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

5 Bible lessons they don't teach you in Sunday School

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
backwardseden has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/14/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 3,642 times Debate No: 104450
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




taken from "Atheist Republic"
In the books of Matthew and Mark in the Bible, there is a rather strange story about Jesus having a bit of a conflict with....a fig tree. Figs are yummy and all, but this is pretty extreme. This fig tree didn't have any fruit on it - because it wasn't actually fig season yet - and Jesus was hungry. So what's a hungry god-man to do? Curse the tree so it will never bear fruit again of course! Damn tree.

  • Matthew 21:18-20 Early in the morning, as Jesus was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered. When the disciples saw this, they were amazed.
  • Mark 11:12-14 The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.

Jesus was apparently a pretty cryptic guy - or the people writing down his words were - either way, there are quite a few stories like this in the Bible (and that's excluding the book of Revelation which is its own brand of crazy). But God was downright sadistic. Let's take a look at some lessons found in the Bible that most people probably didn't learn in Sunday School.

1. God has a thing with sex and genitals

> Maybe it's because he doesn't get to have it, but according to the Bible, God uses sex (and genitals) to control or punish people more than once. Using rape, incest and circumcision to teach lessons would not be allowed with humans, but apparently it's totally cool for God to do it.

God established the practice of male circumcision as proof of the people's willingness to obey him pretty early on.

  • Genesis 17:10-12 This is my agreement with you and all your descendants, which you must obey: Every male among you must be circumcised. Cut away your foreskin to show that you are prepared to follow the agreement between me and you. From now on when a baby boy is eight days old, you will circumcise him. This includes any boy born among your people or any who is your slave, who is not one of your descendants.

> David, the future king and the man chosen by God to defeat the Philistines (of David and Goliath fame), went out with his men and killed 200 Philistines and "collected" their foreskins, then used them as the payment for marrying King Saul's daughter, Michal. Now that's what I call an engagement present.

  • 1 Samuel 18:24-26 When Saul's servants told him what David had said, Saul said, "Tell David, 'The king doesn't want money for the bride. All he wants is a hundred Philistine foreskins to get even with his enemies.'" Saul planned to let the Philistines kill David. When Saul's servants told this to David, he was pleased to become the king's son-in-law. So he and his men went out and killed two hundred Philistines. David brought all their foreskins to Saul so he could be the king's son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal for his wife.

> God commanded rape in so many places in the Bible it's hard to pick just one, but a passage in 2 Samuel is pretty bad and is a great example of God using rape and child murder as a punishment.

  • 2 Samuel 12:11-14 "This is what the Lord says: 'I am bringing trouble to you from your own family. While you watch, I will take your wives from you and give them to someone who is very close to you. He will have sexual relations with your wives, and everyone will know it. You had sexual relations with Bathsheba in secret, but I will do this so all the people of Israel can see it.'" Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You will not die. But what you did caused the Lord's enemies to lose all respect for him. For this reason the son who was born to you will die."

> God even commanded a raped woman to marry her attacker.

  • Deuteronomy 22:28-29 If a man meets a virgin who is not engaged to be married and forces her to have sexual relations with him and people find out about it, the man must pay the girl's father about one and one-fourth pounds of silver. He must also marry the girl, because he has dishonored her, and he may never divorce her for as long as he lives.

2. ...and on that note, it's pretty clear that God really hates women... A LOT

> Aside from all the raping, even a quick reading of the Bible reveals that God hates women. This can be easily explained using cultural context and by looking at who actually wrote the Bible and when - but it seems if God is perfect, he would teach people not to be sexist a-holes. But in both the New and Old Testaments, the Bible teaches us otherwise. In 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2, women are told not to talk and Titus is practically a how-to manual on being a good, quiet and submissive Christian woman. In fact, most of the epistles are totally sexist.

  • 1 Corinthians 14:34-36 women should keep quiet in the church meetings. They are not allowed to speak, but they must yield to this rule as the law says. If they want to learn something, they should ask their own husbands at home. It is shameful for a woman to speak in the church meeting. Did God's teaching come from you? Or are you the only ones to whom it has come?
  • 1 Timothy 2:9-12 Also, women should wear proper clothes that show respect and self-control, not using braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes. Instead, they should do good deeds, which is right for women who say they worship God. Let a woman learn by listening quietly and being ready to cooperate in everything. But I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to listen quietly,

3. He also doesn't seem too fond of the unborn, infants and children

> Not only does the Bible tell of infanticide, abortion and child murder, it actually tells us God, or his representatives at his behest, commanded it. Not cool God, not cool at all.

The prophet Hosea spoke of pregnant women being ripped open and children being torn to pieces because the nation of Israel had "fought against God."

  • Hosea 13:16 The nation of Israel will be ruined, because it fought against God. The people of Israel will die in war; their children will be torn to pieces, and their pregnant women will be ripped open."

> And Jeremiah told of a time when God would destroy the city and make people so hungry that they would eat their kids.

  • Jeremiah 19:9 An enemy army will surround the city and will not let anyone go out to get food. I will make the people so hungry that they will eat the bodies of their own sons and daughters, and then they will begin to eat each other.'

As an interesting side note, the historian Flavius Josephus told of Jews starving in Jerusalem during the Roman siege of 70 CE who actually did eat their own children.

...and perhaps one of the most disturbing is Psalm (a song of celebration) 137 in which the psalmist is proclaiming retribution by smashing babies against rocks. Very uplifting.

  • Psalm 137:8-9 People of Babylon, you will be destroyed. The people who pay you back for what you did to us will be happy. They will grab your babies and throw them against the rocks.

4. When God likes you, you can get away with ANYTHING

> King David, Cain, all the prophets, all the apostles, Noah, Adam, King Saul...they all committed atrocious acts of violence, greed, sexism, racism, etc. You name it, at least one of them did it, often multiple times. And yet the Bible tells us God blessed them with money and/or power and the apostles were the ones who essentially established the Christian religion...hmmm...

5. When God doesn't like you, you're probably dead, and your death will probably be creative

> Lot's wife turned into a salty version of her former self just because she looked back on her hometown from which she was fleeing because...well...because God was pissed off and was destroying it with burning sulfur.

  • Genesis 19:26 At that point Lot's wife looked back. When she did, she became a pillar of salt.

> People got swallowed up by giant cracks in the earth.

  • Numbers 16:32 The earth opened and swallowed them and all their families. All Korah's men and everything they owned went down.

> 42 Kids got mauled by two mother bears because they mocked the baldness of one of the prophets (no joke).

  • 2 Kings 2:23-24 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. On the way some boys came out of the city and made fun of him. They said to him, "Go up too, you baldhead! Go up too, you baldhead!" Elisha turned around, looked at them, and put a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two mother bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys to pieces.

...and a bonus: Mark 14 tells of a disciple at the time of Jesus' arrest who was only wearing a towel which was grabbed off him and he ran away naked. Yep. Naked. Who was he? No one the Bible is a naked mystery man.

  • Mark 14:51-52 A young man, wearing only a linen cloth, was following Jesus, and the people also grabbed him. But the cloth he was wearing came off, and he ran away naked.

Where do Christians get the image of a loving, just God who wants to bless and heal people and give them peace on earth and good will toward men? It definitely isn't from a simple reading of the Bible. Even though the Bible continues to be a very highly sold book, it's probably safe to say that most people, even Christians, haven't read everything that's in it. This alone makes it easy for Christian leaders now and throughout history, to tell people pretty much anything about God and get them to believe it. And of course a benevolent god is a being more appealing on which to establish a religion.

The Bible contains many inconvenient stories, passages and lessons. This inconvenience is even a reason apologists will give for its validity.

The argument goes something like this, "If people wanted to invent a god and a holy book, wouldn't it make sense to make it beautiful and perfect? Its imperfection and difficult passages are evidence that it's real." Apologetics aside, today in the developed world, most of the more disturbing or unbelievable scriptures in the Bible are explained away as "metaphor" or "culturally unique". But the truth is that there are some really messed up lessons in the Bible that aren't limited to a handful of goofy verses and the most sadistic behavior is modeled by God himself.

What are your favorite Bible verses or your craziest, most horrific, or ridiculous SundaySchool stories? We want to hear them! Reply to this email to tell us. We might share it on the website. Please let us know if you wish to remain anonymous.

Prove that there are redeeming qualities within this so-called god of the bible such as love care and kindness.

I hope that you find this love, care and kindness in this god, somehow, and for whatever reason(s), because then that would be HUGE SUPER MAJOR HYPOCRITICAL CONTRADICTIONS and INCONSISTENCIES in this unproved god, the bible, thus proving the god of the bible, the bible itself to be CONFUSION at best and truly UNREADABLE and should thus be shelved.

dsjpk5 will not be allowed to vote in the voting process.



Right away I just want to say I've heard five out of six of these spoken on in church, so the title of this debate is a lie. I will, throughout this debate, be replacing the word 'Sunday School' with 'Study,' as it seems more appropriate.

The Fig Tree
I mean, he didn't kill a child did he? Did he kill anything sentient? Who created trees? Jesus did. (John 1:1) If he made them he can kill them just as well right? (Job 1:21)

Let's get real here though. There's some very powerful theology behind this passage to the believer. Let's first look at some context. Jesus, the day before, went into Jerusalem as a praised king. (Mark 11:1-11) Jesus saw the tree had leaves the next day. (Mark 11:13) Jesus cursed the tree for having no fruit. (Mark 11:14) Then Jesus went to cleanse the temple. (Mark 11:15-18) The Disciples left the city the next day, and saw the tree withered. (Mark 11:19-20) Jesus then used this as a message about prayer for his followers. (Mark 11:21-25)

There is a lot going on here. But the biggest thing to note is that the Bible uses many symbols to represent Israel. Vines and Trees, especially Fig-Trees, are typically used for this purpose. (Luke 13:6-9, Micah 4:3-4, Genesis 49:9-12, Psalm 80:8-11) Fig Trees generally provide fruit before they provide leaves, so if there were leaves on this tree one would expect fruit as well. In the same way, if Jesus saw 'leaves' in the nation of Israel, he would also expect to see their fruit. (Galatians 5:22-23) The timing of this story is not a coincident. Immediately after this story we see Jesus heading into the temple to curse the false worshippers and false teachers in God's temple. The Fig Tree represents Jesus' cursing and denouncement of Israel following their false worship. (Mark 11:1-11)

This passage, therefore has two spiritual meanings behind it, making it a perfect topic for study.

God made sex and geneitals didn't here? I mean...right? I've never been to a church that simply ignored circumcision, or any of the other verses listed here, so to say this isn't studied in 'sunday school,' is simply false.

Genesis 17:10-12 - This was the sign of the covenant, a permenant mark of the people of God to remember the promise of Abraham. I don't see the issue.

1 Samuel 18:24-26
This passage requires two men doing things by an agreement. This has nothing to do with God.

2 Samuel 12:11-14
David raped someone, then had her husband killed so no one found out. This is the King of Israel, the king of all God's people. God says he will allow the evil of men to be repaid, and will give people over to their evil pursuits if they so desire. (Romans 1:28) I don't see the issue here.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
That's a faulty translation. The original Hebrew text means 'and takes hold of her' or 'wields her.' It does not say, as my opponent has quoted, 'forces her to.' (1) The Hebrew word here is tapas. This can mean a variety of things. Different translations use different phrases such as: "taking her," "lay hold of her," "and takes her." Now to interpret scripture there is a field called hermeneutics. The essentials is that we intrepret scripture with scripture. Does tapas occur elsewhere in the Bible? Well yes, it does. It's used to refer to handling an insturment, (Genesis 4:21) to weirld a sword, (Ezek. 21:11; 30:21), the sickle (Jer. 50:16), the shield (Jer. 46:9), oars (Ezek. 27:29), and the bow (Amos 2:15). Moses “took” the two tablets of the law (Deut. 9:17). Please note the references from Genesis and Deuteronomy - two books written by Moses, who wrote this passage here. This word, as far as I can tell, is never used to indicate force, but rather a simple grabbing. We use this same type of language today. We say we "take" someone as our bride, or a young man takes someone to be his wife. This is not indicative of force.

Let's also take a look at context which my opponent did not include.

23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. 26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: 27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

In verse 25 it is very specific. It says that the man forces her to lie with him. A different word is used in the Hebrew too - chazaq - which means to force. This word is intentionally changed in verse 28, because it's not talking about rape.

Let's also look at Exodus 22:16. This is the exact same law, being given years earlier. It reads, “If a man entices a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall surely pay the bride-price for her to be his wife.” It says here that he entices the virgin, and this is talking about the same law.

So look at the verse again. There are plenty of different circumstances described, but this one is talking about a virgin having intentional and willful sex with another man. After she has stained her virginity like this, who else would marry her? The Bible says that the man mustthen marry the women he had consensual relations with.

(1) -

The Bible supports women's rights, with female leaders, deacons etc. (Genesis 2:18, Judges 4, Romans 16:1) The simple fact of the matter, however, is that men and women are different. The woman is the supportive role of the family structure. This doesn't mean weaker, or less valuable, this simply means that she does not take authority. There are biological differences between the two, so we know they do have differences. Who would know what the woman is best at better than the creator? Isn't God the most qualified to tell us what women are skilled at?

We live in a culture that says outspokenness and dominance equals importance, but this simply isn't true. That means that any introvert who cares not to speak is also less valuable than the extrovert who is perfectly comfortable talking often. This isn't true, they're simply different people.

Me and my opponent had an entire debate on this matter, which I had won. ( This topic is much too large to cover as a sub-point, but allow me to summarize.

Every single person who has ever lived was once a child. Being a child is not a quality or a nature, but a point in development. Therefore, God cannot hate children as people, as such people do not exist. Does he hate the age of childhood? Why then did he create it? Why does he have children speaking and teaching such as Samuel and Solomon? Why does Jesus tell the little children to come to him, as recorded in at least three gospels?

The fact that children are so often referenced as being 'taken' or harmed within the Bible indicates that God, or at least the authors, deems them valuable enough to reference. For more please see my notes in the debate listed above.

This simply isn't true. Noah didn't actually do very many bad deeds, aside from being found drunk and nude. Adam's sins are the reason we're all sinful. King Saul was ousted from his throne because of his sin. David lost a large chunk of his nation, and his family, for his sin. God blessed what was good in people, but he also cursed those who did bad. The entire Old Testament is a story about God wrestling with the sinfulness of man. The entire book of Judges and Kings talk about this in great detail.

'Looked back' entails more than a physical look in the original text. It implies she turned around in order to return to it.

Numbers 16 is full of context that describes the wicked nature of the people being killed here.

Elisha most likely was not bald. This is an insult of cultural significance. Not only were they insulting Elisha, but by being God's prophet and spokemen, they effectively insulted God as well. The original word for child or kid here actually implies ages from 16-20ish. These aren't toddlers who don't know what they're doing.

I don't see the point of the Mark passage, my apologies.

A Question
If God does not exist, how can you say any of the stuff above is wrong? Isn't my opinion on right and wrong just as valid as yours is without an objective standard? To say any of the things above are bad is to borrow from a Christian concept.

Closing Notes
I really wish my opponent had put this together himself. Unfortunately this is all just a copy and paste though.
Debate Round No. 1


Ahhhhhhhhh now, at last, we finally know where our illustrious dogmatic stupendous opponent who obviously doesn’t know his bible all that well and thinks his church does, gets his “how” and “where” interpretations from which are clearly incorrect. Did it ever ever dawn on him that his church is incorrect, wrong, way off base, stupid, ignorant and has no fact base except to meander, and groom him for their own self righteous lawn mowing Coca Puffs prizes so they can use him to convert others into their realms of deceitfulness and absurdities which is what nearly every single christian church does as its members neatly follow and fall in line?
- Kris two highlights 8:00, 12:30

Wow did you absolutely step in a load of doggie paddle arm pit love songs. I mean as usual you invent excuses, you know it, you come up with blatant misfits that are of your own,making that almost no one on this planet will agree with except for precious few christians, if that, not being able to prove one GOD DAMNED thing, and you expect me and everyone to take your word at it without proof naturally, and yet nearly all atheists on this planet will agree with The Atheist Republic. And you know what? If you don’t believe it, tell you what, you go into a few of the better known atheist websites, oh say maybe 10 or so, and you compare the article with the websites. And guess what? They WILL match at nearly every---single---drool of the hungry lips. .

I get it also, your interpretations comes from someone who will not pay any attention to his god when he tells you Deuteronomy 13 9-10 to come on down here and stone me to death because I am not worshiping your god and am leading you astray. This god of yours also tells you to stone gays to death. Those are a few examples of your clear and blatant misinterpretations. So yeah, your word/ well how can anyone take your interpretations as being correct? Ah yes, “the law”? Huh? Once again until your god says something like “I the lord thy god grants jesus to break my laws, rules and regulations and thus bring in your own laws, rules and regulations so that they remain truthful and true” Nothing like that, not even close exists in your bible. Sorry, your god is jesus’s superior. So indeed your precious christianity is false, your jesus is false, the NT is false.
Yeah you like to neatly shovel things in your bible where they don’t exist to suit your wants, needs and desires, just as every christian does. Sorry. Things don’t work that way. But obviously it does work that way in your church. That’s why your are so attached to it and why it is so attached to you.
Oh I get it, so you think that you can “properly” interpret from text in which YOUR god if using 0 intelligence would NEVER use text as a form of communication, the worst form of communication possible so people like you can get it wrong.
Now which translation are you using? Awe gee could it be that the translation YOU are reading has it wrong? What makes you think that YOU are interpreting correctly and EVERYONE outside of YOU is misinterpreting? Nah that never crumbled in your mind.

The Fig Tree
“I mean, he didn't kill a child did he?” Well god did, which is 100% pure evil and for no reason to make it even more evil and that’s also hate. “Did he kill anything sentient?” How do you know trees are not sentient? Regardless trees have just as much a right live as everything else and you DO NOT kill trees just because you throw a temper tantrum as your precious jesus did. AND trees will most certainly be around on this planet a lot longer than man will the way man is going as man is destined to become extinct oh so soon. Pathetic excuse as usual on your part. Try again.

OK I’m not going to look up any verses that you post. If you cannot post them in their entirety, that’s your problem. We’ve gotten into this before.

OK there’s a lot of symbolism in the bible. Big whoop. Anything else that is startling? Do you know what a strangler fig is? Why don’t you look it up. Or better yet, look up fig trees from around the world and discover why, how, where and what makes them so abundant. And then take back the idiotic symbolism between the fig and Israel. Shocking isn’t it that they were around the world before your saddened christ. Jeez.

1. Oh I get it circumcision is taught to kindergartners and its taught to groups your age as well when you are in Sunday school? Um no.

1 Samuel 18:24-26
You really are an idiot. Your so-called point had 0 to do with what the point of the article made. And oh yes IT DOES have to do with YOUR god. Now you go back and you read it again and then you see how disgusting it is which is NOT taught in Sunday school now is it? Nope. Its not even taught to nearly every single person breathing because its so sick and disgusting.

2 Samuel 12:11-14
You are defending rape as being perfectly OK with YOUR god. There is NO justifiable defense. None. No one who is sane will agree with you, only christians and precious few at that.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
No its not a faulty translation.
“Let's also take a look at context which my opponent did not include” I already have. Long before you put them on the screen. Very disgusting. NOT TAUGHT IN SUNDAY SCHOOL and those verses are most certainly talking about rape.
Now do you want some more verses that take about rape that are NOT TAUGHT IN SUNDAY SCHOOL??????? That were NOT in the article?
You haven’t the slightest idea as to what rape is. Study up on what rape actually is before you open your maw. K?

So let’s not look at the verses again. Instead let’s slam it down your throat and rightly so. From another site who also happens to have it correct,...
Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker? Answer: God.

Death to the Rape Victim (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)
If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.
It is clear that God doesn’t give a damn about the rape victim. He is only concerned about the violation of another mans “property”.
biblehub = worthless.

“The Bible supports women's rights,” Good. I am glad that you pointed that out. That means that your bible is a super duper major hypocritical contradiction on women’s issues and cannot be trusted for any reason which are THE RULES for this debate as you have justly proved. ESPECIALLY for women’s rights and issues. Oh and I decided to read genesis 2:18 = X nope, sucking up to Romans 16:1 nope = sucking up to the church a male dominated christ entombed bile kissup. Judges 4 huh?
“The woman is the supportive role of the family structure.” What greasy racist trash heap toaster slivers says so? Oh YOU do. A true womanizer who has no friends or loved ones and has obviously never touched a woman in his life. Wow does it show. Oh absolutely according to you it most certainly does mean weaker and less valuable and damn proud of it. Oh and I get it also, you being the dominate pig headed male, you are to give the woman that “authority”. So your god, according to you does in fact hate women. And 2 verses and one measly chapter which were easily torn down, amount to nothing.
“Who would know what the woman is best at better than the creator? Isn't God the most qualified to tell us what women are skilled at?” No because the woman knows what she is best at considering the fact that you have yet to prove that there is a creator according to your bible. Regardless, the woman is better and more adapt at being who she is than your god is at being a god. Now read that again so you get it straight.

3. No you lost the god hates children debate by the beginnings of every universe imaginable. That’s because your god in fact does hate children. All it takes is simpleton reading in your arrogant bible. There isn’t one sane person on this planet that will agree with you. Once again you must think its perfectly OK and justifiable for your god to kill innocent babies and children for no reason whatsoever as the verses presented by this article clearly proves.
“Every single person who has ever lived was once a child. Being a child is not a quality or a nature, but a point in development.” So according to you that child/ infant does not have the right to develop. OK great then you believe that abortions SHOULD ABSOLUTELY 100% BE LEGAL in which I have NEVER heard a christain state out of me talking with about 25,000 or so. So go out and commit some abortions right now. Become Wayne Williams, Garavito, or Andrei Chikatilo since you think you are so charming and wonderful and bright.
See you cannot take your god’s word at him blatantly telling the universe in his own way that he truly hates children, and yet you, well you take his word at what other than whatever you feel like?
And you ask some questions that you 100% know the answers to. Its all about power, then comes fear and then comes control. That is so easy to do with children especially when they are in pain and suffering. And your god absolutely loves to watch suffering and pain and evil and hate of every kind, otherwise he would not create it. Simple.

Well I do not have enough room to get into #’s 4 and 5. But as predicted you have shown absolutely no love, care or kindness that there is within your god. None. However you have shown that there are most certainly many hypocritical contradictions and inconsistencies within your bible. So your bible is at best, confusion and is truly unreadable and wow what hypocrisy.



Fig Tree
Jesus did not kill a child in this passage. Don't change the subject. You don't know that trees are sentient, so to argue that this was immoral on his part is illogical. Who decides what has the right to live? Who says you can't just kill trees?

The verses I provided are sourcing for what I said. You can choose to look them up or not, but you're effectively ignoring all source work by doing so.

You're telling me what is taught in churches? You know exactly what's taught in every church? Unfortunately you're wrong. Please stop pretending to know more than you do. The issue has been brought up in my church, and I've heard it brought up in nearly a dozen others. It's not an uncommon topic, so please stop lying.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - I use KJV, ESV, NKJV or NASV for translations, as they have a habit of being the most true to the original text. In addition the source I linked was from the Lexicon, which is a literal word for word translation. You cannot get more accurate than that. Unless my opponent knows the Hebrew language, which I'm willing to be he does not, he cannot tell me which translation is superior. The fact of the matter is that the lexicon, most translations, as well as the parallel passage in Exodus all agree with me. You have close to nothing going for your point of view except your opinion on how to interpret it.

I know what rape is. Not only have I been victimized myself but I know many others who have. Don't tell me I don't understand things if you have no idea who I am. I've also heard both passages you proceed to cite discussed in Sunday School, so again you're lying about things you don't understand.

I've already talked about the Deut. 22:28-29 passage. The 22:23-24 passage condemns the woman because she did not call for help and thus must have wanted it. Context reveals the woman who did call for help was not killed, and the woman who was raped where help was not available was also not killed.

My opponent has said nothing intellegent in this part. Women are different from men, and perform different functions. No one would uinderstand this better than the hypothetical creator.

If I lost the debate how come it says that the winner is Con? Interesting. If you deem anyone who disagrees with you insane you'd be correct. Unfortunately that's not how it works though. The rest of what my opponent has shared here is simple nonsense. If God hated children he wouldn't have made them. If God wanted to abuse children he wouldn't have let us grow out of that phase. If God wanted to brainwash us all into following him he would have done it, not let us reason out of believing in him.

My opponent did not address point 4 or 5, nor did he answer any of my questions directed to him. He has provided no substance. There is nothing redeeming about my opponent in this debate.

Debate Round No. 2


I am such an idiot. I totally forgot to mention that The Atheist Experience got into morality, in which you and your god are totally incapable of and are completely immoral, and the article is completely moral...
“When you start making excuses for atrocities you have removed yourself from ANY valid discussion on morals. When you say ‘yes the bible says you can own slaves but’ well now you’re contradicting yourself because before I was asking if you thought the bible was accurately representing the mind of god, the will of god. You’ve got this conflicted mess of contradictions and you’ve found a way to rationalize them. You’ve gone and looked at them and said ‘boy that one really sounds bad, BUT that’s what Israel was doing that’s not what god was doing. So let me ask you this… do you believe that there’s an all knowing all powerful fun loving god who has an important message for humanity and he is so completely inept that his best attempts at communicating to people managed to convey the exact opposite message of what you think he meant. Now like are you the one who got it right? And all the people who authored the holy book and got you started that they managed to get it wrong? Is your god such a bumbling buffoon that he cannot state ‘thou shalt not own somebody as another human being?’ or ‘please don’t rape the people and pillage the villages around you’” and he managed to communicate so poorly that it got written down as Thou shalt be able to own other people as property and oh by the way go over there and kill everybody kill everything except for the young virgins. Its asinine. You cannot reconcile this.” Matt Dillahunty

4. Oh really? Wow. Noah took part in god destroying ALL fricken life except for 2 of each species. So it is true. He could have said “god who the f--k are you? Oh a voice in my head that doesn’t exist and that voice in my head cannot possibly be capable of committing anything like it in the first place and even if this ‘voice’ possibly could, it is clearly WRONG in doing this.” Sheesh. That’s not taught in Sunday school now is it? Adam. Sin. Nope. Am not going to argue with you on sin AGAIN. Its a proven loser from your viewpoint.

5. WHAT? Um no the verse is pretty simple and simple enough for even you to understand. Don’t ever say “implies”. K? Because that would mean that you assume. Then that would obviously mean that according to the article, its correct.

“Numbers 16 is full of context that describes the wicked nature of the people being killed here.” Hey then you admit its true “5. When God doesn't like you, you're probably dead, and your death will probably be creative.” NEXT!

“Elisha most likely was not bald.” “Most likely” means you don’t know, means as usual you have to invent excuses for something in which you know nothing about. It means you guess. It means you cannot take your bible at its word. It means you cannot take your god at his word (that’s a gimme and we already knew that one). You are an insult of cultural insignificance. That’s because you know NOTHING about your bible and you are making truly pathetic incorrect parapets for it that would drown anyone who knows something about it. The verses are correct as they stand and so is the interpretation. AND many atheist websites will agree as the verses are some of the most famous of them all and widely distributed… 42 children to be mauled by bears for absolutely no reason at all and NOBODY of dignity or integrity or both can possibly agree with you and how you try to snake your way around and you fricken know it.

Did I say ANYWHERE where jesus killed a child? No. I didn’t. YOU DID. You brought up such a stupid remark that had absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with what was stated in the opening of the article. Do you not know sarcasm when you read it? OR better yet is it not known that according to your christianity the terminology of “fruit” is that of “offspring” or “infants”? Why by gum, yes it is. So KNOCK IT OFF with your complete and total ineptitude of not being able to translate YOUR fricken bible worth a god damned. Better yet…

Isaiah 13:15-18 "Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. 16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished. 17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it. 18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall not spare children.

Hosea 9:11-16 “As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception. 12 Though they bring up their children, yet will I bereave them, that there shall not be a man left: yea, woe also to them when I depart from them! 13 Ephraim, as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place: but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer.

14 Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. 15 All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters. 16 Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.”

Lamentations 2:20-22 “20 Behold, O LORD, and consider to whom thou hast done this. Shall the women eat their fruit, and children of a span long? shall the priest and the prophet be slain in the sanctuary of the Lord? 21 The young and the old lie on the ground in the streets: my virgins and my young men are fallen by the sword; thou hast slain them in the day of thine anger; thou hast killed, and not pitied. 22 Thou hast called as in a solemn day my terrors round about, so that in the day of the LORD'S anger none escaped nor remained: those that I have swaddled and brought up hath mine enemy consumed.

I do not know if trees are not sentient and neither do you. And for you to say that they are not and single them out as such, well yah got caught. No its not illogical at all on my part because there are quite a few things that you do not know about plants and trees such as plants and trees communicate with each other. Also such as pine trees in within close proximity the parent tree nurtures the baby tree(s). You didn't know any of that.
- In the Minds of Plants
- Nature What plants talk about
So what if plants and trees are not sentient? Does that give man and your messiah the right to do whatever the f--k he wants with them just because he decides to throw an irrelevant deficient ponytailed temper tantrum? And that gives you christians the right to wipe out every living thing and take control of the planet just because genesis 1:26 says so? WRONG!!!

1.”You're telling me what is taught in churches?” Um no. YOUR church just as you said.
Here’s something that you don’t get… I don’t know that much. I really don’t. But I do know 99.999% more than you on god, the bible, religion, music, and film than you ---ever--- will. Why? Because I take the time, almost on a daily basis and have for at least 42+ years (for music and film its been longer than that), for each subject just mentioned to study up and learn more and more and obtain knowledge that I haven’t known or didn’t know to enrich myself so I can nurture myself and grow. I also take the time to enjoy life, to relax, sleep, get out and do things that I can do provided that my health and money allows it. Can you say the same? Ab-so-lu-te-ly not in any way can you. if you say “yes” to that, I 100% know that you are flat out lying.

I never stated , nor pretend that I know what goes on in every church. Quite the contrary Richard Nixon. Oh I get it, so you attend nearly a dozen other churches? Please stop pretending to know more than you do.
Now I do 100% know this that within the bunkers of churches, there’s no common ground/ consensus/ unity. None. If you were to get someone VS you let’s say as an example in one room and let’s say you both were to have the same knowledge about your bible, which is nothing btw, and you both were to be asked to decipher the book of Nahum, you and that someone would come up with TWO, yes count em, 2 completely different answers using, well let’s go for broke and say the NIV version. How’s that? Its a pretty easy version to understand - right? I mean after all you think you are so smart.

OK this debate is now finished and we---are---done. Guess what I did smart a$$eth? I googled “torah” And I looked at the first two translations and compared them with what you posted of Deuteronomy 22 23-29. And take one lucky stab in the dork as to what occurred? Well by golly gosh darned gee whiz bang gee whiz holy gum balls they---don’t---match. I mean the first one, well its not even close. The second one is a little off, but off, not much. So your charade is over thus proving you to be incorrect and you NOT doing YOUR homework at all. Sorry pigeon toes, you lose as always. Now had you done some comparisons in torah translations simply by googling the word “torah” and comparing them you would have found this fallacy. Nah. Its too much to ask you to do anything of the kind.
Let this be a lesson to you to present true evidence and not a portion of it. Because later in life you will be asked to present all of it. And if you are caught with your pants down as proof point A+ positive here, then like here you will continue to have no genuine friends or loved ones and you will ALWAYS, no exceptions, fail with everything that you do. Period.


Well the verse also doesn't say exactly what you're talking about either, so we both have to make some assumptions. My God is only bad in this case if you chose to view him in a poor light, in which case ofc he's gonna look bad.

Same as 5. I don't know, but neither do you. Both of them are equally valid interpretations.

You have to assume trees are sentient for your point to make sense. If Jesus made trees he would know for sure. If he made them he also has the right to unmake them. We're not God, so no we don't have that right.

Tell you what, I know what's taught in my church. I only attend one church fulltime and never claimed to do anything else. I do, however, travel and visit dozens of churches around the states, and even some in other countries. I've heard what they teach, many of them repeatedly.

I also take the time to enjoy life, to relax, sleep, get out and do things that I can do provided that my health and money allows it. Can you say the same? Ab-so-lu-te-ly not in any way can you. if you say “yes” to that, I 100% know that you are flat out lying.
After telling me how you don't know that much your proceed to pretend like you know everything. Interesting.

and you both were to be asked to decipher the book of Nahum, you and that someone would come up with TWO...
Sometimes. I've done many studies with people from many churches. Sometimes we reach different conclusions, and sometimes we reach the same. Regardless, we usually leave agreeing with one or the other, as they would proceed to present a case as to why they interpreted their text some particular way.

well let’s go for broke and say the NIV version. How’s that? Its a pretty easy version to understand - right? I mean after all you think you are so smart.
I don't use NIV for the most part. The people I know use a wide variety of versions from KJV all the way to MSG. No one just uses one exclusively though. I don't quite understand your point here.

I googled “torah”
Have you read the lexicon? Have you researched the language here? Have you spoken with Hebrew professors who understand the original text? Have you cross-referenced nearly a dozen different Bible translations on this passage? If you answered no to any of these questions it would seem I'm more qualified to discuss the translation of this passage than you are, with your five second google search. Who is the one not presenting true evidence here?
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
@DNehlsen - At this moment I have dropped my pills so I can get some sleep in which case I hope to wake up in time to see the new Bladrunner film in which is supposed to be a great film and possibly a masterpiece. In other words I do have an outside life. I mean do you even get out? Be honest. So it may be a day and a half or longer before I respond to your naturally made up lunacy in which I have not read yet. But I hope all is well on your end.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago

Someone is tired of losing.
Posted by Mharman 2 years ago
Idiotic comment, atjacobmajor.

Clickbaitey title, backwardseden.
Posted by SuperAwesomeMusician 2 years ago
Backwardseden hello?
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
You * savory bottom feeder * diaper run * buffoon smelly beef jerk-key * rubber baby buggy bumpers * swollen glands hurricane chimney sweeper for god * skunk perfume bathroom air freshener *
Posted by atjacobmajor 2 years ago
Fig Trees < Kids (female) < Unclean Animals < Women < Clean Animals < Kids (male) < Men < Angles < ME!
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.