Christianity is greater Than atheism

Let's start my defining some terms: Christianity - a monotheistic system of beliefs and practices based on the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus as embodied in the New Testament and emphasizing the role of Jesus as savior Atheism - a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods Greater - more great; superior Since my opponent offered no terms of his own or directions of what he expects in the first round, I shall assume that these definitions are sufficient and continue on with rebuttals. xxx - Rebuttal - "Christianity gives people a basis for living a good life" I will not argue that Christianity provides a basis for a bad life, but instead I am going to try and prove that not only is this an unfounded assertion but that it can be proven false by the following passages from the Christian Holy Scriptures (the Bible) along with analysis of the Christian core values and text. Now, since my opponent has not specified which areas of Christian faith has led him to the conclusion above, I will try to incorporate a diverse selection of texts and experiments to show the error in his logic. Let's start with the Old Testament. To be fair, I will concede that many Christians argue that the Old Testament (which will from here on out be referred to as "OT") should not be read literally and should instead be regarded as symbolic. Shall we see? Starting out with the beloved story of Noah's Ark and how two of every animal was safely chauffeured onto the ark and into safety. But the underlying "symbol" or better yet message of the story is unsettling. God wasn't pleased with the humans, so he (with the exception of one family) ordered a massive flood to drown all of them, including the children and innocent animals who weren't rescued by the ark. For such a popular story, I struggle to see a positive message there. Moving on, let's look at the story of Lot who was spared from the Sodom and Gomorrah destruction for being abnormally righteous. Two male angels were sent to Sodom to warn Lot of the oncoming destruction whereupon all of the Sodom men circled Lot's house and demanded that Lot release the angels into their possession so they could sodomize them as is evident in the Genesis passage, "where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them"(Genesis 19:5). And sadly, "know" does not mean to go grab a bite to eat and talk over dinner. So, if even the angels are sodomized in the Bible, what message is this sending to it's readers? A "good life" does not entail rape, does it? Speaking of rape, that reminds me that the story doesn't end there! It continues on with Lot refusing their request by stating, "I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof" (Genesis 19: 7-8). And so the misogynistic ways of the Bible are shown in his refusal and his bargaining with the price being his daughter's virginity. Luckily it was all for not since the angels struck the men blind and helped Lot escape the town. But even with that bittersweet ending, one cannot help but still be perturbed by the apparent lack of concern for womens' welfare in comparison the mens'. And if you are thinking that this was an isolated incident, you are wrong. In the Book of Judges, a priest is traveling with his concubine in Gibeah where they spent the night with an old man in his quaint home. When supper was served, the men of Gibeah came pounding on the door, demanding for the male visitor so that they may "know" him (remind you of something? ). And, in the same fashion as Lot, the old man cries out, "Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house do not this folly. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing" (Judges 19:23-4). Ah, once again the women are treated as pawns in the bargaining game to protect the man. The two women were gang raped all night and the concubine died the next morning. The priest then cut her body into twelfths and sent the pieces to the coasts of Israel. Now, is the subservience of women in the Bible a "good thing" that should be taught to children and others? If Christianity shows the basis for a good life, I see no way in which misogynistic standards can be counted as a "proper message". Now, judging by your following sentence where you state atheism promotes a person to whom morality does not matter - which I will respond to later - I believe your implying that Christianity then promotes morality in a person. So far, the passages haven't been favoring that idea. But in all fairness, the OT is rarely shown to be tolerant. So let's see how the New Testament (NT) fairs. One of the core tenants of Christianity is "Love thy Neighbor". In John Hartung's original essay Skeptic, he explains that "Love thy neighbor" was intended to mean "love thy fellow Jew". And even one of the most "sacred" of tenants, "Thou shalt not kill", was intended to mean, "Thou shalt not kill Jews" [1]. This kind of hostility towards members of other groups was enforced by Jesus, a man who has been portrayed to "love all". Well, obviously that isn't as true as we would like to think. Let's move outside of the text and see how the Bible or Christianity directly affects those who are believers. Starting with in 2005, one of our cherished cities New Orleans was destroyed by hurricane Katrina. And America's best known Evangelist and former presidential candidate was reported blaming the hurricane on a lesbian comedian [Ellen Degeneres] who was chosen to host the Emmy's and since she happened to live in New Orleans, it was her fault. [2] Is this the tolerance or goodwill towards fellow man? No. And if you are to blame the destruction of an entire city caused by a natural disaster solely on the sexuality of another, how does this help you live a morally good life? What is the benefit? There is no justification for the hatred of the Evangelical clergy towards the homosexuals and yet the claim that they have the right to be unpleasant since it's a God given right found in the Bible. Is homosexuality immoral? xxx "Whereas atheism promotes a person to whom morality does not mean anything. " False. Since atheism was previously defined as "the lack of belief in God or any gods", there is no prerequisite to believe or not believe in morality. Although someone who is an atheist would not follow Divine Command Theory, they could still follow Moral Realism or Moral Relativism since a deity is not needed to believe in such a meta-ethical stance. Therefore, since meta-ethical stances exist that do not require the existence of a deity or the involvement of any god, atheism is not responsible for promoting an apathetic attitude towards morality. xxx "Therefore, an atheist hating Christianity lacks solid reasoning," I would define this person as an "anti-theist" which is different than an atheist. As Christopher Hitchens said, "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful. " Atheist =/= Anti-theist xxx "Christianity is greater than atheism" Based upon my explanations above, this is simply not true. My opponent's assertions were unfounded and not explained. And this one is simply a non-sequitur.