- + New Debate
- Debate News
- About
- Debra AI More
frame
Best Recent Content
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@RickeyHoltsclaw
Christianity is unique among theological endeavors as it is the only Path to life in Eternity and joy and peace in Time. The atheist is a monkey-wrench in the realm of Time, a perverse and wicked of heart individual that is much likened to a metastasizing malignancy in any society seeking sustainable norms, mores, values, holiness, righteousness, life with meaning. How wicked is the atheist, the secular humanist, the progressive, the democrat, that murders babies in the womb and advocates sexual perversion for children...is Hell fitting for these demons? Yes. There is no place in America for those who serve Satan in ignorance or with intent.
Christianity is unique as it's the surest path to stupidity as you prove ricky. Your weak fairy god who turns out bad cops and molesters can hide behind you so it won't kick good honest Americans out, so who's going to do it? Not cowards who hide behind a badge like you. I'd love for you to try and arrest me, punk.
-
There is nothing inherently wrong about rape, debate me
Yes we have. Our brains are biological organs that have evolved thought processes and the fact we have laws against rape supports the reality we've evolved in a way where rape is bad. Just repeating your opinion isn't debating. 10 dollar analogy fails for the same reasons mentioned before with rape. Most of us have evolved from the caveman days which is why we do not behave that way. I know it hurts you, someone who wants to believe we should just aimlessly follow instinct. But we are not rocks and as a species we evolved through the passages of time to where we've developed a sense of morals. None of which would be occurring without evolutionary processes. Not goals. That is more religious.cheetahgod360 said:@Factfinder“Why participate in a discussion?”
I’m bored of destroying people in power scaling debates.
Humans have not evolved in a way that discourages rape physically. If you were not taught in this society and you were raised a cavemen and saw a sexually appealing woman who did not want to have sex with you, you would not care. The point is to prove why rape is not inherently wrong. Why moral values blind people of seeing that everything is neutral. I could have said “stealing 10 dollars is not inherently wrong” but saying things like rape is much more attention attractive.
The point in my debate is to cure my boredom. But it’s not valid to use that as a reason to justify why I am wrong and how rape is bad in all.
One of the prominent ways of tracking the evolution of the human brain is through direct evidence in the form of fossils. The evolutionary history of the human brain shows primarily a gradually bigger brain relative to body size during the evolutionary path from early primates to hominids and finally to Homo sapiens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_brain#:~:text=One of the prominent ways,and finally to Homo sapiens.
-
Why did Elohim create the Heavens and the Earth?
@RickeyHoltsclaw
.this love and intimacy cannot manifest with a snap of the fingers.
Why not? Your fairytale elf book claims all things are possible...
Matthew 19:26 ... but with God all things are possible.” -
What Are The Most Important Things To Know?
JulesKorngold said:What are the most important things to know?Hello Julie:1. Where is the toilet paper?2. What time is dinner?3. Who's got the tuner?excon
-
Is this MAGA or Animal Farm by George Orwell?
Hello:Of course you can tell the difference... Can't you??So, the pigs took over the farm...- Four legs - GOOD. Two legs - BAD.
- They had enemy's. It
was given out that the animals there practiced cannibalism, tortured
one another with red-hot horseshoes, and had their females in common.
This was what came of rebelling against the laws of Nature..
- "They had come to a time when no one dared speak his mind, when fierce, growling dogs roamed everywhere, and when you had to watch your comrades torn to pieces after confessing to shocking crimes."
- "Some
of the animals remembered -- or thought they remembered -- that the
Sixth Commandment decreed, 'No animal shall kill any other animal.'
And, there's more - much more here:The ending, although seemingly impossible to imagine when I read it, scared me to death.. It suggested that the pig knocking on your door, is wearing a MAGA hat and carrying a Bible.excon
-
There is nothing inherently wrong about rape, debate me
@cheetahgod360
Trump celebrates his rapes. Are you a Trump supporter? -
Why did Elohim create the Heavens and the Earth?
Why did God create the whole Universe? (Question posited in theological forum)
Christian response,The entirety of the Universe and our genome was created in direct response to an unfathomable rebellion that manifest in the Kingdom of God before the creation of Time. This rebellion was of such magnitude and destruction that God the Father extricated the participants warring against Him and ultimately placed them upon this Earth partially constrained by Time and physics; the Earth having been created for cause with rapidity for the sole purpose of removing evil from the Kingdom where nothing impure is permitted to exist (Revelation 21:27).Our entire creation and our individual lives are focused on ONE primary objective, we are participants in a cosmic struggle between good v. evil and the Son of God entered Time specifically “to destroy the works of the Devil” (1 John 3:8b) via the Gospel of Jesus Christ ordained “before the beginning of Time” (2 Timothy 1:9-10; Genesis 3:21). God the Father is presently demonstrating to the faithful angelic creation the horrors of sin and disobedience, a scenario that has been playing-out for 6020-years thus far. All of human suffering, death, are the resultant of evil introduced first by God’s nemesis, Satan, and the angels that followed Satan in the rebellion.Subsequent to the Millennial Reign of Messiah where absolute peace will manifest upon the Earth while Satan is bound for 1000-years and then released, this unique Kingdom ruled by Jesus Christ will finally convince the faithful angelic creation that indeed their former boss, Satan, is the culprit for all sin and suffering and these angels will concur with the Father that His extrication of Satan and the fallen angels (Luke 10:18; Revelation 12) was just and holy and these faithful angels will concur with the Father that Satan does indeed deserve eternal torment in Hell forever and ever (Revelation 20:10). Hell having been created specifically for Satan and the fallen angels (Matthew 25:41).Human kind is the byproduct of the Gospel dealing with sin and evil having been introduced into the Kingdom of God and in God’s mercy for having created us as participants in this cosmic war, God has demonstrated His perfect LOVE and compassion by giving Himself as a blood sacrifice through selfless love and suffering for a rebellious and stubborn people yet God is faithful and Holy and the faithful angels look-on with amazement at what their God has done and they are reassured that He is worthy of all praise and worship and servitude as there is no One greater. In all of this, God will have been successful in maintaining volitional love with His faithful angelic creation that He absolutely adores while simultaneously destroying the works of the Evil One through His own selfless LOVE.The One who successfully destroyed the works of the Devil (death, Hell, the grave) through the Crucifixion (Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:8b), Jesus Christ our Lord, is presently preparing a New Kingdom (the New Jerusalem) (John 14:3) and in a most unique turn of events, God will live among His created beings in a resurrected body and those who have loved God in Jesus Christ and served Him faithfully by grace through faith in what He has done for mankind within the Realm of Time, these faithful will serve the Living God in resurrected, redeemed, bodies in a New Kingdom on a New Earth having been purified by fire within a New Heaven, FOREVER.
-
There is nothing inherently wrong about rape, debate me
@MayCaesar
There was a cool exercise one high school teacher had us do. We would express our opinions on something and find a disagreement - and then we would switch the roles and argue the best case for the opponent's position. For instance, suppose I believe that women should have equal rights with men, while my opponent believes that they should not. We would switch the roles, I would make the best argument I can for why women should have fewer rights than men, and my opponent would argue for equality. It was extremely eye-opening: not only would we gain respect for our opponents' positions by finding good arguments in favor of them, but we would strengthen our own positions by finding flaws in them and correcting for them.
I did that once on a debate sight some twenty years ago. Failed miserably as I was still a staunch Christian at the time and couldn't comprehend the reality that some people do not believe in god. Thought about trying to do that here, now but not sure how to structure it so that people seriously participate without quickly dissolving into insults of peoples beliefs. After about 3 or 4 attempts back then that's what the debate deteriorated to.
-
There is nothing inherently wrong about rape, debate me
He is just the kind of person who is deeply ingrained in his thinking and has trouble understanding any argument that does not align with his vision. It is common for religious people, although neither exclusive nor universal.There was a cool exercise one high school teacher had us do. We would express our opinions on something and find a disagreement - and then we would switch the roles and argue the best case for the opponent's position. For instance, suppose I believe that women should have equal rights with men, while my opponent believes that they should not. We would switch the roles, I would make the best argument I can for why women should have fewer rights than men, and my opponent would argue for equality. It was extremely eye-opening: not only would we gain respect for our opponents' positions by finding good arguments in favor of them, but we would strengthen our own positions by finding flaws in them and correcting for them.Doing so though takes guts, especially in the debate setting. It is much easier to simply assume that everyone who disagrees with you is smoking something, and semi-intentionally misunderstand their arguments. -
There is nothing inherently wrong about rape, debate me
@just_sayin
No. I am saying rape is an act of violence, therefore it is wrong and immoral.
Good to know.
1) The word rape is not used, even though it was just in the prior verses, instead a more neutral word is used, the word for 'take'. You have based an argument on a bad translation. In fact, if you look at other translations you see the error. For example Deuteronomy 22:28-29 in NLT translation:
The word "rape" is used in some translations like the NIV.
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
So cherry picking translations can not bring a satisfying conclusion about as neither one of us are qualified to make such determinations arbitrarily. The entire context must be considered and established.
Arguments based on bad translations are not good arguments.
2) If this were rape, then passages that proceeds it would apply See Deuteronomy 22:25-26, explains what happens in the case of rape:“But if the man meets the engaged woman out in the country, and he rapes her, then only the man must die. 26 Do nothing to the young woman; she has committed no crime worthy of death. She is as innocent as a murder victim.
3) The passage, Deuteronomy 22:28-29, itself suggests that the sex is consensual. The phrase 'If they are discovered' strongly suggests this, if it were truly rape, then the man could be killed, however, to be completely accurate, in the OT, any crime that has as the maximum penalty - the death penalty, could be given a lesser sentence or punishment, except for murder.
Not necessarily. Not all rapes are violent and not all victims cry out for help. The only prerequisite for establishing rape mentioned is if the maid should cry out or not; which we all know isn't true. Or is that your argument, that rape is determined only in one way, if the victim cried out?
Meanwhile going back even further in the chapter to establish a more solid contextual foundation we realize sexual behavior in general that includes rape is being discussed. "If they are discovered" can have more applications then the just the one you suggest. A rapist and victim can be discovered and the participants remain rapist and victim. The realization that emotions are running high when a victim finds herself in this kind of extreme situation can cause women to react differently. Women have been known to forgive their assailants and have even entered relationships with them. Given the point in time that we're talking about the victim in a field could sense the isolation of her circumstance and simply submit in an effort to avoid any potential violence as well. Like an instinctual survival response. Remember this is a time where women were often referenced with the same frame of mind as when mentioning cattle to the extent her parents would have to keep proof of her virginity...Deuteronomy 22:
13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.
So a rape in those days under your gods laws could hurt a women in many different ways. She in her situation may want to marry her rapist if for nothing else but to save herself from a life of despair and rejection. If that wasn't bad enough, add the possibility of single motherhood in such an unforgiving oppressive culture. It is in this context that the verses in question should be contemplated in. And not simply which translation best fits the narrative of choice.
I am not supporting rape, but supporting accurate biblical interpretation.
Commendable. However accurate biblical interpretation as I've just demonstrated appears to only condemn rape if the act violates the victims hymen and chooses not to marry her rapist. Well with one and one only exception, she cry out during her assault for help. But then if she does and isn't heard, then what? Also why speak of the female sex as "virgins" as that seems to be what the author is more concerned with; more so than the rape activity itself?
