The Instigator
thegodhand
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Johnicle
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Obama is the Antichrist

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...
Johnicle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,862 times Debate No: 14151
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

thegodhand

Pro

I believe Obama is the Antichrist.

Surely you have heard about the Obama=Satan conspircy going around, but I believe this to be true because-

Obama has publicly mocked the Bible.

"Or should we follow Deuteronomy and stone our children?"- Barack Obama

The description for the Antichrist says he will mock God's word.

Obama and the Lottery.

The day after Obama's election, the Illinois lottery ran these numbers.

Pick 3: 666
Pick 4: 7779

666 is the number of man and devil. It represents the symbol of Satan- a 6 sided star, a 6 sided triangle, and a 6 sided hexagon place over each other, a mockery of Israel's flag. Thud, 666 represents Satan and evil.

777. The number 7 is often shown through the Bible. In the original Hebrew, 7 references to the number 7 are made in Genesis 1:1! Google it if you don't believe me. 777 would represent God's perfect completion.

9 is a number stated to be God's wrath. Many objects in Revelation correspond with 9.

So 666=Satan. 777=Perfection. 9=God's wrath.

So we have Satan, God's wrath on perfection.

This was held by the Illinois lottery, remember, which Obama claims is his home state.

Obama and Dictatorship.

We disposed of a dictator named Saddam Hussein in 2000-something. Then the next president we get has (get this) Barack Hussein Obama as his name. WTF?

Is this a coincidence? A conspiracy theorist at the lottery HQ? Divine intervention?
Johnicle

Con

Thank you for the challenge. I will be organizing my arguments by using groups of arguments. Each of which will be a new reason to reject the resolution.

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

ARGUMENT ONE - The direct interpretation of the Bible is inaccurate. Accepting the premise of this argument means that it is illogical to use the Bible as a source for predicting the future therefore countering the resolution. (If you do not accept this argument, then the remainder of my arguments should still sufficiently reject the resolution.)

A. "Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. (James 5:14-15)."

---Prayer does not cause disease and the only study done on the matter actually shows that prayer decreases the likelihood for medical success (If you want the study I will find it).

B. "Diseases are not caused by demons, unless medicine is exorcism.

-A mute could talk after having the demon driven out (Matthew 9:32)
-A "demon-possessed" man who was blind and mute is cured by Jesus (Matthew 12:22)
-A demon caused seizures (epilepsy) in a boy (Matthew 17:14-18)
-A group of spirits caused a man to be insane (Mark 5:1-13)
-A spirit crippled a woman (Luke 13:11)."

---This contradicts current evidence that physical microorganisms cause disease… not demons.

C. "And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies. (2 Samuel 7:10-11)"

---This is completely a false assessment since the Israelites lost their land several times and are constantly under fire from people committing evil deeds.

[SOURCE] http://www.coppit.org...

D. Exodus is unlikely to have happened.

[SOURCE] http://www.aish.com...

E. Therefore, who is to even know if an antichrist will ever exist?

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

ARGUMENT TWO - If the accuracy of the Bible is legitimized by the judges, then it is unlikely that Obama is the figure known as the antichrist.

A. "We are told quite a bit about this coming world leader, Satan's counterfeit messiah, who will someday soon rise in power...

-He will rise to power first over 3 and then 10 nations
-He will bring 'peace', yet conquer through treaties and war
-He will be very, very popular around the world
-He will not regard "the desire of women"
-He will likely be charismatic and physically attractive ... like King Saul
-He will receive what appears to be a fatal wound to the head
-He will appear to be resurrected from the dead
-His right eye may be blinded and his arm completely withered
-He will enforce a "peace" plan or resolution (covenant) upon nation Israel
-He may help to get the new Jewish Temple built in Jerusalem
-He will appear to perform miracles ("lying signs and wonders")
-He will require that everybody on Earth receive a mark or identification on their forehead or hand and nobody will legally be able to buy or sell without it
-He will stand in a new Jewish Temple in Jerusalem and declare he is "God"
-Unspeakable terror and war will then engulf Earth for exactly 3� years (1260 days)
-He will direct the slaughter of millions of Christians and Jews who come to know the Lord
-He will lead the armies of the world into Israel . . . Armageddon."

---Some of these can be done in the future, but some of them are straight up ridiculous. Does Obama have SOME relations to the biblical prediction? Sure… but he does not have all of them, nor does he even have a majority of them.

[SOURCE] http://www.theprophecies.com...

B. The Bible also talks about how the antichrist will lead an group of horsemen. Obama has yet to lead an army of horses and this is simply unrealistic in this era.

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

ARGUMENT THREE - It is more likely that Prince Charles is the Antichrist.

A. "When the Book of Revelation told us to, "Calculate the number of the Beast, for the number is that of a man and his number is 666", it literally gave us his name. Onomastics is the study of names. Any onomastics book will show that Charles means "man". It means "man" or "manly". The words "Charles" and "man" can be used interchangeably in that verse without affecting the meaning at all. That verse literally reads, "...for the number is that of a Charles...""

B. "That verse also says, "And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority." The dragon is "symbolic" to others, but not to Prince Charles. He has a red dragon on his coat of arms. It comes from the flag of Wales, and it is in his title, Prince of Wales, that Charles is heir-apparent to the throne of Great Britain."

C. "The Bible refers to the Antichrist as a "despicable person" who has not yet received a kingship. Prince Charles is not well respected by his own people (even more so after the Diana 'car crash'). He has been through many messy public scandals, and there have been rumours of homosexuality, adultery (proven), occult practices and spiritual worship-and he has not yet received his kingship!"

D. "Riddle of the Seven Kings, (the 3rd riddle): In the Book of Revelation, Chapter 17, Verses 10-11, it says, "There are seven kings. Five were, one is and one is to be. The Beast is the eighth and of the seven." There were seven emperors of the Holy Roman Empire named Charles, (check the World Book Encyclopaedia). Prince Charles' lineage chart shows that he is descended, through his father, from the fifth emperor of the Holy Roman Empire named Charles, of the House of Hapsburg. Prince Charles is the eighth and, (by his lineage), he is also of the seventh."

E. "Prince Charles' coat of arms and crest was designed for him by the British College of Heraldry, using a system of guidelines over 500 years old. It contains all the Biblical symbols of the Antichrist. It has a dog supported by a roaring lion and a unicorn, (called a wild beast with a straight horn, or a wild oxen). Psalms 22:19-21 describes these animals, with a prayer for deliverance. The composite beast of Revelation 13:2, with the head of a lion, body of a leopard and feet of a bear is symbolic for other people--but not for Prince Charles. It is on his Coat of Arms. It represents the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire. These are the animal symbols for France, the leopard; Germany, the Bear; and England, the lion. These nations represented the western arm of the Holy Roman Empire."

F. Note that none of these apply to Barak Obama.

[SOURCE] http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

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

Let's discuss his opening arguments a little bit:

ILLINOIS LOTTERY NUMBERS

1) Of the MILLIONS of numbers randomly produced around the world each day, it is not surprising that at least one of them would come up with 666 or something else suspicious. Why, however, were 666 and 7779 placed in Pick 1 and Pick 2 (rather than 3 and 4)?

2) Is something that should be waived as a coincidence be seen as a warning? If God wanted to warn us, don't you think it would be done in a more noticeable way? If God did not want to warn us, then this is simply a coincidence.

3) A decade from now, I assure you that we won't be looking back at this regretting that we didn't see the Illinois lottery as key to preventing mass chaos in our world.

4) Prince Charles is linked to 666 in a more legitimate way.

---The rest of his arguments are a bunch of conspiracy theories. These type
Debate Round No. 1
thegodhand

Pro

Thanks for the well-written argument, Johnicle. Though I expected the opponent to be a Christian...

First, I will comment on each of these qualifiers you have used as descriptions for the Antichrist that Obama could match.

He will rise to power over 3 and then 10 nations.
He will bring peace, yet conquer through treaties and war.

The United Nations could very well bring this about. If Obama rose to a position of power in a powerful organization like the UN, he could offer treaties that brought him control over 3 and then 10 nations.

He will be very popular around the world.

Obama doesn't have the overwhelming support of everyone (including me), but he is the chief executive of the most powerful country in the world. Thus, he is popular in a sense, even if not well liked.

He will be charismatic and physically attractive.

Obama is charismatic. His slogan YES WE CAN, whenever said, is repeated by crowds across the nation. That's charisma. And Obama is physically attractive, with full, smooth skin and a lean, tall body.

He will require a Mark Of The Beast to buy or sell.

This "Mark Of The Beast" is already being popularized in Asia. It is conceivable that during the Obama administration (especially if Barack Obama is re-elected) the Mark would meet success in the North American region as well.

Also note that Obama has the ability to achieve all the points you have written so far. You have not mentioned anything that could be theoretcally unappliable to Obama.

Source: Revelations

You said, "The Bible also talks about how the Antichrist will lead a group of horsemen. Since we have yet to see a verified Antichrist, it is entirely possible that since cavalry were, at one time, the supreme forces, and thus "horsemen" might stand for tanks.

Source: The Big Book of Weapons

Charles may mean "man," but "man" can be used to mean a woman, a creature, and in many cases, is. In no way does "man" mean a demon or devil.

Source: Webster's Unabridged Dictionary

"And the dragon gave him power and great authority."

The dragon is a staple of British hubris, and has been for centuries. A dragon symbolizes bravery and a desire to do what is right. This comes from the old knight-slays-dragon tales.

Source: Wikipedia

How can we prove that the other rumors are true? It is very possible that someone started lies to attack Charles even further after the adultery scandal was proven.

Source: Me

First, it is possible to err on lineage charts. Thus, it is possible that Prince Charles is not truly the eighth of the seventh.
Second, how do we know it is referring to Great Britain and not France or another such area?

Source: Wikipedia

Prince Charles coat of arms was designed using guidelines over 500 years old. You did not say that Charles designed his own satanic coat of arms. Thus, perhaps it was a conspiracy theorist in the British College of Heraldry and not Charles's own design.

Source: You And Me

Illinois Lottery- I dunno. I meant that as a way of defining the conspiracy, and it IS unlikely God would have spoken to us like this.

Finally, of course it's a conspiracy. I posted it because I like conspiracies.

The Godhand
Johnicle

Con

Thank you for the response.

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

I. <<<"Though I expected the opponent to be a Christian.">>>

1) Each of my points were arguments that Christians themselves have made. I myself was once a former Christian, and in my days, I rejected the strict interpretation of the Bible. Taking it word for word not only contradicts itself, but it would force us to slay many of our peers in cold blood.

2) My claim stands. You never refuted the argument that the Bible can not be taken literally. Extend this claim.

3) Also extend that in order to affirm the resolution, that you must take the Bible literally in order to even create the being known as the antichrist.

---The rest of my claims will see what happens when we do take the Bible literally...

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

II. <<<"First, I will comment on each of these qualifiers you have used as descriptions for the Antichrist that Obama could match.">>>

a. <<<"a powerful organization like the UN">>>

1) The U.N. is not powerful whatsoever.

[SOURCE] http://www.philforhumanity.com...

2. "The primary reason the UN cannot control war is that it cannot effectively govern its Member States." Therefore, even if Obama has control over the U.N., he does not have control over those countries.

[SOURCE] http://www.notimetokill.org...

3. There are over a hundred countries in the U.N. In order to win the requirement given to us from the Bible, he must have control over 3, then control over 10. You have shown neither is possible nor likely.

[SOURCE] http://www.un.org...

---Therefore, Obama does not have control over 3 nations. (I would even claim that he doesn't have control over America, although that is unnecessary as far as the argument is concerned.)

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

III. <<<"Also note that Obama has the ability to achieve all the points you have written so far. You have not mentioned anything that could be [theoretically inapplicable] to Obama.">>>

1) EXTEND:

-He will rise to power first over 3 and then 10 nations
-He will bring 'peace', yet conquer through treaties and war

---There is no way that he is going to unify the nations.

-He will receive what appears to be a fatal wound to the head
-He will appear to be resurrected from the dead
-His right eye may be blinded and his arm completely withered

---This could be applied to McCain but not to Obama.

-He will enforce a "peace" plan or resolution (covenant) upon nation Israel

---He has no such plans of doing so in the future.

-He may help to get the new Jewish Temple built in Jerusalem
-He will appear to perform miracles ("lying signs and wonders")
-He will require that everybody on Earth receive a mark or identification on their forehead or hand and nobody will legally be able to buy or sell without it
-He will stand in a new Jewish Temple in Jerusalem and declare he is "God"

---Do you really think that Obama will stand in the middle of a Jewish Temple and proclaim that he is God without being shot at? At the very least he would be mocked which would make it impossible for him to be liked "around the world."

-Unspeakable terror and war will then engulf Earth for exactly 3� years (1260 days)
-He will direct the slaughter of millions of Christians and Jews who come to know the Lord

---How could he do this with the power delegated to him from his American Presidency? Your claim that he mocks the Bible which means he's the antichrist is laughable when compared to the actual things that he would have to do to complete this conspiracy.

-He will lead the armies of the world into Israel . . . Armageddon.

---Note: That in order for PRO to win this debate, he would have to prove that Obama will do this (probably) by the end of his Presidency. My argument is not, necessarily, that Obama is without a doubt not the antichrist, but rather, that it is extremely unlikely that he is. The information aforementioned is next to impossible for one man to do even with the most powerful office in the world.

EXTEND: Obama has SOME relations to the biblical prediction, but he does not have all of it, nor does he even have a majority of them.

---I would be satisfied if you could even show that it is likely that Obama would do these things. EVEN with the topic explicitly pointing out that he IS the antichrist (therefore WILL do these things).

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

IV. <<<"thus "horsemen" might stand for tanks">>>

1) Well the Bible says that he will ride on a white horse. If it was being metaphorical, then why would it describe the color of the horse? Furthermore, why would he be riding it?

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

V. <<<"Prince Charles">>>

My argument is two fold:

1) That Prince Charles applies to more of the standards of being the antichrist.
2) Obama does not apply to as many of the standards (and in argument three's case... none of them)

---It really seems that you attacked what could be rather than what is. Therefore, extend this framework. Now, for what you did argue.

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

VI. <<<"Charles may mean "man"">>>

1) Charles does mean man. Man also means Charles.

2) Barack does not mean man.

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

VII. <<<"A dragon symbolizes bravery and a desire to do what is right.">>>

1) Basically this is a justification for why Charles meets one of the standards of being the antichrist given to us from the Bible. Notice, that the dragon does not mean the same things in America, meaning that Obama does not wear any sort of clothing with dragons on it. Thus, he misses this standard completely.

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

VIII. <<<"It is very possible that someone started lies to attack Charles even further after the adultery scandal was proven.">>>

1) It is even more possible that the Obama rumors were spread from some Fox News hippie or a right wing Christian who wanted a reason to hate Obama since they couldn't think of a political way to.

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

IX. <<<"First, it is possible to err on lineage charts. Thus, it is possible that Prince Charles is not truly the eighth of the seventh.">>>

1) How is it possible to completely forget a generation of royalty?

2) Even if this .0001% chance is true, it is still closer to meeting the interpretation of the Bible than Obama.

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

X. <<<"Thus, perhaps it was a conspiracy theorist in the British College of Heraldry and not Charles's own design.">>>

1) The Bible does not say that it has to be his design, only that he wears it.

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

I look forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 2
thegodhand

Pro

thegodhand forfeited this round.
Johnicle

Con

Extend my arguments. I hope my opponent can come up with something for the final round.
Debate Round No. 3
thegodhand

Pro

thegodhand forfeited this round.
Johnicle

Con

Oh well...
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Lol con, nice slaughter
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
He picked on Obama because hes racist, get him xD
Posted by thegodhand 6 years ago
thegodhand
I've already lost and only read half of his second argument.
Posted by IWUEY 6 years ago
IWUEY
Do me a favor and please get your facts right, I have more to say once this debate is over.
Posted by Superboy777 6 years ago
Superboy777
i don see how pro can win
Posted by Awed 6 years ago
Awed
lol.
Posted by EuphoricTurtle 6 years ago
EuphoricTurtle
Lol God this'll be good
Posted by Johnicle 6 years ago
Johnicle
This will be fun :D
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by IWUEY 6 years ago
IWUEY
thegodhandJohnicleTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
thegodhandJohnicleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 6 years ago
Johnicle
thegodhandJohnicleTied
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