Resolved: Batman would beat God himself in a fight

"Simply put, my opponent's arguments reveal the desperation of a losing debater."Opinion. If i appear desperate its because im trying to get this debate you are trying to avoid with semantics back on course and back to the original arguments rather then dispute the semantics of why there wouldnt be a fight in the first place. "A pillow fight is clearly, under the definition of an accepted source, not a real fight"Then i'll classify it as a cartoonishly violent confrontation with pillows, thus it becomes admissible since it would fit the agreed upon definition." This is clearly not intended to be a serious fight."Most fights at first dont intend to be serious and then escalate into a serious fight, since you admit that people can be hurt that makes it violent to a degree. "Anything can lead to violence, that does not make it a fight"But anything that is violent can be seen as a fight or as a confrontation, even if the violence is cartoonish in nature. "A rabbit recently got into my garden and destroyed the tomatoes I've been working hard on, this could lead me to violently kill this rabbit."THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU MAN? Its just a poor little rabbit, probably trying to feed its rabbit family!! And what are you doing hoarding all the tomatoes during times of hardship like this? You should be giving those extra tomatoes to those who really need it who cant afford to help themselves grow tomatoes rather than have you hoard all the wealth during these hard times. Obama 2012!" Unless violence is an essential part of the scenario, it does not meet the criteria that my opponent put forward."The criteria is that there be a violent fight or confrontation. what happened is that the rabbit took what was yours and hauled a** out of there. Had he stayed then there would have surely been a violent confrontation since the rabbit would have been caught red-handed. The same goes for what would happen if Batman caught God/Jesus red handed destroying a fig tree in Central Park without the commissioners authorization. "My opponent then begins an argument against my "wordplay over "could" and "should"" It would behoove my opponent to read more carefully since my argument was actually over a distinction between "Could" and "Would."My bad, my phone's autocorrect hates me and it does that quite a lot :P"Jesus did not kill a fig tree in New York City, he killed said fig tree in ancient Jerusalem. Unless my opponent can show that there was a law in 1st century Jerusalem against killing fig trees"There is such a law though, Deuteronomy 5:17 clearly states "Thou Shalt Not kill", which is a law that God/Jesus had to follow and broke when he did kill..... The fig tree. "my opponent still has to grapple with the fact that Batman would need to assault a man guilty of no crimes in order for scenarios 1 and 2 to result in Batman winning."God did kill many people, my argument is that in his human form (Jesus) he would commit none of these crimes because he is bound to the laws that he preached as Jesus before. Basically, God in heaven = Killings left and right God in the form of Jesus = Nobody gets killed. Being the same person in a different form does not excuse him from all his acts, so Batman would have plenty of justification to beat his a** and God/Jesus, bound in his human form, would be unable to fight back.http://www.godlessgeeks.com..." If God has no regard for the law, then he would simply command Bruce Wayne to wither and die as he did the fig tree."Its not that God has a complete disregard for the law, its that when in human form God is bounded by those laws and that he is unable to violate. Since God is supernatural it can be argued that in his omnipotence he can both created laws he is bound by and violate them at the same time. However when God is in his NON-omnipotent HUMAN form, those same laws bound him and his actions, limiting what he can and cant do since he is no longer in his omnipotent form.Imagine if you will that the laws God preaches are like a fox trap. God can make the fox trap and do whatever the f*ck he wants and the fox trap cant get him because hes in his omnipotent form, but if God is in human form and is not immune or all powerful, then that same fox trap could then screw over God since hes in human form. "to attack a person guilty of no crime is outside of the moral scope of Batman, who would never willingly injure or kill an innocent person."He doesnt have to kill them, and its more than possible that Batman doesnt know who Jesus/God is when he fights him. Have you seen how many hippies there are in New York City who have long brown beards, brown hair, really skinny, against violence, and likes to smoke peyote? Batman wouldnt be able to pick Jesus/God out of a lineup of hippies so he could more then easily mistake Jesus for a hippie and then unwillingly beat him up. "even if Batman were to find some kind of justification for attacking an innocent man, Jesus could simply kill Batman with a word the same way that he killed the fig tree."I can see how my lack of clarity before has caused some confusion, welcome to my life. Jesus is capable of comitting a crime by killing something that isnt his, however it is still outside his moral judgement to kill an actual PERSON like Batman. Killing a fig tree =/= killing a person BUT killing a fig tree = committing a crime which would allow Batman to justifiably attack God/Jesus for committing a crime but God/Jesus wouldnt be able to kill him because they are bound by God's omnipotent laws. ============================================================================This is my final round so let me make my final points. 1) This debate is about who would win in a fight, not about who would win in a fight and who started it and why did they start it and who would throw the first punch. 2) In order to try to do point 1 I have played the Con's game to argue the following reasons about why Batman would attack Jesus and why Jesus couldnt strike him down - Batman could have mistaken God/Jesus for a regular hippie and started the fight, Batman doesnt necessarily have to know who he is fighting and everyone makes mistakes. - It can be argued that God is bound by his own omnipotent laws when he is in non-omnipotent human form - Jesus/God do not have the physical strength or powers to defend against themselves against a physical attack by Batman meaning he would win a physical fight against them - The other three scenarios can be one way or another classified as violent (which can be real or cartoonish) as a fight (harm being done somewhere) or as a confrontation (which could or could not escalate into a physical fight but is in itself a fight) which means they qualify as part of the agreed upon definition of what a fight would be, and are thus admissable - Batman would win in at least two of these other three scenarios and the Con did not offer evidence as to why he wouldnt. Ill end now.I really really thank the con for making this debate wonderfully entertaining and I would like to thank all the open minded people (who wont votebomb this debate because they are not controlled by their religious views while voting) for voting. To those who will vote on this debate squarely based on their own values of God and dont even bother reading our arguments and vote anyways, "Thou shalt go f*ckith yourself" - 11th commandment