God is good

[Skatterbrain]

Hey guys, i've been interested in Christianity for a while but havent been able to have a proper argument about my concerns with it; I thought maybe this would be a good solution? I'm not trying to bash christianity in any way, and know quite a few christians whom I like and respect. (Most of my family are Presbyterian) However there are a few things that haven't made sense to me and this is probably the biggest one.

Dont really care who goes first, i'm more interested in answers than actually winning the debate. The only thing is that the person I'm debating has to believe that the whole bible is the word of god; disregarding minor details, particularly the parts concerning hell.

I'll be arguing against the motion, 4 rounds, 3 days between posts, 3000 words, quotes allowed, debate can start at any time

Thanks, love you all

 

[judechild]

I may be interested, but I could use a clarification: When you say "disregarding minor details" such as hell, do you mean you want your opponent to be someone who does not believe in the existence of hell?

Other than that, I'd recommend expanding the post-window to at least a week.

 

[Skatterbrain]

I may be interested, but I could use a clarification: When you say "disregarding minor details" such as hell, do you mean you want your opponent to be someone who does not believe in the existence of hell?

Other than that, I'd recommend expanding the post-window to at least a week.

Sorry I definitely could have been more clear.

What I meant was; (disregarding minor details), the opponent should believe that the entire bible is the word of god, including the concept of hell.

 

[elopez]

What's the subject of debate?

 

[com7fy8]

I'll be arguing against the motion,

I think a debate can be not only for two "sides" to try to win against each other, but you first bring out issues and bring in resources, instead of only arguing for your points.

4 rounds,

If this means a total of four back-and-forth exchanges . . . for talking about God, I guess I don't know much about debating I would think we would need more than four exchanges of posts. But I can see the point of not getting into a two-hundred-page and endless thread

3 days between posts,

So, you would post, but then need to wait a full three days before you can make another post? Interesting, if this is what you mean. But it could give debaters time to think and pray about what they say, plus give readers time to take things in and evaluate.

And would I be able to keep track of three days?? I'm willing to try, if these things are what you mean >

Each person will do a total of posts, with three days between each of that person's posts.

Also, I do not use an academic approach to the Bible; I trust mainly prayer input. So, you would not get much anywhere with me, about things of scholarship of history and original language meanings and cultural "context". I'm into trying to be prayerful and intuitive and the love meaning of each scripture.

And . . . again . . . for debating, I advise you could get more by using an evaluation approach, not only trying to "win" points of argument and logic. A debate can be used to help bring in different ins and outs of a subject or issue, instead of there being "sides" who each has to stick with a certain position . . . when they may not have been presented with all that needs to be considered!!

So, if you want to take a chance on me remembering to get back to you and keep my posts each three days apart, this is what I offer



You can PM me to invite me, plus you can debate elsewhere with someone else, too?

Why limit yourself?

 

[judechild]

Sorry I definitely could have been more clear.

What I meant was; (disregarding minor details), the opponent should believe that the entire bible is the word of god, including the concept of hell.

Well, a debate on the goodness of God would definitely interest me. Would you consider waiting until after Christmas?

 

[Conscious Z]

Skatterbrain,
Why must your opponent believe the Bible? There is no good reason I see for your opponent to believe what he or she is arguing. It is only relevant that your opponent is willing to argue against the motion (in this case).

I do want to clarify, however: What is the motion, exactly? That god is good? Your post covered a range of topics, such as when you said "...and my concerns with it." Is this a debate about Christianity generally or about the goodness of god specifically?

I would be willing to argue against the motion if the motion is "God is good," assuming we are talking about an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent god, such as the god of the Bible.