azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

The Romans persecuted Christians the Romans weren't Christians or even Catholic yet. Where are you making this stuff up the sixth commandment never said that you could kill Canaanites and Babylonians et. As far as the putting people to death I don't associate Catholics as Christians. True Christian's never asked to put people to death. One of the main reasons why pilgrims left England was because of there freedom of religion to not be persecuted by Catholics. If you look up the history of Catholicism about 300 A.D. Constantin fused together pagan and Christianity there you have the whack Catholics. I cut and pasted from Wiki below. Look I know the argument is not about a specific religion like the one I believe in. Yes if you encompass all religions that call themselves Christian than yes your death statement is correct. A lot of cults out there call themselves Christian but they are a wolf in sheep's clothing just like the Catholics are making up there own rules and laws.Ancient Roman religion encompasses the collection of beliefs and rituals practiced in ancient Rome in the form of cult practices. It is therefore the practical counterpart of Roman mythology. Within the Roman world, religious practice varied enough so that one might speak of Roman religions. The cult practices of Rome extended across Italy with the rise of the Roman Empire. These religions were polytheistic, and as such are sometimes referred to as "pagan".
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

1) The Christians persecuted the pagan Romans with far, far more fervor than the pagan Romans had when "persecuting" Christians. Persecution of Christians prior to the conversion of Rome was occasional and local; the laws were directed primarily at clergymembers and at "church property." Extermination of non-Christians after the conversion of Rome, on the other hand, was a wholesale pogrom that lasted until Rome itself was no more.2) The original Sixth Commandment used a word for "murder" that only applied to the unjustified killing of Israelites. By definition, one could not "murder" a non-Israelite. So the commandment is more accurately translated as "don't kill your own." Had it been a blanket prohibition on killing, the Israelites would have been in violation of it quite routinely, as they attacked plenty of neighboring non-Jews.3) If "true Christians" never asked for anybody to be put to death, then by your own admission the entirety of your religion has been a big steaming pile o' horsehockey throughout its whole history, because Christians have been doing that since Christianity first appeared, and they still are.4) Not associating Catholics with Christians is looney-tunes. Catholics are the original, biggest, and most powerful Christian denomination. And the fact that "one of the main reasons why pilgrims left England was because of their freedom of religion to not be persecuted by Catholics" totally supports my point. Not only have the Christians been killing the non-Christians since time out of mind, but when they run out of non-Christians to kill they turn on each other. The Protestants and Catholics in England were equally brutal towards one another. Then the Protestants came to the Americas and massacred the native folks here. 5) You've reduced your position to "Christian equals me, and anybody who thinks exactly like me." Most self-defined "Christians" would not agree. You are not the authority on who is and isn't a "Christian." Hell, in my opinion, NONE of you are real "Christians" since you all blatantly ignore the teachings of Christ, who advocated giving up all worldly possessions and living an aesthetic lifestyle devoted to god. But leave that as it may, objectively the "Christians" are the people who define themselves as "Christians," and they've killed loads and loads of folks. So nope, still not buying your BS ("belief system") here.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

And FYI, the original text of the Sixth Commandment read "thou shalt not kill other Israelites." You could kill all the Canaanites, Babylonians, Akkadians et. al. that you liked.That is pure Grade AAA bull crap. For there was a period of the Israelite history wherein they were Babylonians. And no, the original text of the sixth commandment was originally translated into English as : thou shalt do no murder. The commandment did not imply exceptions for the commandment. If you were to read the next chapter of Exodus that follows the Covenant with Israel, you will find that murderers are to be killed, including Israelites. What say you?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

I say the priest who taught my sophomore Christian History and Theology class says you're wrong.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

...one moment before he calls you a heretic. Oh well, I would rather be cursed than blessed by a priest.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Oh well, I would rather be cursed than blessed by a priest.Amen!;)(I joke a little. Really it would depend on what faith the priest practiced and what the curse or blessing was meant to do. But it was a great opportunity to use the word "amen" in a totally tongue-in-cheek fashion.)
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"never put anyone to death for not believing in him" - HA!anyone who doesn't believe in him gets eternal damnation
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

"I have never known of any Christian who is a firm believing to ask for anybody to be put to death." - if Osama bin Laden was caught tomorrow how many people would be speaking out for him not to be killed?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

if the non-divine punishment was not enough then atheists would have a much higher rate of criminality which is not the caseonly by challenging the law have we progressed this far - otherwise we would still have slavery and complete ownership and subjugation of women (yes, it is in the new testament not just the old - see 1st Timothy)http://www.humanreligions.info/violence_and_crime.html#Childhoodhttp://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/ sapient/atheist_vs_theist/4149
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

You say god is perfect.If I don't believe in god I go to hell for all eternity right?Well what if I was the nicest man on the face of the planet. I donated a lot, I cared a lot about strangers. But I don't believe in god. So what happens? I still go to hell for all eternity.God isn't perfect. Religion isn't perfect.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Sigh.....You can't tell me God isn't perfect. One of the characteristics of God is perfection. You're too narrow minded to even begin to grasp the concept of God. A bling man with his hand on an elephant.Religion is something you CAN argue. Only some religions would say you'd go to hell for eternity - not all.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

naturally it is of greater good,because god has the supreme power and can help us at any time,and when we believe in god we have to ccept this also.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

just making random statements is not an argument in support of the question - if you just want to say you believe in god, go to church
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

I've tried to make the point that without a real God there can be no good because of the grounding question. Apparently some people aren't familiar with this question. So I've included a link that explains it and demonstrates why there can be no good if there is not a real God. And please don't commit the genetic fallacy of dismissing the argument because it comes from a Christian source. If you disagree please do so on the merits of the argument, not the source.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

the "grounding question" only tries to play semantic word games - if someone asks why a god would allow 'evil' then they seize upon the word evil and say that for objective evil to exist means god has to exist. The argument is silly since using any word but 'objective evil' defeats it (pain, suffering, collectively agreed upon evil, etc.)Put 100 devout people in separate rooms and ask them 100 moral questions (e.g. if a pregnant woman has cancer, can she get chemotherapy to likely save her life if it would likely kill the baby?) - you will get many different answers and different justifications - so if there is objective morality, humans cannot converse with god and figure out what it is.We would still be left with subjective morality only we would be judged by a god who has an objective morality and sends people to the lake of fire based on a morality they can't know.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Everything works the way it would if there was no god, therefore there's no reason to believe there is a god. Just like there's no reason to believe in Zeus or apollo....Etc
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

Clearly, the author of this debate is ignorant of the meaning of the term God, or 'doG' spelled backwards. Why? There are many gods and each god is the God of its believers. Hell, almost all believers and non-believers alike are unaware of the definition of god. Now, in answer to this debate I submit the following: A belief never equates to greater goodness, in fact, a belief of good is always a consequence of a belief in one's importance.Or, said this way, 'Because I believe such and such, more individuals receive the good of my belief.' Extremely irrational I would say!
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

You've missed the point haven't you. I haven't at one point said I myself believe in God. Even though I do. Not very strongly... but I do.So you're telling me the world would be better off believing there was no God? EVER.Again you've missed the point of this debate. In a debate.. you don't just make one statement.. you got to have something to back it up. All you've done is make up a sentence.Groans...
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Kinda,I almost guarantee Lawnman understands your debate just fine. He's pretty bright.I know I understand this debate just fine.but your description does indeed show your hand that you believe in a god. Though attempting to be altruistic in that you say as your example the author of a religion does not himself believe it,the assumption of the reasoning behind an author of religion if there is no god to author it them self (that people were out of control) is both unknowable, and quite debatable.There is no way to know if 1. whether people ever stopped acting out of control because of the introduction of a god. 2. whether people would stop acting out of control because of the introduction of a god as opposed to any other method of persuasion.The assumption that even if there were not a god, there must at least be a reason to believe in a god,is a deep deep indoctrination within all but a small small percent of humans on earth.It shows you believe in a god.I submit that laws work just fine in and of themselves. People do not need now, and never have needed a god or hope of eternal life or fear of eternal damnation. That religion is a decoration and another means of power, sometimes good, sometimes bad, but unnecessary either way.You want atheists to argue while accepting a premise that most of us do not accept at all.I not only believe a god is not for the greater good. I don't believe it ever would be under any circumstance. Not even the circumstance you wrote in the debate description.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Nicepost.One thing though.. don't take the debate description as my main point. I didn't want to put too much there as it would've all pointed towards my side of the argument rather than just give a brief intro to what we should be talking about.So let's go into your talk about how law work just fine. Laws are changing all the time right? Now if they were good, then they wouldn't need to be changed. And if they have been changed then whose to say that they do not need to be changed again? God's Words will always be right till the end of time. We just don't see it, but in the end we will see it. So we can be here right now running around trying to make it all right, or we can follow Gods advice and we'll get there in the end. It's hard and loooooong to explain but ask me what God says that is wrong (one of those rules thats in all religions) and then tell me that if what he says isn't wrong... why should we not follow him.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

God's Words will always be right till the end of time. We just don't see it, but in the end we will see it. So we can be here right now running around trying to make it all right, or we can follow Gods advice and we'll get there in the end.lol, alright, that's really funny. 1. If what the religious think god wants is always changing, and so are always changing how they act (don't eat pork, okay eat pork, have hookers, okay now be celibate, stone people to death, okay turn the other cheek)lol, then how is that any different than how laws change Kinda?It's no different I'm very afraid.I mean, you say his word never changes, we just don't always get it. But you do see that there is no way for you to know that don't you? Whatever, it's really lame. If no one knows what god is really saying, then it's just as likely he doesn't exist.Jeez, I hate debating the religious.The fact is, even if that god does exist, it's a ridiculous way to run things. I'll stick to laws, they're based on living people we see and who feel, live, and die, not some dude no one has ever seen and random people (who are usually schizos or con-artists) say said to do this or that.2. And listen, I have read the silly bible probably a dozen times growing up, I was raised Ultra super religious, church 6 days a week, I took 18 credits in religious studies at a very good University, I dated a Baptist preachers daughter all through high school and not only had to sit through the lame sermons, but had to discuss the meanings for hours and hours and hours.There's nothing about the Christian religion I care to learn, that I probably don't already know, unless it's from a historical or anthropological point of view. And if it's from one of those points of view, I probably already know it.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

What did I say? Don't bring religion in. But you did it again. You do have a point though.What you're getting wrong is what religions are INTERPRETING about God's word, not what it is.You are basing everything on Christianity and that is why your posts on this topic is kind of worthless. I'm not here to discuss Christianity's views on God. I'm here to discuss God.who are usually schizos or con-artistsGreat. Really great.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

this would be far more helpful if you said what exactly you were refering to in your responses, butI was using Christianity as an example of a religion in response to you mentioning how laws are always chaning.You brought religion into it when you used how laws change as an example of how it would be better to have the "word of god" because it does not change.And this is the second time in this debate that you first brought up religion, then when a response was made to your introduction to it, you say "this isn't about religion, this is about god."At any rate. This is just dumb, because the only people espousing the existance of a god are of one religion or another, and there is no religion that does not change, just as laws change, so my point is incredibly valid, regardless of which religion's version of the "word of god" I use as an example.At the end of the day, it's just people.And yeah, I think people who think they hear the word of god are usually schizos of con-artists, because he's not real, therefore they're hearing voices or just making stuff up.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

I'm sorry this is getting retarded but when did I bring up a particular religion or religion at all (apart from the fact that religion = following God). You're the one whining about Christianity and all the evil it's done to you etc. etc. Do you have any knowledge of other religions? Or other religious ideals outside of Abrahmic faiths?Who are you to say whether or not God is real? Nobody can answer that question because nobody knows. you THINK you know, but you don't in the same way i THINK God exists. You can't prove or disprove God.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

You've missed the point haven't you. I haven't at one point said I myself believe in God. Even though I do. Not very strongly... but I do.Nah, I have been known to miss ‘the point’ occasionally, but not so on this occasion. In fact, I have identified the fundamental premise of your debate (more on this later).Also, you do err in your inference that I implied you believe in God. So you're telling me the world would be better off believing there was no God? EVER.Non-sense, what I stated was intended to arouse the minds of those who read my post; it points at the self-evident facts of human nature. I was not attempting to govern or persuade the minds of others, but rather shine a light upon something all men can recognize. Why? All men and women more readily enjoy the benefits of their own critical thoughts than the benefit of some other’s line of reasoning. Now back to the fundamental(not stated)premise of your debate.Demagoguery is good for mankind. I will not put all of the pieces together for you; I will present the facts of my argument without making an argument.Demagogia (Gr)-control of the people.Demagogue- a person who tries to stir up the people by appeals to emotion, prejudice, religion, god, government,etc. in order to become a leader and achieve selfish ends.Demagogos-leader of the people.And finally, the word God is a mere tool of a demagogue. My first reply was intended to implicate all would-be demagogues who would use the word ‘god’ to facilitate there own selfish ends of demagoguery.Your debate is nothing more than the illustration of demagoguery without the use of the word demagoguery while at the same time a debate about whether or not a demagogue should use the word God .BTW, ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, for all men are ignorant of more than they are not ignorant of. (No intended hostility on my part if you have taken offence to something I’ve stated.)
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: No, for the greater good.

Also, you do err in your inference that I implied you believe in God.Oh yeah...A lot of bs...Your debate is nothing more than the illustration of demagoguery without the use of the word demagoguery while at the same time a debate about whether or not a demagogue should use the word God .Finally, we have a winner!.. Kinda. You're right. (although I never knew the word demagoguery) Right so you DO know what my debate is about, but I don't know you're position.So it's kinda useless to argue when you don't have a position.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

I think I've presented enough of my view to negate the necessity of affirming my hatred of a demagogue.But, if I haven't already, allow me to simply affirm this:Demagoguery is intended to primarily benefit the demagogue, and as such he/she is the beneficiary of the greater good!The facts/evidence precede this post.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

You're right. Some of the time. Demagoguery is use for ones own benefit. However do you agree that if it was for the benefit of mankind then it is for the greater good? Forget history, religious sects etc. If demagoguery DID benefit mankind, then it would be for the greater good? Your argument is that it is used for the benefit of the demagogue. Fairplay, this can go on forever but again you're basing it, not on God, but on people. If people did it for mankinds good.... then you would say its for the greater good, but if people did it for mankinds bad, then its not for the greater good. Amirite?...
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

You are showing promise!We are now beginning to come full circle, back to the point of my first post. What is the definition of god? The answer to this question necessarily governs the conclusions of our answers to this debate. Would you care to discuss a proper definition of 'god'?
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc. etc.God has as infinite characteristics but ultimately he loves us all and only wants the best for mankind.^ Tried to make that as short as possible.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: however

Hello kinda,I will reply to your post soon. I was unaware of your reply until now. I will share with you though that the definition you submitted will not denote the efforts of a man. Yes, my definition of 'god' denotes man as well as a supreme cause.
Debate: Is belief in God for the GREATER GOOD?
Side: Yes, for the greater good.

Without question God is in favor of men who love him. Christians give more money to charities to than all others combined. Greater is He who is in me than he who is in the world. John 4 4: Our founding fathers built this nation based on God, whether people want to accept it or not it's all over the and written into the constitution for people that don't agree with the doctrine than move to another country where there Constitution fits your beliefs more. It's not just by coincidence that we have become the most powerful nation on every level in the shortest amount of time in history. However the further we as a nation get further away from God the more kaos and trouble we will face as a nation, and that is happening now.