azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Your argument makes sense, except that that's not how the Bible sees it. According to the Bible, not only did Hitler go to Hell, but so did Anne Frank and the other millions of Jewish nonbelievers who he murdered in the Holocaust. So did Gandhi, a Hindu, and so did so many other great men and women guilty of nothing but the unforgivable crime of not believing in Jesus Christ.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Before I was a Christian, there were many aspects of the faith that baffled me, and I demanded questions, questions that were similar to this one. It wasn't that long after that I heard a preacher man say this: "Many people ask me 'how can God hate if He is love?' and my reply is this 'God must hate because God is love". If you cannot understand this, then perhaps you should inquire no more on the matter, because its not something that one can't understand, it is something that one does not want to understand. I will add this though: would a benevolent God let man who denied His existance stand alongside men who gave up their lives for His existance? Would he reward men who rejected His Son the same way He rewards those who loved His Son and did great things in His name? God's wish is that all believe and come to the knowledge of the truth, those who don't are responsible for what happens next.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

A benevolent God would love unconditionally regardless of belief, especially in a world like ours where people are constantly influenced by atheistic ideas. Your idea of God is not benevolent, and if that god is THE God then he is unworthy of our love.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

of cores y not... if ur a dum shit like some ppl r then of cores have fun in helll! i join u bra
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

The question, however, is based on a wrong premise but not only would He, but He will, if you understand why and reasons behind it.http://www.btscene.eu/subcat/id/3/
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes. He can't save people who will reject them becasue they will be covered in sin, and God is not compatible with sin. But you can't say he's still not benevolent becasue even despite that he gave up his very SON so that we could have a way to escape sin and hell.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Actually everybody DOES at some point come across Christianity. It doesn't matter how; they still will at some point in their life have that opportunity. (Except for babies that die before, although it's thought that he has a place for them.)
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

And so no: it actually doesn't create a lottery: at some point everyone WILL have a point where they decide what they believe in, which is what the Christians now are supposed to be doing: making sure the word DOES get to other people.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes God would send people to hell because some people like atheists and agnostics and people who do not believe in God will go to hell for not believing in God. The only way to not go to hell is you could believe in Jesus Christ and follow his ways and but the road to heaven is very narrow to get but wide it is to get to hell. The road to heaven is going to really hard tho and if anyone is willing to take the challenge its the Christians.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes He would send people to hell. God gave us free will to believe what ever but there will be conquences to people who choose there own way and not God's way. Its the person's choice to believe in God or not if they choose not then then that is ther fault since they choose not to believe in Him.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

I totally agree...The entire sub jet tends to be misinterpreted...It is not GOD that throws us away, but we that throws him away...if you get what I mean
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

we speak of a perfect god and how can he send people to hell? because thats the wrong way to look at it.we choose god, god has already asked us to follow him, its up to us if we choose him or not.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

It would make more sense if everyone places themselves in this situation, would anyone cast their children into the pits of hell. Ofcourse in our case hell would be simply throwing your kid out of the house where he has to fiend for himself in the steets...Does this happen? Yes...all, the time...
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

What most people arguing that god shouldn't send them to hell don't understand is what hell actually is, hell is the pain and suffering of living without a god which people only go to if the refuse god, its not that god sends them to a place full of fire and suffering
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes, it's because God has nowhere to put them except in the place representative of their burning passion against their Creator. Hell burns because sin burns against God...God hates it, and His wrath is against it because He had to take death on Himself in order to buy back His creatures from death...because He is love, He knew this is what He would have to do before He created beings with free will and powers of reasoning like His own. He knew some would rebel and they would have to be thrown into the fire. For the joy of having what He intended from the beginning, a people for His Kingdom to give all things pertaining to life forever, He endured the suffering and despised the shame. In His righteous anger against those who broke His law of perfection, His law of love, He will avenge Himself by the fire of Hell from which only the smoke of the torments of His adversaries will rise forever, and it's good to know God punishes evil.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

God gave you time you do not deserve, you do not deserve to live but He gives you time....and in that time, He died in your place, paid your price, to buy you back from the death you deserve, so you can be forgiven in His resurrection. If you think it is nothing what He did for you, then you have nothing but your own death and nobody but yourself to blame if you find yourself unable to escape the fire of Hell.....and your loss will not stop God from being good. How can God be good if He does not banish all that is not good away from the living forever? You have gone bad, and you can't blame God for not trying to bring you back to Himself through the blood He gave with His own life to pay for your sins. God cannot be benevolent toward evil or He would be evil. God being good does not mean He is benevolent to those who have gone away from and against Him. Your own actions testify against you, and God is good so He honors the facts of reality and will let you burn in Hell if you don't want to seek His mercy and believe on His Son. It doesn't matter how much you say you should be allowed to have life your own way...God gave it to you and he has the right to deny you from it forever.You are arguing something you cannot win in. You are arguing against yourself when you go against God who did all He could for you on the cross of Calvary.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Lots of good comments here, but too many foul mouthed trash bags who God still loves but I have had enough of in this discussion. I hope to see you all in Heaven.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Yes. Not that he doesn't love us, though. When your parents ground you or punish you, it isn't out of hate, but out of love. God isn't out puppeteer... he gives us free will. Along with this free will, the tells us what is right... we just don't listen. THAT is why we go to hell is we don't believe in God.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

This is simply a place to insult people who know something about the bible!
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Two Can Play

This is actually simply a place for intelligence to prevail, and for unsupported ideas to be hacked down like hogs hung from a meat hook. If Christianity is a worthy religion, it will stand the test of extreme scrutiny. History will support it and the text inside the Bible will always speak the truth about society, and how God wants us to live (assuming there is a God, that he directed the writing of the bible, and that he put in the Bible what he wanted his creations to do/how to live their lives).
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Scrutiny by people who do not believe it and from a modern context.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Wow, so you're saying that Christianity should be able to stand the test of extreme scrutiny? Are you trying to use this as an excuse to bash it time and again? Great idea! I think you should spread the wealth a little! Bash some Hindus and Buddhists and Jews! Oh, wait- NO THAT IS DISCRIMINATION!!! YOU RACIST! I think that Christianity has definitely should the test of extreme scrutiny long enough! Millions of Christians have been killed in history as martyrs.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

This is a site for Christianity to be hacked down by atheists! Christians don't get a voice!
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Which is why Christians make up an estimated third of the world's population? Most of which live in Europe and North America, the two greatest industrialized regions in the world (debatable with Russia, China, Japan, S. Korea in Asia). It seems to be that Christians would have much more of a voice where only 16% of the world is non-religious. And even less than that is atheist.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

im here with you brother or sister. Your not alone here sometimes i feel the same way.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

I know something about the Bible and I am not insulted. I am an atheist though and here is where the problem with bible worship starts. Bible bashers have no logic or evidence to back up there claim, they have blind faith which when questioned logically by people descends into insult or blasphemy or boo boos or whatever terminology you wish to use for "I know I have lost so I will sulk".
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Be careful with putting beleivers into sheep pens because some who claim to be sheep who follow their shepard are actullay wolves disguised in sheeps clothing. If ther are beleivers who just boo woo you and dont sit down and talk with you strait and logically, then im sorry because we are not all like that. And plus those beleivers you are talking about probably dont have any roots to hold their ground. That is their own fault, because the word of GOd gives us roots.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

The word of God that has no supporting evidence outside of itself! The Qu'ran also claims to be the only word of God; give me proof that the Bible has a higher claim, other than simple fate. If we had to follow the Bible, God would give us a sign that it was the right way. Otherwise, it's just a random draw on the salvation slot machine.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

He's insulting God. Don't take it personally. He's trying to make God go away, trying to convince himself that he is too good to end up burning in Hell with no way out. Don't take it personally. The guy needs to be saved, God left His people in this world to try to reach the lost. Remember, Jesus said if you follow Him He will make you a fisher of men....and that we should deny ourselves, and take up our cross daily, and follow Him....through His cross and in His resurrection to eternal life. They can't hurt you if God is for you....don't take it personal, they are against God and God is for you if you believe on Jesus.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

No one has time read your novel on "would a benevolent God send people to hell?"
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes cursed or evil doers will go to hell

Huge argument is huge.But yes: God can. I call it benevolent when a person gives up their own SON to save a bunch of people who betrayed him before. Because that IS what the first sin was: Adam and Eve decided to side with the Devil, then tried to hide the fact they did it from him. Their betrayal separated them from God, which was/is hell enough, as well as caused them to deserve the punishment of hell.And yet, despite it God sent Jesus to die for the very people who'd betrayed him just so he could save their nasty behinds.It isn't very hard to get.And I really love how a person cannot comment on here about their beliefs without the rift-raft showing that they are ignorant and bigoted :)Thanks for being another stereotypical atheist, people.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Even if you are right, we aren't Adam and Eve. It's the same idea as saying all Jews will go to Hell because Jews executed Jesus. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE, so why would we be punished for something our ancestors did? That's just complete bull, it really is.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: There is No god

Would a benevolent God Kill 500 Billions Baby's With disease and hunger. If He would do that then he wouldn't Think twice about sending people to hell. Therfore he is not a benevolent god.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

God is good to you or you would be burning in Hell now. Here you can know God's goodness. In Hell you will never be able to know God's goodness because you will have chosen finality of death in rejecting His goodness....you will burn forever in your sin which burns against God, and God's wrath burns against it. Your getting what you deserve if you won't repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

If one was to view morality as a property of the world around around us there would be no problem with the idea of hell as long as the morals or guidelines of a religion would therefore be derived from rationality. Then an individual who makes immoral choices would in the end understand the reason why he must suffer in hell, and would have no logical or ration objection to this commandment of god. If morals can be derived rationally at all however, I believe an eternal hell would be difficult to defend in this theology.Philosophers like Immanuel Kant defended this view and I see no issue with their notion. The issue is proving the existance of god, and not in the concept of punishment for incompliance with the moral properties of the world as rationally set by god.Why has god then not given everybody a full understanding of morality? On the other hand - can you prove he has not? I think the agnostic position is as defendable in this case as in the case of does god exist.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

The true religion is written on all hearts of mankind, it is truth. The truth is what God gave and sacrificed for you to do good but mankind has chosen the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Does one understand what the tree of knowledge of good and evil even means? If a man knows good and evil he is now a judge, if he then being judge of right and wrong, how can the maker be judge? When one assumes his rightful place as unknowing what is right and wrong, throws all that he has prejudices against and all that he accepts as good away then he becomes a clean slate allowing the free will of God to shed light as to what is good. In the beginning you and all things were created good. When you know only good then you know that any temptation of bad that comes along is not of God, therefore it is to be rejected and need not to be eaten for it brings spiritual death. Meaning in direct opposition with the life that one has been assigned. You need not do bad to see bad for bad can be seen simply by knowing good only, have belief in the good only and be freed by the imprisonment of bad; for bad when known will deceive you into believing it is good.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Adam and Eve were told to judge what was wrong before they decided to do wrong, they were told not to do wrong. They were made as judges. They did not have to do wrong in order to judge what is wrong. That was the lie of Satan, telling them that when they do wrong they would be like God. They were like God when they were created, they knew judgement, they knew what was right and what was wrong, and they did the thing they were told not to do when they decided it was not wrong for them to do it because they made excuses for themselves to do wrong."when one assumes his rightful place as unknowing what is right and wrong..."????????????? So you don't know what is right or wrong? That means you do not know what you are talking about....and how can anybody know what you are talking about when your speech is jibberish?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

They not only rejected Him, but they (non-christians) also rejected His son. He does not want to send people into the eternal inferno that is Hell, but they must move towards Him first.I recall a magazine article I read, where they posed the question:Why do films such as the exorcist scare atheists? They do not believe in demonic posession - they believe in the natural, not supernatural, world - so why would they be afraid?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

You didn't answer a single part of the premise I laid out, all you did was recite the time old adage that is what I was taking issue with.In any case, I'm not an atheist but I think you read much to far into that. Anything frightening triggers the natural (biological) fight or flight response, even if its imaginary, or digital as the case may be.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

I am extremely lazy, I didn't read much other than 'Would a benevolent God send people to hell?'However, since I have been disputed, I'll come up with a better argument - however, I assure you that I shall take the same stance as I did before.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

As I demonstrated with my last paragraph, dealing with 'the Exorcist,' a Christian would argue that God built it into men to know Him, and that those who do not, for whatever reason, are damned. I do not think entirely in this manner. Surely, whether they have been told or not they have gone against God - if they had been told, there would likely have been a different outcome. But that is where the missionary comes in. If ignorance gained people access into Heaven, then we would all know nothing about Christianity. It does not work that way, however.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

It is your job to prove this "inbred knowledge of God" hypothesis, which is about as loony as they come, to be honest. As for the rest of your argument, sending someone to be tortured for all the rest of eternity due to ignorance and a failure on the missionaries part is 100% incompatible with a benevolent God.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

I said that I don't believe it, you bitch. Aren't you paying attention???
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Don't Speak

If you do not believe in it, then do not articulate it as though you do. You stated that you would create an argument for it, which you did not do successfully.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

I was simply adding 'food for thought, or rather, 'Advocatus Diaboli.'I directly stated that that could be somebody's opinion, or that I had read it. I was giving the minority a voice in the midst of my own argument.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Well please don't Russell. If they want to have a voice then they will make themselves heard. You should have addressed the question objectively from your own standpoint. So everyone can have a fair chance at tearing your opinions apart, or kissing your ass and agreeing with you ;). And, you still did not support your answer to the question. Wouldn't the creation like a place called Hell (and all the traits we associate with it) by direct proof of the lack of a benevolent God? How about Sin? How can anyone claim that this was anything other than God's fault? A Benevolent being that is God would always have a Utopian society in-place, for every human to live equally happy, equally content, and equally at peace. [I suppose my ideas of a Benevolent God tend to agree with a lot of Marxist values]. Benevolence is a trait that is attached to God (which we are always assuming is real because the discussion topic assumes is real). God is not necessarily benevolent, rather, i would state the it is necessary that if God exists then he (sexist interpretation of God, but normal for a Westerner) must be other than benevolent, he must be more similar to mankind than previously thought.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

"Wouldn't the creation like a place called Hell (and all the traits we associate with it) by [sic] direct proof of the lack of a benevolent God?"Erm, hello? That place was originally meant for Satan alone - until Adam and Eve bit into the forbidden fruit and sin became a part of human nature that can be very difficult to fight."How about Sin?"Sin is the result of people turning away from God - it distances us from Him. But God doesn't make people sin. Free will (gift of God) + sin nature (from Adam and Eve's action) = tendency to sin."How can anyone claim that this was anything other than God's fault?"How can anyone claim that this WAS God's fault when He planned a rescue mission in the form of Jesus and of the church since the beginning of time?
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Haha...some atheist get scared in scary movies therefore they aren't really atheists. Wow, that's a stretch. If someone made a scary movie about aliens, and you were afraid does that mean you believe in aliens? The answer of course is no, but while watching the movie you have willingly suspended your disbelief.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

As I said, that is what I read. I posed it as an argument - I do not believe it.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Then why are you still disputing me...this makes no sense.
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: Yes, they rejected him

Because I still do not agree with you - that is why I am disputing you!
Debate: Would a benevolent God send people to hell?
Side: No, it's incompatible

Disbelief is not rejection. I do not reject Santa Claus, I simply do not believe that he exists. But if Santa does exist, and if he is a "jolly old elf", then he would not punish me for my lack of belief.