There's too much hate in God

Nor can she read people"s tells all that well. If this was a game of poker, I"d take all of her chips before she were even to sit down to the game. Its shocking to believe how far off she is. I went back and I don"t think I ever mentioned the word "christianity". And I know I never mentioned the "christian god". I simply mentioned "god". So where did she dig that up from? So her terminologies of "christinaity" is false. She stated "My opponent started this debate by arguing under the pretenses of Christianity in order to prove Christianity incoherent" yadda yadda yadda in which I never did. "So we're assuming God exists. " Um no-we're-not. I have no idea where she got that one from? 1. My opponent assumes that god exists without any proof. 2. She brings no proof that her god exists to the table. 3. It is always up to her to prove that her god exists because the bible itself is not proof of her god. 4. That is an automatic loser with so much hate printed in the bible that this character god who was obviously written by man, who clearly in itself hates children, as proved in verse after verse after verse and also in a few chapters and also in a book that my opponent cannot counter. 5. When questioned on it previously, twice, and now in this turn, all my opponent can answer is "Performing improper analyses of the scripture itself" which is not an answer of any kind when clearly there is far too much hate being spewed by this god character in this so-called holy book. 6. My opponent tries to justify that murdering and torturing innocent babies and children is somehow justified for any reason. And her reasoning is, is that they worshiped idols. I guess she thinks that must have more value and have more meaning than a rapist murdering 6 5 year olds. And I asked her to prove it in the verses I presented to her. 7. She expects everybody to believe in what she believes. Now she has stated that this is not the case, but lets be honest here she certainly implies it at the very least. 8. My opponent has made countless irrelevant points in this debate in which everybody can go back and check to see in which has nothing to do with the main argument "There"s too Much Hate in god" and completely strays from the subject. I have followed with those points, but only to answer her questions and points. Summation: god-does-not-exist. Its is the mere belief in him that causes this pain, suffering, hate, bloodshed, greed, evil, anger, wrath, vengeance, rage, fury, etc. etc. And this hate in this glorious bible from her christian bible is directed at children more than any other multitude of an already crushed population. In round one my Opponent stated in regards to 2 Chronicles 15, "They were actively choosing a life of violence and idolatry," Really? According to what? You? Now go ahead and prove it. Oh and btw, no one of merit will agree with you. "He essentially issued a death sentence for the people who were living a life of violence and hate. " So according to you, that"s issuing hate. Issuing a death sentence is issuing hate. And how many children were involved? "As I said above, we've established that we're operating under Christian assumptions. " Really? According to what? You? Um no we"re not. "My opponent started this debate by arguing under the pretenses of Christianity in order to prove Christianity incoherent. " Nope. I think you are required to read everything I stated again and the word "incoherent" as it is a far cry from the word "hate". God hates children, babies, women, hey more than half the human race as proved in the book, chapters and verses presented in which in no way can you or anyone on the planet justify. But you did try with only two sentences. Your justification wouldn"t have worked back then which is why there was so much rebellion. It doesn"t work now which is why god is losing his followers day by day. So the hatred of god stands. Whoever said I"m trying to disprove christianity? I already told you what this debate is about. Again, no we"re not operating under christian morals nor assumptions. Who says so? You? And again for roughly, I"m guessing here you still have yet to define your definition of what a "metric" is? So since you didn"t, I"m ignoring the rest of the statement. You mentioned god and christian principles. Well we"re not operating under those principles. So this statement will be ignored as well. "Not if God killing people falls into line with justice," there-is-no-justification-for-it. Period. And your justification for it is worshiping false idols. AND god murdered countless babies and children in the process in which you have absolutely no defense for. None. And I"m tired of repeating myself. Your god murdered every-single-man-woman-and-child except for Noah and his family in the great flood. Yeah right like children and babies suckling on their mothers nipples were wicked and deserved to be suffocated by being drowned? Come up with better excuses please. You haven"t provided with anything that is logical except for the absolute and consummate fact that your god has this blubbering superior "ego" complex in which I 100% agree with. "While I provided a logical analysis of Christian principles of the Bible,. .. " which had nothing to do with god"s hatred now did it? So absolutely it was completely unproductive on your part. Naturally I didn"t fall for it. Onto Free Will. 1. God does not have free will, you are right it is irrelevant to the conversation. But in your existence, since god does not have free will as previously explained, by all the terminology of logic, you do not have free will. Oh and btw, that is not my idea. That is several pythons and generations of thinkers that thought that one up. And its not too hard to think about it and thus analyze it correctly and thus come up with the logical solution as presented to you word for word. And if you were to apply my opponent's analysis of perhaps how god works, which is fascinating btw, though she does not know and obviously does not understand, then perhaps she should read the first few verses of genesis again (but then again as I put forth to her text is the worst form of communication possible in which no supreme deity would even communicate) time IS linear and her god operates in linear time and in no way suggests any other throughout her bible. Strange isn"t it that oh so many biblical scholars have stated and or predicted that the known universe/ Earth is 6,000 years old? Ken Ham believes this is so. I guess my opponent believes this is so also? Perhaps? 2. Already Covered. 3. Biblical evidence of free will is an utter failure. I shall provide biblical evidence to prove this. My opponent has provided some verses in an attempt to show an outlook to Free Will, but it really doesn"t exist. My opponent got her first one totally wrong. Read the verse prior to it. Yeah what a choice huh? Either believe in your god, or die. Simple. Oh and btw, since when are "commands" the same things as "choices" of any kind? They have nothing whatsoever to do with anything. Isaiah 48:18 big whoop. Proverbs 21:5 I see it as another forgettable proverb. Now here"s one for you" "Who"s more the fool? The fool? Or the fool who follows him? " Name who stated that? Here"s a few for you and they require no explaining. There"s no free will here among them" GN 2:17 god threats with death, GN 3:2 god threats with death, (all that threats with death and there are so so so many are NOT Free Will), MT 10:37 especially, MT 10: 20, Romans 8: 28-30, Deuteronomy 13:4, 2 Timothy 1:9, Ephesians 1:4-5, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Jeremiah 10:23, there are many more. Well I"m out of space so I can"t respond to anything else. Regardless in my opponents previous argument she did not cover god's hate with the rest of what she had to say. She only attacked me and avoided subject matter that was directly put forth to her.