You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.
Debate Rounds (5)
I assume in this debate we are assuming basic Christian theology and the general truth of the Bible? Given, I think, by how you made your argument.
Death is separation from God caused... the law does not bring punishment.
Right, we are all lawbreakers at some point. You are correct when you say lawbreakers "deserve" to be punished. What kind of punishment though? You seem to think that eternal and infinite suffering is a just penalty for "the tiniest" lie. I would be horrified if that was the logic humans used. Should we torture to death anyone who breaks the speed limit? There are things such as just and unjust punishments, and it is ludicrous to think that infinite suffering is a just penalty for a finite, minor transgression.
God does not want... He created to enjoy.
You're honestly telling me that an omniscient and omnipotent entity has to fear "rebellion"?
Why would God want to forever go... separted from God forever because of our sin..
Well, if God was so adverse to "heartache", I don't know why he would create creatures that had such a capacity for sin.
Non sequitur. Why must there be an eternal separation between God and his creatures given his not wanting "heartache"? He could just separate the ones who say his law is good and ones who say his law is bad. You know, like the Bible says. Heaven vs hell and all.
Right, God didn't have to create us. He did create us, though. I would think that he wouldn't send to eternal suffering and cause himself "heartache" humans if he bothered to create us in the first place. That probably isn't his intention.
Okay, many points in here for rebels to argue... enough to pull them back from death to life.
Or maybe you could lose because your arguments aren't as good?
Death is separation from God caused... the law does not bring punishment (Hematite)
......the law is good for nothing if breaking the law does not bring punishment. (actual quote)
The punishment for the tiniest infraction against God is death. The infraction itself is an offense to God, and the offender by his infraction has caused a separation between himself and God. This separation is death. The first death is in our bodies. Burning in hell would be the second death and God does not want anybody to suffer there, but He did not want them to be offenders. We do not execute the death penalty for minor infractions. God executes the death penalty. Mr. Hematite is held under the death penalty, on death row even though that row is as broader than the face of the planet. The tiniest infraction is punished by God. Hematite deserves the second death the same as me.
"The punishment for the tiniest infraction against God is death. The infraction itself is an offense to God, and the offender by his infraction has caused a separation between himself and God. This separation is death."
Why? You're just making the bare assertion that the punishment for any "separation" at all is death, but this is what we are debating.
"The first death is in our bodies. Burning in hell would be the second death and God does not want anybody to suffer there, but He did not want them to be offenders."
There's no reason why burning in hell is a necessary result of a minor transgression.
"We do not execute the death penalty forminor infractions. God executes the death penalty. Mr. Hematite is held under the death penalty, on death row even though that row is as broader than the face of the planet."
Same as above.
"The tiniest infraction is punished by God. Hematite deserves the second death the same as me."
Right, of course the tiniest transgression is punished. Now explain how exactly you decided that this punishment is necessarily always burning in hell for eternity?
Mr Hematite asked: "You're honestly telling me that an omniscient and omnipotent entity has to fear "rebellion"?
No sir, I did not say this at all. Perhaps you honestly misuderstood what I said, but I never said God has to fear rebellion.
If He feared rebellion, He would not have given you freedom of choice. He could have made you as only an animal which could live only by instinct, but He made you to be like Himself for His own pleasure, for His own enjoyment. He deserves honor from us who He created. We dishonor Him by our rebellion, and we deserve to burn in hell. He loves you so much, He took on a body Himself and died in your place. Only His own death is enough to satisfy your debt to Him for dishonoring Him. He had no sin of His own to die for, He died for your sins and rose from the grave to justify all who receive Him by faith as their Saviour, and He will be the Judge of all who disregard the price He paid to save them from the fire of Hell.
There really isn't much for me to say at this point. You are making literally dozens and dozens of baseless assertions and specific interpetations of God and biblical texts. Until you provide real evidence or use actual logic, there is nothing for me to debate. This is a debate website, not a televangelist program.
God loves us so much He paid for our sins so if we believe on Him and receive Him as our Saviour, we will be saved through faith in His blood which paid for our sins. And as death could not hold him, it will not hold us who have believed on His resurrection and said "I know I'm a sinner and God's punishment is deserved for my sins, I'm asking God to save me in the name of Jesus Christ, and I have received Him as my Saviour." This is the sinner's prayer for salvation, believing God's promise to pardon us from what we deseve if we only believe.......we all deserve to burn in hell.
I cannot prove that God loves you so much He took your death and rose from the grave to justify all whe believe on Him and receive him by faith. You have to believe it......or reject it.
You're still doing the same thing I told you not to do.
I think your comment here suffices for your general attitude:
You have to believe it......or reject it.
This is a debate website. That is, you provide arguments. You don't just say "Take it or leave it, but I know I'm right". That may be fit for a televangelist program or Fox News, but not here. Obviously I have to believe it or reject it, you telling me to believe it does absolutely nothing for your case. I am quite solid in my views, thank you.
There's no more argument to present. If Mr Hematite refuses to admit he deserves to burn in hell the same as me, that is his choice.
But presenting me with the choice of either side is not debating, it's a question. You need to provide arguments that go beyond various restatements of your HEAVILY religious denominationally biased view.
I did answer all of his objections and denials logically in the debate.
No, you didn't even remotely respond to all of them, and the ones that you did respond to, you just reasserted your core religious views and made baseless and biased assertions. Almost my entire Round 1 argument was left unanswered, especially my core rebuttals to your initial assertions, such as the fact that infinite suffering cannot be "deserved" by someone who makes a small transgression (punishment fits the crime, this is a basic human justice concept), and the fact that he can just separate the ones who actually DO deny his law and the ones who don't deny his law but just slip up now and then. Hell AND heaven.
How can I say "you deserve to burn in hell, the same as me" without preaching? It's a preaching statement at the start, and it's preaching still.
Your sentence right after this is what I mean when I say you are just preaching. It is rather ironic you preach right after saying this.
God loved us so much He paid for our sins with His own blood and if we trample His blood under our feet saying it was nothing that the Creator died in our place to be our Saviour, then be sure He will be the Judge who sends us away into whatever punishment He sees fit for us and we deserve it.
"be sure He will be the Judge who sends us away into whatever punishment He sees fit for us and we deserve it." No justification whatsoever, this is your baseless preaching that has corrupted the entire debate. If you can't see that, there is nothing for me to say, you just totally misunderstand the purpose of all debate and argumentation.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con refuted all of Pro's arguments, and Pro dropped alot of stuff.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.