The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
moneystacker
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

hell is rules and limitations of god etc

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: 1/4/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 84525
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

vi_spex

Pro

hell is rules and limitations of god, so not following the rules and limitations of god means there is no hell
moneystacker

Con

I will be arguing something different in the next round. I will kind of introduce hell and how the devil came to be. THen I will show the purpose of hell. Next I wil show that hell doesn't limit god and and the fact that he pretty much defeated the devil 2 times straight up in the bible and in revelations he will do it again two times more. One after the world ends and another time after the humans destined for heaven are transformed to reside on earth for 1,000 years (as it states in the bible) and after the 1,000 years he beats the devil again this time for good before the people accepted by god reside in heaven with him forever.

Lastly I will show what god made each location for earth, heaven, hell and show that he really has power over hell and elaborate on his belief for choices.

I a glad to accept this debate and await my opponents case. Then of course I will state mine while responding
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

just show me why i am wrong con
moneystacker

Con

Observation 1: Since my opponent doesn't support such a ludicrous claim as "hell is rules and limitations of god etc." I win this round. You can't make a claim like that and not support it. That's like me saying "aliens are real because space is big" but if I don't support such a claim or prove how there are possible regions that provide life its just a claim. Simply said he made a claim nothing more.

Observation 2: My opponent literally says "show me why I am wrong Con" but he hasn't shown us viewers why his position is right therefore I win the round even if I provided nothing since I stated my position and what I am talking about.

He hasn't provided something to back up his view point and by round 3 you are not allowed to provide a case or information so I win either way.

Rather then providing a case, since I have won this round I will simply enlighten my viewers just for an education on hell and some godly principles. I hope you guys learn something. I will respond to his statement as well but yeah nothing too serious.

The devil was an angel before as many know. However he wasn't just an angel he was the gods chief angle. But as stated in revelations chapter 12 And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Now lets focus on his statement "hell is rules and limitations of god, so not following the rules and limitations of god means there is no hell"

This is not true in fact hell is a real location but since its spiritual based we can't see it. Spiritual things cannot be seen with the eye like demons and such. Mathews 25 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. SO yes the first destination for a sinners hell and it is a real thing not a concept that only is applicable to believers in god like my opponent seems to suggest. Obviously people that commit murder and worship sprints and dark arts do not believe in god yet they are mentioned in this scripture.

Also revelations 21:8 states this But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." The lake of fire is the ultimate death that is applicable to any individual. IF you actually magnify the meaning of the statement made by my opponent made "hell is rules and limitations of god, so not following the rules and limitations of god means there is no hell" he is implying the following things.

1. By not believing in god or following his rules you exonerate yourself from the punishment of hell.
EX: Basically I could say I don't believe that jails are real or they are an illusion and jials don't exist for me as an individual.
I read a book called the intro to skeptical Philosophy and they at least had layouts and guidelines to support big philosophical claims. This one has none that make it applicable or realistic.

Also we can look to this scripture Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became living soul.
Conclusion: Since god made humans that means his rules are applicable to any individual regardless of belief.

I like my opponents attempt at being some modern day Socrates or Plato by making some philosophical claim but it's not supported and just some poor observation.

NOw we must look at the most popular rules established in the bible

The 10 commandments

1.You shall have no other gods before Me.
2.You shall not make idols.
3.You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
4.Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5.Honor your father and your mother.
6.You shall not murder.
7.You shall not commit adultery.
8.You shall not steal.
9.You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10.You shall not covet.
A lot of these are rules that even the world itself applies to individuals, thus even if you don't believe in god many of these limitations established in the bible are used today anyway which disproves his theory that limitations don't exist even if you don't believe in god. The world itself says you can't murder and steal therefore godly principles are applicable in society regardless of belief.

The god of choices

In the bible god says he will have supreme control on heaven, let the devil and his demons maintain hell and humans mold and shape earth. God lets us have earth because he wants us to choose. God doesn't believe in forcing people which shows another nice quality of him. He wants us to choose him in heaven but he offers us hell/sin as well. God is a god of choices and one reason he is because he wants us to behave the same way. God wants us as humans to try to influence and get people to follow god but he doesn't want us to force them to.

Conclusion: God could choose to eliminate sin and satan and he could choose to force us all to be Christians but instead he chooses to allow the freedom of choice. God has the ability to do anything he made the earth,, he made heaven, and he made hell so yes he has supreme control. Also god wouldn't make something that could overtake him he obviously has supreme wisdom to make what he has made today. It's amazing that he could do such things but yeah god can do anything he has no limitations.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

i am right, con shows why i am wrong

i dont see a specifik point that shows why i am wrong
moneystacker

Con

You know what I think? I think it wouldn't matter if some major politician debated you on politics, or a doctor debated you on vaccines or a vet debated you on how to heal a dogs leg you would still think your right. You just have a lot of pride man I think that's the problem. Also you never explained your view point to me. It makes sense but you never proved it or provided anything that would help me argue against it even better, like other authors who share this view point or articles over it. Lastly you didn't even read the argument. You state in the comments "it was too long for me" I wasn't aware I was debating a 6th grader my bad there I guess. Also viewers he can't prove I didn't answer his question (I did) since he didn't even read what I stated.

If you don't present your view point then of course some of my arguments might not directly hit it but I easily answered it. I even showed how the same rules in the bible are applicable and utilized in society. I disproved that just because you don't believe in the biblical rules or follow them doesn't mean they don't apply to you. I also proved hell is real and applies to anyone your job was to respond to that with clash but you didn't.

Next even if for whatever reason people don't believe my view point after the round I still get the win. You chose the 7 point voting system which was a bad idea if you didn't plan on using arguments and biblical sources or if you simply wanted to win off me not proving a point. I could win just off the biblical sources I provided or better arguments. On 7 point system which side people believe in doesn't matter(which is why I don't use it for debates I make) the only thing that matters is like argumentation, sources, conduct.

So because I am the only one with sources and arguments and because I proved his point wrong I win the round.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
there is no more to explain

which part do you find unclear if i may ask?
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
Yes and in order to counter you have to say something... but nvm
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
that is what a debate is, con has no function but to counter
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
If you want one sentence debates next time specify that in your debate rules or something. Or set a lower limit in characters each person can type
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
I guess you have never been in debate in real life. Let's put it this way, people who make one countours don't do well. Also that doesn't spark much of a debate. I can say the apple is red but no ones going to take interest.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
a counter takes no more then a sentence
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
Also it wasn't that long. If you read other debates you would see what I posted was small in comparison. Also not bothering to read it lost you the round.
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
That's true I always over explain stuff when I debate or argue with someone in real or on here. Everyone has something they do to much and for me it's that.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
maan, you write to much, i didnt get through it
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
yeah I preety much just provided information and a sort of mini case rather then full one so vote me rip
No votes have been placed for this debate.