The Instigator
mrsatan
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
xXCryptoXx
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

If the Christian God exists, then Satan created mankind.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
xXCryptoXx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/20/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,078 times Debate No: 35816
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (12)
Votes (3)

 

mrsatan

Pro

God:
A being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe


Con will have one round to invalidate my claim. Con may not use the bible to disprove me, as it was written by man, and therefore cannot be trusted anymore than Satan himself.

----------------------------------------------------------------


God, with all it's wisdom, would not create mankind. We are a plague on this world. Ecosystems require balance. Mankind is far, far, beyond imbalance. Sixty-one. That is the number of species that have gone extinct because of mankind. (too difficult to list them all with my phone)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

These were all God's creatures. Every last one of them. And we killed them all. And God supposedly created us? Surely God wouldn't want this. For his creatures to die, for no reason but our sad, greedy, materialistic little minds?

But Satan! Satan would rejoice in the destruction of Gods creations! Satan would have had every reason to create imbalanced creatures such as ourselves.

And yet, God, as the epitome of goodness, still does not destroy us. In fact, it gives us the chance to save ourselves. Pledge ourselves to God, and we will be saved from an eternity in the inferno of torment that is hell! For as all good Christians know: Not accepting God into your life and your hearts is the only sin damning enough to deserve hell as its punishment.

And God, a being of ultimate wisdom, would not create free thinking creatures, able to believe what they want, and still expect them to believe in him against all rational thought! For this would be cruel. And God is not cruel. God is the epitome of all that is good and benevolent.

And so we, mankind, must have been created by Satan. There is no other possible explanation!


xXCryptoXx

Con


Thank you for instigating this debate.



My opponent should technically have the BOP for this since he wants to dismiss the entire use of the Bible and then claims Satan created humans.


My opponent doesn’t want me to use the Bible as a source because humans wrote the Bible and Satan supposedly created humans. This doesn’t make sense. If Satan created humans then Satan would have kept the Bible from existing at all, for the Bible is the source of morality given to humans, and without the Bible humans would end up destroying themselves through their own broken sense of morality. Satan would have wanted humans to decide for themselves what is “moral” and what is not because he knows humans are misguided in morality.


What would make much more sense is that God influenced the writers of the Bible to create a book that would help humans in becoming closer to God, obeying him, acting upon his will, and spreading the word of God.


The Bible has influenced humans in doing the listed examples therefore we can logically conclude that God did indeed inspire humans to write the Bible, and Satan did not.



My opponent claims that because humans do evil acts, Satan created them, because Satan naturally wants humans to do evil.


This also cannot be true. For one, humans are within the ability to hold a perfect relationship with God, and completely avoid sin. This is shown through the sinless life of Mary, Mother of Jesus, and Jesus himself who was fully human (Implying Satan created the Son of God? I think not.) and fully divine (yeah, this would imply that Satan is God).


This means that humans choose to sin, not that they are inherently evil. This would imply that something (Satan) tempts them into sin, which after all is what the Bible says and I already showed that the Bible must have been the work of God.


What God did was create humans with free will. For God didn’t want humans to be mindless creatures that obey him always, God wanted humans to come to him of their own will, out of love, and out of the desire to do good and be with God in Heaven. A mindless creature simply cannot truly fulfill these things, so God created us with the ability to choose. Out of our ability to choose we were able to disregard God, and do what we want. Satan desires this because he detests God, so Satan tempts mankind into sin.


If Satan did create humans, then Satan would have created mindless creatures that would always detest God, always commit evil acts, and never do good. However, the fact that good exists at all, and the fact that Jesus and Mary led the lives of the perfect Christian God calls us to be, then we can logically conclude that Satan did not create humans.


Debate Round No. 1
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
You're definitely correct on the rounds issue. Normally I wouldn't make a debate less than three rounds, but there was a debate I wanted to vote on, and I needed a third debate in the voting period.

I just did this one, cause a) I knew someone would take it quickly, and b) I was curious what the response would be.

While I don't disbelieve the possibility of a higher being, I sincerely doubt that is a God (by the common definition). I've thought on it extensively, and I honestly don't see reason, in any faiths, for God creating mankind, for more reasons than I included here.

When I said I might redo the debate, I meant to add that it would be multiple rounds, in response to your comment about that. If I do, I'll probably revolve it solely around god and not include Satan at all.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
"Anyways, this entire debate is based off of Christianity, which in turn is based off the Bible. It would be impossible to present any arguments at all that are not related to the Bible in some ways."

On my vote I did dock him conduct, yet that mostly boils down to mentioning it by name. Were he to have quoted it, the issue would have been much larger.

As I've said, if you want a debate, you really need more than a single round. Single round stuff, is best for the opinion section (which you could almost copy/paste your argument into).
Posted by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
Well, if there is a reason someone would get into heaven without being a Christian, then that reason would have been perfectly acceptable refutation.

Like I said, I wasn't expecting to win this, I was just annoyed that Con couldn't follow the one stipulation. Whether or not that stipulation is fair doesn't matter, as no one is forced to debate anything.

Perhaps I'll redo the debate at some point, allow the bible and just invalidate it logically.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
I don't know why I know this, but according to the Pope someone can get into heaven without being a Christian.

The big problem with your argument, remains that it's only a single round. You could not do anything to counter the momentum of the other side, or even remind people of dropped points.
Posted by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
And besides, Con never even refuted my second argument, in any way at all. He didn't even address the nonsensical nature of that most damning of sins. And that is very much the stronger of my two arguments.

But, I didn't expect to win this debate when I started it anyways, regardless of what arguments were made.
Posted by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
Hey, you didn't have to accept the debate. I was expecting a logical refutation as to why God would deem it okay to expect people to go against our very nature and worship him irrationally. Why the ultimate sin is to behave the very way we were created to.

If that can't be done without use of the bible (whether you quoted it or not, you did use it), then no one should have accepted the debate at all.
Posted by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
What information? That Satan is evil and opposed to God? It's the very definition of what Satan is, although in retrospect I should have included that alongside the definition of God.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Anyways, this entire debate is based off of Christianity, which in turn is based off the Bible. It would be impossible to present any arguments at all that are not related to the Bible in some ways.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
I did not use the Bible like you asked.

No where did I use the Bible as a source for my arguments, I refuted all of your points out of logic, never did I go "well the Bible says this, this, and this."
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
If the bible is dismissed, where do you get your information on Satan from?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
mrsatanxXCryptoXxTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 as instigator has BOP. Creating a 1 round debate made it virtually impossible for Pro to win provided that con made any sort of coherent argument, which he certainly did.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
mrsatanxXCryptoXxTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't care so much about BoP, strength of argument, organization, and skill at refuting and defending against the opponent's claims are what DDO wants us to grade by. Conduct: con broke conduct a little by mentioning the bible (what pro's source for Satan is other than the bible, I am unsure). Had he simply quoted the bible it would have lead to disregarded arguments as well (as would be suitable for larger conduct breaches). Argument: Pro created a one round debate (that's what the opinion section is for), all con needed to do was dismiss it; more rounds and any weaknesses to his own argument could have been exposed, yet none were suggested leaving his argument undented. Sources: No enough sources to tip this area in favor of either side.
Vote Placed by JustinAMoffatt 4 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
mrsatanxXCryptoXxTied
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: Okiedokie. First off. No. Pro, you have BOP in this situation. You're the one making a statement. RFD: Con successfully showed not only a viable alternative to Pro's statement, but a more probable one. Conduct: Debating/insults in comments are frowned upon.