The Instigator
TheTruthWillPrevail
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SilentStorm
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

The Constitution should be upheld above the teachings of the Holy Bible.

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 2 votes the winner is...
SilentStorm
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 754 times Debate No: 45339
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

TheTruthWillPrevail

Con

This is an easy one. Most logically minded people would understand that what lasts longer is better. The Constitution has only been around a few hundred years, while teachings of the Holy Book has been here since the beginning of time, 10,000 years ago.
Now don't get me wrong. The founding fathers were very wise people. But they wouldn't have done what they did without the saving powers of the Holy Spirit and the Resurrection.

E Pluerbus Union.
SilentStorm

Pro

While I understand why you hold your opinion, I must disagree. In many areas things that last longer are better. But I do not believe that this logic applies to the major laws of the United States. My main reason is that the constitution is just and subject to change. The bible is not flexible and still holds the out dated beliefs of people that lived three thousand years ago. If we feel that something in the bible is wrong we can't just remove that part of the bible. But with the constitution if something becomes out dated we can make an amendment.
Debate Round No. 1
TheTruthWillPrevail

Con

The basis of the idea of having a Constitution is simply having a set of doctrines that are universally true and uphold all principles that the Constitution advocates. All ideals upheld in the Constitution originate from the Bible and if we want t a society true to ethic and principle it should maintain truancy to the Bible. You say that the Bible would not apply to today's circumstance, well I put it to you that "Thou shalt not murder" and "Thou shalt not steal" and every other law in the New Testament still applies to today, even if it takes a little denotation. There is no need to update the Bible, and the Constitution is outdated in its necessity to always be updated with amendments.
SilentStorm

Pro

Not all things in the constitution originate from the bible. I'll admit it was the basis for most of the original constitution, but it wasn't all derived from the bible. And the reason laws need to be updated is because of changing times. Values are changing constantly and so is technology. As these things change the laws will also need to change. For example the bible doesn't say anything about computer ethics.

Honestly if we were to use the bible as a constitution many things would need to be changed. There are some very good rules to follow in the bible. But there are also very horrible things. For instance, I don't think anyone feels that children should be killed for cursing at their parents, or that slavery should be legal.

And what of all the atheists or people of other religions living in the United States? Why should an atheist have to follow laws that are pointless to have just because all the Christian people think that's the way it should be? I feel that laws should be well thought out and based on logic. Instead of just following very old scriptures and not even questioning why you follow them or if the laws are even important.
Debate Round No. 2
TheTruthWillPrevail

Con

Although it may be true that our laws didn't all originate from the Bible, our laws all originally coincided with the Bible. If law, by your idea of purpose, is designed to simply represent what the majority's interest is, then why have a law put into place? You cannot appeal to morality, a standard that is true and virtuous in any circumstance, while only putting law into place that reflect what the masses interests are when disregarding a true and ultimate moral standard.

That exemplary law of children being executed is in the Old Testament, a law that was lifted after the Resurrection and the world was brought into the New Testament. The only new laws that remain are the ten commandments and other things are insinuated to be evil. The only thing that your example of the slavery passages proves is that the Bible acknowledges slavery, not condones it. In no place does it encourage it, but rather offers a good way of living for a slave, as it might offer a good way of living to a child under a parent's home or an employee to an employer.

To ask whether an Atheist in America should be made to abide by Biblical values is like asking whether a rapist should be made to abide by Biblical values.. both are contradictive but neither are harmed by abiding in Biblical values.

If the law was Biblical law, the only laws put into place that would be wrong in themselves would be universally applied to today. There is no need to update the Bible, even though you say it is outdated. The mere advance in technology does not change destroying or stealing property or sleeping with somebody's wife. All of it is either unethical or illegal.
SilentStorm

Pro

I'm sorry but your point doesn't make any sense to me. Isn't the point of laws in America to keep the majority happy? But I don't think that laws should be made for the majority. Like I said above, I believe laws should be based on logic and reason. In the end this would probably make the majority happy. And there is no true morality, there's the bibles version of morality, my version, your version, and many other peoples versions. No two people have the exact same morality. Which is why laws should be based on logic, not the whims of sheep herders that lived a few thousand years ago. People should be able to do what they want as long as it doesn't affect anyone else.

And actually, the Old Testament and the laws of Moses are to be upheld. Matthew 5:17 Don"t suppose that I came to do away with the Law and the Prophets. I did not come to do away with them, but to give them their full meaning. 18 Heaven and earth may disappear. But I promise you that not even a period or comma will ever disappear from the Law. Everything written in it must happen.

The atheist and rapist argument doesn't make any sense either. The rapist could very well be religious. But you're not going to find a religious atheist. That's contradicting. Let me put it this way, if you were living in a country dominated by Muslims that you could not leave from. Wouldn't you be angered if you had to follow the laws of the Quran even though you don't believe in the laws or Allah? That's how the atheists would feel if they had to follow everything in the bible. According to the bible atheists should be shunned.

On top of it all, this country was founded on separation of church and state. If we based everything on the bible the United States would pretty much be a Christian nation. And the founding fathers do not want that. And you say everything in the bible is ethical and it wouldn't affect anyone if we went by the bible. But what about homosexuals? They would never get the right to marriage. I don't see anything unethical about gay people getting married. It's not affecting anyone at all. And how would you like it if it was illegal for heterosexual people to get married just because the country was run by homosexuals and they didn't like it?
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by SilentStorm 3 years ago
SilentStorm
There are many things in the bible that are outdated. The bible says that if your daughter is raped then the man that raped her needs to give you 50 silver coins then they must get married. It says pork should not be eaten. Houses with mildew should be inspected by a priest. Slaves should be gathered from the foreigners in your land. And many other horrible things. On top of all that, the creation story and the belief that the earth is 6000 years old makes no sense. Don't even get me started on Noah's ark.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
If you are religious, god means a whole lot more then your country. Adding religious material to the constitution is wrong though.
Posted by saxman 3 years ago
saxman
SilentStorm, please tell me what facts in the Bible are outdated. Now don't say something about the earth being flat. Those were flawed scientists. In the bible, there are some passages meant to be taken literally, depending on the author, and the context, and some to be taken literally.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by UltimateRussian 3 years ago
UltimateRussian
TheTruthWillPrevailSilentStormTied
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: There was no evidence for cons points so he loses
Vote Placed by Hierocles 3 years ago
Hierocles
TheTruthWillPrevailSilentStormTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: No sources were referenced and both parties were very polite. However, Con failed to respond to pro's arguments concerning how technology changes over time. Furthermore, con failed to address how replacing the constitution with the bible - would alienate non-Christians. I think Con could of won if he narrowed the scope of the debate to a theological argument, assuming you can posit an epistemological framework of foundationalism unchallenged, dealing with how an individual should choose to act in his/her day-to-day life - holding the bible above the constitution will please God and increase the likelihood of salvation etc.