Either the Bible is in a State of Egregious Error or God Seems to Dislike Babies and Small Children

>> "Why, if my opponent is an atheist, give a rat's tail about a god that he doesn't even believe in?" Because it's humorous to me to think that people refer to a Baby-Smiting-Deity as the "God of Love." >> "First, I maintain that my opponent is basing his arguments on feelings. He says that he 'infers' that God is uncaring because He takes life." Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, the CCP, Alexander, Cortes, Columbus, most of the pilgrims... they all took lives - are you going to tell me that they cared about the lives they took, or can we infer from their actions that they probably didn't care too much about killing people? Obviously the latter. >> "Even if one does not get "smited" by Him, one will eventually die. And you will die because God designed you that way. Therefore, your life is in God's hands." So... because I'll die anyway even if not smote, and because God designed me, my life is in God's hands. That doesn't make much sense if I have free will. I can use my free will to reject God if I so choose, and remove my life from his hands. >> "If you believe in God, there is no way around this." Thank God I have a way around this then. >> "Second, the bible points out time and again that God cares about his creation, meaning us." The Bible states that God saw his creation was good, not that he cared about it. I made a very good deuce the other day, and I don't give a crap about it. I made a very good stew last week, and I really don't care about it either. If God cares so much about creation, why does he spend so much time KILLING IT?? >> "Adam and Eve. How are they not viable ancestors for all humanity? How does my opponent know this? I'm coming at this from a biblical perspective, and my opponent is coming from a worldly perspective." First of all - two people is not a viable genetic population. Second, for everyone to have come from two people, they would have needed to commit incest, which is punishable by death, except strangely in the the case of "just and righteous" Lot. My opponent admits he is using a Biblical perspective, which is inherently unrealistic. I approach the matter from a much more reliable source - reality. >> "The next point my opponent makes is just nonsense. He basically says that if there is a God, then something must have created him. Nope. God is, by definition, eternal." Then the existence of matter is, by definition, eternal. If you can accept that God has no creator, then you can easily accept that matter has no creator either. >> "You just can't have an infinite being getting created by another infinite being. They can't coexist." So God can't create another God... seems like he is not omnipotent then. >> "We know for a fact that God is perfect." This makes me giggle. You have no FACTS concerning the nature of God. It's impossible to have FACTS concerning the nature of God. Come on now... >> "perfect people can't exist with a perfect God." And why not? Adam and Eve would have been perfect people until they fell from grace... >> "I believe that God is omniscient and knows from the time of creation exactly how I will choose and in fact, ordains it. Since there is nothing I can do about this, I don't worry about it." In other words, my opponent believes all his choices are predetermined by God and there's nothing he can do about this lack of free will, yet he is not concerned about it. Strange. >> "My contention is that God does exist. God created us so therefore He must care about us. " God's supposed existence is a prerequisite for this debate - my opponent has finally made an on-topic argument. But again... I created a wonderful turd yesterday, but I don't care about it at all... >> "I say, that even though we don't always understand, God uses people to bring others to him. People are his to use, it's his prerogative. In the eyes of God, children are just as sinful as adults." My opponent holds that God kills babies to bring people closer to him, and that this is OK, because God owns the babies he kills and they are just as sinful as adults. This is quite simply a silly notion. >> "One sin is all it takes. One lie, one cheat, one hurtful thought toward another person." Again, I ask... what were the babies' sins? >> "The bible is not flawed." False. There are hundreds of flaws in the Bible. For example, the Bible states that pi is 3. >> "I've read the bible, I've studied the bible, I've read commentaries on the bible. I've been in bible study for a long time." It doesn't seem to have helped your understanding of how God kills babies. *********************************************** Most of my opponent's argument has been a non-sequiter concerning how I'm going to hell, my argument is based on emotion, and that it's OK for God to kill people because he owns them. My status of saint or sinner is a complete red herring. Likewise, the basis for my argument is a red herring, given that I have rational backing for the claim. God kills babies, ergo, he must either dislike them or the Bible is in error about this action. My opponent has done almost nothing to actually address the notion of the argument itself other than to state "God created us so therefore he must care about us." I have shown with my turd example that this is clearly faulty reasoning. Furthermore, consider: God created everything. God cares about everything. God spends a lot of time killing what he cares about. It quite simply doesn't make sense. All three of these statements are supported by the Bible, and they cannot all be correct. Thus, either God does NOT care about everything (for example, babies and small children), or the Bible is in error about one of the other statements, thus fulfilling the resolution. The point of the Bible writ large is completely immaterial to this debate. This debate is whether or not: 1. The Bible is in a state of egregious error; OR 2. God dislikes babies and small children. This is supported by the numerous passages I put forth in the first round wherein God, the almighty, loving, caring steward of creation, smites innocent babies for no good reason at all. It would be simple for an omnipotent God to save the babies, but God chose instead to smite away. Obviously, God either dislikes babies (or saving babies at least), or the Bible is in egregious error about what actually happened. AFFIRMED.