To worship God is to worship a murderer.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
THBT: To worship God is to worship a murderer.
Worship - to honour or show reverence for as a divine being or supernatural power.
God - the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe. For this debate, we will be discussing the Christian God.
Murder. To kill a human being.
-Burden of Proof-
Pro bears the larger burden, as they are the one proposing the idea of God being a murderer. Con must simply refute all allegations and maintain the status quo.
As the Bible is the only document regarding God, it shall be regarded with 100% accuracy. Anything that is stated in the Bible can be used as evidence. Debate about the actual reliability of the bible and the existence of God is for another time.
Forfeit = Instant loss
Definitions are agreed upon
And there came out a fire from the LORD, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense.Number 16:35
And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them.Exodus 14:28
Behold, with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people, and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods:2 Chronicles 21:14
And so it was at the beginning of their dwelling there, that they feared not the LORD: therefore the LORD sent lions among them, which slew some of them.2 Kings 17:25
Neither did Jeroboam recover strength again in the days of Abijah: and the LORD struck him, and he died.2 Chronicles 13:20
“For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, so whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”John 3:16
And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.2 Kings 19:35
Murder, contrary to PRO, is not just the act of killing someone, but the act of killing them unjustly. To murder is to end someone’s life in a fashion that comes from malicious intent and is conducted outside of the law. Virtually all legal definitions of murder include “malice aforethought” as something that must be proven in court.
“I can create whatever debate I want. I can set whatever rules I want. I can debate about whatever I want. What I cannot do is force my opponents to compete against me.”
“the fact is you agreed to debate without even messaging me prior with your concerns.”
Because I had already seen how unreasonable you were in the comments. You said things like “I don’t think I made this possible to lose for myself”, and “If I add the word unjust', a religious person may argue that God cannot act unjustly and that all the murders were justified as God is Omnibenevolent.”
Murder, as was established in my first argument, is the premeditated killing of another human being with malicious intent. If your definition is different, you’re running counter to basically every judicial institution that has ever been founded.
If you kill someone out of self-defense, during war, or with some other reasonable justification you are vindicated and the charges against you are dropped. Civil society has always recognized this, and it baffles me that you’re so willing to contravene that consensus.
The crime of intentionally killing a person.
To cause someone or something to die.
The bible gives a helpful analogy for those struggling with this question. If I fashion a pot and decide, for whatever reason, to destroy it, I am well within my rights to do so. It is my creation, and so I have full claim and jurisdiction over it. I am allowed to do with the pot as I see fit, and while you might quibble about my rationale, no one could seriously maintain that I am in the wrong. Likewise, God created humanity and therefore has the authority to whatever he desires with it. He can strike people down, decimate nations … whatever he feels is suitable, he is right in doing.
My question is this: Do you apply your standards across the board, or are you being selective? Do you admit that your definition requires the damnation of all forms of induced death, including self-defense, warfare, and even abortion (which is undoubtedly the most egregious of the three)? If not, then your redefinition is tentative and prejudiced, and it can be concluded that you don’t really condemn murder (at least, not in the sense you’ve dictated).
When mothers slaughter their children in abortion facilities, is that wrong?
So here we reach a crossroads. Either:1. All forms of murder (killing) are wicked, meaning that the Omnibenevolent God of the Universe is on a par with people like Hitler.
2. Only the murder (killings) God commits are wrong, and not the ones committed in war or at abortion clinics - in which case you’re being inconsistent with your application of this newfangled law.
My opponent first agrees that they broke the rules of the debate, but then go on to insult my debate on a personal level.
The word unjust would actually make this debate impossible for me to win.
The motivation for removing the word "unjust", was not for greed as you seem keen to suggest, but because I wanted to remove any loopholes which would make this debate unfair.
In removing the word unjust, the question is no longer judged by God's perfection, but by our own morality.
I have already cited where my definition came from (Cambridge Dictionary) so this argument is purely emotional.
It is clear that the only difference between killing and murdering is that a) murder is intentional, and b) killing includes causing death to both "someone" and "something".
They seem to believe there is no murder at war.
People at war were presumably fighting for life and death. They had little choice. What they did was still murder, there is no dispute about this, but society simply treats veterans acts of murder differently.
However, murder can be justified.
Before you say God's acts of murder can be justified, tell me how you can justify God burning 250 men into crisp.
This is exactly why I removed the word "unjust". How can I debate against this?
As to the Omnibenevolent, I'll give an analogy.
God is much much worse Hitler.
All killing is wrong, but some can be justified.