The Instigator
silvertechfilms
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
The_Chaos_Heart
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

If God is real, then he is stupid.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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...
The_Chaos_Heart
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/18/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,008 times Debate No: 34881
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

silvertechfilms

Pro

If God is real, then he is stupid.
The_Chaos_Heart

Con

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume this isn't your argument, and that round one is just for acceptance. So, I accept.

If God (note the capital G, denoting the Abrahamic god) is real, then He is not only not stupid, but a genius; an evil genius.
Debate Round No. 1
silvertechfilms

Pro

Being an evil genius is not a good thing.
The_Chaos_Heart

Con

This is true, being evil is inherently not good. However, being good, and being intelligent, are not the same thing. One can be entirely evil, and still be highly intelligent. Especially so if we are dealing with an all-powerful, all-knowing deity.

Since you still haven't posted a case for why God is stupid, I'll wait another round before posting my own. After that though, I'm moving on.
Debate Round No. 2
silvertechfilms

Pro

If he is really so smart he wouldn't of designed an entire civilization and then drowned it because he didn't like it.
The_Chaos_Heart

Con

I fail to see how this is a knock on God's intelligence. It could certainly be seen as a strike against his moral character, that it could. But that would seem to, if anything, support my stance.

I hold that if God is indeed real, he is not only intelligent, but entirely evil. If we take away the presupposition of God being morally good, much of what we see in the modern world, and read in the Bible, suddenly becomes much more clear. An evil force that wipes out whole civilizations, yet gets people to worship it by claiming to be good and holy? This is highly manipulative behavior. Consider the amount of conflict and suffering we see in the world. Consider how many people pray to "God" for peace and clarity. If they receive it, praise be to God. If they are denied it, well, "he works in mysterious ways". To be able to convince people that, no matter what, you are right, requires a highly intelligent mind, capable of knowing just what to say and how to act to deceive others.

My opponent seems to think that because God does bad things, he must not be very smart; this, however, presupposes God is seeking to do good. There are no grounds to assume this, and in fact, the world makes far more sense if we assume that God enjoys the suffering and conflict we experience, to one extent or another.


Take, as an example, my opponent's citing of the biblical flood. God is displeased with the many cultures of the globe, and decides to slaughter them and all life on the planet, save an old man and his family, and some creatures this man brings with him. My opponent claims this is an act of incredible stupidity, but again, basis this on the presupposition that God is seeking to do good. Let us assume that God is instead malevolent. God would have wiped these life forms from the planet, simply because he desired to. Because he didn't like them. And at the same time as doing this, manages to convince a member of these life forms he is about to eradicate that he is morally good, and that he should dedicate the rest of his life to him. He does this successfully, and from this man, manages to spawn a cult that has engulfed the globe. This is nothing short of malevolent, calculated, manipulation. This requires an at least average level of intelligence, if not more so.
Debate Round No. 3
silvertechfilms

Pro

Have you ever read the christian Bible?

Here is a list of stupid sins;
-Mixing fabrics
-If an ox gores someone, the ox shall be stoned to death.
-You must not boil a kid its mother's milk.
-Four-legged fouls are an abomination.
-Those with flat noses or damaged testicles must stay away from the altar.
-Mixing seed when sowing fields
-Breeding cows with diverse species
-Ye shall keep my statutes.
-Masturbation
-Homosexuality
-Women not dressing modestly
-Crafty conversation
-Abortion
-Offending a child of god
-Deceiving a child of god
-Not spanking a disobedient child
-Cursing
-Drugs
-Touching a woman while she's on her period.
-Allowing a woman in church while she's on her period.
-Not killing your neighbors for working on the sabbath.
-Adultery only by looking

-Aaron must wear a bell whenever he enters the holy place or God will kill him.

Here is a small list of bad things God/Jesus is said to have done in the bible.

EX 9:22-25 A plague of hail from the Lord strikes down everything in the fields of Egypt both man and beast except in Goshen where the Israelites reside.

EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

EX 17:13 With the Lord's approval, Joshua mows down Amalek and his people.

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

EX 32:27 "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.

EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

LE 26:7-8 The Lord promises the Israelites that, if they are obedient, their enemies will "fall before your sword."

LE 26:22 "I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children."

LE 26:29, DT 28:53, JE 19:9, EZ 5:8-10 As a punishment, the Lord will cause people to eat the flesh of their own sons and daughters and fathers and friends.

LE 27:29 Human sacrifice is condoned. (Note: An example is given in JG 11:30-39)

NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

NU 12:1-10 God makes Miriam a leper for seven days because she and Aaron had spoken against Moses.

NU 15:32-36 A Sabbath breaker (who had gathered sticks for a fire) is stoned to death at the Lord's command.

NU 16:27-33 The Lord causes the earth to open and swallow up the men and their households (including wives and children) because the men had been rebellious.
The_Chaos_Heart

Con

My opponent still seems to be equating intelligence with goodness. I do not think they understand my argument. I am not proposing God is good. I am saying that pointing at all the evil God as supposedly done, as is all the evidence my opponent has provided for his position, does not render one unintelligent in of itself. Evil acts would only make one unintelligent if their goal was to perform good acts. So to say God is unintelligent, because he does evil, presupposes that God is seeking to do good. If we remove this presupposition, God's actions can be entirely explain and rationalized, through the mind of a malevolent force. And this is my argument. That God is evil, and that the evil he does is not out of a lack of foresight or capacity to do good, but out of a desire not to do good.

I have yet to see my opponent address this argument.
Debate Round No. 4
silvertechfilms

Pro

"God fails to heal amputees and reverse spinal schiolosis and kyphosis. Aids kills innocent victims of aids such as babies and rape victims not just gay people and sexually active heterosexuals. If God exists he's pretty careless ind ineffectual."
The_Chaos_Heart

Con

There's nothing more I can say, as my opponent has again refused to address my argument. Once again, I am not arguing that God is good. I am arguing that he is an intelligent force, and a malevolent force. Pointing out the evil he does and causes only supports my case. Intelligence does not equate to goodness. Yada yada yada.

I'm dissapointed that you did not challenge these points once in the debate. Ah well.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by JustinAMoffatt 3 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
silvertechfilmsThe_Chaos_HeartTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pretty easy RFD. Pro didn't provide anything to argue with until the final round. Even then, Con was right that Pro didn't fill BOP.
Vote Placed by badbob 3 years ago
badbob
silvertechfilmsThe_Chaos_HeartTied
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 did not have much of an argument or put much thought into this debate. con wins!
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
silvertechfilmsThe_Chaos_HeartTied
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 dropped just about every argument in what could have been a very winnable debate. Arguments easily to the con