The Instigator
Wylted
Pro (for)
Winning
39 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Con (against)
Losing
27 Points

In Defense of Evil part 3 of 3: Satan was the Good Guy in the bible. God was the bad guy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+8
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 17 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/13/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 11,178 times Debate No: 45843
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (257)
Votes (17)

 

Wylted

Pro

This is part 3 of my Defending Evil series.

In part one I defend the unabomber's actions as being just.

http://www.debate.org...

In part 2, I take Hitler's position. That eugenics is beneficial.

http://www.debate.org...

In this debate I'm arguing that Satan was the good guy in the bible and that God was the bad guy. By accepting this debate my opponent agrees to assume Jesus is not God and that things traditionally attributed to Satan are from/of Satan such as the serpent in the garden of Eden, references to Lucifer etc..

No other stories outside of the bible referring to God or Satan may be used either.

Nobody with less then 5 debates may accept this debate, but I will make exceptions if given good reasons.

As usual if the resolution or anything else needs to be changed to make the debate more fair I will most likely do that as well.

Round 1: acceptance
Round 2/3: Arguments and rebuttals
Round 4: Closung statements and rebuttals
Zarroette

Con

C'mon then, Mr Satanist.
Debate Round No. 1
Wylted

Pro

Thank you Con for accepting this debate. My hope is that you will take the debate serious and do your due diligence in refuting my claims, as I'm sure you will.

Introduction,

In this debate, I will show Satan as a hero who stood up to a powerful, unjust and evil creator God. It took true courage to stand up to this supposed all powerful being.

Satan is a hero who should be honored not a villain who deserves blame for all of society's ills.

I will begin by showing how truly evil the god of the bible truly is. Once this being's evil nature is understood we will have a proper context to understand our hero's (Satan's) actions.

Part one: The Abrahamic god is evil

God does evil things,

1. God repeatedly orders genocide. In Joshua 6:20-21 God orders the slaughter of every man, woman, child and animal slaughtered in Jericho. Seriously why? The is clearly the act of a sick sadistic being. It's one thing to invade a city it's quite another to slaughter children, women and animals while doing it. This is not the only time God orders acts of genocide. Samuel 15:1-3 god gives the same orders against the Amalekites. In Deuteronomy 2:32-35 God gives the same order against the people of Heshbon. In Deuteronomy 3:3-7 he gives the same order against the people of Bashan. I did find one instance of genocide god orders where he doesn't kill everyone. He lets the virgins live as spoils of war it's in Numbers 31:7-18. God's history of genocide is enough to prove him evil but unsurprisingly the bible gives more examples of God's evil nature.

2. God enjoys receiving human sacrifices. Judges 11:30-39. God has a man sacrifice his daughter as payment for helping him kill the Ammonites. In Genesis 22:5-12 God requests that Abraham sacrifices his son. This time god decided to pull out and pretty much said "April fools" and allowed Abraham's son to live. Still what type of sick god jokes like that. You can say it's a test of faith, but it doesn't change the fact that you'd have to be one sadistic God to test somebody in that way.

3. God values men WAY more then he values women. In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah found in Genesis 18 and Genesis 19, you can see this. Lot takes in 3 male guests to his home. The residents of The city demand that Lot let them rape his guests. Like any good host Lot says "no don't rape my guests"(paraphrasing). Great so far right? But, hold on Lot then follows this up by saying "rape my daughters instead"(paraphrasing). When God's messengers saw how great of a guy Lot is they decide to save his family from the Genocide that God has a direct hand in. This is far from the only time God condones raping women. Judges 21:10-24, Numbers 31:7-18, Deuteronomy 20:10-14, Deuteronomy 22:28-29, Deuteronomy 22:23-24 and many other instances of God showing he is cool with rape as long as it's rape of women.

I could just go on forever about all the evil things God does, but at some point I must move on to show God's contempt for humans and how great Satan is. Moving on.

God hates humans,

1. There is this thing called original sin everyone has just because they are human. This original is what condemns you to a carnal death and a life that sucks Romans 5:12-21. It's a rigged game you can't be sinless, and you will die as punishment for that.

2. God hates everything that makes you human. Have you ever felt even a mild attraction to someone other then your husband/wife. Well if so your an adulterer Matthew 5:27-28.

3. Do you have perfectly natural instincts for self preservation. Well, God hates that. Instead of defending yourself from your enemies, God wants you to be a door mat. Who cares if this just encourages your enemies. Matthew 5:39

4. What about another human trait used everyday by every person lying. What would the would be like if we had to tell our 5 year olds their drawing sucks or our wife that they look fat in that dress. There is damn good reasons we lie, but God would rather us going around hurting each other's feelings and resisting our natural human urges. Psalm 119:163

Don't act human God hates that. Don't even think human thoughts you'll burn for eternity in hell.

Let's meet our hero

1.The serpent in the garden of Eden is where we first meet this brave soul willing to take on an extremely powerful enemy most people would rather cower and bow in front of then to oppose. The story of the garden of Eden can be found in Genesis chapter 2 and 3. God puts these 2 creatures in the Garden that are more animal then man. They walk around naked and have the animals as companions. The serpent (Satan) comes along and finds mercy on these 2 creatures who aren't quite human or animal. God puts this tree with some delicious fruit on it in the middle of the garden and commands Adam and Eve not to eat from it. Another cruel joke I guess. Satan points out to Eve that if she eats from the tree she will gain wisdom. The serpent wasn't lying Eve gained wisdom and shortly after so did Adam. If it weren't for Satan we would all still be slaves to God in his garden and also lacking wisdom. I'd definitely prefer this fate to being a stupid animal enslaved in God's garden.

To sum up this paragraph God wanted man dumb Satan wanted him wise. Who's the good guy in that scenario? Who's the bad guy?

2. We meet Satan again in the story of Job. The book of Job is dedicated to this story for the most part. Satan sees that Job is a great guy that has been brainwashed by God. God has paid for Job's worship by making him extremely successful. Satan decides that he will help out Job by placing a wager with God in hopes of freeing Job's mind from it's enslavement. Unfortunately Satan wasn't successful but the story shows that God was willing to destroy a man's life to prove a point. God even allowed Job's wife to die and thought it was ok as long as he replaced the woman with a younger better looking one.

3. We meet satan in the wilderness with Jesus Matthew 4:1-11. Satan realizes that Jesus is a very influential individual. He comes to him in the wilderness while he is fasting to talk some sense into him. He offers Jesus the entire world if he will worship him. Of course no sense could be talked into Jesus and Satan could not use Jesus to free minds. Imagine the world had Satan been successful and had been able to use Jesus's influence to free minds instead of enslaving them.

It should be clear by now that Satan cares about freeing minds and is therefore a good guy. The story of the garden of Eden is more then enough to demonstrate this. God is clearly the bad guy in this story.

I anxiously await my opponents responses

Note all bible verses can be viewed at http://mobile.biblegateway.com.... I recommend the New International Version.
Zarroette

Con

I thank Wylted for the wonderful opportunity to discuss the Bible’s word. May we find truth in the Lord’s word, such that we can all be saved from a terrible fate.


The Devil is evil

1. Sinning is a crime against God, “Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8). God worried so much about the sin that He died on the cross so that all may be forgiven.

2. Satan is dishonest with his appearance, portraying himself as a snake to fool both Adam and Eve, “And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14).

3. Satan wishes for you to suffer for eternity, such that he will try to deceive anyone, “But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ” (
2 Corinthians 11:3).



C1: God does evil things,

God repeatedly orders genocide, and “enjoys” human sacrifice, because that is all part of his benevolent plan, “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope” (Jeremiah 29:11). Remember, God has every right to do with us as He pleases, because he owns our bodies, “You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body (1 Corinthians 6:20). "

How could you question an omniscient being? God is indeed omniscient, as King David says, “Indeed, the darkness shall not hide from You, but the night shines as the day; the darkness and the light are both alike to You” (Psalm 139:12). As such, our Lord works in ways that are beyond are comprehension, but He makes it clear that faith in our Divine Ruler will bring eternal happiness in the Kingdom of Heaven, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15).

It is clear that in His infinite wisdom, God made women subservient to men, “For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (Ephesians 5:23-24). Since women are lesser, it is so clear why God preferred the raping of women. Remember, this is all part of God’s plan; did Satan ever promise eternal happiness in Heaven?

No evil is done by our Great Ruler; it’s just that we do not understand His ways.



C2: God hates humans,

God does not hate humans, rather he loves us all, so much so that He gave to us his only son, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Through the flesh did out God suffer, just so that our sinful ways may be forgiven. He loves us so much, that even when we stray from the Path of Enlightenment, the path towards the Kingdom of Heaven, he still loves us and respects our decision to not be with Him.

Why would a hateful God offer eternal peace?-, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away” (Revelation 21:1-27). Does this place seem like one in which a hateful God sends humans?

Remember, it is the sin that is to be hated, not the sinner. God of all entities would recognise this, as He made it so. God expects us to sin, and yet will still bring us great prosperity under one easy, simple condition, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us” (1 John 1:8-10).




C3: Let's meet our hero

1. Ignorance is bliss. Such is the burden of knowledge that our loving Father asked us not to dine on the forbidden fruit, for it would tarnish our souls. It is because of this betrayal of His commands that we now live in a world of agony, shame and all kinds of negative affect. Let me put it this way: if I told you that you were going to be brutally murdered in the future, would this not upset you until your demise? But, for grace, let’s say that you were never informed of said demise. Would not your life be a far happier one? Wisdom is a vice, the serpent its evil commander. There is no greater pain than knowing of a loss yet to come.

2. If one were to be “brainwashed” by our Lord, then it would be only with His best intentions. Autonomy from God’s will is not good, for God makes this clear by speaking of the great rewards in the Kingdom of Heaven, which are granted by having faith in God. My opponent continues to suggest that being able to think independently is a wonderful thing. It is not, for the only way to enter a glorious afterlife is by trying to follow the Lord’s word. Even if you are not successful, even if you sin one thousand times, He will forgive you, and love you forever more.

3. A free mind is a burdened one, yet God still gives us the choice to be free of Him because He respects of decisions. One must not stray from the path God’s word lines, or else be granted eternal damnation as one desired.


Remember: “Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5).



Debate Round No. 2
Wylted

Pro

Thank you con for providing your arguments.

Biblical Narrative,

The Bible is written with a variety of writing styles. My arguments were based exclusively on narrative (story telling) and for a reason. There is a lot of bias in the bible regarding Satan because he is God's enemy and the people writing the Bible were worshippers of God.

Any commentary outside of the narrative isn't fact. It merely provides the author's opinion. What people need to do when looking at biblical passages outside the narrative is keep in mind the opinions come from extremely biased people and need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I will now be following my opponents structure to make the debate easier to follow. The titles of each section in no way reflect my arguments or opinions.

The Devil is Evil,

1. Sinning isn't evil. Sinning as defined by God is "Anything that god despises". That's is a really convenient and self serving definition. What does god despise? The answer to that is obvious. He despises things inherently human lust ( being physically attracted to someone), greed (wanting anything beyond what's essential to survival), vanity (not looking like a slob) etc.. So basically a whole list of what defines natural human behavior.

" God worried so much about the sin that He died on the cross so that all may be forgiven."

Jesus isn't god as defined by the terms of the debate in round one. For the purposes of keeping the debate from going off topic. God didn't really have to subject his son to torture and murder to forgive our sins. God has 2 good alternate actions. He can either just forgive them, or he could stop finding human nature so despicable.

2. My opponent uses the premise that Satan is evil because he disguised himself as an angel of light and a serpent in the garden of Eden. The reality is, Satan is an angel of light. The word Lucifer means light bearer[1] and it was a name given to Satan in the bible (Isaiah 14:12 NKJV) by people biased against him. So even his enemies agree he is an angel of light.

My opponent can't define God as good and then say that Satan disguising himself in the garden of Eden is evil. It is hypocritical. God has disguised himself as a burning bush in Exodus 3:2-6. God also disguised himself as some random violent guy in Genesis 32:22-32. The best my opponent can do is say disguising yourself is a neutral act not good or evil.

[1] http://m.dictionary.com...

3. My opponent asserts that Satan is a deceiver and wants you to suffer for eternity. However there is no evidence Satan wants suffering. Even if suffering is the price for wisdom it doesn't mean suffering is the motive. More then likely Satan's goal is to enlighten man since that is exactly what he did. Satan has not been dishonest he has been the opposite of dishonest he has given us wisdom. Where areas it would be fair to call God dishonest because he wishes us to be punished for wisdom. The individual that gives knowledge is typically more honest then the one who withholds knowledge.

C1: God does evil things,

My opponent defends God's orders of Genocide and human sacrifice, by saying, since God owns us his actions are justified and because God says "just trust me"(paraphrasing). "Just trust me" doesn't cut it when trying to justify genocide. It's generally agreed genocide is bad. Even God, mentions murder as bad in the 10 commandments. So by his own definition God is doing something bad. That is unless God is some sort of hypocrite who thinks he is above abiding by his own rules. Also I would like to point out that God stopped owning us the second Satan freed our minds. We aren't owned by God unless we allow him to enslave our minds again.

God isn't omniscient as some of the commentary in the bible describes him. When you look at the narrative of the Bible you can see this. Remember that story of God rewarding lot for offering up his daughters to get raped? Well earlier in that story God shows he is not omniscient. God shares with Abraham that he is about to murder everyone on Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham is able to bargain with God to save Any good people in the cities. God shows he doesn't know how many good people are in Sodom and Gomorrah by sending out Angels to go figure it out for him Genesis 18:16-33.

In the garden of Eden just after Satan gives man the gift of wisdom God shows he isn't omniscient as well. Adam and Eve hear God walking and hide from him. God doesn't know where they are, so he has to call out asking where they are Genesis 3:8-9. Con has argued that I can't question God's wisdom because he is omniscient. I have shown God isn't omniscient, showing that his wisdom can be questioned.

My opponent concedes that God views women as inferior and more deserving of rape.

C2: God hates humans,

"Why would a hateful God offer eternal peace?"

I've shown god to be capable of deceit. We can't just accept his word that he is offering us eternal paradise. What would be the cost of this eternal paradise anyway? Mind control. No I will take free thinker over slave anyday.

"Remember, it is the sin that is to be hated,"

If I'm killed for my sin by God, how does that not signify hate? If God loved me he wouldn't feel it necessary to murder me for something I can't avoid (Romans 6:23).

C3: Let's meet our hero

1. Ignorance is not bliss. God has made it clear that he didn't try to keep wisdom from us to protect us from pondering our fate. God feels threatened by us. Satan told us God didn't want us to eat the forbidden fruit because it would make us more like God. When we ate the fruit God felt threatened and gave us a death sentence to protect himself. This is an angry, jealous God, which he himself admits (Deuteronomy 6:15). He also displays that he feels threatened by humans in Genesis 11:1-9. Humans come together to build a tower and a great city. God looks and feels threatened because he believes man's unity and ambition will make nothing impossible for him and therefore a rival of God. God then punishes man by giving them several different languages and forcing a permanent division among them.

2/3. My opponent here admits that God wants control of our minds. She suggests that the mind control is good because it gets us to a place of eternal peace. But, a loving God would give us our autonomy and still grant us eternal life. Love is not about control.

Summary,

My opponent admits that God engages in genocide, mind control and condones raping women (or atleast down plays it). My opponent then admits Satan has freed our minds.

If you agree that genocide, rape and mind control are the acts of a bad person and standing up to such a person and freeing people's minds is a good thing the please vote pro.
Zarroette

Con

I thank Wylted for continuing this fantastic debate with his challenging arguments.

Holistic view

My opponent takes singular instances of what appears to be god being a tyrannical, hateful being. However, I hope that you, as the reader, would be able to take these criticisms and consider them in their full context. Know that god, as I’ve quoted in the previous round, has a big plan for all of us. Now, in certain instances, it may appear that god is doing wicked things, but these things are all part of his plan. It would be silly to argue only in the narrow context of a particular incidence, yet this is exactly what my opponent is doing, in general.



The Devil is Evil


1. Sinning is evil. Sinning is not wholly defined as “anything that god despises”. There is reasoning behind God’s commandments, for example, “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not steal”. Breeching these will result in a sinful offense, but these commandments are clearly good, right? Is stealing, taking something earned by someone else, good?

Lust is not necessarily a wonderful thing, as it objectifies people. In other words, lust reduces people to their physical properties, ignoring the other components, such as personality, that combine to make a person.

Greed is also frowned upon by our Lord, as it does not make people truly happy. Think about all the things you’ve acquired, those things that are beyond the necessary for survival. Have you ever had enough money? Have you ever said, ‘I’ve had enough holidays, this will be my last’? God knows that the human condition is one wherein it cannot be satisfied by Earthly means, at least beyond the temporary moment. However, the everlasting satisfaction that lies beyond the gates of Heaven, will be far more satisfying, thus God encourages the latter and discourages the former.

In short, some natural human behaviours are not the best for us humans, and thus God does not encourage behaviours.

“God didn't really have to subject his son to torture and murder to forgive our sins. God has 2 good alternate actions. He can either just forgive them, or he could stop finding human nature so despicable.”

My opponent tries to outright ignore my response by moving the goalposts. God absolutely did need to torture and murder His son, as the sins of man needed to be forgiven, yet man himself could not weather the burden. Something had to take the punishment, as punishment for these sins was required, for the Lord is just. It is perfectly reasonable to argue this.

2. Lucifer means “light bearer” because he was once an angel of God. However, the Bible depicts Satan AFTER he fell from the Kingdom of Heaven (Luke 10:18), thus heavily implying Satan to be wicked. Whilst Lucifer’s name implies that he is good, he is indeed not, as I’ve demonstrated throughout this debate.

“My opponent uses the premise that Satan is evil because he disguised himself as an angel of light and a serpent in the garden of Eden. The reality is, Satan is an angel of light. The word Lucifer means light bearer…”

God disguised himself as a burning bush so as not to harm anyway, and even said that, “I am the God of your father””. Lucifer, on the other hand, disguised himself as a snake in order to trick people; he did not say who he was. The difference in intention is clearly evident: Lucifer was trying to deceive.


3.My opponent asserts that Satan is a deceiver and wants you to suffer for eternity. However there is no evidence Satan wants suffering. Even if suffering is the price for wisdom it doesn't mean suffering is the motive…”

Alright, I was wrong to assume that Satan wanted suffering, despite the Bible saying otherwise. In the event that Satan doesn’t want suffering, that he’s inadvertently causing suffering, would it then not be terrible that he is so recklessly causing suffering? Would you not prefer to listen to a god, who says that your suffering will be repaid, that offers you the eternal comfort that is Heaven? This is an omniscient, omnipotent god that is talking to you, not a devil that does not have the capacity to understand the consequences of his actions. This is a God that gave His only son to the world, for him to be tortured to pay for our sins. Such a colossal sacrifice surely indicates how loving our God is, yet we have no example for Lucifer. Which seems more reasonable to accept: a devil, who has yet to prove his love for us, wants suffering; or, God, who has sacrificed His only son for us, wants suffering?



C1: God does evil things,

God does own us; it’s up to Him to do as He pleases. However, keep in mind that this is a loving God, one that has a plan for everyone. It’s not simply, “just trust me”; it’s Jesus, God’s son, dying on the cross for our sins. All God asks is that you believe Jesus died for your sins, and you will be allowed to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. God is working in ways that we cannot understand, for we ourselves are not omniscient as He is.


“Even God, mentions murder as bad in the 10 commandments.”

mur·der

n.

1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. [1]

God, the author of creation, is the founder of rules and order in the universe. Do you not think that His ‘murdering’ would be entirely lawful, as it is He who decides what is lawful? Besides, his “murders” are not done with malice, as God loves us all, it’s just that He is a just God and He will punish those justly.

[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

“My opponent concedes that God views women as inferior and more deserving of rape.”

No, I conceded that in God’s infinite wisdom, that He has decided that in some circumstances, rape may have been permissible. It’s not a universal truth that ‘women are deserving of rape’. My opponent blatantly ignores the context of my words, in an attempt to tarnish my argument. Please, as a reader, make note of this.

Non-Omniscience

In instances where my opponent claims God is not omniscient, it is that God is testing people when appearing to be ignorant. In the Abraham example, God does indeed ask, “Where are you?”-, appearing to be not omniscient. But this is simply a test, you see, the Lord knew how many He would find. He merely wanted to test Abraham’s convictions, to see if Abraham would falter in his faith with the Lord. In the Garden of Eden example, God knows that the fruit of the tree had been eaten, and He knows where the two are. It’s just that, again, He is testing them. He wants to see if they will willingly stand before God and be held accountable for their actions. Such is faith in our Lord: Him testing us, as is explicitly stated in these verses: Genesis 22:1-24; Psalm 11:4-5…



C2: God hates humans,


“I've shown god to be capable of deceit.”

This simply isn’t true. I ask you, as a reader, to control+f and see where the hits are for ‘deceit’ in this debate.


“If I'm killed for my sin by God, how does that not signify hate? If God loved me he wouldn't feel it necessary to murder me for something I can't avoid (Romans 6:23).”

The verse: “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”.

I argue that this verse talks in terms of eternal salvation, meaning that if you are not to believe in God, you will die normally. However, if you are to accept the Gift of God (by believing in Jesus Christ, our saviour), then you will still die, at least physically, yet you will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. See the difference?





C3: Let's meet our hero

1.

“God has made it clear that he didn't try to keep wisdom from us to protect us from pondering our fate. God feels threatened by us. Satan told us God didn't want us to eat the forbidden fruit because it would make us more like God. When we ate the fruit God felt threatened and gave us a death sentence to protect himself…”

Don’t you find it amusing that after dedicating a section to lambasting interpretation beyond the ‘Biblical Narrative’ (made under such a title), that my opponent then tries to interpret God’s intentions? Keep in mind that my opponent is trying to psycho-analyse God, an omniscient being that essentially can work beyond of mind’s grasp (as we are not omniscient ourselves).

Anyway, God admits to being angry and jealous of other idols, and why shouldn’t He? He was the creator of all, and He should be worshipped as such. Falsely worshipping other idols, idols that God gives no power to, would be ridiculous, don’t you think? Would not that worship be wasted? Would not everyone be happier worshipping our Lord?

“Pondering our fate”: The burden of knowledge

My opponent seems to consistently argue that when Lucifer helped free our minds, that he was doing us a favour. Is this kind of freedom, from a benevolent God, really something to strive for? Ignorance is really bliss because in that state, our minds are not troubled with some truly terrible things, such as the shame of being unclothed, or knowing that death is unavoidable. What good comes from knowing these things? Would it really be so fantastic to know everything, especially considering the other option is a wonderful relationship with our Father, who loves us dearly and offers eternal salvation? Would you at least not feel better in believing such things our Lord offers us?



2/3.

“But, a loving God would give us our autonomy and still grant us eternal life. Love is not about control.”

Are you dictating to the creator of the universe, the author of what is, that his method of love is defunct, as it does not fit your definition? Must I point out the preposterous nature of such a notion?

Debate Round No. 3
Wylted

Pro

Thank you Zarroette for your arguments.

Agreement

Me and my opponent agree on a lot of stuff. We agree that God committed Genocide. We agree that he at the least found rape of women preferable to rape of men as he rewarded Lot for offering up his daughters to be raped, over his guests. My opponent agrees with me that God wants control our thoughts and prevent us from having wisdom. The Garden of Eden shows this.

We also agreed that Satan's main purpose was to free men's minds. To give them wisdom.

My opponent believes God's deeds are part of his greater plans of goodness, and therefore makes these plans good because they are part of the plan.

My opponent believes the wisdom Satan gave us is evil because it seperates us from God.

Speculation

This subject is of a very speculative nature. I've tried to keep my speculation to a minimum by sticking to biblical narrative. My opponent hasn't stuck with the narrative and has instead focused on different author's opinions within the Bible. These opinions that rest outside the narrative have caused her to conclude that God is omniscient and has a greater plan.

We can only judge God on his actions, not on some elusive divine plan that we can't know. He's probably just using this "divine plan" to justify his evil deeds anyway. Any speculation that God is omniscient is unsupported by narrative. In fact as I've shown, the narrative shows some evidence he isn't omniscient. I'm sure God wants his followers to believe he is, to better control them though.

Actions Speak Louder than Words

We can't know God's divine plan or even if he has one (despite his claims). So, we must judge him based on his actions. My opponent argues, God's actions when viewed as isolated incidents and from our human perspectives are evil, but when looked at from an omniscient being and in light of this being's divine plan, his actions are good.

The problem is, we can only look at his actions. Assuming a divine plan based on this being's claim of one, is useless. So I ask the reader to mentally create 2 columns in his/her head. One column labeled evil. The other column labeled good. Now look at the actions both me and my opponent agree on and put them in a column. The genocide, rewarding Lot for offering up his daughters to be raped, keeping man a stupid beast in the wild by depriving him of knowledge etc..

Now take Satan's actions, which all revolve around him freeing man's mind and giving him wisdom. What box does wisdom and a free mind go into? Good or evil?

The Devil is Evil

1. Sinning isn't evil. There is nothing wrong with these actions God labels as sin. If I go to the store pick up a playboy and jerk off, I'm not hurting anyone and I feel good as a response. The evil comes when you label these primal urges as sins. When you view these things as taboos, you repress them and then they become compulsions.

The last thing anyone should do is repress their carnal urges. Repressing things takes them from impulsive to compulsive. The second something becomes compulsive, you lose a lot of control over your actions.

2. I've shown God to be capable of deception. I gave 2 examples and my opponent only refuted the one about the burning bush. Saying God disguised himself to avoid hurting Moses. What about the other example? The example I gave showing God disguised himself as a drifter and then randomly attacked one of his own followers leaving that follower with a permanent limp. God doesn't just disguise himself to avoid harming people. He also disguises himself to harm people.

3. My opponent asserts many assumptions. She uses an example of God subjecting his son to torture as proof of his love for us. I ask what kind of sick being would subject their child to torture to prove their love for another person? If God is omniscient like my opponent claims then he easily could have shown mankind his love and spared them from a permanent demise through more humane means. I don't believe God does love his creation. That is not really the question at hand though. The question is; Is God evil? Based on this action (subjecting his son to torture), I think we can put another point in the evil column.

My opponent also makes the claim that Satan doesn't know the consequences of his actions. This is more support for Satan being Good. If my opponent claims the actions of Satan while seeming good have negative consequences, but Satan can only be judged on the action it's self because he doesn't know the consequences. Satan knows he is providing man knowledge. His motivation as far as we can tell was to enlighten man.

God Does Evil Things

When Adam and Eve are from the tree of knowledge, all his descendants were given the knowledge of good and evil. That means we all have an inner voice telling us if something is evil or good. What does your inner voice tell you? Is destroying numerous cities, women and children within those cities and even the animals that reside in them evil? Is giving people knowledge to judge things for themselves good?

My opponent admits that in some circumstances God finds rape as acceptable. What does your knowledge of good and evil tell you? Is rape ever morally permissible? Is rape of your daughter superior to rape of complete strangers? Is a being that rewards Lot for those actions Good or Evil?

My opponent again argues that God is omniscient. Despite many examples to the contrary my opponent still makes this absurd claim. She calls the examples given "tests". There is no proof they are tests. If God needs to test people it would imply he doesn't know the results of the test before hand, therefore making him non-omniscient.

God Hates Humans

Despite any of God's claims to the contrary, he is hateful. He has shown contempt by making even our most primal urges a crime. Be attracted to another woman but never act on it and you've committed a crime, according to Jesus in his sermon on the mount speach. The punishment for that sin is death, just like the punishment for any other sin. "For the wages of sin are death".

Even your urge for self preservation is hated by God. "If your enemy smites you on one cheek, then turn to him the other one". Now you can't even defend yourself from your enemy.

God has hated mankind since the fall of Adam. He's shown this by flooding the Earth, committing Genocides, outlawing the primal urges he created, demanding we lay down for our enemies etc..

Let's Meet our Hero

1. I'm not psychoanalyzing God. God directly tells us in the story of the Tower of Babel that I mentioned. That he is afraid humans will be capable of anything should they be able to come together for this. God directly states that he scattered people because he didn't want them being capable of anything. Not too coincidently God is supposedly capable of anything. So God literally scattered men so they wouldn't be capable of what he is capable of.

In the Garden of Eden man was punished for eating a fruit that caused him to be like God and know right from wrong. I want it noted that God stated one of the reasons he kicked man out of the garden of Eden was to prevent him from eating from the tree of life.

These are clear indicators of God's motives. We are punished for gaining wisdom that rivals God's. We are punished for almost attaining the ability to do works that rivals gods, such as in the story of the Tower of Babel. God kicks us out of Eden for fear we will become immortal like him. It is clear God feels threatened by man. It is no wonder that he would go as far as he did to gain back control of our minds.

2/3. Love isn't about control. If God loved us he would give us autonomy, not reluctantly but freely. You know what love is? Going up against an unbeatable force to give the world knowledge. Satan was better off minding his own business. He couldn't do it though. His love for mankind was so strong that he had to risk spending an eternity in a lake of fire to free the minds of us mere mortals. Satan wanted us to remain free so he stood back and let God blaspheme him, rather then stooping to God's level and creating a holy book. Satan knew holy books and free minds don't go together.

Summary,

I ask that voters of all religious persuasions, put aside their knowledge of the Bible, their emotions, their indoctrinations into certain knowledge (both religious and non religious alike), and use a blank slate to judge everything presented in this debate. I also wish my opponent good luck with her last round and thank her for participating in this debate.
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, Wylted, for your response.


General summary:



Uncontested points (since I last responded)


- God’s rules should take precedence over our relatively ignorant interpretations. Remember, this is the creator of everything that we’re talking about; a being that is omniscient too (I’ve addressed my opponent’s few criticisms on this matter). Why should human interpretation take place over what God has commanded as rule? Is He not the author of rules?

- There is essentially nothing to indicate that Satan’s plans are good, and thus, they default to neutral at best. If we’re to use our minds to determine as to whether Satan’s plans are good, then this would be interpretation outside of the ‘Biblical Narrative’, which my opponent has disallowed

- Lucifer means ‘Angel of Light’, yet he was granted that name whilst he was an angel of Heaven


God’s plan


My opponent continues to reiterate arguments on this topic, pertaining to the impossibility of knowing God’s exact plan. Again, as it is written in the Bible, God sacrificed his only son to die for our sins. God’s involves everyone entering Heaven, and all you have to do is believe Jesus died for your sins. That’s it! God is allowing you to enter the Kingdom of eternal peace, and all so easily! We know this aspect of God’s plan, and it’s so clearly wonderful. We don’t know what the devil intended, as my opponent admitted via his counter-arguments (‘we don’t know if the devil intended suffering to result from freeing our minds’).

Yes, there are aspects of God’s plan that we do not know, at least at this moment. But He’s promised us such wonderful things, and it’s written in the Bible how his only son died for us. Would an evil God promise us eternal happiness? Perhaps. But would an evil God sacrifice His only son, in order to forgive our excessive sins? I sincerely doubt that, don’t you? Doesn’t that indicate that God is probably telling the truth?

So, you should be judging God by His actions, and my opponent agrees with this. God has orchestrated the ultimate sacrifice for you and me, in order to save us from our sins. So what if he does things that on the surface, seem terrible and evil? Could they not be part of a big plan? Has God not shown that he is benevolent?


Satan’s ‘gift’ of wisdom


Again, as I’ve questioned before: is wisdom really such a gift? If you were smart enough to realise that you were going to roast in hell for eternity for disobeying God’s orders, wouldn’t that wisdom be harmful? Wouldn’t you feel terrible? Besides, wouldn’t it be better to trust in God?

Let’s have a quick look at a hypothetical example that doesn’t directly involve God. Let’s say that you, as a 10 year old child, wanted a certain gift for Christmas. The problem with this is now you’re expecting something, you know that you want this and you could potentially have this. The problem is: what if you don’t get what you wanted? What if the gift was too much for your parents to afford? Wouldn’t you be really sad? The negative affect that results from wisdom can be very harmful.

My objection has somewhat to do with “separating us from God”, which my opponent argues, but as you can now see, that’s not its entire purpose.




The Devil is Evil

1.

“Sinning isn't evil.”

I have demonstrated it to be in my murder example. It, at the very least, has the capacity to be evil. As I’ll continue to argue here, sinning can be argued as evil in every scenario.

“If I go to the store pick up a playboy and jerk off, I'm not hurting anyone and I feel good as a response.”

Hurting anyone *else* isn’t the problem. The problem is that it is easy to become addicted to this, and this can in turn lead to asocial behaviour. God wants you to, since you’re a man, meet real women, so that you can form a loving bond in His name, for He knows this to be good. He’s trying to help you here.

“The evil comes when you label these primal urges as sins. When you view these things as taboos, you repress them and then they become compulsions…”

Where is the proof of this?



2.

My opponent concedes that I have successfully refuted his first example, as I showed that God announced Himself, hence He wasn’t trying to deceive.

“The example I gave showing God disguised himself as a drifter and then randomly attacked one of his own followers leaving that follower with a permanent limp. God doesn't just disguise himself to avoid harming people. He also disguises himself to harm people.”

The context to this verse is very important. Some of Jacob’s history: he stole the Esau's birthright blessing (Genesis 27), and he had several children with women he didn't love, and was a relatively poor father to them (Genesis 30-31).

God initially disguised Himself as a man, in order to fulfil the purpose of the confrontation. God revealed Himself in order to show who Jacob had been fighting with, to show that Jacob could no longer flee his sins forever, that God would eventually punish Him. God did indeed punish Jacob, and rightly so. Jacob even admits this, thanking God for the blessing (Genesis 32:29), and learning a valuable lesson.



3.

“If God is omniscient like my opponent claims then he easily could have shown mankind his love and spared them from a permanent demise through more humane means.”

No, as I’ve explained, He couldn’t have (not because he isn't omnipotent, though). The sins cannot go unpunished, for that would be unjust, and our Lord is not unjust. He essentially has spared us all from a truly awful demise; all we have to do is believe that Jesus died on the cross for us.

“The question is; Is God evil? Based on this action (subjecting his son to torture), I think we can put another point in the evil column.”

If someone was willing to die for all of us, so that everyone else may live, would that be a bad thing? Isn’t that far more preferable than God making virtually everybody suffer and die? How could you possible say that this is a bad thing?

“His motivation as far as we can tell was to enlighten man.”

This cannot be substantiated with anything inside the Biblical Narrative, as suggested by my opponent failing to provide any evidence. It’s also hypocritical, in this regard, that my opponent would criticise me for arguing outside of the narrative, which I haven’t, when he is clearly doing it here.



God Does Evil Things


“My opponent admits that in some circumstances God finds rape as acceptable. What does your knowledge of good and evil tell you?”

So God, an omniscient being, acts in a way that is evil, against His wishes, despite Him being the author of reality? Humans are essentially smarter than an omniscient being? Does that make sense to you?

“My opponent again argues that God is omniscient. She calls the examples given "tests". There is no proof they are tests. If God needs to test people it would imply he doesn't know the results of the test before hand, therefore making him non-omniscient.”


Test:

noun

1. A procedure intended to establish the quality, performance, or reliability of something. [1]


[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...

God tests people for people’s sake, not His. We, as humans, are the ones that can establish the quality of our belief, by God testing us. My opponent makes the incorrect presumption that the being giving the test is the one who must require the test results, which defies definition. God gives us tests so that we can know the results.



God Hates Humans

“Be attracted to another woman but never act on it and you've committed a crime, according to Jesus in his sermon on the mount speech...”

As stipulated by my opponent, Jesus is not to be taken as God in, in this debate; therefore, Jesus does not speak God’s will in this instance.


"If your enemy smites you on one cheek, then turn to him the other one".

“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” God will judge us all, in the end, and He will do so justly.

“God has hated mankind since the fall of Adam. He's shown this by flooding the Earth, committing Genocides, outlawing the primal urges he created, demanding we lay down for our enemies etc..”

This generalised, gloss-over of issues does my opponent’s argument no good, as we cannot begin to debate the context of such things, on this front. I have always addressed my opponent’s specific criticism, when appropriate.


Let's Meet our Hero

1.

God does not tell us directly in the Tower of Babel story, rather, this is my opponent’s interpretation of the Bible’s verse (as is the reason it is not supported by a Bible verse). God commanded them to spread far and wide: Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth" (Genesis 9:1), but He never said why.


“These are clear indicators of God's motives.”

Nonsense, besides, this is my opponent’s interpretation, not Biblical Narrative (hence the word “indicators”, implying interpretation).



2/3.

“Love isn't about control.”

You’re always free to disobey God, it’s just that God will justly punish you if you disobey him.

The rest of what my opponent says here is merely conjecture, and has been addressed earlier on. The arguments above should convince you either way, hence I’m not going to respond to this here.



Closing Comments


I wish to first thank Wylted for his formidable arguments. I also wish to thank you, for reading any/all of this. Whether you know what I say to be true, since you’re a Christian of some kind; whether you’re religious yourself, and have a love for other religions, or you’re an atheist that is likely to side with Wylted, know this. I’ve tried my best to defend the words in the Bible in a fair way. If the Bible was really about God being evil, why does everyone choose to follow God? Do you really think that Wylted’s interpretation of the Bible is correct? Do you really think that the Bible is about God being evil? On the surface, it may appear as if God is doing evil things, but look a bit deeper and you will find the truth.

Debate Round No. 4
257 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Loveshismom 3 years ago
Loveshismom
Or not
Posted by Loveshismom 3 years ago
Loveshismom
Yes they're still going
Posted by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
Lol wth the comments on this debate are still going? XD
Posted by Zhege 3 years ago
Zhege
Most, if not all, of your points I've addressed, even if it's just to say I dismiss them for x reason.

A problem with your arguments that I find is that you take the Bible with a grain of salt, rather than an open mind. The debate isn't about refuting the Bible, otherwise we'd be talking about Moses splitting water, Jesus healing the sick, and reincarnation. But we're not arguing the fallacies that may lie within, we're discussing interpretation and perspective.

God, Jesus, and Satan are three entities we really can't comprehend, for example, an omnipotent and nigh-omnipotent being can do things we could never do and you've brought up an example and applied human reasoning to entities that aren't.

You've just commented on how the basis of your arguments are highly philosophical, which means in all purposes that you're inferring things, connecting two things that may not correlate, and cherry picking. To be fair, in a debate about God's morality I would cherry pick the Old Testament. The end result, however, is that the Bible is clear about many things and the only source of reference to be used. This concludes that you and maybe a million other could believe that Satan was actually good by highly philosophizing, but I don't have to philosophize. Not to say some things I don't have to, such as why Job's trial had to be as great as it was, which is why you brought it up.

Anyway, I'm not sure if some of the verses you provided in Round 2 you actually read them when correlating them to the subject. As I had initially said they are taken out of context and I do encourage you to read them. My post is like five or six pages ago and you dismissed what I had. Either way, I guess we're done. Have a good day and God bless (yes, I am a Christian after all).
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
I suppose Zarroette was playing Devil's advocate.
It's a hard act in such a debate.
Especially when it is concerning the Bible where the Narcissistic, Megalomaniac, Omni-Malevolent God destroys far more lives than Satan.
What was their tally again: Satan 10 victims, God Thousands, if not Millions of Victims.

A tough call to argue against.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Not bad for an argument formulated in a mere hour that I had to pull out of my a$$ huh?

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
I don't mind hearing from you. It frustrates me that you seem to talk through me and ignore my points. I will never, ever do this debate again.

I wouldn't mind doing one on the morality of God. It's one thing to argue God is immoral. There is enough material in the bible for me to make an argument.

I can't prove Satan is good. Well I could argue he is good, but the arguments would be highly philosophical and actually contradict the immoral God arguments.

The reason I won this debate is, because my opponent is a strong atheist and unfamiliar with the bible, I was able to steer her arguments (which she was unaware of), she focused too much on proving that god isn't evil than she did on exposing the fact that there wasn't enough info on satan in the bible to provide a good argument for his benevolence.

I had a lot of 7 point vote bombs against me that I had to report on a daily basis. If I missed reporting them that final day, I would have loss.

I have just 2 hours to provide a completely Unresearched argument for a debate now and won't be able to respon to anything until later.
Posted by Zhege 3 years ago
Zhege
Are you saying everything in the Bible is physically possible without any intervention and you understand Jesus Christ entirely? Please tell us all the meaning of life, you imbecile. Fact of the mater is that Jesus is not narrating and any implications are assumed.

Seeing as you've personally claimed your victory over me already on two occasions - let's formally debate.

The format would be three rounds in which you copy word for word your Round 1 & Round 2. I'll accept in Round 1 and reference this page. Then Round 3 is rebuttal and closing statements. I'll reword my original posts here removing the demeaning tone and elaborating and presenting some argument as my Round 2.

If you don't like doing Round 1 & Round 2 verbatim, then you are conceding that your arguments were in fact weak and I could beat them. In your original Round 3 you used it mostly for rebuttal, which is why I'm eliminating it. This'll be short and sweet. Either you are wrong or I am, no swaying the public with ten dollar words spilled out through 30,000 characters. I'm over-simplifying for you as you've only got one post to write and you've said that if it was me I would have lost. Show me and throw me an invite.

What do you say? After the debate, you won't hear from me again, too.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
You're an idiot. Obviously I wasn't saying Jesus, said it. I was saying the story was relayed by Jesus to his disciples and then at some point was written down. Satan's only involvement in the story is in what occurred. He obviously took no part in relaying the story or writing it down. Wtf. How can you even consider #4 to be true. It's physically impossible.
Posted by Zhege 3 years ago
Zhege
I will elaborate on how you are retarded.

Let's begin with your claim that Jesus said this and Jesus said that. The narrator of the book of Mathew is not Jesus. Jesus would have to be speaking in third person and had to have been around Earth longer to write the parchment. The sentence we are disputing isn't even a quote from Jesus. To break it down you are wrong in these three areas from the get-go:

a. Jesus is not narrating.
b. It's not a quote from Jesus.
c. The sentence doesn't mention Jesus having implied, inferred, or having put the "kingdoms" as Satan's bargaining chips.

This leaves us with a lot of scenarios, let's list some:

i. Satan lied.
ii. Jesus lied.
iii. The author lied.
iv. Author or Satan or Jesus was speaking in an artistic way.

Are you still with me? Let's eliminate number iv since you're determined on there being a liar. For kicks let's also cross out number iii, since you know, he's just the middle man in all of this. That would boil it down to Satan or Jesus lying.

The verse says that Satan took and showed Jesus. We both agree on this, right? Or does your Bible say that Satan took Jesus and Jesus then saw? If it does, then we need to pick a translation, otherwise, Satan couldn't have possibly showed Jesus all the kingdoms. At the end of the day, though, Jesus was shown these kingdoms. That leaves us with these scenarios:

1. Satan's lying and the narrator went with it.
2. Jesus lied exaggerating.
3. The narrator lied.
4. Satan showed Jesus the kingdoms and Jesus saw them.
5. Satan lied and Jesus continued the lie.
6. They spoke artistically (i.e. The kingdoms may refer to the ones around the promised land as they don't recognized others as kingdoms, such as how China disregarded the rest of the world.)

I'm in favor of 4 and 6, because there is no evidence to discredit either one. If you really are determined to choose one of them, however, don't forget one of them is nicknamed the Father of Lies.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Moroni23 3 years ago
Moroni23
WyltedZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: I really wish I would of taken this debate... You gave it your all Con, but you came at it from a very... unforgiving... bias view point (as expected from a typical christian). I agree with Con before and after the debate but Pro unfortunately won it in my mind. I have to ask Pro, do you really believe in this? Or did you just make this debate for fun?
Vote Placed by Jakeross6 3 years ago
Jakeross6
WyltedZarroetteTied
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: Very nice debate! I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Pro had the best, most convincing arguments where as Con had hardly anything really worth reading in content. As Pro showed, based on God's actions, he is the evil one where as Satan is the good one. It is sad that the whole of the bible can be seen as a divine lie conceived to make the resistance seem evil. There were many many theological problems with Zarroette's arguments, though, and Pro seemed to have near impeccable arguments. Well done.
Vote Placed by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
WyltedZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Please note that I am considering the Bible the source, and I feel Wylted "nit-picked" the bad things that happened with God involved, but never considered what Satan did (i.e. possession). Overall it was a good debate though. I enjoyed reading it. My convincing argument vote has been explained well already by AdamKG.
Vote Placed by WesleyBucher1 3 years ago
WesleyBucher1
WyltedZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: If Pro actually had read the Bible, he would know that God is all-good. He is always described as such. Therefore, sin would be anything that God hates, which is anything evil, as a perfect God cannot have evil in his presence. Thus, sin is evil, and the doer of sin is evil. Also, Satan stood up against God because of his selfishness, because he wanted to be as powerful God. This is neither good nor moral. Finally, Satan does not kill people because God does not let him
Vote Placed by AgnosticRadar 3 years ago
AgnosticRadar
WyltedZarroetteTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Both contenders did absolutely wonderful, this is a very controversial topic, and for Wylted to start this debate is very courageous of him. This was probably the best debate I have read fully in a while. I thank for contenders for giving this great opportunity to read this. In this instance, I choose the side of Pro, for he did superbly in this debate. Thanks for doing this guys
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
WyltedZarroetteTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: R2: Pro's arguments are funny and convincing, except for the last one. Con's "Eternal Happiness Promise" & "Ignorance = Bliss" arguments beat them, but loses conduct point for breaking the "Jesus =/= God" rule. R3: Pro undermines God's "Eternal Happiness Promise" by questioning God's credibility, but Con shows Satan is the dishonest one (burning bush & serpent examples). R2 to Con. R4: Pro made many good points, yet failed to counter Con's biggest one: God is credible and promises eternal happiness, while the devil isn't credible and only tries to enlighten man. Con tried to explain Pro's reference to God disguising himself as a "drifter" but he did a bad job. I'm still curious as to what story in the Bible that's referring to. Regardless, that particular story didn't effect my vote either way. I'm giving argument points to Con because given a choice of wisdom or happiness, I'd definitely choose happiness. I don't care how dumb I am, as long as I'm happy =D Good deb
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
WyltedZarroetteTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Zarroette loses conduct for blatant sexism. As far as arguments, Wylted provided verifiable evidence that Satan is, if not perfect, then at least well-meaning. Con relied almost entirely on "God is good because God is good" circular reasoning and claiming that God's plan is for the better (this is unknowable, since nobody knows what God's plan is aside from God). Both sides seem to agree that God commits or condones genocide and rape, which I agree with Pro are definitely evil behaviours.
Vote Placed by JustAnotherGuy 3 years ago
JustAnotherGuy
WyltedZarroetteTied
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 made very convincing arguments and counter-arguments against con's case. He also had no opinion, which con had a little bit of.
Vote Placed by AdamKG 3 years ago
AdamKG
WyltedZarroetteTied
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: Both arguments were excellent and very interesting. I learned a lot from pro, but con ultimately wins. I am usually not a very religious type even though I was raised Christian. However, while I like the idea of a hero who comes along and tries to free minds and bring wisdom, God is the real hero. Con brought up the irrefutable point that God created the universe including Lucifer. God is omniscient and omnipotent. Satan is ultimately a fool for competing with the creator of the universe and that is not a person I want to gain wisdom from the begin with. You can question some parts of the Bible because it was written by man and also subject to various interpretations, contradictions, and poor translations when it was first written.
Vote Placed by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
WyltedZarroetteTied
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: Based on the actions of God, I would have to agree that God is evil. Even if he did orchestrate Jesus dying for our sins, he orchestrated everything leading up to that being necessary as well. Perhaps he does have a divine plan for which all of it is necessary, but his actions do nothing to convince me that there is, and as we all know, actions speak louder than words. Pros defense of Satan as being good is rather speculative, but defying evil is most certainly good, so showing that God defied is evil is enough to show Satan's defiance to be good and, as such, Satan himself as well.