The Instigator
WrickItRalph
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Speedrace
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is Satan More Moral Than God?

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: 2/25/2019 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,071 times Debate No: 120499
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (34)
Votes (0)

 

WrickItRalph

Pro

This is my model.

P1A. God delivers edicts in the bible that are immoral
P2A. Delivering immoral edicts makes one immoral
CA. Therefore, God is immoral

P1B: God is immoral [CA]
P2B: Rejecting immoral beings is moral
CB: Therefore, Rejecting God is moral

P1C: Rejecting God is moral [CB]
P2C: Satan Rejects God
CC: Therefore, Satan is moral

P1D: God is immoral [CA]
P2D: Satan is moral [CC]
P3D: moral beings are more moral than immoral beings.
CD: Therefore, Satan is more moral than God.

You may invalidate it using and sound logic. Inlucding counter proofs, Reductio ad absurdum, Or by the impossibility to the contrary. There's other ways as well that I don't know the names of. Lol.
Speedrace

Con

"P1A. God delivers edicts in the bible that are immoral
P2A. Delivering immoral edicts makes one immoral
CA. Therefore, God is immoral"

You offered literally no evidence for this, So it falls until you do.

"P1B: God is immoral [CA]
P2B: Rejecting immoral beings is moral
CB: Therefore, Rejecting God is moral"

Fair enough except you still have to prove that he is immoral.

"P1C: Rejecting God is moral [CB]
P2C: Satan Rejects God
CC: Therefore, Satan is moral"

This premise is blatantly wrong. If someone was to reject Hitler and then go murder a hundred people in cold-blood, Would you call them moral? I absolutely hope not.

1 John 3:8:

The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, Because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.


"P1D: God is immoral [CA]
P2D: Satan is moral [CC]
P3D: moral beings are more moral than immoral beings.
CD: Therefore, Satan is more moral than God. "

You have to prove the others to prove this one, And so far you have not.
Debate Round No. 1
WrickItRalph

Pro

"P1A. God delivers edicts in the bible that are immoral"

I submit the entirety of duetorotomy as my evidence. there are multiple accounts of immoral edicts. Woman shall marry her rapist becuse of property crime against her father. Kill the enemys and their boys and keep their woman as sex slaves. Happy is he who dashes their head into the rock. I foget that one, But they want your to smash your kid in the head with a rock if they're bad. I think this is sufficient evidence for god's misdeeds. This means that P2A logically follows and makes this a tautology. It can no longer be refuted unless you can approve the above edicts are not immoral. This would also mean that P1B P2B and CB would hold as well. Btw, I noticed you're applying the logic critiques that I used on you before. I"m glad :) Logic is a beautiful thing.


P1C, P2C, CC. To be honest, I was hoping to slide this one passed you. well played. Allow me a chance to rehabilitate.

P1C: Doing less harm than god makes one more moral than god
P2C: Satan did less harm than god
CC: Satan is more moral than god!

There we go and now I will provide a source at the bottom that provides estimations of who killed more pople in the bible

I'll articulate their results. There are two esimates they use. The second one includes unnumbered killings and is extremely high in favor of god commiting more murders by a landslide. I'll use the fair conservative estimate they gave instead. God tolled in at a whopping 2. 4 million people. While Satan chimed in with a humble 10. I think this proves that god did much more harm. I would like to point out that this is considered biblical evidence since the source of the data was the bible.

Assuming all this evidence stands. I will have a valid and sound argument under our "God automatically Exist" conditions.

Your Floor.

https://dwindlinginunbelief. Blogspot. Com/2006/08/who-has-killed-more-satan-or-god. Html




Speedrace

Con

"I submit the entirety of duetorotomy as my evidence. There are multiple accounts of immoral edicts. Woman shall marry her rapist becuse of property crime against her father. Kill the enemys and their boys and keep their woman as sex slaves. Happy is he who dashes their head into the rock. I foget that one, But they want your to smash your kid in the head with a rock if they're bad. I think this is sufficient evidence for god's misdeeds. This means that P2A logically follows and makes this a tautology. It can no longer be refuted unless you can approve the above edicts are not immoral. This would also mean that P1B P2B and CB would hold as well. Btw, I noticed you're applying the logic critiques that I used on you before. I"m glad :) Logic is a beautiful thing. "

You can't simply use all of Deuteronomy as your evidence, Because then I have to go and debunk all of that. That's not fair to me because I don't have enough characters to do that. So I will simply debunk the points that you made. Also, In the future, Please include the scriptures for it. It's very annoying to have to guess.

"Woman shall marry her rapist becuse of property crime against her father. "

I assume you mean Deuteronomy 22:28-29.

In that case, This is NOT rape. We know this because that scripture says if a man lie with a woman, However TWO scriptures BEFORE, It says if a man lies with a woman and FORCES HER, Then he must die. This scripture never mentioned force, Which simply means that it was sex before marriage.


"Kill the enemys and their boys and keep their woman as sex slaves. "

I could not find this one so please provide the scripture for it.

"Happy is he who dashes their head into the rock. "

I assume that you mean Psalms 137:9

This was a psalm/song that the Jewish people were singing because THEY were calling for revenge against their enemies.

Romans 12:17-19 says:

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. "

So no, God did not condone that.


And therefore, You have not proven that God is immoral. Nice try though >:)

"P1C, P2C, CC. To be honest, I was hoping to slide this one passed you. Well played. Allow me a chance to rehabilitate. "

Nah, I'm too good for that m8 >B)


"P1C: Doing less harm than god makes one more moral than god
P2C: Satan did less harm than god
CC: Satan is more moral than god! "

That's better.

"I'll articulate their results. There are two esimates they use. The second one includes unnumbered killings and is extremely high in favor of god commiting more murders by a landslide. I'll use the fair conservative estimate they gave instead. God tolled in at a whopping 2. 4 million people. While Satan chimed in with a humble 10. I think this proves that god did much more harm. I would like to point out that this is considered biblical evidence since the source of the data was the bible. "

Again, I can't respond to that number of killings. Can you please select a few for me to respond to and debunk?

Also, Satan tempted literally billions of people to refuse Jesus and now they will go to hell. That's way worse than anything you think God did.

Your floor.
Debate Round No. 2
WrickItRalph

Pro

Sorry, But you can't tell me not to submit evidence just because it's overwhelming.

I highlighted a few of the key scripture from the book. You don't have to debunk EVERYTHING in that book. It's not violence cover to cover. But it is a lot, Lol. Also, It's not like the audience is going to expect you to know ever chapter in that book. Just chillax, Lol.

"Again, I can't respond to that number of killings. Can you please select a few for me to respond to and debunk"

Sorry, But those killings are crucial evidence for my case. You're gonig to have to defend 2. 4 millions deaths. Those were deaths SPECIFICALLY cause by god btw. all of the "unumbered deaths" puts god and 24 MIL so I was being generious. You actually agreed that mew new structure was better and P1C P2C and CC. Prove my case independent from the other premises. so refuting these deaths becomes your one and only mission. Don't get overwhelmed. I will allow you to catagorically rule out some of the killings and if you can reduce the death toll close enough to satans "10" people then it would create moral ambiguity.



Speedrace

Con

"Sorry, But you can't tell me not to submit evidence just because it's overwhelming. "

Ok then, I'll revise my stance. You have not proven that any of those scriptures are immoral, All you said is "there are multiple accounts of immoral edicts" in it. How many? In which scriptures? I already responded to the ones you said, Except for one which I could not find the scripture for and you did not provide it. Please do. Until you do, I will simply assume that those were the only examples which you were referring to.

"I highlighted a few of the key scripture from the book. You don't have to debunk EVERYTHING in that book. It's not violence cover to cover. But it is a lot, Lol. Also, It's not like the audience is going to expect you to know ever chapter in that book. Just chillax, Lol. "

Ok then lol, But I debunked two of three you highlighted so far, And you did not provide a scripture for the third one, And I could not find it. Again, You must provide more WITH scriptures, Or I will simply assume that those are the only ones that you say are immoral.

"Sorry, But those killings are crucial evidence for my case. You're gonig to have to defend 2. 4 millions deaths. Those were deaths SPECIFICALLY cause by god btw. All of the "unumbered deaths" puts god and 24 MIL so I was being generious. You actually agreed that mew new structure was better and P1C P2C and CC. "

I did not agree to fulfill an impossible task.

Besides this, I already told you that Satan has tempted billions, Literally anyone and everyone who has lived to come of age. That's WAY more than anything you claim God did.

Ephesians 6:11
Put on the whole armor of God, That you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.

"Prove my case independent from the other premises. So refuting these deaths becomes your one and only mission. Don't get overwhelmed. I will allow you to categorically rule out some of the killings and if you can reduce the death toll close enough to satans "10" people then it would create moral ambiguity. "


I will not attempt an impossible task. Even if I categorically rule some out, I would have to look at every single case, Which I cannot do.

Besides this, You have yet to prove that God is immoral, Which is the basis of your first model. Because of that, This model cannot go through until you have proven the other one.
Debate Round No. 3
WrickItRalph

Pro

I proved God Immoral. I showed several parts of duetorotomy where god issued evil edicts. If you think those aren't evil, Then we got bigger problems.

All of my premises hold up unless you can show me that god didn't kill 2. 4 million people.
Speedrace

Con

"I proved God Immoral. I showed several parts of duetorotomy where god issued evil edicts. If you think those aren't evil, Then we got bigger problems. "

Excuse my frankness, But are you blind? I debunked all of the things you pointed out, and then said that I would assume those were the only ones unless you pointed out more. You did not point out anymore, So your first premise falls and therefore so do all of the other ones.

My response was:

""Woman shall marry her rapist becuse of property crime against her father. "

I assume you mean Deuteronomy 22:28-29.

In that case, This is NOT rape. We know this because that scripture says if a man lie with a woman, However TWO scriptures BEFORE, It says if a man lies with a woman and FORCES HER, Then he must die. This scripture never mentioned force, Which simply means that it was sex before marriage.


"Kill the enemys and their boys and keep their woman as sex slaves. "

I could not find this one so please provide the scripture for it.

"Happy is he who dashes their head into the rock. "

I assume that you mean Psalms 137:9

This was a psalm/song that the Jewish people were singing because THEY were calling for revenge against their enemies.

Romans 12:17-19 says:

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. "

So no, God did not condone that.


And therefore, You have not proven that God is immoral. Nice try though >:)"

You did not name anymore, So it logically follows that those were the only examples that you had. Therefore, I have debunked all of them and premise one falls, Along with the rest of your premises.


"All of my premises hold up unless you can show me that god didn't kill 2. 4 million people. "

No, They don't because you failed to prove that God is immoral.
Debate Round No. 4
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
No problem. Just challenge me with a topic you like. I'm not picky
Posted by Killercross_23 3 years ago
Killercross_23
@WrickItRalph depending on what the topic is specifically about yah sure. Also sorry for the wait, Like I said I"m not on much.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
@Killercross. You down to have a god debate?
Posted by Killercross_23 3 years ago
Killercross_23
God's morality isn't subjective, Or at least biblicaly speaking it isn't. Also, God isn't the reason for death, The reason for death would be Adam's fault. From the verse that melcharaz pulled up, I'm assuming (correct me if I'm wrong) that his point is that God created the tree that allows his creation to die so therefore God is evil. This wouldn't be the case because Adam and Eve are the ones that sinned. I apologize if this isn't very well put together haha this is my first time posting anything opinionated on this site and I'm still relatively new to debating in general. I'm not on this site much, But this debate is very interesting. These kinds of debates make me want to get on more though.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
You said: "from our point of view, His morality is objective"

Well if it's only objective from your point of view, Then that makes it subjective.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
from our point of view, His morality is objective, Even to his own point of view (To some degree) its objective in that it doesn't change. Infact, God doesn't change period.

We can see him as changing, But he doesn't change. We can see him as evil, He isn't evil but he creates evil.
Posted by Speedrace 3 years ago
Speedrace
God's point of view is subjective but yours isn't?
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
Not particularly no. If the Christian god existed I would be sad that our universe was created by an evil thug. His opinion would still be subjective. God existing wouldn't necessarily make the bible true either. Plus God could just be a liar.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
its very intresting. But i would like to point out that God causes all death according to scripture. Genesis 2:17. Thus you can conclude based on the morality that God is sum total of evil done to mankind and sum total of Good. But that would have to recognize the divinity and authority of God. That he does all things, Whatsoever he pleases.

Does that sound intresting to you?
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
God's point of view would be subjective, So no.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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