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

religion (be it Christianity, Islam or Judaism) is immoral

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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: 6/10/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 955 times Debate No: 56392
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)




High, saw your debate with that 'dumb' atheist. I am not an atheist (I am a pantheist). But I am against religion- it is basically being a control freak. I'll give you a few more points on the next round on why I think it is immoral.

You say that I can't be moral without religion (or at least atheists can't)- please clarify
You said that how can one believe in nothing- please also clarify
Also, tell me about your stance on creationism in science classes
Lastly, tell me why you think the so called 'word of God' is more moral, more factual etc. I'll 'riposte' next round


Well, hi, (not 'high')! I will tell you a bit about myself before answering those interesting questions my opponent gave.

I am a Christian, grown up in a Christian home and I guess you could say I am religious because the definition of it is...
...And that is what I do.

But I would consider my belief in God more than a practice of religion. It's a RELATIONSHIP. God created the world, including me, and I chose to allow Jesus into my heart--(meaning to let God be the main part of my life; making decisions and doing every day life using prayer and "What Would Jesus Do")--and this makes it a sealed relationship with The God! Because of His Creations and the sins He paid for, I worship God in prayer and song regularly and this is different from any other religions; Christianity allows you a relationship.

For this debate I am defending the CHRISTIANITY one out of the 3 choices given in parentheses [title]. I know little about the other two religions but will answer any questions you give about them to the best of my ability.

I did not call the atheist dumb (I hope I didn't)! I'll give you this: at least you admit there IS a God!! Here's a question, what kind of pantheist are you? There are two kinds that the web gave me: 1 (common) and 2 (rare). If you believe in a God/god, do you believe he is omniscient and perfect and all-loving?

Now to answer your questions.
1. "...I can't be moral without religion (or at least atheists can't)." First off, as an atheist you don't have any sort of 'written in stone rules' which you have to follow. Now, for Christianity, I'm not saying there are rules you ABSOLUTELY have to follow (as I believe we are all sinners and have fallen short of the glory of God), but atheists don't have 'holy books' or 'ten commandments' which help guide them in life.

But, again, nobody always obeys the rules, in fact most of us sometimes feel the urge to break the rules on purpose, right? So rules don't make anyone moral, in my opinion. As the atheist I debated said, [I'm paraphrasing], "I would never think of murdering a human being because it is just awful...My fear is jail, not hell" so rules don't keep people from being immoral. Common sense does. That's what atheists use for guidance, that's what keeps some of them from jail, etc. A lot of atheists say they have lived a good life, maybe even close to perfect because of all the "good deeds" and "refraining from doing evil" type of things. This is what most would call 'moral.'

So in most religions (like Islam and Mormonism) there are rules you HAVE to follow and, if you don't, you're practically guaranteed to go to Hell or sometimes you are "banned" from your cult. With Christianity, it is not ONLY a religion, it's a relationship with God, and there are rules which we get from the Bible that we would WANT to obey because they are God-written/inspired. I would say that God gave the Bible as a set of rules, praises, and journal entries which we can apply to our lives and use to communicate/know more with/about God. I think there are many ways to define morality, but with Christianity relationship comes first, THEN morality/religion. Atheists may act moral but if they do not know Jesus than their life is worthless (and when they die it all comes down to Heaven or Hell, therefore you must repent and receive God THEN do all your good acts. I hope this clarifies some things for you.

2. "You said that how can one believe in nothing..." I admit I said that in that debate. That was a wacko sentence but I will explain it for you in better words.

As you are a pantheist I'd think it's be simple to understand: belief in nothing basically means you believe that nothing created nothing; everything came from nothing. I'm a Christian so I believe God created everything, that everything is Intelligently Designed therefore we are not all by all ties in with NOT believing in nothing.

3. Evolution, what most atheists believe in, is said to have "mounds of evidence" and "proven countless times"..."by the majority of scientists." So most kids who take science class automatically believe Evolution is true, since, after all, it's in all the textbooks how would it be false?

But this ties in with religion, somehow. Society thinks Creationism is tied in with Christianity. Yes, it is a theistic theory, but it has lots of evidence also (and the proof shouldn't be ignored). I think kids should see both sides of the story. They should know that Evolution isn't the only option for the origin of species, just as the Big Bang isn't the only option for the origin of life. The Theory of Evolution is an assumption based on worldly facts, but that doesn't mean it's true, like the textbooks say!

It is not "shoving religion down people's throats," as some people say, to have Creationism be known to kids. It is simply showing the other side of the coin to them, making sure they understand there are two options to believe in and that both options require faith and research. Neither theories are perfect because there are facts that fit both, so they contradict each other and nobody can say with COMPLETE CERTAINTY that one of the theories is UTTERLY CORRECT with no flaws.

No, I don't think Creationism will be taught in public schools science classes, but I straight out disagree with all the textbooks claiming Evolutionism is fact, because that is not proven, there are contradictions, and the statement is not true.

4. The Bible is the Word of God because God inspired the writings and it is according to what He did, who He is, or His intentions. I believe it is moral because, first, all the proverbs and sayings and simple-to-understand guidelines that help us be (a) a better light [evangelist] to those around us, and (b) to act the way God wants us to act.

Second there are the Ten Commandments which, even for non-Christians, are agreeable as most of them are obvious common sense 'rules.'

NOTE. This is the definition of 'control freak.'

Christians are called to spread the good news, share the Gospel, and evangelize about Jesus to everyone and anyone everywhere and everyday, so I guess the web defines us pretty well since we want to win people over to Christ! If it is taken offensively by people receiving or "invitation" to Christ it is fine with me because the bottom line for me is to make people think. Think about where the earth came from, why people believe there is a God, when time and matter actually began, etc. I don't want people to waste their lives trying to be moral because that doesn't do it: we all need to accept Jesus and believe in our hearts that Jesus is Lord and Creator of all, as earthly acts do not matter as much as the decision between Heaven and Hell.

That's all for now folks but I look forward to my opponent's response and sorry for the long round!
Debate Round No. 1


Regarding evolution, though this is strictly a debate about whether religion is moral or not, I feel obliged to address my opponent. Evolution is, at least nominally, not proven- it is a theory. At the moment evolution is confirmed beyond reasonable doubt with what you rightly said, 'mounds of evidence'- it is even happening in the world of bacteria as we've seen with MRSA and other superbugs due to selective pressure (not the 'work of the devil'). Some say it should not be taught in school because it is not proven, but nor is the theory of gravitation, electromagnetism, special relativity and many other fields of physics, chemistry or biology complete. Moreover my AQA textbooks don't seem to say anything about the 'truth' in evolution- just like all scientific ideas, confirmed. I'm sorry if you have the impression that we evolutionists say it is proven, still if you can't teach what is not proven then don't bother teaching anything.

Now onto morality. You said, 'Atheists may act moral but if they do not know Jesus than their life is worthless '. Let me rephrase that for you- 'How can the Korean people live without our Great Leader Kim Il Sung and Dear Leader Kim Jong Il? How can we be without the loving guidance of our brilliant leaders and the Party?' It is truly totalitarian to say that we owe our life to one man (or a supreme being in the heavens)- if we have to thank the book to be moral, to be health, to be whatever, then our lives are truly worthless- because it is God who put it there, not our own work. To be honest, in regard to this point, when my Catholic aunt pray and thank God for all her meals, I was so tempted to say it was her hard work that earned her daily bread not prayer. If for the sake of argument God will take away your food if you don't pray, then he is nothing better than Kim Jong Il.

So what is the secular or atheist morality? We (I have to side with the atheist on this side) believe that we are moral because it is in our interest and in our nature to be moral- to not kill, steal, honour our neighbours etc. On the other hand, having Ten Commandments whose first four points are more to do with praising the celestial Great Leader than to treat your neighbours properly is utmost immoral. And what about 'thou shalt not kill/murder (depending on the translation)' and 'thou shalt not steal'? It is condescending and insulting to human beings to constantly have to remind them of that, as if they don't know. It is also ironic that in Exodus 32:28, 'The Levites obeyed Moses' command, and about 3,000 people died that day.' The semi-full story goes something like this:

"27 He said to them, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'Every man of you put his sword upon his thigh, and go back and forth from gate to gate in the camp, and kill every man his brother, and every man his friend, and every man his neighbour.'" 28 So the sons of Levi did as Moses instructed, and about three thousand men of the people fell that day. 29 Then Moses said, "Dedicate yourselves today to the LORD-- for every man has been against his son and against his brother-- in order that He may bestow a blessing upon you today."

Just how totalitarian is that? Obey or die. It is not the only part that's a bit like that- a large proportion of the Old Testament involves genocide and murder- how the Lord's own tribe (i.e. the chosen race) triumphs over the others. OK, the Jews suffered at the hands of the Egyptians, but Angel of Death killing every first born child as the 'grand finale' to the ten plagues? I'm sorry, but today that would be called genocide.

What is religion?

'the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.'

or more commonly, the word faith is thrown in as well. What is faith? It is 'complete trust or confidence in someone or something.' Tell me if I am wrong, but you believe the Bible to be absolutely true right? To believe in an absolute truth or complete trust is essentially totalitarianism- that an unalterable authority cannot be contradicted. You say it's not shoving down your throat, but really that claim is bogus. Firm conviction in faith usually (though by no means always) arise from childhood indoctrination or authoritative coercion. If you want to know what is like to worship and thank a god all day long for fictious achievements, even though it might not be a Christian God, I'd recommend a country called North Korea.

I know you as all Christians want to do what you think is good (according the Jesus)- but that is totalitarianism- a conviction in an absolute truth, the obedience to an absolute authority who constant put you under surveillance and threaten you with labour camp of Hell if you dissent against him. Totalitarians always want to do good, they are well meaning idealistic individuals- but their good is different to others so they require constant denunciation of the opponents and if they control the state, repression.

'we all need to accept Jesus and believe in our hearts that Jesus is Lord and Creator of all, as earthly acts do not matter as much as the decision between Heaven and Hell.'

That is a rather bold assertion(basically 'just believe it'). Let me change that a bit for you

we all need to accept Kim Il Sung and believe in our hearts that in the Great Leader and Father of the DPRK, those who refuse his generosity will be punished (with Yodok). Earth acts do not matter means the believe in transcendence to the so-called 'greater good'.

Finally, it is not love to threaten people with hell (the concept of which is disputed). To love and to fear, to believe in God's wrath and God's love is basically double think.

Just to close off this round, what do doctrinaire Christians do? Blow up abortion clinics because they think that abortion is killing according to their interpretation of the Bible. What do doctrinaire Muslims do? 9/11 and galore. Doctrinaire atheists? No such thing and 'militant' atheists like Richard Dawkins write a book. I know you want to talk about Stalin and the 'godless reds', I'll come onto that the next round.

I'm not a Communist by the way, it's just I like that name.


"I'm sorry if you have the impression that we evolutionists say it is proven, still if you can't teach what is not proven then don't bother teaching anything." So you're an evolutionist? Ah, I didn't see that coming. Since you're a pantheist, do you believe God created the Big Bang or the process of evolution happened with the help of a god? I know you don't believe that the Bible is true. Why? What do you base your belief in God on?

Did you tell your aunt that it was her hard work that earned her daily bread, not prayer? Because you should. Challenge her faith/religion and see what her response is. If you believe God created us then you should already be grateful to him; if you believe God loves and cares for us so much that he sent his only son to die on a cross as a symbol of him taking our guilt and sin, then you should be thanking him through prayer and worship; and if you believe you have a relationship with Jesus than you also believe He can take care of you (and already has, such as providing daily bread). Oh, and "daily bread" can be taken literally or metaphorically, as it basically means "our needs" and "our every day materials." As a Christian [little Christ] you would believe all the things above and would probably feel some need to praise the Creator.

About Koreans, I don't know how to respond besides telling you not to compare 'God' with any earthly leader even as powerful as he is. A verse in Ephesians is "...for our fight is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers and the authorities of this dark and evil world." God is spirit and Kim Jong Il is flesh. I believe God is omniscient and all-loving therefore I also argue he knows ahead/more than any of us will ever know. He tests us, He helps us, and He is with us as a Spirit.

You defined secular or atheist morality the way I did in Round 1.

The Ten Commandments do not insult and condescend human beings at all, they are simply guidelines as I have said times before! For Christians, if their wasn't a commandment saying 'thou shalt not steal...murder,' how would we know God doesn't want us to perform these acts? In fact these "rules" just go to show how much God cares for us. The Ten Commandments are most definitely moral because it is 'the concern of human behavior.'

Concerning Exodus and the 'killing' God commanded them to do, I argue that it is NOT a contradiction with the fourth commandment. Included in these commandments was the first and most important commandment, "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. So, after giving the Hebrews an opportunity to join God's side, God ordered the others who were worshipping idols to be killed. Is this a contradiction? No! It would be a contradiction if God had NOT order the idol worshippers to be killed. Killing under these circumstances is not murder, but justice. Even so, there will always be people who prefer justice to mercy.

"Just how totalitarian is that? Obey or die." God was giving a gift and a warning to man kind. It was a logical command and God gave it for good reason, and the people should listen because God knows everything. Again, with the ten plagues given to the Egyptians, God had warned the Pharaoh about the things coming. Would people call it a genocide if God plagued a people-group now-days? I don't think so. We'd all pee our pants and take underground cover.

When was the last time Christianity was "shoved down your throat." The claim that it IS is bogus and doesn't make sense. I told you why we might look like "control freaks" from the outside. It's because we want people to see the truth and know God for themselves. But please, give me one example of religion getting shoved into your throat because it is a vague statement that can't be claimed without a vague example. Busted.

We do not threaten people with Hell; there is much more to telling people about God! We want them to experience GOD'S love so that they will be convinced of the spiritual realms such as Heaven and Hell. Hell is not what brings people to Christ. It's the thought of 'forgiveness of all sins and eternal life' that draws people in. And once they dig deeper and see the evidence, the truth, their faith, relationship, and religion becomes genuine.

About militant atheists, I think it is (a) against the Constitution and immoral; (b) pointless for themselves and harmful to religious folk; (c) they should let religious people be religious. If they can't admit that they don't know which life-style/religion is true and false, they should let the religious people alone and focus on their own lives.

Doctrinaire Christians =

As a Christian: yes, I think of the Bible and God when considering if abortion is right or wrong, who/which gives us morals to live by and I believe we should obey the commandments which God has set before us. But to me abortion is also murder, I get that from plain common sense. It's wrong to take away life from an innocent thing in a mother's womb who will grow up to be a human being.

By the way, abortion is immoral to me because a mother shouldn't control whether the next generation in her family gets to live or not. It's a bad human behavior.
Debate Round No. 2


Religion shoved down your throat? OK
Medieval Europe
Islamic Khilafah
Mormon fundamentalists
Ken Ham's creation 'science classes' for children- there's even a song where its lyrics include 'Bible...100% true...because it is the word of God!' (sorry that I have to paraphrase it)
Taliban Afghanistan
or just general 'Bible studies' for children, while telling them it's all true

'About Koreans... I believe God is omniscient...'

Totalitarians always tell us how they are different from other equally totalitarian ideals, their lines of argument are always the same- 'oh our ideology is perfect. Past crimes, oh those are just aberrations of our perfect ideals. The opponents' ideals are wrong- we know the absolute truth.' Furthermore, every leader in a totalitarian regime, along with its fanatic supporters, will ruthlessly reject the legitimacy of the other regimes and denounce their enemies as 'false Gods'. The Christians crusaded against the Muslims in the middle ages, both of whom believe theirs is the true God and their holy book is the correct one- indeed similar but opposing totalitarian forces like Communism and Nazism faced brutal confrontation with each other. They believe each others God to be heretical- in other words, my imaginary godfather (excuse the pun) is better than yours. Notice I said religion as in both Christianity, Islam and Judaism, because every religion thinks theirs is the true God (except for Buddhism, which by definition is wrongly classified as a religion, which is not very dogmatic and is more open).

Let me emphasise on that point. Imagine you're talking to a dogmatic Communist and ask why Communism is better than National Socialism and not as equally as bad. They will point to a passage in the Communist Manifesto and say, 'but Marx talked about class struggle and the eventual triumph of the working class ('workers of the world have nothing to lose but their chains, and a whole world to win'-Karl Marx). The Nazis wanted are different because they talk about race'. The so called 'perfect ideology'- is only different to the 'criminal ideology' by one word- class as opposed to race. The differences between totalitarianisms are very superficial- the practices of 'truth imposing' are the same.

"You So, after giving the Hebrews an opportunity to join God's side, God ordered the others who were worshipping idols to be killed. Is this a contradiction? No! It would be a contradiction if God had NOT order the idol worshippers to be killed. Killing under these circumstances is not murder, but justice. Even so, there will always be people who prefer justice to mercy.

This still perfectly demonstrates the totalitarianism of religion. This is essentially begging the question here, to assume that the Bible is already true before its validity is being discussed. This is the problem with religion and the supposedly 'secular' totalitarian doctrines- 'this is the absolute truth because the book said so'. The last part when it says the people rejected God's mercy- just watch a North Korean execution to see how the victims rejected 'the generosity of the general' by defecting to the enemies. Perhaps Ghandi very poignantly pointed out 'an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'.

You said that God gave a warning when he send the Ten Plagues. Well, the Nazis had given the Jews advance notices when rounding them up for deportation to the ghettos in 1942. Also, if I say to you, 'I'll kill your son if you don't believe this...'- I have given advanced warning, but should the act be carried out it is still murder, with or without warning. Besides, they are children! Why should they be punished for the Pharaoh's sins, any more than a murderer's daughter be punished for her father's?

Coming back to the North Koreans, let me tell you about some North Korean propaganda. Kim Il Sung was thought to have created the universe, the Koreans were the first humans; Kim the first can also supposedly create hand grenades out of pine cones. Kim can also allegedly create bountiful harvests, control the weather with his moods. Apparently, a new star appeared in the sky on the day of Kim Jong Il's birth, with double rainbows , birds singing in Korean welcoming him, who was born in a log cabin on Mount Baekdu. North Korean must live in accordance to the 'Juche spirit'- it is the absolute truth in North Korea- the truth is whatever the party wants them to say and believe. The North Koreans live highly regimented lives, praising the sham doctrine daily and fanatically hate the 'US imperialist' enemies, while almost totally blissful in their ignorant and deprived state. Now the Father, the Son and the Juche Spirit are no coincidence- North Korea's capital, Pyongyang was once 'the Jerusalem of the East'. Kim Il Sung was once a Christian who knew the miracles of the Bible- he was very meticulous and cunning in exploiting the pre-existing Christian superstition as well as imported Japanese emperor worship to control the people. North Korean morality is that 'the Great Leader is always right', just as the Christians and Muslims, unless secular enough to not literally interpret it, believe that the Bible/Qur'an to be 100% infallible.

Now I promised to address the common misconception that Communism is Godless and antithetical to Christianity. When a French ambassador visited the Soviet Union in the 1930s and saw a massive mural of Stalin being paraded. He exclaimed, 'oh God!' to which the Soviet translator said, 'yes you're looking at him right now'. When Stalin took over the Soviet Union the Russians were very superstitious and had a cultural tendency of obedience to a strong leader who ruled in the name of God. Stalin took advantage of this, as well as keeping the Orthodox church close to control the people. Yes he did blow up churches, but so did Bloody Mary shut down non-Catholic churches- it was to suppress opposition (like Galileo's house arrest), not religion. Communism in the English language was supposed coined by John Goodwyn Bramby, who actually founded the Communist Church. The earlier record of its use was in the 16th century by Thomas More in his book Utopia (Thomas More was a Catholic and staunchly anti-Christian).

But even this society he spoke of is radically different to the doctrinaire Christian and Communist views- it believes that there is no absolute truth or correct religion. The society advocates secularism and reasoning as opposed to pure faith to convince people into a certain religion. In fact, in the book, a Christian convert was imprisoned for shouting how all the other people will be damned- but that is not to say he is evil because he is a Christian.

This also tells you a bit more about me- Christianity is part of our really history- it has influenced our culture and language. But to study its cultural impact is not the same as believing in its absolutist moral values.

Having said so, it is not to say religious people are immoral- but the truly moral religious people have not taken the Bible too literally and selectively quoted it to justify good actions. Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa and Mahatma Ghandi had all done good charitable works. That is not to say they did so because of religion- do I need to be told by a celestial North Korea to be good? Do atheists have no morality because there isn't a central doctrine guiding them? The only 'central doctrine' is the belief that there is no absolute truth, that by imposing our truths on people based on blind faith in favour of rational induction and experimentation is immoral.

Religion overall tries to do good, I'm sure you are not unloving, but ultimately create totalitarian nightmares like medieval Europe or the Khilafah in trying to create their utopia- because oppositions are 'damned'. Remember- good and evil depends on context and perspective, not narrow, dogmatic absolutist convictions as religions do.

For atheism and constitution- see my comments


I see how we are talking about religion shoved down our throat--not that it goes along with the topic, morality--but I am going to mostly defend Christianity.

I don't know what you mean by Medieval Europe. But I agree about Mormon fundamentalists, since it's actually PART of their religion to go door-to-door and do some sort of missionary work (whether on bicycles or foot); the Islamic Khilafa does not publically announce a lot to the general public about their beliefs [argue if you think otherwise].

Here are a few sites which slightly explain each religions you think are getting "shoved down our throats."

About Ken Ham, though, I don't want to hear these sentences coming from the same mouth: "science classes for children...a song where its lyrics include 'Bible...100% true..." and you also saying, "Evolutionists don't claim that their theory is 100% true" (paraphrasing). That's the thing. Every Evolutionist I've seen or met has said WITHOUT DOUBT that there aren't a lot of contradictions with Evolution and it is completely true. Don't complain about how Creationism is being pronounced true, when Evolution is doing the same thing! In textbooks and even on little TV shows--shows on PBS Kids where paleontologists say, straight out, that the world is billions of years old. Evolutionism takes the same amount of faith as Creationism to believe it, and while I do admit Creationism is part of a religion, I also think IT should have the same rights for proclamation as Evolution does. Getting off topic here, though!

My opponent: "They believe each others God to be heretical- in other words, my imaginary godfather (excuse the pun) is better than yours. Notice I said religion as in both Christianity, Islam and Judaism, because every religion thinks theirs is the true God." Well, I am arguing that Christianity is most (1) scientific, (2) logical, (3) moral.

(1) Christianity's "holy book," the Bible, is accurate in many historically observational AND scientific ways, including the way each book in the Bible
-tells the story of the life in that time period (journalism)
-tells praises in form of song and poetry to God
-has historical letters from that time (i. e. Eph., Rom., etc.)
-prophesies FORETOLD and HAPPENING
-scientific claims made before any of it was discovered/invented/figured out

(2) Christianity is the most logical, and unique, because of it's salvation. No other religion has the same way to get to an eternal after-life (such as heaven) and the Christian God makes more sense than the others. Take for example His emotions, explained to us through the Bible, how he loves all his creations but hates those who do evil [see site].
We are ALL sinners and it is impossible to live on this earth doing everything perfectly. So, unlike all the other religions moral ideals, the Bible says you have to trust and believe in you heart that Jesus is Lord and you will never get to God by doing good works. This doesn't mean salvation is IMMORAL, it just means to GET saved you don't have to/can't be moral.

(3) To further explain why Christianity is moral, the Bible shows that Jesus, 2-3,000 years ago, taught the Experts on the Torah which of the commandments in the Law is the most important [or greatest]. See Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. But it goes something like this: the expert asks Jesus the question and He replies,

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. The second is this: love your neighbor as yourself."

Is this, (love), not the most powerful weapon to use against/for anybody? Is this not the best and most important moral in life? Many learn that when you are with someone who loves you, you should love them too (and express it). If somebody treats you badly, many also learn that the best way to end the fight or conflict, is to love. There are many ways to love and some people think they should only love family, and/or friends, but the Bible tells us to love 'your neighbor.' That means love ANYONE that passes your way. (By the way I'm not talking about the "marriage" type of love between two genders, just LOVE in general to show KINDNESS...!) In fact ALL the commandments are about loving God and others, respecting God and others, and not hurting others, etc.
Other verses concerning love; forgiveness; morals: Matthew 5:38, Matthew 5:9, Matthew 5:19 Luke 6:27-30, Luke 21:14-15.

I don't know what your definition of morals is but Christianity/the Bible shows us a lot of ways we should be moral in life. Islam and Judaism do not have that kind of morality.

Begging the question and totalitarianism are completely different things, I don't know how they came up in the same paragraph. Why would we discuss the moralities of a Book you can't assume JUST ONCE that's true? This debate doesn't work if you aren't ready for me to use the words in the Bible as Christianity's foundation for morality.

"This is the problem with religion and the supposedly 'secular' totalitarian doctrines- 'this is the absolute truth because the book said so'. In a way, this statement works because what is said in the Bible is proven true: historically, observably, and scientifically. So how couldn't it be the absolute truth because what is said in the book is true?

"Also, if I say to you, 'I'll kill your son if you don't believe this...' - I have given advanced warning but should the act be carried out it is still murder, with or without warning." Is this about the morality of God, of the people 2,000 years ago, or about the morals of modern day Christians using the Bible? It seems like you've been focused on the first two options most of all. But to rebut your scenario, take Kermit Gosnell, America's biggest serial killer...or guilty people like him. Should he have been life-sentenced? Killed...? Now, given all the adjectives and ways the Bible describes the Christian God, He is all-knowing. (You can assume that since we are arguing the morality of Christianity.) Would we obey the Ultimate Judge (God), or our selfish, tiny pea-brain instincts which don't know the future?

The children of Pharaoh, murdered by the Death Angel were not guilty of doing anything. But the Pharaoh was punished severely BY losing his first-born. The Bible says God righteously judges us of our sins and gives mercy to those who are innocent. What do you think Christ would do: send the children to Hell? The first-borns died a painful life, taken away by death, but if all this was true God WOULD NOT punish the kids any more, not according to the Bible! yeah--we blame God for taking the life of innocent children when abortion is legal...but...that's another topic :)

North Korea is what you call totalitarianism. Kim Il Sung and the Authorities of NK are the type of people you'd call control freaks.
"North Korean must live in accordance to the 'Juche spirit'- it is the absolute truth in North Korea- the truth is whatever the party wants them to say and believe." There is no religious freedom, and the story of who created the earth, Kim Il Sung's birthday, was all made and publically pronounced "truth" as a way to support the highness of Sung. After all, the party wants them to say and believe anything they say, the people believe it or they are FORCED to. You say Kim Il Sung was "...once a Christian who knew the miracles of the Bible- he was very meticulous and cunning in exploiting the pre-existing Christian superstition as well as imported Japanese emperor worship to control the people." So basically he copied the Christian ideas and forced everyone to believe that HE was god.

Thanks, vote con!
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
Thanks for the sarcasm...
Posted by spinosauruskin 2 years ago
As eloquent as always, comrade.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
So did I. Thankfully my A level economics has paid off. PS I think we should have another debate about religion and morality- I think I was attacking the straw man and we misrepresented each other's views
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
I ran out of characters in the last round!!
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
Sorry, I'd like to correct the fact that Thomas More was anti-protestant, it was a typo when I put anti-Christian
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
Another thing, when I say God, I meant by the theist God- the God that is all pervasive, all knowing, all caring, all powerful all etc. As a pantheist God to me is a metaphor or 'a sweet dream' as fellow Pantheist Stephen Hawking would put it.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
This is what the First Amendment said,

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."

Article VI specifies that

"no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

It also guarantees right to privacy, strange how God never allows you to even have private thoughts- reminds me of the concept of 'ThinkPol' (thought police) in Orwell's dystopian 1984.
Posted by zommunist 2 years ago
That's true, but I don't think teaching creationism in school as another hypothesis is a good idea. Maybe as a history of biology- I'll explain after or maybe during next round. But thanks for raising this point
Posted by Mussab 2 years ago
Con said he was against the idea of calling Evolution a fact. Not against the idea of teaching Evolution. In his opinion, he thinks both should be taught
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
Haha OK :)
No votes have been placed for this debate.