azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

So you think slavery, sexism, torture and indiscriminately slaughtering entire towns (including children and animals) are "truly good"They are neutral. They are all actions. None of there definitions show evil. That is to be determined by society. Yes you did. You redefined evil as a "lack of good" and a "lack of God." Show me one dictionary that says that evil is either one of those things.Christians define it this way. I don't believe in an absolute good or bad. What you've done is say that since evil is a subjective term nothing can be labeled evil. Therefore this whole debate is pointless because the topic becomes nonsensical without a usable definition of evil. The debate title should be "Is the Christian god a subjective word that has no applicable meaning in this debate."How can I tell people my view points without listening to theirs? If there is no objective evil God cannot be evil.  Even religious people use the standard definitions of good and evil until someone points out that their god does evil things, then they change the definitionWhat does that have to do with my views? That is not a standard definition because you won't find it in any standard dictionary. And? My statement tell you what evil is. In its subject nature. Even if I accept the definition "evil is the lack of good" you still have to prove that god is good, otherwise it's just a baseless assertion.I understand.  Evil is not the absence of good. Why? Good and evil are just words we use to describe certain actionsRelative to the subjective right? If I'm not doing a good action does that mean I'm doing an evil action? Of course not, the default is neutral. Good things can happen without evil, and evil things can happen without good. The two are not as intertwined as most people seem to think.This supports my argument. I said, "define evil." You replied with "Evil is the lack of good, evil is the lack of God, therefore evil is the lack of God." Now you're saying you haven't defined evil, you were just defining something to explain the existence of evil. This debate has one big semantic nightmare, so unless you can come up with a clear definition of good and evil that can actually be applied I'm done.Neither objectively exist, so ttyl.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

If you just wanted to show that evil is a subjective term, then "Is evil subjective or objective?" would have been a much better title for the debate. Just sayin'.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

I was under the impressiom that you had departed. Totes un-fabu man. Anyways yeah I know. This is about God though, you know?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

This isn't what I meanThen you need to explain what you mean. Just asking the same questions again without explaining what you mean is just going to get you the same response.If we are using the English definitions of the words Immoral and Malevolent then gods actions clearly match the definitions. If you are using some other definition of those words then you need to tell me what those definitions are.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

Then you need to explain what you mean. Just asking the same questions again without explaining what you mean is just going to get you the same response.What was the point in posting this if I just took the time to make an argument around it?If we are using the English definitions of the words Immoral and Malevolent then gods actions clearly match the definitions.Again, they don't. I gave the definitions and nothing showed me that God's actions fit them. Let me show you why. tell me, what makes slavery bad? What makes mass murder bad?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

You know, for a "non-christian", you do seem to take heavy defense of the bible and christian principles. But anyway, evil can be judged by how an action affects society, other individuals, the environment, etc. If I kill someone, then I might be kiloing a productive member of society (hindering social progress), killing a parent (leaving their child(ren) parentless), ending the existance of another human being. I can use my conscience to put myself in another individuals shoes and know that I would not want the same to happen to me. Btw, there is no such thing as "religous morality", secular morality is all we have, religion only makes a claim to certain moral principles. If you read up on your science,myou will see that a ton of other species have their own set of moral principles, in the way they often fight to protect the well being if their own community.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

You know, for a "non-christian", you do seem to take heavy defense of the bible and christian principles.Grew up with a religious family. Well they weren't religious in the sense that they worship God, but they studied and worked with others to figure out what exactly makes God good or evil. I use the same arguments they do. But anyway, evil can be judged by how an action affects society, other individuals, the environment, etc. If they must be judged then they are inherently neutral. Thus God's actions are neutral.  If I kill someone, then I might be kiloing a productive member of society (hindering social progress), killing a parent (leaving their child(ren) parentless), ending the existance of another human beingWhat is wrong with killing another person? What makes it immoral? Btw, there is no such thing as "religous morality"I think I am aware of this. I have never claimed that any morality existed.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

Immoral is simply a label, if killing another human being for no reason is "moral", then Im prouldy declare myself to be "immoral"
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

Immoral is simply a label,The label must be given subjectively. Thus all actions are neutral.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

The label must be given subjectively. Thus all actions are neutral.If they must be judged then they are inherently neutral. Thus God's actions are neutral.Objective reality versus subjective reality. Actions are simply just an objective reality, all actions are not neutral since neutral is a label upon that action. That is to say any descriptor assigned to an action is already a subjectified reality. Words themselves add value to the perceived action, "kill" has a different value than "slay" as does "god" or "jerk". By using a more value neutral word or idea (even the word neutral itself) for an action you are subjectifying the action. Whether someone perceives the actions as good, neutral or bad is subjective to them and is the subjective reality. By saying all actions are neutral you have just subjectified the action to your own perspective.The act of seeing/doing/experiencing, let alone verbalizing anything already makes the any action subjective to the entity experiencing the action. The act does not happen then they person or deity taking action judges their own action, that would be backwards. Action originates from a stimuli, want/need etc., and the resulting action is the answer.Therefore The Christian gods action are immediately subjective to himself. Wrathful, rightous, something drives his action. You cannot say an action from a person or entity is neutral, you can theorize if they feel it is a neutral action or state how you feel about it. An experienced action can not be experienced objectively. We can try to be more objective about it though.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

You god people believe to much. please vote !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://seriousbusiness.createdebate.com/ debate/show/should itbelegaltohavesexwithdogs#arg517436
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

Samuel 15:3"Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”In our modern age, it is hard to find a military or social leader that has ordered the above and not thought of as "Evil".The old testament, specifically, is simply full of acts, edicts and other statements reminiscent of the type of statements from the worst of humanity.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

Do you not think that evil should be destroyed? Do you hate justice?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

My feelings about evil and justice have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether God is evil. In the same way that my personal feelings about speeding has absolutely no bearing on whether the Bugatti Veyron is the fastest road car in the world.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

How is God not doing good here, then?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

How is God not doing good here, then?For all the reasons thus far stated in this thread. Including, but not limited to, all the examples stated here and more throughout the Bible where God has ordered, assisted or carried out acts that would be considered crimes against humanity, and evil personified if a human was responsible.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

How are they crimes against humanity?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

Indiscriminate murder of men, women and children, repeated genocide and killing of innocent people for the hell of it, sanctioned rape and abductions of women "are particularly odious offenses in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings."Not only that, they are on a par with the nature of war rape, genocide, mass murder and a pattern of indiscriminate killings that have been repeatedly seen in the modern world and universally condemned.This begs the question, on what planet do you have to be to not see genocide, rape, indiscriminate purposeful murder of innocent men women children as not evil.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

Indiscriminate murder of men, women and children, repeated genocide and killing of innocent people for the hell of itGod only destroys evil.sanctioned rape and abductions of women "are particularly odious offenses in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings."When does God do this? He sanctions the taking of women as wives.Not only that, they are on a par with the nature of war rape, genocide, mass murder and a pattern of indiscriminate killings that have been repeatedly seen in the modern world and universally condemned.How so?This begs the question, on what planet do you have to be to not see genocide, rape, indiscriminate purposeful murder of innocent men women children as not evil.*Raises the question. Begs the question is a logical fallacy. I do see these things as wrong, but God did no such thing. You might get away with saying "genocide", but that is because God destroys those who are evil.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

Saying that God "only destroys evil" is fairly ridiculous and evidence of wishful thinking at its worst. Given the examples described here:-42 children who simply mocked Elijah are "evil"-All children, new borns and unborn life was "evil" at the flood, even if it is assumed that all adults on the planet are evil.-Lots wife was evil for looking back at her home.-the women and children who were killed at the sanction of God were evil (Jericho, and others mentioned here)- the 50,000 killed were evil because they looked inside the ark.There are many, many more.The problem here is, that for your statement to be true, "evil" would describe so banal and different from our concept of "evil" as to be morally irrelevant. After this, the argument simply becomes an incoherent semantic one about the definition of evil that has no bearing or correlation to what we experience in the real world.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

How are any of these things that you have mentioned not just? God destroyed the evil. You should really read the Bible, not pick and choose which Bible verses you want to use. Especially look at the contexts of those passages, to which every objection of yours is answered. For example, the flood: the Bible says that every person, except for Noah, had evil in their hearts continually. Read. Don't pluck.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

I am picking the Bible versus that demonstrate where God has committed attrocities.You can try and divorce your opinions from reality and try and claim the babies and unborn children wiped out in the flood had "evil in their heart" or try and rationalise the murder and genocide in the bible, but if you applied ANY of the things mentioned in the Bible to a single person, they would be considered evil. One of my favourite bible quotes, and the basis of my interpretation here is this: Matthew 7:15-20"By your fruits you will know them." in this regard, God is vindictive, evil and genocidal.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

God destroying evil is good. You can argue against justice all day, but at the end of it justice will always win. It doesn't matter if it is applied to many people or individuals: justice is justice, and it is good. If God did this solely to one person, then it would be good. I deserve it. We all deserve it.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

This is arguing for a type of metaphysical evil that simply is not applied in the real world."Every evil thing God does is good because we're all evil"In the real world, evil is judged by ones actions and their intentions and effects on others. A baby is not evil, a mass murderer is.By your own argument, all good intentioned rape, mass murder and genocide throughout history is acceptable as its destroying evil and therefore good. This is not a coherent position.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

This is a straw man of straw men. When did I say any of these things that you are saying I said?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

God destroying evil is good. You can argue against justice all day, but at the end of it justice will always win. It doesn't matter if it is applied to many people or individuals: justice is justice, and it is good. If God did this solely to one person, then it would be good. I deserve it. We all deserve it.What you are most definitely saying is that we are all evil, so God can do whatever he likes and it is good. You are not contending that the acts are not evil in and of themselves, but are excusable due to us all being evil and it is therefore justice.As a result, the only thing that makes the act good instead of evil, is that all humans are evil.Therefore, it is in no way a misrepresentation of your argument that is required for a straw man.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

I never said that God can do whatever He wants because we are evil. I said that whatever God does is just, which includes the destruction of the wicked. Mainly, though, I didn't even represent the previous statement, and only said that God has judged the evil and is punishing it appropriately. Do not commit a straw man.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

I said that whatever God does is just, which includes the destruction of the wicked.God is not evil, because no matter what actions he has performed, and no matter whether these actions would be abhorrent if committed by a human, whatever God does is just.The only way you have tried to justify this, is by claiming all the victims, including children, women, etc are all "evil". My statement is a logical conclusion of your own argument. What let's god off is that the victims are evil and thus deserve it. This is no straw man.The alternative is your above statement, which is basically the same as saying God is obviously not evil because he is not evil. This is a circular argument.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

It is in no way the logical conclusion from my argument. The argument is that Gods nature is intrinsically just. Do not commit a straw man. Also, the argument is that God has judged justly that these people are evil, giving them death as justice, which is good intrinsically. Do not commit a strawman
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.If people are evil (as you mentioned previously) then God killing them is just.This is either justified (and not evil) because:A: all those people who were murdered are evil and the action is therefore just (note including women, children and infants always in all situations: and I note that you do not even bother challenging my examples of lots wife and the children who simply mocked elijah). Note you even go so far as to say everyone is evil in a previous post.b: God is always just so that action cannot possibly be evil.If a) it means that I could go out murder, rape and kill and be equally just. Therefore not a straw man.If b) Your argument is inherently circular and is simply stating that the reason God is not Evil because he is not Evil.If you want to simply claim I am committing a straw man, I would suggest you provided a step by step critique and explain exactly what steps above are not your argument and why rather than simply saying so.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

A does not follow. Simply because someone has done evil, it does not mean that it is just to kill them. It is just to kill them when the punishment for a convicted person is death, and the sentencing is carried out by the one, or people, who have the right to do so. Simply killing someone who has done evil is not just. Do not commit a strawman.B is not circular at all. If something is a cow, then all you can say is that it is a cow. You can't do anything past that. But this wasn't even my argument. Do not commit a red herring.Are you new to debating?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

A does not follow. Simply because someone has done evil, it does not mean that it is just to kill them. It is just to kill them when the punishment for a convicted person is death, and the sentencing is carried out by the one, or people, who have the right to do so. Simply killing someone who has done evil is not just. Do not commit a strawman.You have been arguing that God is not evil, because his actions were justified as the people being murdered were evil. It is NOT a straw man to point this out and then extend this to me; as you are arguing along the lines that the action is justified based on the act and those who are acted upon. If God is held to a different moral standard that means the ACTIONS he carries out are not justified by what the actions are and who they are acted upon by the fact that God is and so this whole strand of your argument is simply moot. Pointing out a logical hole in your argument by demonstrating the logical conclusions of your explanations by simply changing what you are saying from "God" to "A human" is very much not a straw man. B is not circular at all. If something is a cow, then all you can say is that it is a cow. You can't do anything past that. But this wasn't even my argument. Do not commit a red herring.  The resolution is "Is the Christian God Evil", I pointed out the acts he carries out as proof he is evil. You point out that these are not evil acts; when prompted for why; they are not evil acts because God cannot be evil.This is most assuredly a circular argument. Proving your conclusion from your premise; and simply means that the entire strand of argument trying to justify his actions are simply moot. Are you new to debating? No; but I find it telling that you decide to resort to Ad-Hominem.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

You have been arguing that God is not evil, because his actions were justified as the people being murdered were evil. It is NOT a straw man to point this out and then extend this to me; as you are arguing along the lines that the action is justified based on the act and those who are acted upon.I have been arguing that God has condemned these people for doing evil and is serving justice. Do not commit a strawman. If you can't understand this, then there is no point in continuing.The resolution is "Is the Christian God Evil", I pointed out the acts he carries out as proof he is evil. You point out that these are not evil acts; when prompted for why; they are not evil acts because God cannot be evil. / This is most assuredly a circular argument. Proving your conclusion from your premise; and simply means that the entire strand of argument trying to justify his actions are simply moot.This is not circular. The argument goes from a state of morality necessarily being based in God's nature. Thus, everything that God does it just. Hence, it is just if God does it. This is not a circular argument. It appears as if you don't like deductive arguments.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

I have been arguing that God has condemned these people for doing evil and is serving justice. Do not commit a strawman. If you can't understand this, then there is no point in continuing.Well, you actually were talking about the people "Being" evil; which was odd considering I mentioned the deaths of lots wife, and the 40 children mauled by a bear; whose justification for death is "turning round" and "Mocking Elijah respectively".You are arguing from a position that God has condemned these people for doing evil and therefore serving justice (this is simply only a semantic difference from what I said).I have been continually pointing out that this is ridiculous; as if I commited those same acts, for the same reason; it would not be justice.I find it ironic that you basically restate what I said you were arguing and then claim it was a straw man.This is not circular. The argument goes from a state of morality necessarily being based in God's nature. Thus, everything that God does it just. Hence, it is just if God does it. This is not a circular argument. It appears as if you don't like deductive arguments.Oh, it is fine to simply say "God is not evil, because God is not evil", but it makes the previous dozen or so statements relatively redundant. You spend many posts trying to justify Gods actions, and now say that Gods actioned are justified becuase he's God. You seem to be arguing that God is justified in murdering children for mocking elijah, destroy lots wife simply for turning round, murder 15,000 people for looking in a box; on the grounds that he is justified because they must be evil because he is God and can't do any evil.My point is; and it still stands is that this is neither coherent or rational: As applying this same logic in the real world with our real moral values demonstrates the absurdity of your argument. The whole purpose of my argument here, is that God carries out deeds that, were it applied to a human would be considered evil. As you don't seem to be really contesting this (even though you were); and are instead saying that God doesn't count because he's God and is therefore not Evil; seems to illustrate exactly my point.So I don't see any point continuing as you seem to have conceeded my initial point: If I did any of those things for the same reasons, I would be Evil, but God wouldn't be, because he's God.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

A. Please explain to me how the babies of the town are evil?B. Is evil justified by more evil?
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Nope

A. Please explain to me how the babies of the town are evil?Everyone is evil.B. Is evil justified by more evil?Evil is not justified by more evil. But God does no evil.
Debate: Is the Christian God evil?
Side: Yep

According to your justification in A, it logically follows that God should kill everyone all the time. Is that not absurd?B is simply a bald assertion. If killing is evil, and God kills, then it logically follows that God is evil. Either God's evil actions are justified because of the evil of the tribe he chose to kill, and thus evil justifies more evil, or God's actions are unjustified because they are evil. Which is it?