The Instigator
GeoLaureate8
Pro (for)
Winning
32 Points
The Contender
amcclinton
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Satan is More Benign than the Christian God

Do you like this debate?NoYes+7
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 7 votes the winner is...
GeoLaureate8
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/15/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,073 times Debate No: 8368
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (34)
Votes (7)

 

GeoLaureate8

Pro

I assert that Satan is a more benevolent being than the God of the Bible.

Here's why:

- God killed 2,301,417 people in the Bible [1]

- Satan killed 10 people in the Bible [1]

- God said don't eat from the Tree of Knowledge

- Satan said to eat from the Tree of Knowledge

- God demands the slaughter of babies. (This occurs in several verses including this one: Samuel 15:3: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and a$$.")

- God mutilates those who oppose him: "... they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." - Hosea 13:16

As Thomas Paine rightly put it: "Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the [Old Testament] is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the Word of God."

In conclusion, the Christian God performs genocide, kills babies, and advocates ignorance while Satan is more merciful and advocates enlightenment.

*Let me note that this is to be taken from a Universal standpoint, not a Biblical standpoint. If this were from a Biblical standpoint, it would lead to circular reasoning about how God is the moral standard, etc.

[1] http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com...

.
amcclinton

Con

There is only one point I wish to establish in this round. This in not my entire argument, but only the first of 2 points I wish to make in conjunction with my argument.

Prior to this debate I asked my opponent in the comments section if he agreed with the total death count and the manner in which God is held responsible for the deaths according to this source sited at http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com....

My opponent agreed on both counts. Therefore according to this list God is credited with 120,001 deaths by means of deceit and not a direct act of "God caused such and such to do so and so."

My argument is as follows:

In Judges 7:2-22 God is credited for the death of 120,000 Midianite soldiers. The words used in this list is, "God forces Midianite soldiers to kill each other" force is a bit of a stretch when you look at the passage in its entirety. The Israelites were told what to do and part of that was break jars after blowing their trumpets. What this in effect led the Midianites to believe was that the sound of the jars mimicked the sound of countless swords being unsheaved and that the Israelites had an enormous army. This put the Midianite army in a panicked state and led them to turn on each other. So in effect this was death by deceit.

I am in no way at this time contesting the body count in this instance, but only trying to establish the manner in which these deaths occurred. It can be agreed, then that the death was through an indirect means of deceiving the Midianites into thinking they would be killed mercilessly.

In 1st Kings 13:1 is another example of an indirect death as a result of deceit. This example is a bit more obvious. It says, "A prophet for believing another prophet's lie." Granted there would be a difference if the text said, "God caused a lion to maul the prophet," but it only says "a lion met him along the way." This example could hold as a case for God trying to warn the young prophet to not deviate from his course because God knew what would happen if he did. Regardless, the death was brought about by deception and therefore is the only point I am trying to establish.
Debate Round No. 1
GeoLaureate8

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

I want to point out to the readers that my opponent has not provided any substantial contentions to my argument.

Essentially, my opponent has pointed out that a small fraction (~5%) of Yahweh's total kill count is due to deceit which has indirectly led to thousands of deaths. Though, this does not account for the other 2 million murders committed by Yahweh. I would also like to point out that the number of kills, 2,301,417, does not even include the number of people killed in Noah's flood. If we were to include that, Yahweh's total kill count is actually 33,000,000, which was in fact, direct worldwide manslaughter performed by Yahweh, not indirect deceit.

In conclusion, my opponent really only helped my argument by adding that, not only does Yahweh perform genocide, kill babies, and promote ignorance, he is also a liar. He did not attempt to explain how Yahweh is more benevolent than Satan, but rather tried to subtract some numbers from Yahweh's total kill count. This does not, in any way, help my opponent's case given that Yahweh's kill count still surpasses Satan's.

Resolution Affirmed.

.
amcclinton

Con

I would also like to thank my opponent for such a thought provoking debate. I look forward to your rebuttals.

Here is my Second Point.

War, The Death Penalty, and Doctors

In war a nation takes up arms against another nation or nations and begins to shoot, bomb, burn, execute, murder, kill, stab, cut, pierce, torture, rape and pillage for some "noble" idea or purpose. The casualty count in WWI alone was a staggering 37 million:16 million deaths and 21 million wounded. The total number of deaths includes 9.7 million military personnel and about 6.8 million civilians. The Entente Powers (also known as the Allies) lost 5.7 million soldiers and the Central Powers about 4 million. (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org...)

World War II casualty statistics vary greatly. Estimates of total dead range from 50 million to over 70 million. The sources cited document an estimated death toll in World War II of roughly 73 million, making it the deadliest war ever. Civilians killed totaled around 47 million, including 20 million from war-related disease and famine. Total military dead: about 25 million, including deaths in captivity of about 4 million prisoners of war. Axis dead: approximately 11 million; Allied dead: about 61 million. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

In total, taking only these two wars into account – notwithstanding there were many other wars and countless casualties – stands at a looming 87 million on the conservative estimate and a whopping 110 million on the opposite end. That is roughly 43 times larger than the death count attributed to God and 55 times larger when taking the higher projected number. Even if we were to factor in the largest number of 33 million, we still end up with 22 million more deaths on the conservative estimate attributed to mankind (specifically the United States of America).

The United States was involved in both wars. As your profile states you are a citizen of the U.S. residing in Las Vegas, Nevada. For the sake of brevity, let's just say everyone in the U.S. is dead besides you and in a court of law we have attributed all actions to you as the United States sole citizen. Therefore, you're making a case against God with 110,000,010 at your total versus 2 to 33 million roughly?

Consequently, if you justify America and her wars, then you cannot in the same breath condemn God.

Secondly, the Death Penalty. The death penalty is a sentence given criminals who have been found guilty of the most horrific of crimes (particularly murder or mass murder). It is either designed to be a deterrent to would-be murderers or simply the punishment of convicted murderers or both. If we consider the death penalty as a deterrent, then we justify the death of others to prevent more deaths. Also, if we consider the death penalty as punishment, then we likewise agree that death is a justifiable sentence for the convicted criminal.

Therefore, if you are opposed to the death penalty carried out by judges in the U.S., then you stand justified. However, if you are in agreement with the death penalty in the U.S., then you by default cannot condemn God as a judge.

Lastly, doctors and modern medicine.
There was a recent case where a 77 year-old-man was temporarily put to death by his surgeons. The man was clinically dead. There were no heart, lung or brain functions.

This elaborate and complex surgery was all done to save the man's life who was dying from cancer. (http://www.medindia.net...)

In this instance death is justified because the life was not going to be lost, but rather saved. Is it any less of a death because the man was only clinically dead for less than an hour? How long is time to God?

Since we are taking into account all the actions of God found in the Bible we must also accept his actions in Revelation and in other passages that speak about the resurrection of the dead.

In Revelation 7:9, it reads, "After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands." (http://www.biblegateway.com...;)

"Martha answered, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." (John 11:24 http://www.biblegateway.com...)

"and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked." (Acts 24:15 http://www.biblegateway.com...)

So as we see God indeed brings all those who died and all those who were put to death back to life. The only instance we see of someone getting sentenced to the Lake of Fire (which is the final death) is Satan and the Beast. No one else is recorded in the Bible to have that sentence executed on them. To assume would only be mere speculation.

If God causes the death to save the life, is he no more guilty than the surgeons? If sin is the cancer and death is its cure, then we either have to attribute an act of murder to the surgeons or an act of goodness to God.

Therefore, unless you disagree with this method of saving a patient's life, then you must also agree with the method in which God ultimately brings about salvation since everyone who has ever died he has brought back to life.

This ends my second point.
Debate Round No. 2
GeoLaureate8

Pro

=============
Wars and Body Count
=============

My opponent's first point was that more people were killed in the two World Wars than the amount killed by Yahweh. There are several things wrong with this argument. First of all, this is irrelevant to the resolution. Satan's kill count has nothing to do with mankind's kill count. Also, the kill count of the two World Wars cannot be attributed to one person alone, nor does the magnitude of death surpass a global genocide. My opponent is essentially saying that Yahweh's global genocide is not as bad as the World Wars. But really this does not, in any way, demonstrate that Yahweh is a more benevolent being than Satan. Yahweh's kill count will still surpass Satan's no matter what.

My opponent also went on to say: "Consequently, if you justify America and her wars, then you cannot in the same breath condemn God." This whole argument completely falls apart when you realize that I am against all wars, all murders, and all violence. I never supported America and her wars. No murder is just.

========
Death Penalty
========

My opponent argued that our judges are justified in sentencing criminals to death because their crimes (i.e. murder) deserved the death penalty. He went on to say: "If you are in agreement with the death penalty in the U.S., then you by default cannot condemn God as a judge." Again, this whole argument does not withstand given that I am against the death penalty. Also, you don't fix murder with murder because as Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

============
Doctors and Surgery
============

My opponent's other point was that doctors sometimes have to take the life of one to save another. Of course, this cannot be compared to the murders committed by Yahweh because he was not sacrificing one life to save another. He was simply mad that people disobeyed him, and therefore killed them.

==========
Life After Death
==========

My opponent argued that since everyone lives after they die, it's ok to kill. But if that were the case, Hitler would also be justified in his genocide, merely because all of those men would be resurrected. He also assumes that all of the people who were killed by the hand of God, were all sent to Heaven as he states here:

"So as we see God indeed brings all those who died and all those who were put to death back to life. The only instance we see of someone getting sentenced to the Lake of Fire (which is the final death) is Satan and the Beast. No one else is recorded in the Bible to have that sentence executed on them. To assume would only be mere speculation."

To assume that they are sent to Heaven is also mere speculation. It would be more wise to assume these people were sent to Hell because anyone who's sin was deserving enough to be killed by the hand of God, must also be worthy of Hell. Just look at the little things you can be sent to Hell for. Christians assert that Atheism is a crime worthy of Hell. So not only does God unjustly murder millions, he also gives an unjust punishment of eternal damnation.

***************************

In conclusion, my opponent has yet to demonstrate how Yahweh is more benevolent than Satan. He has not exploited one wrong doing by Satan and instead tried to downplay the cruelty and quantity of Yahweh's genocide. That's because one fact will always remain, and that's that Yahweh has killed far more people than Satan. Satan also promotes free thinking, knowledge, and self-empowerment, while Yahweh promotes slavery, ignorance, and blind obedience. Therefore, Satan is more benign than the Christian God.

Resolution Affirmed.

Thank you for this debate.

.
amcclinton

Con

amcclinton forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
I may do, but in our debate, I was strict and stable. But it does not matter, that wasn't the point I was making here.

Tell me more about your faith which David Wilcocks also partakes in.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
@GodSands

Care to point out which arguments that were left uncontended in our debate? I even quoted you and directly refuted many of your arguments in that debate. The only ones I ignored, were the ones that were completely irrelevant to the resolution. You tend to stray way off topic in debates.
Posted by brian_eggleston 8 years ago
brian_eggleston
What a interesting debate!

I must admit, I had previously thought that God was totally benign, you know, more about Church sewing circles and coffee mornings in the vicarage than smiting and wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Thanks to Geolauriat8 I know realise that He is, in fact, a total, unmitigated bastard!

On a serious note, that quote about killing the Amalek is one that right-wing Jews use to justify killing innocent Palestinian women and children.
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
Amcclinton, I know how you feel. Don't let these people who seek truth in their own way use you as bate to find their unknown truth.

Same happened in my debate against Geo, seemed like he never read my argument, he probably did, but Geo kept on bring up the points that I already explained were incorrect or wrong every round.
Posted by Mimo1991 8 years ago
Mimo1991
christian god, LAWL!!
god means ourselves homie.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
@amc

How is my argument unoriginal? None of my arguments came from any website. The only thing I got from a website was the number of kills for Satan and Yahweh. I wasn't about to go through and count them personally. If anything, your position isn't original. The majority believe without a second thought that Yahweh is better than Satan.

Also, there is nothing in Christianity that can be considered "new ideas."
Posted by amcclinton 8 years ago
amcclinton
@Common_Sense_Please

Wow. You are amazingly wrong. Did you read anything I wrote? Or are you that content with your own ideas that new ones don't really matter?

How's that for lobbing?
Posted by amcclinton 8 years ago
amcclinton
@Kleptin

"I found that these arguments were very poorly thought out and that PRO did an excellent job lobbing them back."

What argument were you looking at? This entire argument came from some website. It's not original and there was no original arguments on the part of PRO. Yet you are attempting to judge my argument against it. The only references used is this website and the Bible.

Is there anyone on this entire DDO that can vote without already being biased as to how they will vote?

Sad. Very sad.
Posted by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
Conduct: PRO. Any forfeit is a risk. Con falsely assumed that his last round forfeit was justified because he made enough of his arguments when in reality, the general weakness of his counterpoints just made his final round forfeit seem like he was giving up completely.

S&G: Tie. No outrageous errors on either side.
Argument: PRO. Con did a pretty bad job responding to all the points. All of the points he brought up seemed to be attempts to mislead the audience (killing by deceit, comparing to the world wars, etc) I found that these arguments were very poorly thought out and that PRO did an excellent job lobbing them back.

Sources: PRO. While CON offered more sources, none of these were relevant to the debate. These include his wikis on warfare statistics, bible quotes for an irrelevant argument, etc.

I believe that CON should spend a bit more time in preparing his response, understanding his opponent, and honing his style. Shows promise, but needs a bit of work.
Posted by Common_Sense_Please 8 years ago
Common_Sense_Please
Satan is not Benign" Wasn't the resolution that Satan was MORE benign than God? Not that he IS benign?

"Therefore, Satan is in fact responsible for every single death that has ever occurred and will ever occur." Sorry, but God decides when you die (apparently) so God is responsible for every death. Satan hasn't got that power.

sorry, couldn't help myself replying to this one...
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by patsox834 8 years ago
patsox834
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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 
Vote Placed by prov1s 8 years ago
prov1s
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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 JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Mimo1991 8 years ago
Mimo1991
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Osiris 8 years ago
Osiris
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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:50 
Vote Placed by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
GeoLaureate8amcclintonTied
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