The Instigator
Adam_Godzilla
Pro (for)
Winning
29 Points
The Contender
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

God's love for humanity is questionable

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 9 votes the winner is...
Adam_Godzilla
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/24/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,664 times Debate No: 59499
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (251)
Votes (9)

 

Adam_Godzilla

Pro

I will start in round 2. This is an acceptance round.

Premise; The biblical God does not love you unconditionally, therefore 'His' love for humanity is questionable.

I challenge lifemeansgodisgood to this debate.

I am not here to convert you, only to discuss. I am not an atheist, I am an agnostic. So please, join me in the dinner table conversation.

I wait for your reply.
LifeMeansGodIsGood

Con

Ok, I have to kind of agree with you but then I have to disagree. You are free to question God's love for you.......his unconditional love for you. He loves you and wants you to come to Him just as you are. If you accept His love for you, it's going to change you. If you refuse to believe God loves you unconditionally, you can try changing yourself or you can remain just the way you are and never know that God loves you. So while you are free to question God's love, it really is unquestionable. Questioning God's love is a mistake. The only thing questionable between you and God is you. You are making a mistake if you question God's love. The fact that you question God's love for you does not mean His love is questionable.

Your basic premise for this debate: "The biblical God does not love you unconditionally" Is wrong in two ways. First, God is God, there is not a Biblical God and a non-Biblical God. There is only one God. Second, God does love me unconditionally.

The greatest expression of human love is when a man dies to save his friends, like when a soldier in combat throws himself on a live hand grenade and dies shielding his friends from the blast. A soldier who throws himself in front of an enemy fighter in order to shield that enemy from the assault of his companions and thereby allows the enemy fighter to continue killing the soldiers companions would be considered a traitor. God loves me unconditionally and proved it because even though I hated Him and was His enemy, He died to save me so that I can continue to live. Before I believed He loved me unconditionally, I was speaking in many ways against Him and doing many things in violation of His law such as stealing, lying, and many evil thoughts and actions I am not proud of. All of these things were harmful in one way or another to the people around me, and God hates every one of those things I did, and every evil thought I had, and He still hates it when I do things like that. I'm not perfect yet, but I have learned to agree with Him speedily when I see I am thinking or acting contrary to His Law. His Law is for the good of all mankind, but we have all broken His law. Any time we do wrong toward another person in word, thought, or action, it is a violation of God's law and God hates it. He loves us but He hates our sin. He loves us so much that He (Jesus) still died in my place to pay for my crimes against Him so He can be satisfied that my penalty has been paid in full and we can be forgiven.
If you will not believe God loves you and is willing and able to deliver you from the guilt of your violations of His law, you will only see God as hateful toward you because you are rejecting His love and He hates your violations of His law. He cannot allow violations of His law to go unpunished or He would be good for nothing and no angel or person would have any reason to respect Him. It's not His love which is questionable, it's you who is questionable.

Now I suppose you will accuse God of being hateful towards different people at different times, and say that proves He does not love them. God never stopped loving them, but their steadfast rejection of God's love and their insistence on going their own way in acting their life out as rebels against God will not allow them to see God as anything other than hateful toward them so to them He is hateful, and He even said of Esau "Esau have I hated"......they made it that way, they wanted it that way, and God gave them their own way because he loved them and gave them the freedom to go their own way even if it means they go away from Him forever. You can never know that God loves you if you won't agree with Him that your sin is evil against Him, and all you will know is His hatred against your sin and if you leave God no choice but to have you cast away into the fire of Hell, he still loves you though you chose your own death in rebellion against Him. His love will be withdrawn from you because you are withdrawing yourself away from Him. You can only go so far with that before God lets you go completely in the finalization of your death. I hope you change your mind before it is too late and believe that God loves you unconditionally. He won't give you forever to decide. He is not going to allow evil to go on unpunished forever.

If you are trying to figure out how God loved Esau even while He hated Esau, I can only point you to this verse in the Bible which is the premise of my argument, and Esau is included......every person who has ever lived and every person who will be conceived is included in this as they are all together called "the world", and "whosoever" . "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Esau was included in this as Esau was part of "whosoever' and "the world". All of God's enemies who forced God's hatred against them for their sins were included in this display of God's love for them all. God loves you.
God wants you to be saved from the fire of Hell which you deserve so you can remain with Him in heaven forever.

you are free to question God's love all the way to the fire of Hell if that's what you want to do. The fire of Hell burning against violations of God's law does not change his love for you. God loves you and died in your place to save you from the fire of Hell. Right now, if you are breathing air, no matter how bad things seem, it's better than what you deserve. The same goes for me and everybody else.

Binding Contract:

I, God, do hereby swear by the blood of my Son, Jesus, to overlook all of your violations of my Holy Law and grant you full pardon and entrance into eternal life by the resurrection of my Son from the dead if you will agree to the following terms:

1) You must acknowledge that you are the one who deserved to die and my Son did not deserve to die.

2) You must believe that I love you so much that I died in your place in the form of Jesus Christ my Son, and you must believe that I raised Him from the dead and can do the same for you.

3) You must ask me to accept you on these terms, asking for my mercy to forgive you and believe that I am willing to forgive you. You must receive my Son, Jesus, as your Saviour by asking me in His name to save you.

This contract is written by me in the blood of my Son whom I gave to be the satisfaction for payment for your sins against me. If you honestly agree to the terms above, and will receive my Son as your Saviour,
sign here..........................<-----your name here. It's not too good to be true, I always honor my Word, and I have committed all Judgement into the hands of My Son, Jesus, who paid the price to secure this contract for you. Did you sign it? Will you sign it?

God
.........................<---------you sign here to enter into agreement with God and receive His guarantee of pardon and eternal life
in Jesus Christ.
Debate Round No. 1
Adam_Godzilla

Pro

I will leave it up to the voters to decide a conduct point loss for con as I had clearly said round 1 was an acceptance round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Honestly, I did not know how much hate u receive from people gmlig. Seriously, what did you do to them? Please don't tell me you tried to get them to sign your contract. I mean, it's very well constructed, and extremely persuasive really. But... no thanks. And who made that? Doesn't look like God made it. Otherwise it would be much more . . . persuasive.

Remember that 'god loves u' debate? And how u won it because your opponent couldn't rebut without saying 'spaaaghetti monsta!' at least once? I felt that there was a bit of injustice there.

And that, is why I made this debate. To give you a proper rebuttal. Also, I will not insult you like the others. Much.

(Got the GOT reference?)

Well enough kidding around for now. Here's my response:


Before I rebut, here are my initial arguments as to why god's love is questionable which was for this round. Shortened because of Con's arguments before:

1. He puts you in hell.

This is pretty simple. In fact pretty obvious. If god loves you unconditionally - without condition - then why does he punish you for what you are or will become?

Remember the definition of unconditional?

The Google definition: not subject to any conditions.
Merriam Webster : not conditional or limited
Dictionary.com : not limited by conditions; absolute

Are you really being serious when you say that a god that loves us absolutely, who loves us no matter what, will punish us in hell? And the reason? Because we don't believe in him? I thought he gave us free will to do what we want because he loves us unconditionally? But it's clearly not conditional when you get punished for doing the wrong things.

It's like a parent telling their child they can do whatever they want, but they will get spanked if they do any of these 10 very bad bad things. Why would you tell the freaking child they could do whatever they want in the first place?? It's nonsensical.

Loving without condition means with NO condition. At all! You can't say to your girlfriend, "I love you unconditionally." But then once they break your trust and sleep with other men, you say, "I hate you and I wish I never met you!"

If you say you love them unconditionally then you can't just suddenly not love them because then that would be loving them conditionally. Loving them AS long as they don't do X number of things. Loving them as long as they are who YOU want them to be. That is not unconditional love.

And if you think god can still love you even while he punishes you, inflicts pain personally on you, and tortures you. Then you have the most messed up definition of love.

You cannot love someone and still want to hurt them at the same time. God isn't a human. At least a human is limited and only has very few ways to express control over someone they love. So they hurt them in order to protect them from; going to jail, becoming a criminal, addict, or murderer, or so they can be accepted by society.

Parents who commit corporal punishment on their children do so in fear of the above things because of the limited way society works. But when you die, such physical limitations are lifted. You don't have to answer to court, be sent to prison or be punished for stealing.

In the after world, you can have as many items and jewels that you wish. There are no consequences to stealing because you can just wish the item again and replace it. There are no consequences to killing because everyone is a soul and you can't kill them because they don't have a body. There are no courts to answer to because no governments are needed in heaven.

Basically, there are no consequences in heaven. Because in heaven, everything is unlimited. God doesn't need to punish anybody because there isn't a reason to! Yet even when you die; and see that the person you robbed is now dwelling in riches, that the person you killed is - oh my god! - alive again, and that the wife you cheated on is now surrounded with the men of her dreams; yet even when you die, you are sent to hell by god. And for what reason?

Because you broke a rule he arbitrarily made. And he made this rule even when, after physical life, there are really no consequences or ever lasting effect on a person's life. Since everything in your life is undermined when you enter the after world.

Not only is god not unconditionally loving (he loves us only if we obey him). His punishments and reasons for doing so are also unjust (no actual consequences in after-life).

People do heinous things because the physical world god created is very limited. A lot don't just commit sins because they freely chose to. They do it because they believe they don't have a choice. Yet god, because he conditionally loves them, will punish them anyway because they are not whom He wants them to be.

And because they are no longer reflecting the omnibenevolent image of god. They are pieces of garbage who need punishing for who knows what reason in the eyes of god.

It's not that god's unconditional love is questionable. It's nonexistent.



Rebuttal


Yes, that's right. That is the only point I will make. I trust that readers are intelligent enough to get my point already so there's no point in repeating myself in different ways.

However, I might repeat myself in this rebuttal. Let's begin.

"Questioning God's love is a mistake. The only thing questionable between you and God is you. You are making a mistake if you question God's love. The fact that you question God's love for you does not mean His love is questionable."

I didn't make a mistake. God's mistake is giving me the free will to question his love if he doesn't want me to question his love. The fact, is that he will punish me for questioning his love, when he gave me the free will to do it in the first place.

Either he gives me free will and not punish me for questioning him; an act of unconditional love. Or not give me free will so I can't question him; an act of conditional love, no love, or an act of hatred and anger. He can't do both because both are polar opposites of each other.

"First, God is God, there is not a Biblical God and a non-Biblical God. There is only one God. Second, God does love me unconditionally."

Well then that just makes things much easier. I no longer have to refer to god as 'the biblical god'. Glad we agree on that.

"He loves us but He hates our sin. He loves us so much that He (Jesus) still died in my place to pay for my crimes against Him so He can be satisfied that my penalty has been paid in full and we can be forgiven."

Another example of god's conditional love, if it's love at all. He attempts to forgive what he himself created; sin. And his need for satisfaction for humans to do exactly as he says shows he doesn't really fully allow us to do what we wish.

Doesn't matter how many times he died - because he didn't (he's in heaven) - people will still do what god hates and that won't stop till either he robs our free will, or loves us enough to let us be.

We already have enough of our own laws and regulations to deal with.


"Esau, Esau, Esau. Basically his whole defense of Esau."

Same arguments. So same rebuttal.

And finally,

"God loves you and died in your place to save you from the fire of Hell."

He didn't save me from the fire of hell. He just decided one day to not put me in hell. He wasn't saving anyone. He just decides.

Basically if he didn't 'die' for us, we would all go to hell. And here I thought god is omnipotent. He has a choice, send us to hell, or don't. There is no love. Just a mindless game of inni minnie maini moe. I don't see the love. I don't see any 'unconditional' love from it at all.

To close:



When god decides to truly love us for WHO we are and not for what he WANTS us to be. Then that, my friends, is what's called, UNCONDITIONAL LOVE <3.


See you in the next round.

LifeMeansGodIsGood

Con

The voters should notice that immediately after you said round 1 is an acceptance round, you posted this argumentative statement "Premise; The biblical God does not love you unconditionally, therefore 'His' love for humanity is questionable.
"The biblical God does not love you unconditionally" is an argumentative statement made in support of the Pro position arguing that God's love for humanity is questionable. I failed to see why I should not put an argument in Round 1 after my opponent made this argumentative statement under the guise of "Premise" If Round 1 was for acceptance only, my opponent should not have made this argumentative statement. The conduct point should be tied. Had I simply accepted and pointed out that my opponent's "Premise" statement as an argument in Round 1, the conduct point should go to me.
My mistake, and I'm sorry the debate started out this way. My opponent should take heed to this, because if his future opponents are reading this and he makes the same mistake of making a rule for acceptance only in Round 1 and then in his next statement makes an argument under the guise of "premise', his opponents should point out his violation of his own rule when they accept without posting any argumentative statement. Then the conduct point will clearly lean in favor of the opponent.
I want to thank my opponent for presenting multiple dictionary references for the word "unconditional', and I hope the voters are clear on the meaning of the word now. To all of those dictionary definitions which are an unnecessary waste of time for most of the voters, I will add the Biblical illustration of unconditional love to my opponents definitions, since my opponent is having difficulty seeing that God loves him unconditionally.

It seems my opponent is wresting with the concept of eternal punishment being unnecessary if God cannot be hurt by anything we do wrong due to His Omnipotence. The problem is, God has already been hurt by the things we have done in violation of His law, the Ten Commandments. God's Law is written as protection for innocent people from violators and victimizers. In order to be true to Himself (God cannot deny Himself, and in order to be just (righteous, fair) in support of innocent beings who have not broken His law, and to give justice to those who have been victimized and violated by others who have broken His law, , God must punish the perpetrators. He cannot say His Law is not good and protective of His creatures and His creation. He cannot say it is ok for you to break His law and remain a lawbreaker forever. A temporary punishment can't change you from being guilty to innocent. A temporary punishment cannot restore the damage that has been done by the lawbreaker, and a temporary punishment cannot make the lawbreakers record clean. God loves you so much, He does not want you to suffer the only punishment that can fix the breach you have made against the beauty and perfection of His Heaven. The only punishment that can fix the problems caused by lawbreakers is to remove the lawbreakers and make it impossible for them to ever against disturb the peace of Heaven. This punishment is eternal fire of Hell. God loves you and does not want you to go there so He gives time......time for us to procreate and bring into existence more of the creatures God loves the most (us) and time for those of us who know we have broken God's law to come into agreement with Him on the matter so He can show His mercy and goodness for His own name's sake in front of all of His creatures for His own honor and for His own glory.
God knows when a sparrow falls from it's nest, and He grieves when He sees it die. We are much more than sparrows to God, He made us for Himself to enjoy the pleasure of the company of a multitude of beings like Himself who have communicative, reasoning, and creative powers like His, even to the point that He gave us the capability of procreating to bring more creatures made in His image into being. When we break His law, He cannot be true to Himself if he allows the violations to go unpunished. Every time we break His law, it hurts us and it hurts people around us when what we do is more than in thought or imagination alone.
Every time we break His law, we become more experienced criminals against God and our enmity toward God is added to. God knows we have all broken His Law. We have all done things like lying, stealing, (coveting, desiring things that do not belong to us, is the same as stealing in the attitude of our heart, planning to honestly buy something we want is not coveting) committing adultery (if you look on a woman with lust in your heart, you have committed adultery with her in your heart), dishonoring our parents (how many of us growing up did not at some point, mostly in our teens when we became smarter than our parents, say "I hate you" out loud or under our breath or our thoughts to our father or mother?) and the list goes on. God sees our hearts, and even when we do these things only in our thoughts or imaginations, the time we are giving to these kind of things is in violation of God's law which is summarized in The Ten Commandments. Doing these kinds of things puts us at enmity toward God, because he wants us to love each other The proof that God loves us starts with the fact that He gives us time even though we do not deserve it when we have all broken His law and are at enmity with Him and He still gives us air to breathe. God does not want to give us what we really deserve, which is eternal separation from Him because we have all rebelled against Him, disregarding His law and disrespecting Him who created us and has the power and the right to destroy after we have turned our backs on Him who loves us unconditionally.

The second step in proving God's love for us is unconditional is in the fact that He gave Himself as a sacrifice to pay for our violations of His law, so He is satisfied that our penalty has been paid in full. His love is unconditional for us in that while we were (and many of us remain to this day) His enemies, Christ died for us. If we believe on His resurrection and receive Him as our Saviour, the payment for our crimes against God (sin), is finished by Christ on our behalf and we will be forgiven and have eternal life.

God's unconditional love for us cannot allow him to love the breaking's of His law. God cannot allow violations against His law to go unpunished, and it is not possible for a guilty person to change himself into an innocent person and wipe out the record of His past. God Himself paid the price in full for us, so we can be forgiven......any one of us. God loves you just as you are now. God wants the best for you which is victory over death. Why not believe God loves you and will accept you just as you are based on the terms of His contract which He wrote in the blood of His only begotten Son who He gave to pay for your sins? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16). God loves you unconditionally so He died in your place to save you just as you are from the fire of Hell which you have earned.

Binding Contract:

I, God, do hereby swear by the blood of my Son, Jesus, to overlook all of your violations of my Holy Law and grant you full pardon and entrance into eternal life by the resurrection of my Son from the dead if you will agree to the following terms:

1) You must acknowledge that you are the one who deserved to die and my Son did not deserve to die.

2) You must believe that I love you so much that I died in your place in the form of Jesus Christ my Son, and you must believe that I raised Him from the dead and can do the same for you.

3) You must ask me to accept you on these terms, asking for my mercy to forgive you and believe that I am willing to forgive you. You must receive my Son, Jesus, as your Saviour by asking me in His name to save you.

This contract is written by me in the blood of my Son whom I gave to be the satisfaction for payment for your sins against me. If you honestly agree to the terms above, and will receive my Son as your Saviour,
sign here..........................<-----your name here. It's not too good to be true, I always honor my Word, and I have committed all Judgement into the hands of My Son, Jesus, who paid the price to secure this contract for you. Did you sign it? Will you sign it?

God
.........................<---------you sign here to enter into agreement with God and receive His guarantee of pardon and eternal life
in Jesus Christ.
Debate Round No. 2
Adam_Godzilla

Pro

Thank you for the rebuttal.

The video I share now is not for the readers but for you, lmgig. Perhaps it will convince you to open your mind and see other possibilities.




And if you want the conduct to be tied, I suggest you write 'no round as agreed' in the last round, to balance the number of arguments.



Rebuttal:


""The biblical God does not love you unconditionally" is an argumentative statement made in support of the Pro position arguing that God's love for humanity is questionable. I failed to see why I should not put an argument in Round 1"

It is an argumentative statement. A proposition of an argument. Which is what a premise is. Needless to say, you could have saved your arguments for the next round. And because of arguing first in round 1, in order for the conduct to be a tie, you will have to leave the final round blank so we have an equal number of rebuttals and arguments. Failure to do this may result in a 7 point loss.

"The problem is, God has already been hurt by the things we have done in violation of His law, the Ten Commandments. God's Law is written as protection for innocent people from violators and victimizers. In order to be true to Himself (God cannot deny Himself, and in order to be just (righteous, fair) in support of innocent beings who have not broken His law, and to give justice to those who have been victimized and violated by others who have broken His law, , God must punish the perpetrators."

Which means god is not able to completely make his creations stop doing evil. But if he is truly not able to, then he is not omnipotent and is not God. Which therefore means he IS able to prevent evil but he's just not willing to. But if he isn't willing to, then chances are, he's malevolent. If you can stop evil, why wouldn't you? One reason is because you WANT evil to exist, thereby making you an evil person.

This is however another contradiction. God is omnibenevolent. He is all good so the reason can't be that he wants evil to exist in the world. As Con pointed out, he hates sin and therefore he hates evil. So why then does he allow evil to exist? Now the only possible explanation is that he wants to give all his creations free will. But there is a major flaw in the argument and this goes back to my main arguments. Let me say it once more,

He. Puts. You. In. Hell.

Which automatically robs you of free will. When you are in hell for eternity, it means you are unable to do to anything anymore, forever.

Therefore, either god is actually evil or that the existence of evil gives him a good justification to punish his creation whenever he wishes.

I will repeat in a different way.
P1) God is an omnipotent being and should be able to erase sin.
P2) According to the bible, sin exists.
C1) Therefore God is able to erase sin but is not willing.
P3) God does this because:
a) he wants there to be free will in his creations.
b) he needs to justify why he punishes his creations
p3) Hell takes free will away from you. Hell contradicts God"s desire for free will in his creations.
C2) Therefore sin exists as God needs a justification to punish his creations.

Hell is a place of eternal suffering. To love unconditionally is to love without condition. God does not love us unconditionally as he will punish us in hell if we do not accept his conditions.

If God's love was unquestionable, then his love cannot be reasonably or logically doubted. However there is a reasonable, logical doubt to question God's love. Thus, God's love for humanity is questionable.

"When we break His law, He cannot be true to Himself if he allows the violations to go unpunished.... Every time we break His law, we become more experienced criminals against God and our enmity toward God is added to. God knows we have all broken His Law. We have all done things like lying, stealing,, dishonoring our parents and the list goes on."

And I have already said in my main arguments - to which you did not rebut - all these things don't have any consequences whatsoever. If heaven is for real, then these petty crimes won't have any real effects on your soul or other people's soul. In fact, the very mere existence of a heaven gives this life no meaning at all. Most crimes are sometimes caused because of a lack of something. A beggar steals because he has no food and was uneducated his whole life. A bully may murder a kid because he lacks the nurture, care and love he/she wanted or needed in life. A teenager lies and shouts at his parents because his life is a turmoil of authorities looking down on him and peers who disregard him at the institution that kid's very own parents sent him to, he lacks respect.

If everyone was in heaven right now, they would have everything they ever wished for and their basic needs would be satisfied. If he didn't put us here in the first place, we would be respecting him and loving him for being the kind creator he says he is.


"It is not possible for a guilty person to change himself into an innocent person and wipe out the record of His past."
This does not give God the excuse to punish the guilty person. For he was the one who made it possible for there to be sin. And can't your sins be forgiven if you accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior? So then a guilty person is actually able to wipe "His" record and still go to heaven. Your argument has a contradiction.

"God loves you unconditionally so He died in your place to save you just as you are from the fire of Hell which you have earned."
There wouldn"t be a reason for me to go to hell if there was no hell to begin with. God"s excuse for creating hell is unreasonable and contradictory. As I have said, he does not give us free will and neither is he willing to erase sin. This is not an act of unconditional love. He only gives free will to us as long as we do as he says or follow his conditions. The bible says he loves us unconditionally but his creation of hell contradicts this statement greatly.

Take a look at this website and skim through it. You will understand that God does not love us unconditionally and that Christians misinterpret God's actions as unconditional love. http://www.acts17-11.com...;(1)

Here are some bible verses which show the conditions God places among us,

"Luke 13:3 (DVP) [Jesus:] "...If you do not repent, then you will all perish..."" (1)
"God judges the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day." (Psa 7:11)" (2)
"Amos 3:2 you only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." (2)


This one speaks for itself.


"I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments. (Ex 20:5-6)"
(2)



You do not threaten your child to put him/her in a cage, locked up forever, if they do anything to disobey you, and then claim that you unconditionally love that child. It is a contradiction. You are placing limits and fears on the child and that clearly shows your lack of true love for the child.

God is such a parent. He does not love us unconditionally. The existence of hell contradicts his love for humanity. Therefore it is highly reasonable to doubt God"s love (if has any) for humanity. God"s love for humanity, is in fact, questionable.


I remind Con to write "no round" in round 4 to even out the arguments.

See you in the next round.


(1) http://www.acts17-11.com...
(2) http://scriptureknowledgebase.blogspot.jp...;


(both are theistic sources)
LifeMeansGodIsGood

Con

My opponents "premise" statement was an argument in support of his postion as "pro" in the debate, and I failed to see why I should allow him to post an argumentative statement in Round 1 and I should not argue in Round 1. The argument under guise of "premise" called for an argument in response. Had I been more careful, I would have limited my Round 1 argument to "God loves you unconditionally" and mimicked my opponents style of posting an argument after making a rule for acceptance only as "premise : God loves you unconditionally" It seems to me that this is two different debates. The Debate Challenge is "God's love for humanity is questionalbe". The Con position would be "God's love for humanity is not questionable". By adding an argument under "premise" which could be an entrirely different debate, my opponent confused his own rule if he did not violate it. If the voters wish to hold this against me in conduct, so be it.

I will concede that I posted more of an argument than I should have in Round 1, and as I am posting no argument for the debate in this round other than a reasonable explanation of the confusion, Conduct points should be tied in this debate and if my opponent wil not agree so in the opening round, I will post no further arguments in this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
Adam_Godzilla

Pro

I want to apologize to my opponent for my spite and condescension in the previous rounds. I had no right to do so. Con is a civil and a respectable opponent. I thank him for accepting my challenge and wish him the best in his time at DDO. May the final round be peaceful, calm and smooth.



A little rebuttal:


"My opponents "premise" statement was an argument in support of his postion as "pro" in the debate, and I failed to see why I should allow him to post an argumentative statement in Round 1 and I should not argue in Round 1. The argument under guise of "premise" called for an argument in response."


I believe the explanation of the definitions of a premise will help you understand that there is nothing wrong with my statement.

Definition of premise:

"a proposition antecedently supposed or proved as a basis of argument or inference; specifically : either of the first two propositions of a syllogism from which the conclusion is drawn"

or

"a statement or idea that is accepted as being true and that is used as the basis of an argument" (1)

My claim that ‘God does not love us unconditionally’ was a proposition I made and was to be my premise. My conclusion and resolution resulting from the premise was then, ‘God's love for humanity is questionable.' I do not think there is any problems or issues with this.


Also as requested kindly by Con, I ask the voters to not deduct conduct points from Con. Please let the conduct be a tie or if you wish, reduce my points.


End of rebuttal.


I would now like to take the time to address an earlier statement my opponent had made. And then I will write a conclusion/ summary.


In round 1, my opponent gave me insight to some reasons as to why he is a theist. I wish to properly give a reply and opinion to this statement.

"Before I believed He loved me unconditionally, I was speaking in many ways against Him and doing many things in violation of His law such as stealing, lying, and many evil thoughts and actions I am not proud of. All of these things were harmful in one way or another to the people around me, and God hates every one of those things I did, and every evil thought I had, and He still hates it when I do things like that. I'm not perfect yet, but I have learned to agree with Him speedily when I see I am thinking or acting contrary to His Law."


Understand that you did these things because you believed you didn’t have a choice. Humans evolved to survive. When you lie, you do it to protect yourself from accusations and blame. When you steal, you do it because you fear a lack of abundance and resources. When you have negative thoughts your brain is just trying to process the negativity in your life and find positivity and peace where it can.


Perhaps you keep your belief in God because you are afraid to feel guilt and are afraid of what others might think of you. That perhaps you are worthless and that you do not deserve to live. So you seek redemption from religion. However in doing so, you have also come to accept the 'truth' and believe that you might after all be, worthless. But such a belief is nonsensical and the truth is that you can decide to stop feeling guilty and move on whenever you want. Your emotions are yours to control and if you define yourself as a worthless being, then perhaps you need to find the time to be alone and ask yourself why you would believe such things.


Conclusion/ Summary

God puts you in hell. Not just that hell exists as God’s creation but that God, with his will, sends people to hell. This negates the idea that God wishes humans to have free will. There is no point to free will if it is going to be stripped away in the end.


To God, time is wildly different and one human lifetime is probably only micro-seconds to God. From this perspective we see that God gives us free will for only a miniscule amount of time. This shows his lack of compassion and willingness to bestow free will on humans. If you only let a hamster out of its cage for an hour and then lock it up and leave it there for a year or forever, then you really weren’t going to give the hamster free will at all. You just wanted to test what it would do if you released it for a while.

Because of this, it contradicts one of the human made reasons for why God does not prevent evil from existing.


Another point I wished to make but sort of swayed from is that God may not be omnibenevolent. Which means there is a reasonable justification to doubt God’s love. According to this popular modus tollens, evil cannot exist if a God exists (2);


  1. God exists.
  2. God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.
  3. An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.
  4. An Omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence, and knows every way I which those evils could be prevented.
  5. An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
  6. A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
  7. If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists.


This modus tollens is valid since if premises are true, the conclusion must follow and be valid as well. However evil does exist and that’s an issue. This is my solution if we were to just assume and accept that God exists. It continues from the above modus tollens.


  1. Evil exists.
  2. Therefore God cannot be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. And God does not want to prevent evil.
  3. In order for God’s existence to be valid, one of God’s attributions is false.
  4. God must require to be omnipotent in order to create the universe and carry it with His mind.
  5. God must require to be omniscient in order to keep the image of the infrastructure of the universe in His mind and create the universe.
  6. God does not require to be omnibenevolent in order to be able to do the above things.
  7. If God is omniscient, omnipotent but not omnibenevolent, then evil can exist.
  8. God is not omnibenevolent.


Therefore if God is not omnibenevolent, then it is highly questionable whether or not He loves us. There is reasonable doubt to negate the idea that God truly loves us. It is reasonable to doubt any claims purporting that God loves us. The truth of such claims are highly questionable.


Con must prove that such claims cannot be questioned and that God’s love for humanity is unquestionable, undoubtable and undeniable.


Thank you for the debate, sincerely,

Adam Godzilla.




(1) http://www.merriam-webster.com...

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org...

LifeMeansGodIsGood

Con

You can question God's love for humanity of for yourself personally, but in doing so you are making a mistake. God loves you unconditionally and He proved it by dying for you to save you from the fire of Hell which you deserve.

Please read the following offer from God carefully before you decide it is not for you. Don't make a final decision against God's offer to you; print the contract and put it away until you are ready to sign it and enter into agreement with God. I hope you won't put it off too long. You see there are no strings attached in the contract. You do not have to get baptized, pray, read your Bible, or anything else after you sign the contract, If you sign the contract and you really mean it from your heart, you will probably find you have a strong desire to do the things recommended after you sign, but you do not have to do any of those things. God loves you just as you are now, and He only wants you to come into agreement with Him so you can be forgiven and have eternal life, pardoned from eternal death in the fire of Hell. If you really believe God and take Him at His word and ask God to save you in the name of Jesus Christ and receive Him by faith as your Saviour, you will be saved.

Binding Contract:

I, God, do hereby swear by the blood of my Son, Jesus, to overlook all of your violations of my Holy Law (sin) and grant you full pardon and entrance into eternal life by the resurrection of my Son from the dead if you will agree to the following terms:

1) You must acknowledge that you are the one who deserved to die and my Son did not deserve to die.
2) You must believe that I love you so much that I died in your place in the form of Jesus Christ my Son, and you must believe that I raised Him from the dead and can do the same for you.
3) You must ask me to accept you on these terms, asking for my mercy to forgive you and believe that I am willing to forgive you. You must receive my Son, Jesus, as your Saviour by asking me in His name to save you.

This contract is written by me in the blood of my Son whom I gave to be the satisfaction of payment for your sins against me. If you honestly agree to the terms above, and will receive my Son as your Saviour, sign below.
It's not too good to be true, , I always honor my Word, and I have committed all Judgement into the hands of My Son, Jesus, who paid the price to secure this contract for you.

Sign here ____________________________________if you have asked God in the name of Jesus Christ to save you, and have entered into agreement with God to receive His guarantee of pardon from Hell and have received Jesus Christ as your Saviour and now have eternal life.

If you signed this agreement and received Jesus Christ as your Saviour, getting baptized is the next step showing you are now identified in His death, burial, (shown by submersion under water) and resurrection (shown by being raised up out of water), and share the good news!
The Gospel according to John is a good place to start reading, and of course use only the King James Bible. Then read the Letter to the Romans. And pray and talk to God every day and ask Him to show Himself to you through His Word, the Bible, and thank God and praise the LORD forever!
Debate Round No. 4
251 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sorry_youre_wrong 2 years ago
sorry_youre_wrong
i guess not
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 2 years ago
Adam_Godzilla
Thank you ldow2000 for your vote.
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 2 years ago
Adam_Godzilla
Thank you Yama and Pheonix for the votes!
Posted by sorry_youre_wrong 2 years ago
sorry_youre_wrong
should I provide more evidence?
Posted by ldow2000 2 years ago
ldow2000
God should sue you for impersonating him on a contract! Seriously? You wrote an AGREEMENT with God?!
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 2 years ago
Adam_Godzilla
You cant believe god loves you while also believing he might trap you in hell. It's a contradiction.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
God loves you so much that He died in your place to pay for your sins so He can be faithful and just to forgive you. That goes for everybody, there can be no greater proof of God's love for you and everybody else. If you do not believe God's love for you is unquestionable, then you will not know God loves you. That is your choice. You can question God's love for you, but you are wrong in doing so. God loves you just as you are and He wants you to receive His offer of pardon from the penalty attached to your sin and his gift of eternal life. If you won't receive it, you won't get it and you won't have it and you will have eternal death in the Lake of Fire by your own choice of refusting to believe God loves you. If you vote against me in this debate, you are voting from and for your own blindness. Sorry.
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 2 years ago
Adam_Godzilla
Thank you Saska for the vote.
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 2 years ago
Adam_Godzilla
Thank you debatability for a bold, detailed and excellent RFD. I appreciate you taking the time to read this debate. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
This subject reminds me of a classic debate.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by ldow2000 2 years ago
ldow2000
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro brought several good points, while con was rather repetitive. The annoying contract did NOT belong in a debate, and that alone would make me vote pro!
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
Phoenix61397
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con failed to refute Pro's main argument here. I kept hoping, as the way pro described hell left an opening for a good rebuttal for con. Unfortunately, con never rebutted. Pro's arguments stood uncontested, and therefore he fulfilled his BoP and won the debate. The repetitive posting of the contract got annoying but not so much as to detract a conduct point.
Vote Placed by debatability 2 years ago
debatability
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Comments.
Vote Placed by Vexorator 2 years ago
Vexorator
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's argument of unconditional love and hell was hardly refuted by Con and played a big part in this debate. Voted Pro.
Vote Placed by Saska 2 years ago
Saska
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling and grammar was about equal. I gave conduct to pro, not because Con broke the rules at the start (that was settled respectably between them) but because Con repeatedly copy and pasted his "contract", which is irrelevant to this debate and is just an absurd thing to include in the debate. Sources obviously go to Pro because he actually provided sources for a few of his arguments. Arguments go to Pro both because he made better arguments and because Con contradicted himself by offering a contract that suggests a very conditional type of love from God, meaning it can very much be questioned by people. Awful job debating by Con... Maybe stick to preaching rather than debating.
Vote Placed by jackh4mm3r 2 years ago
jackh4mm3r
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's point was that no unconditionally loving God would flog a child forever; Con admit that the love i conditional on signing a contract.
Vote Placed by daley 2 years ago
daley
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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 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 used the illustration of a parent flogging a child as evidence that they didn't love the child unconditionally, which showed he didn't understand Con's argument that unconditional love doesn't change the justice of God, and its because parents love their kids that they punish them. Pro didn't counted well the argument for God's love in that he died for us while we were his enemies.
Vote Placed by YaHey 2 years ago
YaHey
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro showed the contradiction in an all loving God that sends people to Hell, and Con just took the time to preach.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Adam_GodzillaLifeMeansGodIsGoodTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: con made a good case for why his conduct should be tied, but really had trouble rebutting pro's one and only point, which was supported furthermore by God's lack of willingness to erase sin even though he can do it