The Instigator
jh1234lnew
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Holler
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Hello guys Christians eat Homosexuals and rape people

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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 3 votes the winner is...
Holler
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/22/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 781 times Debate No: 62081
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

jh1234lnew

Pro

Hello guys, I am a proud atheist and here I am going to prove that Christians like to kill and eat Homosexuals and rape people.

Christians are homophobes which is why they like to kill and eat Homosexuals. Why? Well, they follow a book called the BIBLE, which is a LIE and all Christians are ENEMIES OF THE NEW, ILLUMINATED ATHEIST WORLD ORDER!

Their holy book, the BIBLE, says that we should murder gay people for being gay! This shows that they are Homophobes and irrationally are scared of gay people![1]

The Bible, which is a EVIL LIE, states that we should eat gay people:

I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed on them by the enemies who seek their lives. [2]

This is because Christians are irrationally scared of gay people and think that gays are the "enemies who seek their lives(The lives of Christians)".

The BIBLE is also a EVIL BOOK that supports rape!

Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2, emphasis added by EvilBible.com)[3]

wAKE UP GUYS, cHRISTIANITY IS A EVIL LIE AND OPPRESSION AND BRAINWASHING AND cHRISTIANS ARE CLOSED MINDED PEOPLE WHO SHOULD OPEN THEIR MINDS AND ACCEPT THE TRUTH OF THE NEW, ILLUMINATED ATHEIST WORLD ORDER.

Christian God Is A Big Fat Lie.
You Have Been Deceived By Those Evil Christians If You Believe In That Lie.

Worship Of EVIL LIE of CHRISTIANITY Causes All Adults
To Eat Their Children.
Source: Bible Deuteronomy 28:53-58.[4]

Sources:

1. http://www.evilbible.com...
2. http://biblehub.com...
3. http://www.evilbible.com...
4.http://www.abovegod.com...
Holler

Con


This must be a troll, but I shall challenge your absurdity.

For the record, I am neither Christian nor Atheist.

And you will have to forgive any structural shortcomings in my rebuttal.
_____________________________________________________

Something you have done throughout your entire opening argument is cite text from The Old Testament. This is only half of the Christian Bible.

To rebut your first point I shall offer a few contradictory extracts from The New Testament,

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone." (Romans 12:17) [1]
"See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone." (1 Thessalonian 5:15) [1]
"Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing." (Peter 3:9) [1]

Also, read Jesus' teachings in "The Adulterous Women" in the book of John

"Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again." (NRSV, John 8:7-11) [1]

Everyone of these examples contradicts your original excerpt from Leviticus 20:13.

_____________________________________________________

Your second point, an extract from the Old Testament, Jeremiah 19:

"I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed on them by the enemies who seek their lives."

You have taken this quote out of context entirely, the book of Jeremiah has no reference to homosexuality.

Its purpose was to
warn of the destruction that they were about to face and to urge Judah to return and submit to God. Jeremiah was a priest who God calls to be His prophet. Jeremiah identifies their sins and treachery, as he wants them to realize the serious condition of their sinful ways. He then gives prophecies of the coming king and the New Covenant that would be made.[2]

Of all the sins mentioned in Jeremiah, Homosexuality does not appear once.

And the "enemies who seek their lives" are enemies of Israel, not of Christians.

This part of your argument is therefore moot.


_____________________________________________________

As for the bible supporting rape, you have quoted an extract from the Book of Zechariah with some ambiguous wording.

The word "ravish" has multiple definitions, including rape. But interestingly, the Archaic definition does not define it as rape.

Define: Ravish
archaic

seize and carry off (someone) by force.

"there is no assurance that her infant child will not be ravished from her breast"[3]

I would purpose, considering the Book of Zechariah is the most well dated book in the Old Testament, we can confidently assume that the intended meaning of the word corroborates with the archaic definition of the word ravish.



_____________________________________________________



[1]http://www.christianbiblereference.org...
[2]http://biblehub.com...
[3]https://www.google.co.uk...



Debate Round No. 1
jh1234lnew

Pro

Con claims that these passages are from the Old Testament, and that they are, therefore, false.

However, according to the Bible, Jesus never abolished the laws of the Old Testament, instead he supported and approved of those laws.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17)

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) [1]

This proves that the Old Testament laws still stand.

The cannibalism was not to warn of the destruction it was cannibalism towards gays the Bible tells us to eat Homosexuals.

Carrying someone off by force often involves rape and it actually does mean Rape because Evilbible said so.

====================

I know why con disagrees with me: He supports the EVIL LIE of Christianity, which is an ENEMY of the ILLUMINATED ATHEIST WORLD ORDER! All Christians are ENEMIES OF THE STATE and all have mental illnesses that make them Christian! Christians who refuse to accept the word of our god Charles Darwin and prophet Richard Dawkins will be put in reeducation centres until they do accept the TRUTH!

1. http://www.evilbible.com...
Holler

Con

Pro has misinterpreted my initial point.

I stated that the Old Testament was only half of the Christian Bible. Which it is.

This is as far as my statement went, at no point did I state that this means the Old Testament is false.

_____________________________________________________


If Jesus truly endorsed the teachings of the Old Testament to the letter. Then why did he go against them?

I again quote "The Adulterous Woman" From the book of John.

"Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again." (NRSV, John 8:7-11) [1]

According to the Old Testament, Adultery is punishable by stoning. But Jesus intervened with this act and prevented a woman being stoned to death. He has gone against the laws of the Old Testament in this instance. Why has he done this if he was not abolishing some Laws of the Old Testament?

Maybe he wasn't abolishing them, maybe he was amending them.

Jesus continues throughout the New Testament to teach about compassion and forgiveness, this is an indication that Jesus wishes his followers to demonstrate the same acts of compassion and forgiveness when it came to the Laws of the Old Testament, as he did.

These are simple interpretations someone could draw from the Bible.

_____________________________________________________


Interpretation.

There is many a contradiction in the Bible and this is quite likely down to the fallible nature of the humans who wrote it when writing down the word of God.

It is up to the reader to interpret the true teaching and word of God from these writings. To take them at face value with little to no study, would be naive. This can result in many conflicting interpretations.

This fact has resulted in the formation of many separate branches of Christianity. Notable examples being Catholicism, Protestantism and Eastern Orthodox. Past this, there are hundreds of denominations, each with their own interpretations. Moreover, each individual Christian reads the Bible and brings away their own interpretations.

Point being, the Bible isn't an obvious set of teachings. One needs to study it, to discover the true teachings and true word of God. This study can result in hundreds, if not thousands of interpretations that differ sometimes subtly and sometimes not so subtly. This means that just because you have read a handful of verses, and interpreted that they discriminate against homosexuals and relate to rape, does not mean that every Christian on earth follows these same interpretations.

I can prove this by providing you with a list of Christian denominations that affirm homosexuality as not a sin.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org...

This debunks your original statement "Hello guys Christians eat Homosexuals and rape people".

_____________________________________________________

One last thing I'd like to look at pros most frequented source.

www.evilbible.com

This seems a source with incredible bias, they analyze scripture and draw conclusions to deliberately portray the Bible in a negative way. If one is to impartially analyze the meaning of scripture, one must not jump to conclusions without considering other possibilities. Evilbible fail to do this time and again. I am therefore questioning it's integrity as a valid source to corroborate pros arguments.

_____________________________________________________

[1]https://www.biblegateway.com...
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
jh1234lnew

Pro

Con misintepreted my arguments so they still stand.
Holler

Con

Any misinterpretation by con was due to a lack of clarity from pro.

However, I fail to see any misinterpretation on my behalf and would therefore surmise, that pro has failed to come up with a rational rebuttal for the final round.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by welliott 2 years ago
welliott
I see why Christians hate us (athiests) now. Its because of YOU.
Posted by Nathan.apologetics 2 years ago
Nathan.apologetics
Wow this had a lot of hateful statements targeting Christians. jh1234lnew if you hate Christians so much, why on earth did you send me a friend request. If it weren't for the fact that a lot of my friends are atheists, I would have gotten the impression that most atheists are christophobic demagogues. Your arguments on this debate were even more flawed than the arguments you used to support evolution. If this was supposed to be a joke,it was not funny. Sure I believe that homosexuality is wrong, but that doesn't prevent me from befriending people who chose to live this way. As a christian I strive to be loving towards all people, but I don't necessarily agree with everything people do. I am thankful that there are a lot of people in america who respect all people regardless of their beliefs and know how to kindly disagree with one another.
Posted by jh1234lnew 2 years ago
jh1234lnew
No one notices that this was a blatant troll debate? Lulwut?
Posted by Frank36 2 years ago
Frank36
Ok, let me rephrase that in a more calm, nice manner. Christians accept people who are homosexual and people with issues. We have nothing against them, we just simply don't think the same way. We don't have the same thoughts. Do not assume random false facts.
Posted by Frank36 2 years ago
Frank36
This is a ridiculous argument. That is not at all what is in the bible. You must have issues.
Posted by Rachel_Boivin 2 years ago
Rachel_Boivin
Imnot sure where you got you information but you are wrong. The Bible is not evil and clearly state we are to love those who hate us. We are not homophobes either. I do not support gay rights but that does not mean I hate gay people nor am I afraid of them. Just because I, as a Christian, do not support it, does not make me a bad person. You need to get the right information before you start saying crap like that.
Posted by Emilirose 2 years ago
Emilirose
Are you serious? This should be an easy one for con.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Troll
Posted by Mopi 2 years ago
Mopi
I am not a Christian, but its insanity on how you choose to insult another religion, if you're an atheist, well, that's good for you. You don't need to try and hurt others sentiments as its an open forum. Its not a topic that I believe need to be debated upon. Just because the Bible says it, doesn't mean all of them are what you say they are, like the previous commenter mentioned that he was a Christian and isn't against gay people. Infact there are LOADS of Christians who aren't against gay people. I only hope you taken this down to avoid disturbing people. Loude ke bal.
Posted by PartTimeHipster 2 years ago
PartTimeHipster
This has to be the stupidest approach to Christians ever. I'm a Christian and I support gay rights. Heck, I even have three gay friends! I really hope you're trolling and that you don't actually believe this.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
jh1234lnewHollerTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro seems to have been trying to actively insult Christianity in this debate, and Con responded to every claim. Pro never framed a rational logic to argue his case, and the few points Pro did offer are largely debatable in nature. Con takes this debate easily in my mind.
Vote Placed by Jellon 2 years ago
Jellon
jh1234lnewHollerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has bad conduct. Pro relies on absurd interpretations of the Bible which Con shows do not correlate to real experience.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
jh1234lnewHollerTied
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 made insane arguments that didn't work out. What was he even talking about? Did his proof even make sense?