The Biblical God is Immoral

Con is trying to tell me what I believe or don’t believe to further his own argument. Con’s first argument was that I couldn’t evaluate what is moral because he didn’t think I believed in objective morality. When I stated that I do believe in objective morality, he argues that I might not believe in the right “type” of objective morality. To be clear, there is only one definition of objective morality: Objective Morality (definition): the idea that a certain system of ethics or set of moral judgments is not just true according to a person's subjective opinion, but factually true. Source: . http://rationalwiki.org... Con proceeds to try to obfuscate the issue by nit-picking the subject of objective morality. Objective morality is not the subject of the debate. I simply acknowledged I accept its existence as a possibility. By definition, there are not multiple versions of objective morality. If it exists, there is only one version and people may have correct or incorrect opinions about what objective morality encompasses. “Why is Islamic Law not our version of objective morality? -Under Islamic law, the crimes that carry defined penalties are murder, apostasy (rejection or desertion of Islam), adultery, fornication, homosexuality and theft. Interpretations of the law and punishments vary from state to state. Lesser offences might include debt, usury, alcohol and drug abuse, and use of pornography. The punishments range from flogging to cutting off of limbs, or even death. ” What is Con’s point with the above paragraph? Is he saying that other societies commit more horrendous acts than God? Even in the terrible and unjust punishments listed above, many people would consider execution for working on Sunday even more extreme. “Here is a short video on how white blood cells kill a parasitic worm. Are the white blood cells commiting an "immoral" act by killing the worm? Are doctors immoral if they don't prevent the white blood cells from killing the worm? Does the worm have the right to live? Do we "morally" have the right to allow the worm's death? It's a living creature just trying to get by isn't it? ” Con’s argument has devolved into a desperate comparison between killing a worm and murdering a human for the crime of working on Sunday. This is a red herring if I’ve ever seen one. I don’t think the reader/voter needs me to explain the difference. ”Pro has forsaken one of the variables in this equation. This is that the Biblical account of God is that He is omniscient. To be omniscient meaning that He sees the future and knows all results from every angle possible. If you could see the future, you might come off as not only insane but somehow "wrong" to anyone who could not see the results. ” “For example, if you were a time traveler from the future and wanted to prevent Hitler from burning people in ovens, you would go back to before he came into power, and you might kill him. Are you immoral? You just saved millions of lives and prevented mass torture and slaughter. It's subjective. It's semantics. Is killing someone immoral or not? It depends on who you ask and what the circumstance is. If you add the ability to see the future, you further complicate the issue. ” What possible catastrophe could be averted by murdering someone for working on Sunday? Con is participating in this debate on Sunday. How could someone possibly argue that it would be moral to execute him for it? How would that affect the future? The death of the man of the household a couple thousand years ago might mean the death for the women and children also due to starvation, marauders, etc. If God desired to kill someone for some future crime they did not yet commit, why not cause them to have a heart attack? What about having a commandment to kill every person that eats with their mouth open to prevent a few people from causing future catastrophes? Con is comparing execution of someone for working on Sundays with executing someone for genocide. What is his argument here? Is he saying that if someone works on Sundays, they will commit atrocities comparable to genocide in the future? Since Con brought up Hitler, where was God during Hitler’s reign? If an interventionist god existed, would God have executed him for working on Sunday or would he have executed him for killing millions of people? The title of this debate is, “The Biblical God is Immoral”. Here is a breakdown of my argument: According to the bible, God commanded that people that worked on any given Sunday should be murdered. The biblical God caused the unjust murder of people through his commandment. Murdering someone for working on Sunday is immoral under all circumstances. The Biblical God is immoral. Here is a breakdown of Con’s argument: Con incorrectly claimed I didn’t believe in objective morality and therefore cannot possibly know what is moral. Con then claimed I believed in the “wrong” kind of objective morality. Con compared killing a worm to killing a human being for working on Sunday. Con pointed out some societies do evil things. (I do not know what the point of that was) Con compared killing a dictator that committed genocide to murdering someone for working on Sunday. (I don’t know what the point of that was either) Con claims that by killing someone for working on Sunday, a future imagined catastrophe is averted. The reason why Con’s argument is so strange and grasping is because a good argument for his position does not exist. This isn’t a theoretical situation. A couple thousand years ago, people were actually murdered by their neighbors when they were caught working on Sundays. Enough said.