (https://carm.org...). So it is completely okay that God would justly punish the wicked people.
My opponent has not showed that God is evil. He has only showed his/her misunderstanding of the Bible.
God - the Christian interpretation of God
Evil - profoundly immoral and malevolent
Free Will - the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
Whether the sixth commandment says kill or murder depends upon the version of the Bible that is used.
If God is as opposed to slavery as you claim he is, why wouldn't he clearly oppose it and punish people for having slaves? God is either not entirely against slavery, or he is just terrible at communicating that he disagrees with slavery. God forbids many things directly, but he only places some restrictions on immoral practices like slavery. One that stands out is Exodus 21:7, that states women are not allowed to leave during the seventh year of service like men are. No reason is given as to why female slaves do not receive the same rights as the males. Men and women are treated differently often. " If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman"s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father"s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father"s house. You must purge the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21) An intact hymen was what determined whether or not someone was a virgin, but it has been proven that this is not reliable. Physical exercise can cause the hymen to tear, and the hymen doesn't even tear during sex sometimes. (http://www.womenonwaves.org...) Women were stoned to death if they were unmarried and had lost their virginity, but Deuteronomy 22:20-21 says nothing about punishing the man who takes her virginity. Christians preach that God loves everyone equally, but these verses seem to disagree.
I find it strange that, supposedly God gives humans free will, unless they do something he dislikes. I would argue that humans have no free will under God, and that the Bible lies about humans having free will. If God exists, either He knows everything, and we have no free will, or we have free will and He does not know everything, and therefore He is not God. God supposedly has a plan that dictates what will happen to each of us, this means that every death was part of that plan. If everything is already decided we cannot change our fate. God knows in advance what each human will do. God knew that Hitler would kill eleven million people during The Holocaust. God still created Hitler, even though he was aware of what would happen and is responsible for his actions.
When God flooded the Earth, how come he killed all but two of every (presumably blameless) animals as well? I've looked for a Bible verse that provides some justifiable reason as to why the innocent animals had to die, but I could not manage to find any. If God gets to decide when we die (Psalm 139:16), why wouldn't he just decide that everyone except Noah and his family should die, instead of wiping out massive populations of animals?
The Bible doesn't seem to explain where all of the water goes when it dries up.
You still have to defend that fact that Noah and his family were forced to have incestuous relations with each other. The Bible clearly forbids incest (Leviticus 18:6), yet the only way the human race could have continued is if Noah and his relatives produced children.
I did not misunderstand the Bible, I am only questioning it.
The sixth commandment states "do not murder" in most translations. Whatever translation said "do not kill" was referring to unlawful killing. You will see examples in the Bible where certain killing is alright (capital punishment). The passage was clearly speaking of murder (unlawful killing).
God did oppose slavery and he made his position clear on many occasions. In Genesis 21:10 Hagar was a slave that was left to fend for herself and her son. God later provided for her because he cares about all people. In Exodus 14, God frees thousands upon thousands of slaves. In Leviticus, Exodus, and etc...God commands that all people will be treated well and fairly. And in the book of Galatians, God states that "there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." God has made his position known.
And again, Exodus 21:7-11 was for the benefit of the daughters. In those days, if a father was too poor to pay for a normal marriage, he might sell his daughter to a rich man (not saying this is okay). God made sure that the daughters would not be tossed aside by the rich man or to be sold by the rich man to a foreign people. The husband had to provide clothing, food, and etc..for the daughter by law. If the man didn't do these things for the daughter, he would have to pay her money (read the whole passage for details).
The verse from Deuteronomy is another case where you just didn't read the passage. The woman was put to death if she was a non-virgin pretending to be a virgin and trying to dishonestly deceive a man. As for the men, if they wrongly accused their partner as being a non-virgin, he was whipped and had to pay a huge sum of money. And as for the man who had sex with the previous virgin, he had to marry her himself and provide for her for the rest of his life (Deut. 22:28-29).
The evidence of her virginity was most likely a garment stained with menstrual blood. Or they might show a garment stained with hymenal blood to show that the girl had sex on the wedding night. Then there was a whole trial...
My opponent says "I find it strange that, supposedly God gives humans free will, unless they do something he dislikes." This is an interesting statement. But...my opponent also refuted himself when he stated that God allowed Hitler to murder millions of people. God allows people to have freewill. This means that people will make their own choice. However, this does not mean that they will not be punished for making the wrong decisions. And just because God knows what will happen...that doesn't mean there is no freewill. It merely means that he knows what is going to happen. If my opponent were to place a bowl or rocks and a bowl of ice cream in front of a child. And then told the kid to pick one. Just because my opponent would know which one the kid would pick doesn't mean the kid doesn't have freewill.
For the record, my opponent should be angry at Hitler for making horrible choices and not at the God who allowed him to make them. He should also be thanking God that the man will be burning in Hell for the rest of eternity.
As for the flood, the Bible says "The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth (Genesis 6). In other words, sin has affected not just humans, but even the earth itself. The earth needed a reboot. So God did what was best for the planet. The animals died due to the sin of humanity. Sin has consequences and the results of sin do not merely affect the person that committed the sin.
By the way, send me a message if you want to talk about where the water went. This debate is about the nature of God.
Noah and his family were not forced to have sex. They did it by their own freewill. This was not considered incest at that time. This was just sex that didn't result in any complications. People didn't have the same genetic problems that we have now. As you may recall, people were living a long time back then. So, the sexual relations were not a problem at the time. But as time went on, God did make a law about incest because disease started to get worse.
My opponent never questioned the Bible in round one. He made statements like "God is evil" and "the Bible contradicts itself." My opponent made false statements about the Bible. These were certainly not questions.
A woman faking her virginity, and a man wrongly accusing her of faking her virginity are very similar crimes. How come when the woman was convicted, she was put to death, but when the man was convicted, he was only whipped and fined?
I don't understand how menstrual blood can be used as evidence. Hymens are not solid dividers, there is a hole for menstrual blood to escape. Women can have periods, and produce menstrual blood, whether they are a virgin or not. How could someone have distinguished between menstrual blood and hymenal blood? There was no DNA testing at the time, so there was no absolute way of knowing it was even that woman's blood.
God knew that Hitler would kill eleven million people. According to you, God loved these people, yet he still created Hitler.
If God already knows what we will do, we do not actually have free will. Using the same example as you did, if the child chooses the bowl of ice cream, he was always going to choose the ice cream. He didn't actually have any say in it, because in the future he has already chosen the ice cream.
Some animals act only on instinct. Unless you are going to argue that the wickedness of humans somehow corrupted the biologically ingrained instincts of these animals, these animals did not deserve to die. Also, if the animals needed to die, what about the fish? The chances of only two fish of each species surviving the flood is next to impossible.
If Noah and his family didn't have incest, the human timeline would have ended there. If they wanted the human race to survive, they absolutely had to.
A woman committing adultery and a man falsely accusing his soon to be wife as an adulterous are not even close to being the same thing. Adultery was punishable by death and a false accusation led to the accuser being whipped.
My opponent then asks a few questions about proof of virginity and etc...I first encourage my opponent to look at this link: http://lavistachurchofchrist.org... There are a few things in there that I forgot about. A proof of the virginity was a cloth stained by the blood spilled when her hymen broke. But there also had to be 2-3 witnesses and they could also hear testimonies from doctors. So there were multiple things here that showed evidence of virginity.
I would like to point out that all people have done something wrong and we have all have hurt someone in our life time. Yet...God still created the whole human race. Blame Hitler for what he did and not his creator. Also...I am curious to see if my opponent blames God for all the good things that happen in his/her life. Or does God only get credit for bad things that happen in their worldview? Either way, this is an emotional argument my opponent is using and he blames God for something another being did. This should not count as evidence for any God being evil.
The child did have freewill. Knowing that something will happen doesn't mean that there is no freewill. The child was not forced to pick the ice cream. I don't understand why my opponent equivocates the words "knowing" and "forcing."
As for the animals, I am not sure why my opponent started speaking of instincts. Animals died as a result of humans wickedness. God actually spared more animals than humans in the flood so I don't know why he/she has such an issue with this. As for the fish, the bible never says that the flood destroyed all the fish. But...that has nothing to do with the nature of God.
Lastly, according to the human genome project, all people are apart of the same race. In other words, science has proved that we are all related. So my response to my opponent is that there were not the same genetic problems with marrying close relatives back in biblical times since the human race started off perfect (Adam and Eve). It wasn't until years later when there was genetic problems that developed.
So nothing my opponent has brought up shows that the God is Evil.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.