Given the Bible, God is Morally Repugnant and Undeserving of Praise (+).

My opponent starts by saying that I have committed the same Ad Populum fallacy he did. If he would simply reread what I wrote he would see that I said that EVEN IF we were to take his fallacious reasoning into consideration, it would yield unfortunate results for his case. "I'm also confused as to where my opponent got the impression that morality was subject to an ad populum framework." Let me quote you in your round three verbatim: "In fact, when considered in light of what the majority of people consider to be "morals," much of what God lays out or endorses in the Bible is in fact immoral." As you can see you clearly inferred that God is immoral based on "what the majority of people consider." Ad Populum. "It is also quite clear that I presented two options for accessing morality, not two different forms of morality. The two methods will yield a morality that is roughly equivalent on most issues and nearly exactly the same on core moral issues." The fact of the matter is that you presuppose a universal morality. Giving two ways to access this morality – ways that yield contradictory results in many cases – in no way proves that a universal morality exists. Let me now list the points my opponent did not adequately (or at all) refute: 1. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and Righteousness My opponent goes on to give definitions that apparently show that Righteousness has nothing to do with Morality. This is intellectually dishonest and a casuistic trick of definitions. He ignored the literal meaning of the Greek word employed, dikaiosune. AND he ignored the very clear meaning apparent in the roots. The Greek word dikaiosune literally means to do that which is right. Righteous simply to act uprightly i.e. morally. His convenient omitting of the word's literal meaning notwithstanding, he ignored how most all other dictionaries seem to categorize righteousness. Dictionary.com 1. characterized by uprightness or morality American Heritage Dictionary 1. Morally upright; without guilt or sin: a righteous parishioner. WorldNet Princeton University 1. Characterized by or proceeding from accepted standards of morality or justice Merriam-Webster 1: acting in accord with divine or moral law : free from guilt or sin 2 a: morally right or justifiable b: arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality Since it is very clear that Righteousness is defined by an adherence to morality, it is unreasonable to say that the Bible does not teach morality. This syllogism still stands: A. The Bible lays out commandments and prohibitions. B. Following these commandments and prohibitions is considered righteous C. Righteousness is, by definition, conformity to morality D. Therefore, the Bible lays a framework for morality. 2. Appeal to a moral source outside of the Bible contradicts the resolution. "My opponent also asserts that an appeal to a source of morality outside of the Bible contradicts the resolution. It is plain that there is nothing in the resolution that defines a standard of morality." My opponent must show that God is morally repugnant and undeserving of praise, GIVEN THE BIBLE. Since the Bible is very clear that God is a moral being and is most definitely worthy of praise, my opponent appealing to a moral source outside of the Bible in which to classify God's actions as immoral is not GIVEN THE BIBLE – it is in complete disregard of the bible – and therefore a contradiction of the resolution. 3. My opponent admits that he is incorrect "The truth of the matter, is that if you look at the Bible, you will see: 1) God has committed atrocities 2) God is worthy of praise." If the Bible says God is worthy of praise then your resolution cannot stand. Given the Bible, God has not committed any atrocities because it never says that he does. You classify his actions as atrocious by a standard that is quite apart from the Bible, and most definitely not GIVEN THE BIBLE. Conclusion: The rest of my opponents argument is mere red herring as he is not addressing the fact that God is morally upright and worthy of praise GIVEN THE BIBLE. He is appealing to emotion and wishing that the audience will look at God's actions as morally repugnant without giving a standard for which we can judge that which is and is not moral. We are talking the creator of the universe. The One Almighty Lord who gave each being, human and otherwise, life. He gave humans the power to reason. Can the pot really complain to the potter?