azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes but for reasons we can't understand

after reading a argument and the such i have realized my argument is incorrect, but since i cant edit my post i shall dispute my self.hell is a place of torture,but also psychological torture as well. the second death means a spiritual death, that is the inability to have relationship with god. after talking with a theologian, we cam across a very interesting fact, if god is omniscient, that means hes presence is in hell to. so imagine the torture a person in hell feels. he can sense gods presence but due to his spiritual death he has no ability to connect to god or any thing, so then the presence of god turns into torment and pain. such a horrible feeling it must be to loose the ability to have a relationship with god but to be tortured by his presence still lingering there.the main reason why i thought hell was a place of simply ceasing to exist was because i thought hell was a place predestined for sinners to go to. but this is not the case. hell was never intended for humans. it was created by god for satin when he rebelled against heaven. the garden or paradise that Adam lived in was what god created for humanity, but out of love and free will that god gave Adam, he ate the apple and now us humans must ether follow god back to heaven, where we were intended, or fall into hell, a place created for satin.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Good job, good for you for criticizing your own conclusions are changing your mind when you were wrong. The way of life is simple to those who have understanding.Only a persons choice of being a sinner rather than honestly seeking to know God's mercy, which is available through the blood of His Son, Jesus Christ, predestines that person to Hell. If they will repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, they will be saved. God knows who will and won't be saved, we do not so He leaves us here to witness for Him, to reach the lost and build testimonies against those who will not accept His Son as their Savior...and to encourage each other by our testimonies, to know more of His love and to grow in grace so we can serve Him more and more perfectly until we see Jesus face to face and are forever changed to be like Him, with Him, by Him, through Him, for Him, forever!!
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

I'd say that makes him worse because that sounds worse than eternal suffering to me.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

That makes him WORSE??? You are given a choice! Whether or not you accept him is your choice.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Really? See that's why I use logic. That's like me telling you that you have to live with a complete stranger who may or may not exist, but if you choose not to you die. Some choice.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

That's like me telling you that you have to live with a complete stranger who may or may not exist, but if you choose not to you die. Some choice.Then don't choose not to. Then you do not die. I think you'd find it quite enjoyable considering this "stranger" is benevolent.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Then don't choose not to. Then you do not die. I think you'd find it quite enjoyable considering this "stranger" is benevolent.If the Stranger is benevolent then why does he kill you if you refuse to live with Him? Christians regularly cite 'free will' as the root of the issue. Having a penalty attached to exercising one's free will is neither fair nor benevolent.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

and who is to say that any one religion is any more correct than another?Sure, it is easy to say that the 'benefits' of following you Christian G-d outweigh the disadvantages, but what about every other religion that has just as much (or as little) proof to suggest they are correct?This is not a matter of trusting an imaginary supposedly benevolent strangerthis is a matter of deciding among myriads of imaginary supposedly benevolent strangers, or none at all.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Except God doesn't want to be a complete stranger. He wants you to get to know him. He doesn't ask you to choose a complete stranger, He asks you to choose a friend.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

That seems very at odds with the belief many Christians hold that they are going to heaven and everyone else is going to hell.Could you please explain the countless threats people get about hell if there is no such place?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: RAWR

sure, I can explain the countless threats people get about hell.when you want people to believe your doctrine, you threaten them with stories about fire and brimstone! It is almost as effective as logic, and much simpler to explain.And anyone who argues with me will be cast into the cavernous distended belly of an obese pig in the center of the earth.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

It's also a way of controlling the people already under your denomination. Don't argue with what you're told, and you won't get sent to Hell.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Do you know how retarded you sound? You believe in that fairy tale? Go back to 2nd grade you incompetent chump
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

That's not really an argument. That's a personal attack. Arguments are supposed to be logical. If attacks were counted, than everyone would get into a shouting match because each view probably looks equally 'retarded' to the other side.You believe in that fairy tale?Which 'fairy tale' are you speaking of. If you think the idea of God is a fairy tale, than why did you even join this thread? It's obviously for people who either believe in God or are willing to accept the idea for the sake of argument. You have done neither. Or is it the 'fairy tale' of Hell. If you don't believe in hell, either, than, once again, why would you join. Same thing applies here as it did above.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

I have only known of this site recently. I have answered your premises.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

We agree that its possible but your premise isn't as strong as some others.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

And what premise was that? Cause it seems a little vague to me.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Here is how dictionary.com defines benevolent;1.characterized by or expressing goodwill or kindly feelings: a benevolent attitude; her benevolent smile.2.desiring to help others; charitable: gifts from several benevolent alumni.3intended for benefits rather than profit: a benevolent institution.So if you were a benevolent God who had two people and one of them picked up a knife to kill the other, what would be the most benevolent thing to do? Stop him from doing harm?That's what hell is for.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

First off, sending someone to Hell does not "stop him from doing harm", it only retroactively punishes them for harm they have already caused. Hell does absolutely nothing whatsoever to decrease the amount of suffering in the world.Second, most interpretations of Hell are of infinite suffering. Hell is an infinite response to a finite amount of harm - certainly not a benevolent action. All the suffering every person in the world has ever experienced is not even equivalent to sending even 1 person to hell. That seems ridiculously out of line.Third, if God intended to use Hell as a deterrent, she did a really terrible job of it - leaving absolutely zero evidence of her presence and no universal rulebook. How exactly is one supposed to be deterred by the notion of Hell if one can't be sure that one's actions will lead to it, or even that it exists in the first place? If Hell is really supposed to be a deterrent, it would have worked much better if God made it very, very obvious - as a benevolent God should do, rather than toying around with the possibility of infinite suffering.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

"Hell is an infinite response to a finite amount of harm"... no. Hell is where those who are imperfect (i.e. have a sin nature) and do not seek to be perfected (i.e. do not seek Christ [and the reconciliation to the Father that comes with Him, and thence to slowly kill off the sin nature]) go, because with the sin nature left unchecked anyone can do an inordinate amount of harm, however finite. Look at Hitler in WWII with the Shoah (or Holocaust as only Anglophones call it), for instance. He used warped reasoning to justify his hatred, and hatred comes from letting the sin nature run unchecked - as most people are wont to do (at least in our worst of moments).
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Nothing you said responds to what I said originally. I cannot do anything aside from restate what I said before.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Very good, I do like your usage of the concept of the sin nature being unchecked. People tend to say "yeah, Hitler deserves Hell but I'm not that bad". The only thing that can check our sin nature is death, and we all deserve to die and burn in Hell the same as Hitler because we have all sinned against God. That is why Jesus said, "...there is none good, no not one". We are all gone bad, we all are corrupt, unholy, ungodly in our human hearts.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Below is a copy of a post I had above, but I cannot link you to it.-----Revelation constantly informs the reader that 'hell' is the Second Death:Revelation 2:11b "Whoever is victorious will not be hurt by the second death."Revelation 20:6a "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. For them the second death holds no power"Revelation 20:14 "And death and the grave were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death--the lake of fire."Revelation 21:8 "But cowards who turn away from me, and unbelievers, and the corrupt, and murderers, and the immoral, and those who practice witchcraft, and idol worshipers, and all liars--their doom is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur. This is the second death."As for death, itself, the Bible also states that there is no life in death, no spirit surviving on. You're dead, in the ground.Ecclesiastes 9:5 "The living at least know they will die, but the dead know nothing"John 11:11 "Then he said, "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep[1], but now I will go and wake him up."[1] The Greek word used here (koimaō) is also used in Matthew 27 to describe dead people. It also describes death in Acts 7 (Stephen's death), Acts 13 (King David is now sleeping), and others.So the first death is sleeping, but everyone will get awoken at some point in time. The Second Death would then be 'sleep' without waking. Dead. Gone.Thus, Hell is not an eternal fire-pit, but an eternal death.-----So hell is not infinite suffering. It's very, very finite. If it was infinite, it wouldn't destroy sin. It would only contain sin.And isn't the Bible a universal rulebook.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

The only thing you got right here is that Hell, being infinite, contains sin. That's what God made it for. It contains sin, confining it forever separate from the living.You are confused about life and death. We have a body of death, we are dying in the first death. Remember Jesus said "let the dead bury their dead." People who are dead in their sins are walking and talking dead people.....separated from God by their sin, in the first death until it is finalized when the enter Hell, and after the Judgment they are cast into the Lake of Fire which is the second death. It is eternal dying, forever stuck in death, the same as they are stuck in death now. Now they can know God's goodness, they can see and sense indications of His goodness and love. He took their place in death as the Lamb of God, and if they will not receive Him as the payment for their sins, they will serve time forever as they are serving time now, in death, with no indication of God's mercy, goodness, or kindness and nothing but His wrath which they deserve for their sins.If there is no punishment in death, if it is only a "sleep" with no awareness, then there is no need for anybody to stop being evil because death will relieve them of the consequences of being evil. In your punishment-free imagination, you have made the faith of God of no effect since nobody needs it if they believe the things you are saying are true. God created us forever, and we will serve Him forever in Heaven knowing His blessings, or in Hell knowing His wrath...honoring Him as our Creator because He is good and all He created is good.........even if it is gone bad and is good only as a testimony to His right to rule over and against sin. One day, after the Judgement is complete, Heaven will be filled with nothing but God's people and His holy presence and Hell will forever confine sin and the smoke of the torments of people and devils there will rise while their words are lost in the flames......and the rising smoke will testify of God's goodness in that He punishes evil.....And there will NEVER be another rebellion in Heaven.......God will have what He intended from the beginning, a perfect Heaven and a perfect Earth, and His Kingdom will NEVER end.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

So do you think people who commit moral crimes should be punished?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

So do you think people who commit moral crimes should be punished?Infinite punishment for finite crimes, you mean?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

No that's not what I mean. I mean; do you think people who commit moral crimes should be punished?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

But is that not what Hell is? An infinite punishment??????????
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

What crime is moral? How can crime be moral? Crime is immoral, and of course the perpetrators should be punished for it. That's why we have policemen and jails.......and the death penalty in some cases.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

I got your back.LOL I dont like being down voted, and then on top of it a person im argueing against get upvoted while im getting downvoted. lol
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Hell is contrary to benevolence.As a purely benevolent god in that situation I would disable his willingness to hurt other humans.Of course that restricts free will, but to be compliant with benevolence, that's the type of action one would have to take.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Great comments. A knife is a good thing if it is used for good, but in Hell there will be no knife to use and nobody will be able to use a knife to cause harm.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

It is completely in the hands of God. We can not tell anyone who is going to hell or not, because the final judgement is between the person and the father, son holy spirit. I can say this however. God has given all of us many chances to come to him, and in many different ways. Sometimes people can not see or hear his voice speaking to them because they have rejected him. Even then god will find ways in trying to bring his people to him. And remeber their consists of only 2 sides. Sons of darkness, and sons of light. We have to make a choice. Beleivers are called to spread his word like water covers paper. He works in majestic ways. He works through people and in other ways that only the god of life can do. Please dont underestimate his power. We have to choose to love him, because that is what makes our relationship with him special, choice.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

It's His goodness which leads us to repentance.....when we see He is always good and we are sinners, His love wins us over so we say sorry for our sins and seek His mercy.Mercy and truth are met together, righteousness and peace have kissed one another. The Truth, Jesus, took our place in death to that God's wrath against sin was satisfied by Himself, and by His resurrection God's mercy toward us is secured. I don't mean to be preaching to the choir, I hope to see lost people believe and see the Light of Heaven and receive Him as their Savior.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Depends which hell

If hell is a place to repent, reflect, and eventually leave, yeah probably. Otherwise, no. I mean, it's all really out there so it's not something I'd have a totally awesome opinion on, but I think that if this hell is a place where you learn and leave, then yeah. Of course, some people tend to think you just burn there forever, which if you do, then no, that would not be a very benevolent god.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Being on Earth is the place for people to reflect and repent. They have their lives to make a decision and if they don't then that's their problem. Why should they go and just have nothing but fun and look away from God until they get to Hell and then decide that they want to follow him?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

You do realize that in order for you to be correct, Earth would actually have to be Hell.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Having fun, enjoying life is a bad thing for which you must suffer eternally. Nice God you've got there.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes, some people have fun raping, some have fun being perverts and taking advantage of other perverts for pleasure, some have fun lying and stealing, ........go on and have your fun and forget God's law. God is being good to you and you want to have fun...go on and have your fun, enjoy while you can.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Depends which hell

No. You're wrong. Life is a journey, not a test. And I never said they'd just go to hell and say "Okay I like you now because I hate this place." That isn't what I meant. I'm saying if there was a hell and god and all of that fun stuff, it would be right for a benevolent god to send people there if they were able to learn from hell and eventually leave or something. Learn. Not lie and cheat. There's a difference.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

No. You're wrong. Being on Earth is a journey, but it is also a test. The devil gives you tests to see how you will react to them and to see whether or not you will stay faithful. You have your entire life to make that decision so if you go to Hell and then get another chance to be faithful that's like giving them another chance after many failed attempts.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Depends which hell

I don't know about you, but if my son didn't get it, I probably wouldn't hate him forever for it. Forever is a long time, and all wounds heal. You can't condemn someone for eternity just because they're stupid or they don't get it.(Or because they were total assholes, we can fix that.) That makes you just as bad as they are. Now if god was a douchebag or something, I guess he'd send people to hell forever.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

But he doesn't really have a choice. If they follow him during their lifetime then he will bring them to Heaven, but if they don't follow him then the Devil will bring them to Hell.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Depends which hell

I'm pretty sure the devil doesn't have a choice in the matter, considering he's suffering in hell too for pulling the largest act of superdickery in existence. The devil doesn't influence or tempt anyone. People belong to and control themselves completely. They just hate to admit it.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

The Devil and God have an agreement. God allows him to tempt people to see how they react to the situation. If people are truly faithful then they will not let it get to them so much that they lose faith. God trusts that you don't lose faith. You are right people do make their own decisions, whether they are the right ones or not is their choice also.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Depends which hell

Alright, fine whatever, you win. You don't get it though. Nobody ever gets it. I'm just kind of done arguing this because I can see this isn't going to go anywhere.Just remember, Christianity is about turning the other cheek, acceptance, and forgiveness. Not about burning in hell. Jesus himself believed that.I doubt a benevolent god would allow the ultimate sinner to hold on to his children forever.The minute you condemn someone is the minute you lose your 'faith'.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

....How can God not have a choice? (Assuming he is real )How can you even make a statement like that. That is one of the single most stupidest statements I have ever come across. God is fucking omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent. He is perfect by definition. He is not bound by any restrictions by the simple fact that God is ABSOLUTE.God has a choice. If he does not, then the God your speaking about is not God, or there is no God.A benevolent God would be definition not force his most dear creations to suffer eternally, and to argue in favor of such a point is a fruitless endeavor.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

wrong. If people can learn from Hell, and be corrected by it, then eventually be released from being punished, then they have no need to believe God now, no need to obey God now, because after a limited time they get off the hook and then have eternity to enjoy. By that thinking, they might as well do whatever they feel suits them best for now and they can pay for it later and then they are paid off and free.What you are saying is the teaching of Islam and Catholicism...two murderous religions which believe the people they murder will be sent to Hell (or Purgatory) where they will be "corrected" and then God will be satisfied so they can be released and set free. It's a doctrine of demons from Hell designed to keep people in the dark, believing lies, which will lead them into the devils eternal damnation in Hell...the only thing the devil can do to strike back at God for denying him freedom to roam in rebellion against God.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: What a homo

THERE IS NO GOD! Their is only the man and his fellow country men! We must rise above the outdated instituions of religion and praise our fatherland! Religion only controlls the masses.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

as opposed to Nationalism, which has never been used to manipulate people....