The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The Angel of the LORD is evil part 2

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/9/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 353 times Debate No: 64830
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




In "The Angel of the LORD is evil" part 1 my opponent made the argument that there is a double standard. That the LAW of Moses does not apply to the angels. That was the entire debate. As Pro I argued that there is a double standard but that it should not be allowed. That the angels are just as subject to the LAW of Moses as the humans are. Specifically that murder is against the law whether one is an Angel or a human. In this debate we are going to apply the LAW of Moses concerning murder directly instead of in the abstract as was done in the first debate "The Angel of the LORD is evil" My Bible text is thus-

"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies." John 8:44 NIV

The Pro position, (mine) is that the Angels, all of them are subject to the Scripture just like all the humans are. As always my main source is the Bible but Con is welcome to use any source and good luck Con.

Argument One:

Jesus says that the devil was a murderer from the beginning.
The Law of Moses directly applies to the Angels.


Although I am Con, I will hold the same position that ALL the angels are subject to the law of Moses or, Torah, but the Character called "the angel of the LORD" is 100% Good.
The Hebrew word for murder in Exodus 20; "Thou shalt not kill, or murder" is ratzakh, which means strictly murder in the sense of killing someone based on your own desire as a morally wrong motive. In every place where it says that "the angel of the LORD" killed some one it does not use this word, it uses the word nakah. this word actually only means to smite and it is required that it specifies "to death" for it to for sure mean to take a life. Yes, the text does clearly say that "the angel of the LORD" smote TO DEATH. But this killing is not called murder. God also commanded other righteous men, like Joshua, to kill the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. The word nakah, or smite, is used here as well as another Hebrew word that means specifically to kill (harag). This word, again, does not mean murder as a morally wrong motive to kill as the word ratzakh does. It was only the ratzakh that we are all commanded not to do.
The angel of the LORD is 100% good, only executing the righteous judgement of the Almighty.
Debate Round No. 1


My opponent wants to play a word game.

Name of game:
Thimblerig, (in this case with words and angels)

The object of the game:
To establish a double standard.

Rules of the game:
1 Strict adherence to literal word definitions
2 If the Torah does not say it specifically then reading a meaning into the scripture is not allowed

When Joshua entered Jericho he was around 60 years old. By that time Joshua had fought several battles and killed many men. Joshua was a seasoned veteran of war by the time he conquered Jericho. So when Joshua entered Jericho and picked a young defenseless child up by the feet and dashed the child against the wall was it-

1 Murder
2 Self defense
3 Justifiable Homicide
4 Smote
5 Genocide

(Pro explanation of what is going on: As Con stands at the table entertaining the crowd by moving the three shells around, Con's partner is pick pocketing some of the observers in the crowd. For more information please see the famous painting "The Conjurer", by Hieronymus Bosch.)


Because the object of the game is to establish a double standard, I can not play, because I do not believe in a double standard. Nevertheless I will answer the simple question.... The Almighty God commanded Joshua to take the city of Jericho. He even helped take the walls down. The men of Jericho were evil, and all their children would grow to walk in the same evil way of their fathers. But when a child is innocent, having done neither good nor evil, He is accepted into the kingdom of God for his name's sake (1 John 2:12). It is actually the mercy of God that ended the innocent lives before they could do evil. The words here used are "nakah l'mot" (Smite to death) and "harag" (kill; take a life). Still not breaking the commandment "thou shalt not "ratzakh" murder. Joshua was Executing the righteous judgment of the Almighty.
#4 smote, and you needed more answer choices for your multiple choice.
Debate Round No. 2


Well Con, you were given "smote" as an option. You can pick smote. But here is the problem with "smote"-

The word "smote" has no meaning. Your word game has no meaning. The life and death of the young defenseless child that Joshua the seasoned professional army guy "smote" had/has no meaning. The "smote"-ing of the children of Jericho was a meaningless act. How shall we change the list for Con?

1 Vain
2 Vain
3 Vain
4 Vanity
5 Vexation

Because Joshua was not commanded by the LORD to "smote" any innocent life. We have this in writing. It is against the law to take innocent life by any means including to "smote". The LORD gave Moses the 10 Commandments. What Joshua did was the opposite of what the LORD put down in writing.

We are going to keep playing the word game. It is my turn to pick a word-


Does the word "beginning" have any meaning? Or is it to be vain like "smote"? The Gospel of John 8:44 has the devil as a murderer from the "beginning". What beginning? There is a connection between the devil and Moses if we say that the act of murder starts the "beginning". Here is how it works-

In the beginning of Moses' life in rejection of the way of the Egyptian Court Moses was a murderer. (For he, Moses did murder the Egyptian guard.)

Now that we have established the link between Moses and the devil as starting out in the beginning as murderers we want to focus on Joshua. We want Joshua because Joshua represents the Angel of the LORD here on Earth.

1 The Angel of the LORD could not be stopped through human methods
1 Joshua could not be stopped through human methods
2 The Angel of the LORD was a killing machine
2 Joshua was a killing machine
3 The Angel of the LORD killed indiscriminately both believers and nonbelievers
3 Joshua killed indiscriminately both believers and nonbelievers

What "beginning" are we talking about for Joshua? It is the beginning of his life of crime. Crime against the 10 Commandments. Crime against the State. Crime against humanity.

We are talking about War Crime.

It is against the LAW for an officer of the military to enter a defeated city and execute the innocent civilian population. It is against God's moral LAW. And it is against man's moral LAW.


You are pulling this all out of a hat. I already explained the Hebrew definitions of the different words. The word "in the beginning" is "b'reshit" and it means in the beginning. The root word is rosh, which means head, top, chief or beginning. Devil being a murderer from the beginning means from the beginning of creation he committed murder. I am not playing any word games, just taking you back to the original language to clear up confusion about different words. It Is not against Gods Law to kill period. only to ratzakh murder. It is God himself that sends the angel of the LORD to various people in the scriptures. You clearly have some weird beliefs about the Scriptures. There are no vain words going on. every word has a meaning that should be interpreted by their true definition within the context in which it was written. Joshua was the warrior of Yahuwah! It was Yah Almighty himself that spoke to Joshua in Joshua chapter one and told him, "Be strong and of a good courage. take the land of Canaan, there shall no one be able to stand before thee all the days of your life." Yah Almighty himself commanded Joshua to kill everyone. Nakah l'mot smite to death, and harag kill. never once is ratzakh used in these contexts. give me one scripture that says, "Thou shalt not harag kill, or smite to death nakah l'mot. These are the words used in the original language and they are different one from another. The devil MURDERED from the beginning of creation. None of these righteous men committed murder at the commandment of the angel of the LORD. none of these righteous men were connected to the devil.
And by the way, I did choose "smote" in your little game. Go back and read it.

"It is against the law to take innocent life by any means including to "smote". This depends on your definition of innocent. A child born of the Canaanite is not considered innocent in God's eyes. It is the child of a wicked man. In 1 Samuel 15 Yahuwah himself commands Saul to kill ALL the Amalakites; man, woman, child and infant. according to Yah's judgement this was a righteous thing to do. And because Saul rebelled against this commandment, the spirit of Yah left him and the kingdom was taken from him. It is only against the Law to ratzakh murder. Nakah smite can be againsts the law if it is done by ratzakh murder. But it is not always like that.
Debate Round No. 3


Moses had a prob. His prob was a simple one. Everyone who knew Moses knew that Moses was an Egyptian vassal-

1 Moses was the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter.
2 Moses was a resident of the Egyptian court.
3 Moses was an Egyptian.

Everyone who knew Moses knew this. His prob was identification. This is my final choice in our word game-


Moses had an identity crisis. How could the Egyptian Moses change his identity into the Isrealite Moses? Moses' prob was a simple one that demanded a simple solution. All Moses had to do was to murder an Egyptian task master then everyone would know that Moses had turned. After the murder of the Egyptian task master by Moses we have-

1 Moses was no longer the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter.
2 Moses was no longer a resident of the Egyptian court.
3 Moses was no longer an Egyptian.

Moses was a murderer from the beginning. What beginning? The beginning of his life of crime. When Moses killed the Egyptian guard Moses automatically became a fugitive from Justice. Now why would God choose a murderer to give the Israelites the Ten Commandments?

Answer: God intended to use the Law to kill every single person on Earth.

To do that would take a murderer. A serial killer. A Moses. A Joshua. An Angel of the LORD times 2.


Still stuff coming out of that hat... Exodus 2:11- "And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto HIS BRETHREN, and looked on THEIR BURDENS (burdens of his brethren the Hebrews): and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, ONE OF HIS BRETHREN."
Moses knew full well who he was. He knew that the Hebrews were his brethren. Moses was never called a murderer, although it is a possibility that it would have been considered murder. But the God of Israel is a merciful God and well able to forgive. When Yahuwah Showed himself to Moses in that burning bush, Moses surrendered all to Yah and was made clean. Yah then used a clean and humble man to set his people free. Not to kill them. The law was to show us how imperfect we are so that we would know that we need a savior; Y'shua the anointed one who gave himself on the cross, that we might live and not die.
I don't know if maybe you are a Satanist, but what you are saying is so blasphemous. Your religion is obviously not based off the Old/New Covenant Hebrew/Aramaic Scriptures.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by pivot 1 year ago
The text says that the devil was a murderer from the beginning. That means the devil had to have killed someone. I am here to debate this subject. Not to text message.
Posted by dsjpk5 1 year ago
The law of Moses didn't always exist, so Satan didn't break the law of Moses in the beginning.
No votes have been placed for this debate.